Astralis, Brand Value and Sponsors

Abstract

The purpose of this paper has been to identify the value created by Astralis as interpreted and allotted by their external stakeholders. In addition, how it has had an impact to include sponsors in the marketing to create value for Astralis as an organization. This purpose has been studied and analyzed through a collection of quantitative research. The respondents have been found through personal social media as well as Astralis forums to gain insights into the mind of external stakeholders both with and without an emotional connection to Astralis. This data has been analyzed through the usage of the cluster analysis, where all respondents have been grouped based on their opinions towards Astralis. This analysis has shown that Astralis achieves a mediocre brand value based on the answers given. To indicate how valuable Astralis is perceived by their stakeholders a score system of 1 to 5 has been used. Overall, Astralis achieves a score of 2.54 out of 5. This is a result of a score of 2.65 based on the metric loyalty, 3.9 based on the metric awareness, 2.5 based on the metric associations, and 1.4 based on the metric quality. In addition, it has been concluded that the strategies used by Astralis in their communication with sponsor involvement, the strategic choices match the brand value. The main issues tied to the strategic choices are the lack of consistency, as Astralis uses all the strategies in different ways that does not match the goals. As a result, there are seen no major positive effects through the usage of strategies. Therefore, it has been suggested that Astralis makes a clear plan for which strategies are used based on the type of brand value the organization wishes to increase. For awareness it has been suggested that it would be beneficial to use a mix of the product paradigm with enactment as bracketing. For the parameter loyalty it has been suggested that Astralis could benefit from using the relational paradigm with a mix of enactment as bracketing and self-fulfilling prophecies. For associations it has been suggested that the best results could be seen from using the projective paradigm with enactment as self-fulfilling prophecies and social construction of reality. For the quality it has been suggested that overall enactment as a social construction of reality should be used. The brand paradigm used depends on the subgoal for the communication. With a focus on results the adaptive paradigm is to be used, but with a focus on popularity the relational paradigm should be used.