User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 18 to 31 of 31
  1. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bdfreak87 View Post
    Or perhaps world champion means being in the no.1 spot of the world ranking list..
    Not likely as I believe it won't go down well with Li Yongbo if any of his player is WR1 and yet fails to gain any major title for the nation.

  2. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,839
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think we talk about this in Tang Wei's thread. Apparently, Asian Badminton Championship is a major title for China, even though it's only a GP Gold event.

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...24#post2062124
    Last edited by pcll99; 12-22-2013 at 08:34 AM.

  3. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    keep 100%. How does his tax work for this? Anybody in the UK earning over 150k a year has to give at least 50% to the "state". He gets looked after on tour fed/accommodation, flights etc free all as added perks. 50% sounds like a great deal to me.
    First, LYB's suggestion or proposal refers only to the advertising income not the prize money which still has to be shared 50% with the association.

    Second, I too feel keeping 50% of the advertising money is substantial already but considering most if not all fully independent professional athletes get to pocket 100% of it, it may not be too far-fetched or unreasonable an expectation. As for the taxation part, the athlete is subject to China's income tax law which is rather progressive -- http://www.worldwide-tax.com/china/china_tax.asp .

    Third, maybe LYB is thinking that instead of letting the state, not CBA (which shares 50% of the prize money only), take 50% of the advertising income, why not let the athlete have more, up to 100%, to incentivize them and raise the attraction and stature of the sport as a profession, esp when he considers badminton players are not as well rewarded as , say, their table tennis counterparts in proportion to the physical demands and risk of injury.

    Besides, CBA is known to be adequately if not well funded by the Chinese government as Chinese badminton is already doing so well on the world stage (as only any sport that is doing poorly get reduced funding) and the prize money the association is collecting from the players' winnings on a regular basis, 50% of it, is a welcome bonus, even possibly a reliable and good source of revenue for CBA in actuality, I'd say.

  4. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcll99 View Post
    I think we talk about this in Tang Wei's thread. Apparently, Asian Badminton Championship is a major title for China, even though it's only a GP Gold event.

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...24#post2062124
    Right, the Asia Badminton Championships (aka BAC) is important enough to China, even more so the multi-sport Asian Games.

  5. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,839
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    Right, the Asia Badminton Championships (aka BAC) is important enough to China, even more so the multi-sport Asian Games.
    I would rank importance in the following order for China:

    1. Olympics
    2. World Championship
    3. Asian Games
    4. TUC and Sudirman Cup
    5. All England
    6. Asian Badminton Championship
    7. SS Finals
    8. Other PSS events.
    9. Other SS Events.
    10. GPG events.

    Just my personal observations.

  6. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcll99 View Post
    I would rank importance in the following order for China:

    1. Olympics
    2. World Championship
    3. Asian Games
    4. TUC and Sudirman Cup
    5. All England
    6. Asian Badminton Championship
    7. SS Finals
    8. Other PSS events.
    9. Other SS Events.
    10. GPG events.

    Just my personal observations.
    Basically, I more or less agree with you except that the All England is in recent times, I'm afraid, regarded by CBA/LYB as just one of the many PSS/SS events in a year and does not have pride of place by itself.

    As for the GPGs, I think you can disregard its importance for CHN - it's more for their second tier and junior players to acquire experience and earn ranking points as needed. Seldom do we see CHN's elite players at GPG events.

    But I do sense that the CHN players themselves actually do want to win the All England. For example, when LXR won it last year she expressed at the post-match court-side interview that she was aware of its special significance in view of its long tradition and illustrious history. And Chen Long who won it this year beating Lee CW actually said at the post-match interview that the All England is widely regarded as a mini-WC of sorts and he was delighted to have gained such a victory.

  7. #24
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,766
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    First, LYB's suggestion or proposal refers only to the advertising income not the prize money which still has to be shared 50% with the association.

    Second, I too feel keeping 50% of the advertising money is substantial already but considering most if not all fully independent professional athletes get to pocket 100% of it, it may not be too far-fetched or unreasonable an expectation. As for the taxation part, the athlete is subject to China's income tax law which is rather progressive -- http://www.worldwide-tax.com/china/china_tax.asp .

