You might be familiar with Pay As You Play, or PPP for short, from watching NHL hockey. PPP is a form of hockey sponsorship whereby the advertiser pays for each goal that is scored while their logo is displayed on the screen.
If You are unfamiliar, PPP is used extensively in hockey because it’s easy for advertisers to track. Advertisers can easily determine how many goals were scored while their logo was displayed.
But what is PPP?
Simply put, PPP is “Pay per Performance.” When an athlete performs an action that the sponsor deems beneficial to their brand, they will pay for it. So if you hit a puck into the net, they will pay you for that goal. If you complete a pass to set up a scoring chance, they will pay you for that too.
PPP is used worldwide and has been utilized in the NHL for over 90 years. It’s also the form of hockey sponsorship preferred by the NBA.
And now for the difficult part:
Table of Contents
The Trouble With PPP
While PPP is a popular form of hockey sponsorship, it’s not without its flaws. The biggest of which is the concept behind it. Rather than paying the player for actual performance, the advertiser is typically paying the player for brand exposure and promoting a specific product or service.
This can lead to some awkward situations. Consider the case of Alexander Ovechkin. Ovechkin is one of the best hockey players in the world and is also one of the most recognized athletes in the world. He is sponsored by a variety of companies, including Reebok, Heineken, and Monster Energy.
As you might imagine, Ovechkin has amassed a large collection of expensive sportswear, especially considering his status as one of the superstitions elite players. PPP allows the advertiser to spread their brand awareness and reach a massive audience for the cost of a few advertising spots in a stadium.
This was evident in the 2018-19 NHL season when Ovechkin scored the most goals of any player in the league, not including overtime goals. He also became the first hockey player ever to score 50 goals in a season. Naturally, Reebok and the rest of the companies that sponsor him were eager to shower him with praise and give him a brand new wardrobe.
The issue with PPP is that the player is not necessarily performing up to the level that they can command, not because they’re not good enough but because they’re agreeing to play on a certain level for the benefit of the brand. This can lead to situations where not all of the goals that are scored while sponsored by a certain advertiser are created equal. Sometimes, they will pay for goals that the athlete would not score were it not for the brand’s help. This has caused many issues in the past and continues to create tension between advertisers and athletes.
An Evolving Trend
PPP has been around for a very long time and has been popularized by the NHL. It’s used worldwide and has stuck around because it’s easy to implement and very effective. It’s also an easy way for advertisers to track brand awareness and impact.
But just because something is easy to implement doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea. In fact, that’s probably the worst thing you can say about PPP. Easy to implement, but not necessarily a good idea. At least, not in 2019.
In the last year, the NHL has shifted towards something different and more effective for brand exposure and player sponsorship. Known as “experiential marketing,” this method focuses more on providing an enriching sporting experience for the fans.
Specifically, NHL games, concerts, and other sporting events will now feature branded activations that will make the viewer feel as though they’re a part of the event. These activations can range from interactive displays to match tickets that give the fans access to an exclusive area on the day of the game. Essentially, the NHL is looking for ways to make the game more immersive and interactive for sponsors and fans alike, and PPP does not necessarily fit into that equation.