Search results

Most college athletics department have not sold corporate naming rights to their athletics facilities. Popp et al. (2016) suggests two primary reasons: (1) difficulty in determining proper valuation and (2) fear of stakeholder backlash. The purpose of the current study is to address both concerns by utilizing a hedonic pricing model predicting collegiate naming rights values and utilizing fixed-effects models to determine if consumer behavior (event attendance and donations) is impacted by a corporate name change.

Data from 110 naming rights agreements among NCAA Division I programs were examined, alongside market-related variables, institution-related variables and venue-related variables. Utilizing hierarchical model building to reduce independent variables and OLS regression modeling, significant relationships with annual value of naming rights agreements were uncovered. Fixed effects models were utilized to determine if naming rights impacted attendance and donations.

A final model explained more than 53% of the variance in average annual value of naming rights agreements, with three significant factors: (1) attendance, (2) all-time winning percentage and (3) venue construction cost. Fixed-effects models revealed no significant differences in attendance or donations after a naming rights deal was signed.

Corporate naming rights agreements for college athletics facilities are a recent phenomenon. While a similar study examining drivers of collegiate sport naming rights was previously conducted, the current study revealed a shifting marketplace. In addition, no prior study has examined the impact of a corporate naming rights agreement on future attendance and donations.

This chapter examines the shifting significance of data ownership and athlete rights as they pertain to the growth and expansion of the global sports gambling industry. It provides a nuanced overview of the ‘datafication’ of society, tracing how the omnipresent embrace of digital technologies has expediated new forms of organisational, political and corporate surveillance from which concerns over privacy, rights to ownership and the misuse of personal data arise. The chapter moves on to discuss how the extraction and trade of data has revolutionised how elite sport is performed, manufactured, broadcast and consumed, shedding critical light on the role of the gambling industry in the exchange of human data as a market commodity. These insights inform a series of socio-legal and ethical questions about the relationships between athlete data and the sports gambling industry for the purpose of signposting emerging issues and opportunities for critical sociological research and intervention.

This research finds out to what extent companies’ names are influenced by the place’s attributes versus the official branding policies of a place and, consequently, whether and how local companies “buy into” the place’s strategies put forth by official bodies.

This paper is both conceptual and empirical, as a mixed quantitative and interpretive approach is used. The companies’ names of a tourist industry (the tour and guiding companies) in three destinations are compared and pitched against the branding of these cities. The companies' names are classified into categories to ascertain whether they reflect (or diverge from) the official strategies. Finally, a conceptual model is developed to explain the findings: the strategic naming model (SNM).

Our main finding is that the overall business features of a place being stronger determinants to the naming strategies than tourist destination branding initiatives. The intrinsic features of a place seem thus to be “above” destination branding policies. The researched features account for different naming strategies, such as highly original names, flat names or non-strategic names.

As the work is based on a convenience sample, it cannot claim strong representativity. The fact that each of the three data sets was processed by a different researcher might bring up personal biases.

This work is a call for a more intensive use of naming strategies to the companies’ advantages, as naming is found out to be strategy used to a very low degree. Thanks to this research, companies will understand the different naming possibilities and be able to apply them to their strategies by choosing names which express “uniqueness” or “belonging”. Practitioners will also be aware of whether they are communicating towards the industry or towards the market.

No works were found that empirically pursue our research goals. Therefore, this research might be considered as a novelty. The proposed SNM model explains and relates the most usual company naming techniques, which were unrelated up to date.

Given the rise of sport non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and sponsorships from cryptocurrency companies in the sport industry during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, this paper aims to critically frame the partnerships between cryptocurrency and sport by exploring the reception of fan tokens amongst supporters of three English Premier League clubs: Manchester City, Everton and Crystal Palace.

Drawing upon the emerging critical scholarship on cryptocurrency and the political economy of professional football, this study uses digital ethnography in an attempt to understand the major themes emanating from the online forum discussions amongst fans in response to the issuance of fan tokens by the aforementioned three clubs, among other types of partnerships with crypto companies.

The supporters’ critical deliberations revolved around the contradictions of fan tokens (as a means for supposed “fan engagement” or for financial speculation) and the utility of cryptocurrency for the public. These reactions in turn showcase a larger tension underlying the financially unstable professional football industry: the contest between the owners and the fan bases over the exchange value (for profit) and use value (for community) of the clubs.

