This Post is Sponsored by MegaCorp - or, Random Corporate Naming
While waiting for a flight at Newark Airport, I was looking out at the runway, watching planes land and ground crews manhandle luggage. It was only about 20 minutes later that I noticed the advertisement. “HSBC Bank, the world’s local bank” was emblazoned on the side of the jet bridge (that accordian-style platform that connects the plane to the terminal). The jet bridge is now sponsored!
How many people do you guess are sitting in the airport thinking, “Hmm, I need to switch banks. Now who should I choose? Why, maybe HSBC Bank!” Advertising gurus tell us that immediate action is not actually the point of billboards and name placements like this. The point is name recognition so even a year from now, when you’re choosing a new bank, you’ll feel comfortable looking into HSBC since you’re familiar with the name.
This is also the reasoning behind corporate naming of stadiums. Good times = good emotional affiliation with the brand. The companies in the naming pool usually have a strong local presence, in the case of Coors Field in Denver and the very first sponsored stadium, Busch Stadium in St. Louis (now closed). Companies interested in naming a stadium are also very rich, as deals range from $2 million to the record $20 million a YEAR for a decade or two. That seems like a mighty steep price for name recognition, a method whose success rate is not easily measured.
I personally find corporate stadium-naming ridiculous. The $20 million per year (as in the case of CitiGroup for the Met’s home, Citi Field) seems like it could be used in better places for better products. Seriously, CitiGroup better offer the best customer service I’ve ever seen or the $20 million might be a waste. I also find it sad when historic stadiums are renamed. The Boston Garden, Candlestick Park, the Meadowlands. Well, it seems Candlestick Park will always be Candlestick Park, no matter what you name it. And the new Meadowlands has yet to find a sponsor.
But above all, it’s the randomness of corporate naming that I find crazy. Local or not, AT&T has nothing to do with baseball. Jobing.com has nothing to do with hockey (those poor AZ Coyotes). HSBC has nothing to do with travel, though I guess they do sell life insurance. Will they slap their names on anything? Where will the line be drawn?
How many people do you guess are sitting in the airport thinking, “Hmm, I need to switch banks. Now who should I choose? Why, maybe HSBC Bank!” Advertising gurus tell us that immediate action is not actually the point of billboards and name placements like this. The point is name recognition so even a year from now, when you’re choosing a new bank, you’ll feel comfortable looking into HSBC since you’re familiar with the name.
This is also the reasoning behind corporate naming of stadiums. Good times = good emotional affiliation with the brand. The companies in the naming pool usually have a strong local presence, in the case of Coors Field in Denver and the very first sponsored stadium, Busch Stadium in St. Louis (now closed). Companies interested in naming a stadium are also very rich, as deals range from $2 million to the record $20 million a YEAR for a decade or two. That seems like a mighty steep price for name recognition, a method whose success rate is not easily measured.
I personally find corporate stadium-naming ridiculous. The $20 million per year (as in the case of CitiGroup for the Met’s home, Citi Field) seems like it could be used in better places for better products. Seriously, CitiGroup better offer the best customer service I’ve ever seen or the $20 million might be a waste. I also find it sad when historic stadiums are renamed. The Boston Garden, Candlestick Park, the Meadowlands. Well, it seems Candlestick Park will always be Candlestick Park, no matter what you name it. And the new Meadowlands has yet to find a sponsor.
But above all, it’s the randomness of corporate naming that I find crazy. Local or not, AT&T has nothing to do with baseball. Jobing.com has nothing to do with hockey (those poor AZ Coyotes). HSBC has nothing to do with travel, though I guess they do sell life insurance. Will they slap their names on anything? Where will the line be drawn?
Labels: advertising, brands, corporate naming
posted by Anonymous at
11:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home