This ugly little game takes place when a sponsor pays a fair fee for a sponsorship, but then encounters one after another additional costs – some small, some larger – bringing the sum total of the investment to a level that is no longer commensurate with the benefits provided. I’ve outlined some of the classics below.

Charging the sponsor a “leverage fee” on top of the sponsorship fee

First off, it is the sponsor’s job to leverage the sponsorship, and pay for it. Second, and most important, what this “fee” provides for has nothing to do with leverage. It is virtually always used to pay for some of the harder costs of what has already been promised in the proposal, such as paying for production of sponsor signage and putting sponsor logos onto event signage. Sponsors, don’t fall for this. Tell the partner flat out that you will not be paying a leverage fee. Further, tell the sponsee that if they want to revisit the sponsorship fee so that all benefit delivery costs are covered, they are free to do that, and you will re-evaluate your position once you’ve reviewed the new offer.

Charging additional license fees if you want to do more with the IP

So, a sponsor negotiates lots of access to event/team/whatever intellectual property. This is a great idea, as it offers a huge number of marketing opportunities and flexibility, provided you don’t breach any of the rules set forth. Sometimes, however, the sponsee will decide that you’re being too creative and thorough and go back for another bite of the cherry, claiming that you are going beyond “standard usage”.

Sponsors, unless there was a specific restriction on the amount you can use the IP provided, tell the sponsee to get over themselves and that they should be happy to have a proactive partner who is so willing to showcase their event (and the value it can have to sponsors).

If you did sign a contract with some limitation on the amount you can use IP, you’ve really created a rod for your own back. Yes, there will be rules on what you can do, so that your creative doesn’t diminish the sponsee’s brand, but aside from that, you should be able to use it as fully as you want.

Charging sponsors if they elect to extend or expand the program

As an example, you sponsor a series of professional development workshops run by an association and taking place in eight cities. It is going so well for the association that they decide to add two more cities to the program – then they turn around and ask for more money from you. I know there will be arguments about it, but I think this is wrong.

If you sponsor a series, you sponsor the series – not individual workshops in eight cities. If demand warrants that the series is extended by your partner, they should not be expecting that you pay for their decision to make it bigger. Frankly, your leverage program – how you get a result from the marketing opportunity – is unlikely to be much different with the addition of 60-odd additional participants.

Charging a sponsor to participate in event research

This one kills me.

Let’s say an event decides to do some market research, which is a very good idea. They then decide that this would be a good way to squeeze another grand or two out of their sponsors by offering them the opportunity to include a question or two on the survey.

The basic premise of best practice sponsorship is that sponsors are not trying to connect with an event or program, but to their target markets, using the event as a conduit. And the more a sponsor knows about that target market, and their experience with that event or program, the more able they will be to create great leverage programs. Getting access to audience research should be a threshold right for sponsors, and larger sponsors should have questions included on that research.

If you are a sponsor, you may or may not be prepared to go along with these, but at least you should be aware that you’re being gamed by an organisation that has shown itself to put greed ahead of partnership. I just hate that, and when it happens to my clients, I always advise them to call the sponsee on it – to tell them they are taking advantage of the relationship, and that’s not what a healthy partnership is all about.

I also believe that sponsors should keep this kind of treatment firmly in mind at renewal time. If it was painful enough, don’t even consider renewing, and be sure you tell the CEO of the organisation why. If you still see scope for working together, tell them firmly that their new proposal must include all costs.

Sponsorship seekers, please take this as a warning about how not to treat your sponsors. They don’t have all the money in the world, they are not an endless font of money, they’re not suckers, they do talk to other sponsors, and they do know when you’re taking advantage. Is that really the reputation you want?

Next up, The Games Sponsorship Seekers Play – Game #3: The Outrageous Renewal