An N.I.T. Sponsorship? Clueless

Imagine you're a 'me too' brand. You're Pepsi vs. Coke, Burger King vs. McDonald's or Avis vs. Hertz. Year after year, you struggle mightily to improve your quality and service to change the status quo. And, one would hope, you make damn sure your marketing strategy reflects your desired goal. As a result, you associate your brand with everything that Frank Sinatra might describe as, '...A number one, top of the heap.'

So, how do we account for MasterCard’s sponsorship of the N.I.T. College basketball tournament? Why would the perennial number two credit card company lend its name to an also-ran tourney that absolutely no one cares about? What were they thinking? Was the strategy to 'own' mediocrity? Did someone in MasterCard’s Purchase, NY, headquarters sigh and say, “You know what? We know we're second best. Everyone else knows we're second best, so why not strike a partnership with a second rate tournament?”

Thousand of dollars to underwrite target market golf events? Smart. Hundreds of thousands of dollars to 'own' category exclusivity at the upcoming Olympics? Strategic. Millions to sponsor a totally bogus college basketball tournament? Clueless.

Comments

[Liz]

this is hilarious. i just came across your blog searching for celebrity endorsement dirt for my English paper for college. your bang on about the second rate sponsoring the second rate. i love it.

[David Heiser]

After reading this I went out and found the website for the College Basketball Invitational, the new tournament that is even less prestigious than the N.I.T., hoping that it would be sponsored by someone like Discover or Reebok. Sadly, I didn't see a sponsor listed anywhere. I guess a few companies out there still have some common sense.

Do you feel the same way about things like the Nationwide or Hooters golf tours?

[RepMans]

Thanks for the comment (and the research). Hard to say whether the Nationwide or Hooters sponsorships make sense since I don't know their relative market positions. MasterCard's marketing transgression was to select a partner whose image reinforces an already negative, me-too stereotype.