Madam, - I refer to an article by Richard Gillis in The Irish Times (July 18th) entitled "Ambush, the chosen tactic in telecoms war" preceded on the front page of "Business This Week" by the headline "Digicel's Telecoms war - Richard Gillis on the Denis O'Brien ambush". Digicel has a five-year sponsorship contract with the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) that was extended only a year ago until 2012. This has been to the benefit of the WICB, Digicel and the game of cricket in general. Our concern is that the WICB is effectively trying to put out a shadow West Indies cricket team and parking our sponsorship contract.
To draw an analogy with the way Digicel extended Irish hospitality and support to the Irish cricket team at the Cricket World Cup in Jamaica last year is bad journalism. Why? Because it replaces fact with fiction.
The facts are as follows: 1. When the Irish cricket team qualified for the quarter finals there were insufficient funds to cover the extra costs triggered by the unforeseen success.
2. The result of a private phone call was that a personal donation was made by Mr O'Brien to enable the Irish team to continue in the tournament with the only specific request being that the assistance remains confidential.
At no time did Digicel seek to "ambush" the sponsors of the Irish team or the sponsors (including Hutchison, the official telecom sponsor) of the Cricket World Cup. We did not at any time ask the team to do anything in return. Instead, as an Irish company, we were extending hospitality and support, including use of mobile phones. It was a case of the Irish looking after the Irish away from home.
The hospitality was not "ambush marketing" because the general public in Jamaica, Ireland or elsewhere, were never told of this "largesse" as described by Mr Gillis. There was no "ambush" and no "marketing". Mr Gillis's description of this as "put another way, they were trying to associate with the event on the cheap" is factually and fundamentally incorrect.
Finally, Mr Gillis goes on to write "the cynical among us, including, I'm sure, a good few working the corridors of FAI sponsor Eircom, suspect O'Brien's motive. What's the difference between O'Brien's paying Giovanni Trapattoni's wages as Ireland team boss and Sir Allen Stanford wanting to support cricket in the Caribbean? One for the lawyers." Denis contributed funding to pay 50 per cent of Mr Trapattoni and his management team's costs under the strict agreement that he does not want anything in return, not even a free ticket at the back of the stand. On the other hand, Sir Allen Stanford is primarily running the 20:20 match for commercial reasons. If Mr Gillis had bothered to check the facts he would have ascertained the facts. But then doing so might just get in the way of a "good story"? When will we ever give up knocking people in Ireland? The saying "no good deed goes unpunished" comes to mind. - Yours, etc,
KIERAN FOLEY, Group Head of Sponsorship, Digicel, 40 Knutsford Blvd, Kingston 5, Jamaica.