Ambush Protection
Mon 18 August, 2008 
By Graham FleetWith such vast sums of money paid by official sponsors of the Games it is not surprising that the threat of 'ambush' is a regular topic of conversation out here. In the past Nike has often been cast as a villain in the piece - but suggesting this of Nike, a company that invests hundreds of millions of pounds into the sports and sportspeople competing at the Games, feels a bit disingenuous to me. They have more right than most to be involved and its not as if adidas will not have taken it into account when signing up to be a sponsor.
However I can imagine the people at lloyds Bank (tier one sponsors at London) shifting uncomfortably in their seats when reading the newspapers and seeing a Skandia advert showing a picture of a GB boat and carrying the phrase "Helping to put Britain’s sailors on the podium". There are no British sailors in the ad because that would break the athletes rules that forbids them from promoting non official sponsors in Games time but the association is clear and the positioning of the ad within the Olympic coverage impactful.
It is to the Olympics credit that they do have such control over the athletes. I cannot imagine the same been enforceable in football. But rights holders should not just focus on 'protection'. The real key is to provide the sponsor with the rights and support that means no one can be left in any doubt who has invested in sport and those that do not. There is much talk about 'partnership' between sponsors and rights holders but too often the deeds do not follow the words. If rights holders want to avoid value disintegration and fees evaporation due to the threat of ambush, they must be committed to actively delivering sponsor objectives in true working-level partnership with their sponsors.