    Third, maybe LYB is thinking that instead of letting the state, not CBA (which shares 50% of the prize money only), take 50% of the advertising income, why not let the athlete have more, up to 100%, to incentivize them and raise the attraction and stature of the sport as a profession, esp when he considers badminton players are not as well rewarded as , say, their table tennis counterparts in proportion to the physical demands and risk of injury.

    Besides, CBA is known to be adequately if not well funded by the Chinese government as Chinese badminton is already doing so well on the world stage (as only any sport that is doing poorly get reduced funding) and the prize money the association is collecting from the players' winnings on a regular basis, 50% of it, is a welcome bonus, even possibly a reliable and good source of revenue for CBA in actuality, I'd say.
    ok thanks for the info. Still not sure I get you. If your independent and raking in money you have to give away about half in tax, right?
    Are you saying for example LD has to give away 50% to the state/state body and then pay his tax aswell on the remaining 50%?

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    360
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    But 位 also means position (say, title) besides person and other meanings (eg place,seat,location). Anyway, you could be right except that to produce 100 different world champions would most probably require more than a normal person's lifetime to do so; that's why I assume from the context that he meant world championships (titles, the major ones) when he used the term world champions 世界冠军. Perhaps, the reporter himself wasn't too clear either as he didn't elaborate nor ask Li Yongbo for clarification.

    Frankly, no matter how I count, I still don't get it how he arrived at the number 74 'different' world champions in his 20 years tenure as Head Coach beginning 1993. Let's say, counting from 1993, Sun Jun (IBF WC'99), Dong Jiong (World Cup'96), Ji Xinpeng(Olympic gold 2000), Xia Xuanze (WC 2003), Ge Fei and Gu Jun, Gao Ling and Zhang Jun, Zhang Jiewen and Yang Wei, Huang Sui (partnering Gao Ling in 2006 World Cup), Liu Yong (with Ge Fei in 1997 World Cup), Xie Zhongbo and Zhang Yawen (2005 World Cup), Du Jing (with Yu Yang in Beijing Olympic 2008), Gong Zhichao (Olympic gold 2000)Ye Zhaoying, Xie Xingfang, Zhang Ning, Zhu Lin, Lu Lan, Wang Lin, etc,etc... (you may want to give it a try, I'm not too familiar with the earlier ones and have to depend on Wikipedia).

    OTOH, if we count the number of major titles won, we might be able to arrive at 74. Just think, right now, Lin Dan already has 18; Li Xuerui, 3, including the Olympic gold, Sudirman Cup, and Uber Cup; Wang Yihan,3, including WC, Sudirman and Uber Cups; and so on.... when we add up all the major titles won since 1993 (not sure if, in team events, the MS2 and MS3, WS2 and WS3, MD2, and WD2, are considered as well).

    Come to think of it, maybe all the team members in a major championship are counted or maybe not as that would seem to be too many. Whatever, to tally all of it, some research would be necessary to see if the figure adds up. Of course, Li Yongbo is the best person to answer this question.
    It should be the number of titles won, regardless of the winner. 37 WC, 9 SC, 5 TC, 7 UC, 16 OG since 1994.

  9. #26
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    ok thanks for the info. Still not sure I get you. If your independent and raking in money you have to give away about half in tax, right?
    Are you saying for example LD has to give away 50% to the state/state body and then pay his tax aswell on the remaining 50%?
    Yes, it seems so in Lin Dan's case,i.e. he keeps 50% of it after giving 50% to the state and pays tax on it, for example.

    Whether you're a fully independent professional or not, your earnings/income (from salary,advertising,prize money,etc) are taxed accordingly, the amount depending on your tax bracket (say, 45% for monthly income 80,001 RMB and above); that's how I understood it. CMIIW.

  10. #27
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yamsyams View Post
    It should be the number of titles won, regardless of the winner. 37 WC, 9 SC, 5 TC, 7 UC, 16 OG since 1994.
    Sounds plausible. So, assuming your figures are correct, it's based on the total number of titles won regardless of the winners whether individual (for WC and OG) or team (for TUC and SC). Thanks, that should clarify it.

