Golf clubs and Rolex watches

Polo Ralph Lauren and Rolex have just announced separate new sponsorship deals with various golf properties. On the face of it, both make sense: clearly there would appear to be considerable synergy between the target demographics of the sponsors and the spectators engaged in watching golf. But is sponsorship that easy, which prompts a further question: what makes a good sponsor? In sponsorship deals such as those mentioned here (as indeed is the case in many sponsorships), the emphasis seems to be placed on identifying a compatible partner, and then on confirming that this partner is actually likely to be suitable. But is this approach to sponsorship management only half the story? Getting together is one thing, but how should partners manage a relationship once they are in it? And when the inevitable divorce comes (as it surely must in sponsorship), on what basis might an amicable and value-generating split be achieved? Alternatively stated, isn't prevailing sponsorship thinking more about the rules of attraction than it is about the rules of the deeper relationship? That is, is too much emphasis placed on establishing the criteria for getting together in the first place, rather than working to ensure that the depth of a relationship (as one does in any other type of relationship with a partner)? In which case, where do factors such as trust, commitment, communication, shared values et al. fit into the sponsorship process? Or is this a rather idealistic viewpoint? Perhaps sponsorship is ultimately much more direct than that, is it simply a way of boosting the bottom-line and requires little appreciation of the art and science of relationships?