Offering an apology in advance if this post strikes some as overly-naiive, but how is the value of NASCAR sponsorships measured? The U.S. Army sponsorship caught my attention and made me wonder about it.
I Googled US Army NASCAR sponsorship cost and the very first hit was about Democrats criticizing the Army's NASCAR sponsorship. The article (dated 2/11/11) quoted an apparent DOD-hater, stating "the Army spent $7 million dollars on NASCAR last year, and $11.6 million in 2009. Another $5 million was spent sponsoring drag racing.
"This is contrasted with the Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard, all of which ceased their NASCAR sponsorships five years ago." So if this is correct, the Army spent @ $23.6 million over a two year period advertising at motorsports events.
So, how does that compare with other potential advertising options that the Army might choose from? Without getting into political rants one way or another, did the other military services terminate their motorsports sponsorships because they didn't see sufficient value, or were they motivated by political pressure from the left?
It seems to me that advertising/marketing pros know how to measure the effect of advertising dollars spent. And NASCAR sponsorship by automotive-related companies like GoodYear, Exide, Valvoline, etc. makes sense to me as well. Heck, given the presumed heavily-male demographic that NASCAR appeals to, I guess I even see how it might pay for Cialis or Budweiser.
But Rheem? Clorox? Bush's Baked Beans? M&M's? U.S. Army? Do any Linkers know how that works in those cases? And if it pays for the U.S. Army, what happened to the sponsorships of the other Armed Forces?
[This post was last edited on 6/26/12 at 4:19 PM]