    Also noteworthy is that the Asian Games though important to CHN but being a regional rather than world event is discounted as far as LYB is concerned. Furthermore,just saying, if LYB had included the All England as well, he would probably, offhand, have reached or exceeded his target of 100 already.

  11. #28
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,766
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    Yes, it seems so in Lin Dan's case,i.e. he keeps 50% of it after giving 50% to the state and pays tax on it, for example.

    Whether you're a fully independent professional or not, your earnings/income (from salary,advertising,prize money,etc) are taxed accordingly, the amount depending on your tax bracket (say, 45% for monthly income 80,001 RMB and above); that's how I understood it. CMIIW.
    If that's the reality then that is steep, 50% to the "state" then taxed 45% (again to the state) on his remaining 50%. If however he is 50% tax covered then that is same same as everyone on LD's income.

  12. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Citizen of The World
    Posts
    14,992
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    If that's the reality then that is steep, 50% to the "state" then taxed 45% (again to the state) on his remaining 50%. If however he is 50% tax covered then that is same same as everyone on LD's income.
    Apparently, the state considers advertising income as easy extra money as compared with tournament prize money for which the athlete has to slog his/her guts out and gets their well-deserved compensation whereas in advertising, for which any one athlete can have several sponsors at any one time, all he/she has to do is to act cute,cool or suave in addition to saying a few words to pose for at most an hour or two for the camera, in addition to the occasional obligatory commercial activities.

    Come to think of it, there is a fair bit of truth to it. Taking Lin Dan as an example again,during his almost a year break after the London Olympics and before his sterling WC comeback, Lin Dan was practically enjoying himself away from active competition hence zero tournament prize money, yet his advertising income from various product endorsements keep rolling in, pretty solid figures to boot compared with which the prize money is measly sum.

    Anyway, I can understand LYB's motivation for intending to propose that badminton players be allowed to keep all 100% of the advertising money, esp. when he has in mind their table tennis counterparts of whom he once said many of them are already capable of owning their own houses, let alone other more lucrative sports such as tennis.

    Luckily, badminton ranks as one of the top 3 sports in China,if I'm not wrong; still, LYB has to be mindful of other currently less popular sports, such as golf,snooker, swimming,even athletics, steadily gaining in popularity and contending for the same pool of athletes and sports enthusiasts so much so that he cannot rest easy but to constantly find ways to attract and retain more talents to badminton. Fighting for more advertising money for the badminton players is but one of the steps in the right direction,I suppose.

  13. #30
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,839
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    LYB needs money to run his team. He has trainers for strength, endurance, weight, etc. Nutritional specialists, physiotherapists, etc.

    Needless to say, he has hundreds of people on payroll.

    Lin Dan's 50% contribution is a big part of China National Team's source of income.

    If I remember correctly, LD's income for last year was over RMB 40 million.

  14. #31
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,766
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    Apparently, the state considers advertising income as easy extra money as compared with tournament prize money for which the athlete has to slog his/her guts out and gets their well-deserved compensation whereas in advertising, for which any one athlete can have several sponsors at any one time, all he/she has to do is to act cute,cool or suave in addition to saying a few words to pose for at most an hour or two for the camera, in addition to the occasional obligatory commercial activities.

    Come to think of it, there is a fair bit of truth to it.
    Lol, not sure the athletes view the demand on their time in the same way but I agree with you


    Quote Originally Posted by Justin L View Post
    Anyway, I can understand LYB's motivation for intending to propose that badminton players be allowed to keep all 100% of the advertising money, esp. when he has in mind their table tennis counterparts of whom he once said many of them are already capable of owning their own houses, let alone other more lucrative sports such as tennis.

    Luckily, badminton ranks as one of the top 3 sports in China,if I'm not wrong; still, LYB has to be mindful of other currently less popular sports, such as golf,snooker, swimming,even athletics, steadily gaining in popularity and contending for the same pool of athletes and sports enthusiasts so much so that he cannot rest easy but to constantly find ways to attract and retain more talents to badminton. Fighting for more advertising money for the badminton players is but one of the steps in the right direction,I suppose.
    Ah is that the thinking. Thanks for insight.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •