Yet, the (800) million dollar question remains: is this a good spend for Scotiabank?
Fans of the deal argue Scotiabank is a Canadian organization that can easily afford the $40 million annual price tag. And with existing expertise in working with entertainment properties -- most notably via their partnership with Cineplex Entertainment -- and their existing partnership with the NHL, it isn't difficult to imagine how the bank might potentially derive tremendous value from the sponsorship.
But critics of the sponsorship (and its enormous price tag) are asking whether Scotiabank can possibly derive $40 million worth of value every year.
Personally, I think the answer to that question will turn out to be a resounding yes.
Sure, $40 million a year could have otherwise used to buy a whole lot of impressions via TV ads. But what's the value of the number of impressions the bank will get from having "Scotiabank" on every single piece of communication (including ticket stubs, remember) coming out of the arena? From the numerous on-air mentions from announcers stating, "We're coming to you live from Scotiabank Arena" before and after every commercial break? From in-venue shots of enormous crowds gathered before home games of one of Canada's most iconic hockey teams or Canada's only professional basketball team? I don't have the information needed to calculate that number, but let's all remember that those impressions count too.
What's the value of the "other" benefits that will inevitably come as part of the deal? While I have zero inside knowledge of the deal itself, it isn't difficult to imagine what else might have been negotiated as part of the sponsorship. A corporate box for entertaining clients, and rows upon rows of platinum-level seats? Numerous "Meet the Team" events throughout the year the bank could be used for high-net-worth customers and their families? A special in-venue branded area where the bank can showcase their latest products and services? Commemorative Scotiabank-Red Maple Leaf jerseys worn during the first game played in the newly-named arena? (I totally made that last one up just now, but it's not a terrible idea, right? After all, maple leaves do turn red every Fall...) Such ancillary benefits would be worth significant value providing the bank is willing to activate them. (And in that regard, I certainly wouldn't bet against the bank...)
But perhaps most importantly, what's the value of a company spending money to solidify their position as a prominent (corporate) player in Canada's favorite game? (And don't think they won't leverage that in the traditional advertising they'll continue to run over the next two decades.)
Only time, and inevitably a small army of number-crunchers at the bank, will tell for certain if this deal makes financial sense.
Fortunately for marketers in this country (whose budgets tend not to be "richer than you think"), most deals won't cost as many cents as this one.
** David Pullara is fairly indifferent about hockey and banking, but he does love everything that's marketing or strategy related. If you enjoyed this article, please like it, share it, or make a comment. If you really liked it, subscribe to this blog by submitting your email address to the "Follow By Email" box at right, and follow me on LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com/in/pullara) or Twitter (@pullara) so you'll know when my next piece is ready. **