This paper is one of the first studies to adopt a critical framework to examine the emerging partnerships between sports and cryptocurrency companies during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also provides one of the first in-depth analyses of the critical receptions of sport NFTs amongst sport fans. While contributing to the literature on fan activism/protest in the context of the commercialization and commodification of sport, the paper also raises new questions on the responsible use of cryptocurrency/NFT in sport.

The purpose of this work is (1) to supply a framework of actors in sport sponsorship and articulate the service relationships that support these partnerships and (2) to propose research questions in this space that are unaddressed and forward-looking.

Sponsorship is part of a complex network of actors and service relationships found in sport. The sports team, activity, or event is a sport property, often with long-term and dynamic service relationships. The authors consider how a sponsor's relationship with the sport property intersects with organizing bodies, venues, communities and society. The authors identify clusters of actors that interact with and influence other clusters (e.g. governing bodies, media, host community and venue/teams/fans) within an ecosystem, paying special attention to aspects of co-creation and co-destruction and the feedback loops that cause them.

Through this analysis, the authors identify areas of needed research at the intersection of sport sponsorship and service. The model synthesizes the literature from service-dominant logic, sports, sponsorship, systems thinking and co-creation/co-destruction research areas. Using the model and relevant cases, the authors can better understand the complexities of sport service relationships and advance research at the intersection of sport sponsorship and service.

This is the first sport sponsorship service ecosystem model. It is also the first integration of systems thinking with constructs in sport sponsorship and services.

This chapter builds upon the analysis of the last chapter, as fans have to deal with the issues that arise from their team’s financial superiority. Here, we question what happens when that financial superiority is accompanied by significant moral and ethical issues. Recent involvement of state actors in the ownership of English football has been evidencable and occasionally appears clear. Various reflexes and cognitive distancing occur from fandoms when football club ownership engages in practices that, according to the normative models that fans ascribe to their clubs, are mutually exclusive with the values of the fanbase and the club’s history. A common form of fan reflex often takes the form of distancing the players on the pitch from the club’s institutional structures, effectively teasing out the matchday experience from the structures that benefit from the raw emotion it generates. Another reflex is questioning why the fan should surrender their club when a morally, ethically problematic ownership model has acquired it. Here we have perhaps the greatest challenge to the normative model and, rather than negotiating that tension, as often as not the response is to try and ignore it.

The paper discusses a range of aspects of the spread of sportswashing within top-flight football, identifies the motivations of its proponents, what is on offer to football clubs, their followers and local communities and the ways in which it coheres with the nature of the modern game.

A range of disparate literature, both academic and non-academic, is synthesised to provide a broad-ranging introduction to the spread of sportswashing within top-flight football.

Sportswashing is likely to increase within top-flight football in future years as a result of its resonance with aspects of the game's evolving nature. Resistance to its continuing spread presently appears improbable.

As relatively recent development within football, the sportswashing topic has produced a limited literature to which this paper contributes.

Football exists and evolves in a dynamic ecosystem, displaying a massive and multidimensional influence on most contemporary societies, and football has grown into a significant industry with a plethora of stakeholders. This research is the first to comprehensively identify the key industry stakeholders and their distinct value, from the individual club perspective, and to conceptualise and test their interrelationship toward the development of a corresponding framework of club benefits.

The study applied a multilevel approach to collect and verify qualitative data. It initially developed a preliminary conceptual framework, which was first validated by an expert panel and was subsequently extensively tested in the Cyprus-specific context, which offered fertile ground for such a study. The empirical stage rested on 41 semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with very high-ranking individuals from the top nine football clubs, as well as with key industry stakeholders.

Though the examined industry is partly in line with international norms, it is also highly affected by unique characteristics that alter the various stakeholders' role, producing (even negative) value of varied typologies that is directly linked with the industry's financial, sporting, cultural and social conditions.

The research ultimately presents scholars, practitioners and policymakers with a systemic and comprehensive understanding of the individual club stakeholder value offerings, delivers a tested framework as a tool for social and business management and prescribes future avenues for research, governance and practice.

Extant studies on the subject are either partial or focus on individual stakeholders and evidently lack requisite scientific comprehensiveness. The current research bridges this significant gap in knowledge by exhaustively identifying the key industry stakeholders, explicating their relative social, economic or other value in the individual club perspective and developing a value-based stakeholder framework.

The chapter deals with the interface between the law of succession and corporate law and explains the completely different objects of these two fields of law. Succession law tries to shift and contribute assets to the successors, whereas corporate law focuses on the well-being of the company. However, in a family business, it is necessary to find legal, social, and psychological techniques to combine these two areas and to establish strong and binding relations. This is the function of shareholder agreements and family constitutions.