To sponsor or not to sponsor…

Written by

Penn state is an iconic brand it itself. This brand’s football team alone generates $53 million in revenue annually from the football games, and the entire athletic program receives an additional $24 million in sponsorships and merchandising deals. The team’s brand: The Nittany Lion, has been in jeopardy since the sexual abuse scandal began unraveling and continues to be making headlines in the news. With the story still on the minds of students and faculty, it is still a heavy situation for the sponsors of the school and team. Pepsi announced on Wednesday that it will remain a sponsor of the school and its team. Pepsi has been one of the university’s largest corporate partners, and is on prominent on both in both the sports stadiums as well as Penn State’s main State College campus. In its original deal with the school in 1992, Pepsi Co. paid Penn State $14 million over 10 years for exclusive vending and advertising rights. In this deal, soft drinks are served in Pepsi cups on game day and the signage is anchored by a permanent Pepsi logo on the scoreboard of the 106,537-seat football stadium.

The Penn State situation eerily reflects the Tiger Woods scandal along with his loss of sponsors. The status of Penn State’s other advertisers other than Pepsi remains uncertain. Mohegan Sun Casino in Uncasville, Conn, on Wednesday expressed that the casino’s deal with Penn State football “technically” ended for the year. Penn State also has sponsors from AT&T (T), Berks Hot Dogs and Chesapeake Energy (CHK). For now, these sponsors still remain, but the future of their sponsorships of the university are uncertain.

Other high-profile sponsors such as Chevrolet, PNC Financial, John Deere, State Farm Insurance and the American Red Cross are staying put for now. So what does this all mean? Large corporations are also in jeopardy of being in the line of fire for continuing to sponsor a school that has done nothing to protect victims of sexual molestation. Iconic Brands like Penn State and Pepsi have a developed a strong relationship over the years, and will continue to keep their partnership. It poses the question that when is a situation too much for a corporation; what is the breaking point? With modern-day heroes such as Joe Paterno (Penn State) and Tiger Woods, being the center of major scandals which in turn led to the loss of major sponsorship and thus embarrassment for them and their sponsors; is it in the best interest of Pepsi to remain with Penn State? You be the judge?

— Michela Noreski, Jordan Hill, Ashley Nelson

Comments

9 responses to “To sponsor or not to sponsor…”

November 18, 2011

Sarah Lively

The Pepsi-Penn State relationship is similar to the Nike-Tiger Woods one, but both of the major sponsors announced after scandal they would still remain sponsors. Nike defended itself by saying they sponsored Tiger for his athletic skills, not his personal choices. Pepsi probably based their choice on the same thing; they sponsor Penn State because of football or just the University in general. The choices of one or a couple individuals should not be able to change the entire brand of Penn State University. They are not a “child-abuse University” but rather had an individual who chose to make immoral decisions on their property. I think it is in Pepsi’s best interest to stay a sponsor.

Reply
November 19, 2011

David Sorensen

The brand of Penn State football is one of the best in college football. Over the last 40 years that program has produced winners on the field, and generated tons of $$$ off the field. Thats a great recipe for success. With the child sex abuse scandal hanging a dark cloud over Happy Valley, I think it’s best for Pepsi to part ways with Penn State. I understand that Penn State has incredible football tradition, but Pepsi has to look at the big picture here. This isn’t kids going to a tatoo parlor and getting free tatoos for merchandise. This isn’t getting a tutor to write your paper and teachers giving you good grades to make you eligible. This is a CHILD SEX ABUSE SCANDAL. It’s not just one victim, it’s 20 victims. This didn’t happen 1 time, it happened for 12 years. The university and Joe Paterno allowed this predator access to facilities, and he used Penn State facilities to commit his crimes. IT’S SICK. And I feel strongly that Pepsi should part ways with Penn State.

Reply
November 20, 2011

Alexandria Kapczynski

Sponsoring another brand, is quite literally signing one’s name to that product and approving it’s message. It is the harsh reality that the two are then combined for better or worse, this proverbial marriage is like that of an actual nuptial bond in that very sense and “what’s mine is yours and what’s yours is mine.” Pepsi being associated with Penn State after the scandal, raises some ethical questions that so commonly come up within our society. Do the bad ethics trump all other aspects? Does someone’s poor personal decisions ruin their business capability? By buying the product of the brand do we support their bad behavior? These moral dilemmas can be found in the Tiger Woods scandal, as the blog stated, President Clinton’s scandal, John Edwards’ transgressions, Martha Stewart’s insider trading, and even the ever so popular Charlie Sheen meltdown. In all of these examples the culprit/subject lost money, their prestige, and in most their position of power. These individuals committed social prosecuted crimes (and in Martha’s case, legally prosecuted) that didn’t have much to do with their occupations directly but their suffered professionally anyway because we, as culture, hold people of power to higher standards of all areas and aspects of their lives. The best way to get back at them for betraying our trust is to not financially support them or their cause. Pepsi has not followed the pattern of denouncement that the public most often choses, Pepsi’ decision mirrors that of the politician wife (i.e. Hilary Clinton) “standing by her man.” Although the general population eventually moves on to other topics to criticize and boycott in these other cases of personal sin, a monstrosity to the extent of Penn State’s will not soon be forgotten. Although Pepsi is trying to remain faithful to it’s vows and pick up the pieces, few observers will support a relationship with such a dark cloud looming overhead. No one wants to be seen as publicly supporting or even being apathetic about such despicable acts and they will chastised those who do, especially if it is just to save a buck (/investment).

