Search results

Many studies have analysed the impact of various variables on the ability of companies to raise capital. While most of these studies are sector-agnostic, literature on the effects of macroeconomic variables on sectors that established over the last 20 years like property technology and financial technology, is scarce. This study aims to identify macroeconomic factors that influence the ability of both sectors and is extended by real estate variables.

The impact of macroeconomic and real estate related factors is analysed using multiple linear regression and quantile regression. The sample covers 338 observations for PropTech and 595 for FinTech across 18 European countries and 5 deal types between 2000–2001 with each observation representing the capital invested per year for each deal type and country.

Besides confirming a significant impact of macroeconomic variables on the amount of capital invested, this study finds that additionally the real estate transaction volume positively impacts PropTech while the real estate yield-bond-gap negatively impacts FinTech.

For PropTech and FinTech companies and their investors it is critical to understand the dynamic with mac-ro variables and also the real estate industry. The direct connection identified in this paper is critical for a holistic understanding of the effects of measurable real estate variables on capital investments into both sectors.

The analysis fills the gap in the literature between variables affecting investment into firms and effects of the real estate industry on the investment activity into PropTech and FinTech.

The purpose of this paper is to study the effects of sports sponsorship on brand equity using two managerially related outcomes: price premium and market share.

This study uses a best–worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE) and compares the outcome with that of the purchase intention scale, an established probabilistic measure of purchase intention. The total sample consists of 409 fans of three soccer teams sponsored by three different competing brands: Nike, Adidas and Puma.

With sports sponsorship, fans were willing to pay more for the sponsor’s product, with the sponsoring brand obtaining the highest market share. Prominent brands generally performed better than less prominent brands. The best–worst scaling method was also 35% more accurate in predicting brand choice than a purchase intention scale.

Future research could use the same method to study other types of sponsors, such as title sponsors or other product categories.

Sponsorship managers can use this methodology to assess the return on investment in sponsorship engagement.

Prior sponsorship studies on brand equity tend to ignore market share or fans’ willingness to pay a price premium for a sponsor’s goods and services. However, these two measures are crucial in assessing the effectiveness of sponsorship. This study demonstrates how to conduct such an assessment using the BWDCE method. It provides a clearer picture of sponsorship in terms of its economic value, which is more managerially useful.