JPMorgan Cuts Back On U.S. Open Hospitality

In the wake of a terrific US Open attendance-wise, more news regarding corporate partners scaling back on effective sports sponsorship and on-site sports marketing.  JPMorgan Chase & Co., a very well respected major bank led by Jamie Dimon, cut the onsite activation piece for the 2009 US Open, part of a six-year $90 million extension of its open sponsorship.

JPMorgan was said to have saved money on food & beverage by going dark for eight days and 16 total sessions. Many assume this move was done due to “perception.” Is that so? Or was JPMorgan Chase using effective sports ticket software to make a calculated decision?  A ticket management solution like Spotlight will show a company whether they are achieving a positive return on their sports market investments.

A common trend continues as public perception forces firms to make decisions: “Ever since congressmen late last year began bashing banks for wining and dining at sporting events, companies have been pulling back out of fear of public derision.  A source close to JPMorgan said cost-cutting was the primary reason for the move.  Neither the bank nor the U.S. Tennis Association, which owns the Open, would say how much the company spends on corporate hospitality”.

Is this appropriate as a tax-payer?  If these firms can show a return is it worth allowing this to continue or are there better uses of the money?

Tweet This Post