-A. Kapczynski

Reply
November 21, 2011

Tyler Smith

I personally would not compare pepsi’s sponsorship of penn state to any of tiger wood’s major sponsors. For years we were bombarded with nike, gatorade, and buick commercials featuring tiger. while pepsi is using penn state football and their facility to move their product in a more literal manner, these other companies figurative use of tiger remain much more powerful in my mind. Pepsi sponsors numerous pro and collegiate organizations because it makes them money, but i don’t think they are in danger of people saying “wowwwww Penn state sells pepsi? get me a coke” Tiger on the other hand had his own brand of gatorade, his own video game, and literally wore nike’s brand from head to toe. I have never seen a pepsi commercial about the nittany lions, or brought home a 12-pack (of pepsi) and seen we are penn state on the label. I could walk in a convenience store in the midst of the scandal and really feel like i was putting money in his pocket when i purchased a “gatorade tiger” (which i continued to do because they were delicious, you can call me shallow).

Reply
November 21, 2011

Meaghan Beam

I think Pepsi is making the right choice by still sponsoring Penn State. I agree how companies have to choose who they sponser and who endorses them wisely because their reputation is at stake but for this case I do not see how the scandal and Pepsi go hand and hand. I do not think the average person is thinking that they cannot drink Pepsi because they sponsor the school that has been hiding sexual scandal for years. What type of brand that is served at their stadium had nothing to do with the this scandal happening. It is a said situation however, athletics, the schools programs, and having drinks for fans has to go own. I believe Pepsi is making the right decision to stick with the Nittany Lions.

Reply
November 22, 2011

Brooke Keller

I personally think people need to take a second and look at the bigger picture here. The Penn State University is an academic institution and more than just a football team. Obviously Penn State is most well known for their football accomplishments, but what about the other athletic teams? Or even the university dining services? When a company enters into a sponsorship deal like this, it’s for the entire university not just one specific athletic team. Therefore even in a case as terrible as the Penn State scandals the sponsorship goes beyond the athletic departments. On the flip side you have Tiger Woods. He is the face of his own brand and the only member sponsored by these high profile companies. Tiger was the center of his major scandals which in turn led to the loss of his major sponsorship and thus embarrassment for both Tiger and his sponsors. However, Sandusky was one person in the entire body of the university. This one man made some absolutely horrid decisions and deserves the harshest of punishments, but he was not the face of the university. That belongs to the students. These sponsors would be taking away their services from the students whom would wrongly lose their benefits. It’s smart for Pepsi to stay on as a sponsor for the university and it would be smart financially and logically for the remaining sponsors to do the same.

Reply
November 22, 2011

Chris Montero

Not to sponsor! I understand that Pepsi is attempting to protect their investment and it may be that they continues to sponsor Penn State. Regardless of what did or did not happen in the “sex abuse” scandal is important to consider little kids around the nation… What if this sex abuse really did happen? Do “we” as society want to sponsor/endorse this type of abusive sexual behavior?

If Pepsi as a brand doesn’t question the sexual abuse allegations and plays “dummy” (I dont know what they are talking about type of attitude) regarding the pending situation it may affect their brand credibility, reputation but most importantly it may send the wrong message to society.

Is true that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but as a nation (including Pepsi as a leading brand within our nation) the human rights and the well being of our youth should always be protected at all costs.

Reply
November 22, 2011

Ashley Oliver

Despite the fact that Penn State is far away geographically from North Carolina, we all know someone that is a student, alumni or fan of the school. When news broke about the scandal the entire nation turned its attention to the school and its football program. That Penn State chose to fire Joe Paterno after a relationship that had lasted decades, it showed the importance of saving the brand of Penn State football. Football is not just a sport at Penn State, it is its own brand and entity. This entity has built relationships and developed ties to huge corporations. Due to these relationships and ties, Penn State was not the only organization people questioned after the scandal. On one hand it can be argued that the football players themselves and Penn State students should not be punished by having these corporations sever ties with the football program and decreasing funding. The football players and students did not participate nor even know about the actions of Jerry Sandusky and collaborators. Therefore, why should they have to suffer? At the same time, it can also be argued that continuing to sponsor Penn State football could be seen as acceptance of what happened to the victims of the abuse. There should be some type of act that shows what happened was wrong and therefore will not be condoned by financial support. It is hard to say whether these companies should continue to support Penn State football.

Reply
November 29, 2011

Lindsay Gallagher

I find this article really interesting because I see both sides clearly. While I think the Penn State scandal is a complete tragedy, I do not think it is at all reflective on the school as a whole. It is a great school, with great teachers and faculty, students and athletic programs. A single mistake, no matter how big, should not be all the school is known for. I think it is a pity that this is how Penn State will be known and how Paterno will be remembered. From an advertising standpoint, this becomes a very sticky situation. While I do not think the school should be known for this one thing, I would see why companies would not want to sponsor them. I do not think it is right for the school to lost all of the money it makes off of sponsorships, but at the same time companies such as Pepsi could have very unwanted consequences for sponsoring a school that went through such a scandal.

Reply