SPORTS MARKETING and what BRANDS can learn from the FIFA World Cup 2026

What can the largest global sporting event teach us? The brand possibilities in these 39 days is endless. This year it had 11 official sponsors and 15,000 social media creators and there are lessons to be learned for understanding how brands compete for attention, build emotional connections, and create cultural relevance. FIFA generated approximately $2.7 billion in sponsorship and marketing-rights, but that is not where it ends. Around the tournament, brands spent an estimated $1.4 billion on World Cup-related advertising in the US alone, with nearly 7,000 brands advertising around the event. South Africa was no exception with retailer, clothing and drinks brands getting in on the event! 

James May from Kantar wrote an article for Kantar who studied sponsor performance, creative effectiveness, creator content, consumer reactions, and brand outcomes throughout the tournament.  We will look at 4 main lessons learned! 

Finding 1: There is a difference between brand participation and brand success. 

What the researched showed is that the brands that stood out built programs that behaved more like culture and less like advertising. It wasn’t just about buying sponsorship rights, but rather about creating a meaningful role for the fans in the stadium and at home. 

One of the most common questions ask ed is “Is sponsorship worth the cost?”. The research is not straightforward. Across the 11 official partners and sponsors Kantar tracked during the tournament, they saw almost no material increase in sponsorship awareness over the course of the event. Sadly, it is is entirely possible to spend millions of dollars on sponsorship rights and for consumers not to notice. 

But, a brand like Coca-Cola (who has been a FIFA partner since the 70ies) shows what those rights are worth when a brand puts them to work. 

What matters, and what consumers pay attention to, is a well-activated campaign where the brand fits with the event. Coca-Cola understands how to successfully activate against a sponsorship. The FIFA World Cup Trophy Tour built anticipation months before the first match, and the brand carried that idea across advertising, social, creators, retail and experiential. 

Results show that the activations created gains in buzz, brand health and sales (they had their strongest volume growth in 17 years outside of the post-COVID recovery period.) 

What it means for brand managers?  If you do sponsor an event, ensure a really strong activation plan to maximize the deal. A sponsorship without a creative activation plan is money wasted, not a marketing strategy. 

Finding 2: Non-sponsors can compete 

Kantar found no meaningful difference in creative effectiveness between the brands that sponsored the World Cup and those that did not. This suggests that breakthrough creativity and great activation matter more than sponsorship. 

Nike is probably the best example of this. Without sponsorship, Nike launched Rip the Script, a six-minute film one week before opening and entered the tournament with the highest buzz of any brands Kantar tracked (75% among 18-34s). The campaign was built to be added on Social Media in snippets, rather than to run as a whole and this drove Nike’s social media awareness throughout the group stage. 

What this means for marketers? If you aren’t a sponsor, don’t let that rule you out – you can still play!  

Finding 3: Social Media drove the biggest Brand Impact 

And this momentum kept going after FIFA ended. 

But engagement does not equal effectiveness. Kantar analysed more than 15,000 creator assets and found that engagement metrics only created brand-building about 1/3^rd  of the time. Fewer than 1 in 5 showed strong potential to build the brand and 1 in 8 showed strong short-term sales. 

A successful example of this is Lays crips which used creators to extend its Will Ferrell campaign into social rather than running social as a separate idea. This meant it researched in the top tier of all creator content evaluated. 

Being flexible and reacting to events happening was also important. When the Tartan Army arrived in Boston for Scotland’s group-stage matches, it gained so much traction that the 2 cities established a sister-city relationship  between Boston and Glascow. Miller Lite took the opportunity to create a “Restock the Scots,”  campaign which supplied Scottish through the next match. The response ranked in the top 16% for enjoyment. 

What this means for marketers?  Select creators based on brand-lift potential and be flexible. 

Finding 4: Great marketing still wins 

A simple truth was reinforced that great marketing basics still remain the biggest competitive advantage. 

Kantar’s evaluation found the average World Cup ad grabbed attention, scoring well above norms for involvement, enjoyment and distinctiveness. Yet some products struggled on branding. Consumers often remembered the Ad but failed to remember who it was for. 

Celebrity involvement didn’t help either. Less than half the World Cup Ads but most failed to connect that fame to their brand. David Beckham alone appeared at least 11 brand Ads.  

However, Cools beer is a successful example.  They made Andrés Cantor’s iconic “Gooooooaaaal!” call into “Cooooooors!” Michelob Ultra’s Earned Stripes tied national pride to the brand’s striped bottle so the branding and the story could not be separated. Stella Artois did it with Beckham as the only fan in the scene who doesn’t spill his glass while celebrating a goal. That Ad the top 27% for branding on the strength of a single deliberate choice. 

What this means for marketers: To ensure your campaign drives impact and cuts through in a crowded field, make it both highly engaging linked to your brand. If it doesn’t, don’t spend the money.