Ambush marketing has been around for decades, but there are a number of factors at play right now that I believe will see both the amount and effectiveness of ambush marketing rise dramatically.

Most ambushes are nothing more than cosmetic ago trips. Do brand managers really think they are building their brands by planting 40 people wearing branded t-shirts into an event? Apparently… but they’re wrong. This type of exposure- or proximity-based ambush is very low value, but will likely continue for as long as brands believe that “being there” equates to “being meaningful”. It’s annoying, but not impactful, and not the type of ambush I’m referring to.

What I’m talking about is strategic ambush – ambushes that are planned, leveraged, managed, and measured exactly like best practice sponsorship, minus the sponsorship. It’s not about deception or damaging the competition, and they don’t need to breach IP or proximity rules to do it.

Strategic ambush is built on the premise that the event may control the venue, the official media, and the IP, but they don’t control the event experience. That belongs to the fans. The event experience lasts from the first consideration of attending until the last memory fades and everything in between. People can have an event experience without ever attending the event – just ask someone who lives in an Olympic or World Cup host city! And within that event experience are countless ways in which an ambusher can add value to that event experience.

For the record, I take no ethical stance on ambush marketing. My book, The Ambush Marketing Toolkit gives equal time to how to mount a strategic ambush and how to stop one, and I make no bones about the fact that I’ve done strategic ambushes with a number of clients. My belief is that you’re all big boys and girls – you can make your own decisions.

Whichever side of the “should we ambush” argument you take, if you sponsor any major properties, you are likely to face increased ambush activity as we move forward. There are several reasons for that, and in those reasons lie the solutions.

Less leverage creates more opportunity for ambush

Sponsorship budgets have taken a beating. This is not news. Unfortunately, neither is the fact that some sponsors have made budget by cutting back on their leverage activities. This is a very bad idea, as it simultaneously reduces the marketing returns and leaves the sponsor wide open to ambush.

Here’s the deal, when a sponsor invests in a sponsorship, what they are buying is opportunity, not results. It is leverage that provides the results. If you invest in sponsorship and don’t leverage it, you will not achieve any strategic results. It’s like buying a ladder and never climbing it.

Best practice leverage evokes changes in perceptions and behaviours around a brand in many ways, but the most powerful are:

• Adding value to the event experience
• Using the event to add value to the brand experience
• Demonstrating an understanding of and alignment with the target markets’ needs, wants, and priorities

The thing is, a brand doesn’t need to be a sponsor to do any of these things. And if the sponsor isn’t, there is absolutely nothing stopping an ambusher from doing it.

I am all for cutting back on leverage budgets, because great leverage really does not have to cost a fortune. In fact, some of the best leverage programs in the world cost the least amount of incremental money (10-20% of sponsorship fees, not 100-200% or more). What this requires is a great deal of internal buy-in and a process that will draw creative ideas from a diverse group of stakeholders.

My advice is that no matter what the financial circumstances, do not cut back on leverage activities. In fact, you should be extending your leverage activities outward from the event and throughout the event experience, where ambushers ply their trade.

Recommended resource: Webinar – Out-of-the-Box Sponsorship Leverage Made Simple (27 Oct)

Recommended blog: For maximum impact, forget the event, concentrate on the event experience!

Events and media no longer control the communications

Hello, social media!

Between blogs and Twitter and Facebook and Flickr and so on, events have lost control over the communications around their events. A few events are nurturing this user-generated content and getting their sponsors involved. Most, however, are freaking – as evidenced by moratoriums on sportspeople tweeting from some events and other events trying to stop a stadium full of people from uploading video clips from their phones. The result is not dissimilar to trying to hold onto a banana by squeezing it as hard as you can.

There used to be a clear line around the part of the event experience that is actually controlled by the event – the venue, the marketing, the IP – but that line vanishing fast. Every seat in every stadium is now filled with rebel paparazzi, and they are all bound and determined to share their experiences with their global audience of virtual friends.

This is creating a whole new channel – powerful, flexible, relevant, and immediate – that both sponsors and ambushers can leverage. The problem is, most sponsors aren’t. Luckily, most ambushers aren’t using this channel, either. But given that ambushers tend to be both more aggressive and more creative than the average sponsor, I’m certain this grace period won’t last long.

My advice to sponsors is to stop with the toe-in-the-water stuff and embrace social media as an amazing opportunity for sponsorship leverage. As this is an untamable medium, controlled by no one, it really is an “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” situation. Get out there and run with those wolves! Create platforms for sharing and amplifying and rewarding this user-generated content, and don’t just brand it, get your brand fully involved in the conversation.

Sponsors are smarter, but some sponsees still don’t get it

To every inflexible, uncreative, gold-silver-bronze sponsee in the world, you just don’t get it. And as a result of not understanding (or caring) what sponsors need, potential sponsors of your most desirable events may very well choose to ambush your event rather than do business with you. Sponsors are spending their money smarter than they ever have, and if you look unsophisticated or selfish, your event will be an ambush magnet.

My advice to sponsors is to think very carefully before investing in a big, sexy event run by an old-school organisation. Insist on getting the powerful benefits you need (see below) or don’t do it.

If you can get the results without the fee…

As already canvassed, budgets are tight, and even as the industry is starting to perk up, there is no question that sponsors are being much more careful about how they spend their money.

Strategic ambush is legal and delivers strong results for the brand. Because it operates exactly like a best practice sponsorship, the costs of leverage, management, and measurement are the same. Except for the thing about not having to pay a fee to the rightsholder. With the price of major sponsorships running into the hundreds of thousands, millions, and tens of millions, not paying the fee can be a very attractive option.

My advice to sponsors is to use everything you’ve got that an ambusher wouldn’t have – access to IP, behind-the-scenes information, what-money-can’t-buy experiences, etc. I’m not talking about sticking “proud sponsor of…” badges everywhere, I’m talking about providing meaningful insights, benefits, and experiences to your target markets. Use that as a platform across both the event and the larger event experience.

Think of it this way: Imagine playing the ambusher at football. Your team can play the whole field, but their team can only play the left-hand side. Your game plan would clearly be to run the ball down the right side – where you are unopposed – over and over again, winning the game decisively.

My advice to sponsorship seekers is to be generous with these IP benefits. They provide a lot of value for your sponsors and the markets they’re targeting, while helping them to ambush-proof their investments better than any laws could.

The upshot

There are many sound arguments why ambush marketing will increase, but you don’t need to let it happen to you. The emphasis is on “you”, because rightsholders can’t protect you from ambush. They can enforce IP and proximity laws, but that’s about it, and expecting them to do more is unrealistic. And relying on anti-ambush legislation is simply relying on bigger fences around the same IP and proximity turf.

If you want to ambush-proof your investments, you need to know how strategic ambush is done and outplay the ambushers at their own game. As a bonus, you’ll get dramatically better results.