Results 103 to 117 of 117
04-15-2012, 12:08 PM #103
Last edited by Krisna; 04-15-2012 at 12:20 PM.
04-15-2012, 08:30 PM #104
For tournaments in excess of the $500,000, they pay a $50,000 fee + 5% of the prize money that is in excess of the $500,000.
And a reply to the old post: I think that all R1 losers still get a certain amount of prize money.
Looking up at a wiki article, anyone in the top 32 and so on get a little part of the prize money. The chart has been changed however, but I'm not sure of the exact new numbers.
04-15-2012, 10:27 PM #105
"BWF Council agreed in May 2011 a Sanction Fee Cap starting January 2012. The following wording will be included in General Competition Regulations;
‘Level 1 - 3 BWF sanctioned tournaments or international tournaments offering prize money US$ 50,000 or more shall pay a sanction fee to BWF at the rate of 10 per cent of the prize fund up to and including the first US$ 500,000 and a lower rate of 5 per cent for prize money in excess of US$ 500,000’.
sounds ok to me.. but obviously not as much as 15% of revenue, as I proposed.
I wonder what BWF will do with this money?
Last edited by pcll99; 04-15-2012 at 10:33 PM.
04-16-2012, 10:09 AM #106
What do you mean by revenue. I would call Revenue ticket and merchandise sales during the tournament.
04-16-2012, 10:45 AM #107
i guess my 15% proposal seemed a bit far fetch after learning about 10% sanction fee.
15% of revenue is a whole lot more than 10% of prize money.
further, 15% of revenue is hard to implement administratively because BWF has to audit (or has to have the right to audit) the books and accounts of the organizers (or the events).
10% of prize money (eg, US$300,000) is fixed and everyone knows what the exact amounts would be beforehand.
never mind. 10% of prize money is better, i guess.
06-22-2012, 11:49 AM #108
yaa. my personal experience:
I went to the states for a badminton tournament, when I told the officer at the border, he didn't even know what is badminton.
06-22-2012, 12:24 PM #109
Actually BWF had contributed (a bit in this regards) by setting up a few badminton training centers at a few locations throughout the world, just for the purpose of accommodating & providing players who need some sort of pro training. I don't know if those centers are still around or still active or not..
In this thread topic, it may seem excessive to have CHN host 3 different SS (or any country to host more than 1 SS or major event), but i'd say more power to them if they're willing to take up the task..
Last edited by ctjcad; 06-22-2012 at 12:28 PM.
06-22-2012, 12:32 PM #110
06-22-2012, 12:33 PM #111
06-22-2012, 12:40 PM #112
06-22-2012, 01:04 PM #113
06-22-2012, 01:05 PM #114
06-22-2012, 01:06 PM #115
06-22-2012, 01:27 PM #116
06-28-2012, 12:21 AM #117
China is the power house in badminton. That's why they have 2 ss per year.
If England if given 2 ss per year, i don't think they is any meaning at all.
By danielwong in forum China Masters / Japan Open 2009Replies: 261: 09-28-2009, 08:08 AM
By LI De Quan in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007Replies: 117: 07-15-2007, 10:11 AM
By X Ball in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007Replies: 38: 07-15-2007, 05:43 AM
By ants in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007Replies: 0: 06-22-2007, 02:49 PM
By Kai91 in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 1: 12-11-2004, 10:52 AM