The value of sponsorship

By DAVID GREEN

Those of us old enough to remember the classic "Hee Haw" program probably recall the skit where the quartet of ladies sang, "You'll never hear one of us repeating gossip, so you better be sure and listen close the first time."

Gossip, I suspect, is one of the most popular activities among human beings, even those who look down on it. Sometimes we even attempt to euphemize it by saying, "I don't mean to gossip, I'm just commenting about him (or her)." It's particularly rampant in activities in which people tend to be hyper-interested -- such as racing.

I heard the other day from a source about three or four people removed from the supposed observation that there's some dissatisfaction among NAPA store owners about the auto part corporation's NASCAR sponsorship program. The grumpiness is over two issues -- revenues (supposedly the stores are going to pay a little more to support it in the next-generation contract) and Michael Waltrip.

I have no idea about the specific accuracy of any of that information, and don't really have a great deal of curiosity about it, but it did get me to thinking (no small accomplishment) about the matter of sponsorships in auto racing.

My first attempts to get local sponsorship for my own dirt-track racing efforts were often met with concerns that, "If my name is on your car and it comes off the trailer and hits somebody, they'll sue me." This, long before the litigation plague reached today's pandemic proportions. I'm no lawyer , but I believe they were confusing sponsorship with ownership. I could be wrong about that (help me out here, Doug in CA).

Anyway, nowadays big corporations, fortified with lawyers of their own and apparently unafraid of getting sued, spend huge amounts of money to market their products by putting their brands on racecars and the big tractor-trailer rigs that haul them around the country. I think it's pretty well established that there is some value in doing that.

Just how much, is the question.

And just how important is it that the car and driver have competitive success? No offense to Michael Waltrip and his fans, but MW has not had a whole lot of that, as measured by race victories and championship titles.

He's a great, glib salesman, and it isn't as if he can't drive at all. He has won a couple of Daytona 500s, and that's nothing to sneeze at.

This is no new debate. As recently as -- oh, whenever corporate sponsors began to plow big money into the sport -- there have been snide suggestions ("gossip," let's call it) that "so-and-so got his ride because of his good looks, not because he can drive well."

Of course, that has been carried to new levels as drivers from the distaff side have begun to compete (see "Patrick, Danica" for the latest argument on this note).

I'd offer a summation of this, but to be honest I'm not sure how I feel about it. So, I'll sit back and listen to the comments y'all may have to offer.