User Tag List

Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 LastLast
Results 341 to 357 of 390
  1. #341
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    5,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badMania View Post
    Well said Krisna!! That's why its important for INA badminton to fix the internal problems within PBSI first, before we can bring in the brands to sponsor our players. It does seem that the new administration is capable of doing that (slowly but surely).

    To rely on the money from Americans & Europeans???? I don't that's feasible given the fact that the current crisis hit them more than Asian companies Even AIG is withdrawing its sponsorship of Manchester United in the coming year.

    Instead, we have lots of "invisible" Asian companies with deep pockets that are passionate enough to support badminton, like Li Ning, Pertamina, etc.
    Yes indeed, badMania... In the long looonnnggg run... Sometime around 2050 to 2100... These countries: Greater China [including HK, Macau, Taiwan], India, Unified Korea, ASEAN, Russia, Australia, and Brazil will contribute more to the Earth's GDP than today's situation. By that time Japan, Europe and the Americas will still be a large portion of the world's economy... but they won't be as dominant as today.

    Companies and brands from those countries I mention above will be more world class than today too... If we cannot get the involvement of Wilson, Spalding, Dunlop, Nike, Adidas etc. today, fine! Getting Li Ning, Victor, Apacs involved today is already a better move than doing nothing to even out the strength badminton brands.

    Business history have shown again and again, consumers benefit most when their options are served by several strong brands competing in an oligopolistic situation. Example: sport shoes consumers have a good time being offered cool TV ads, cool overall marketing campaigns [oftentimes using sports stars], and cool products... by Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc.

    Imagine the badminton equipment brands doing the same thing as those guys but for outcool-ing the other in badminton equipment... That would be THE cool situation that will improve the popularity of badminton!

  2. #342
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krisna View Post
    Yes indeed, badMania... In the long looonnnggg run... Sometime around 2050 to 2100... These countries: Greater China [including HK, Macau, Taiwan], India, Unified Korea, ASEAN, Russia, Australia, and Brazil will contribute more to the Earth's GDP than today's situation. By that time Japan, Europe and the Americas will still be a large portion of the world's economy... but they won't be as dominant as today.

    Companies and brands from those countries I mention above will be more world class than today too... If we cannot get the involvement of Wilson, Spalding, Dunlop, Nike, Adidas etc. today, fine! Getting Li Ning, Victor, Apacs involved today is already a better move than doing nothing to even out the strength badminton brands.

    Business history have shown again and again, consumers benefit most when their options are served by several strong brands competing in an oligopolistic situation. Example: sport shoes consumers have a good time being offered cool TV ads, cool overall marketing campaigns [oftentimes using sports stars], and cool products... by Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc.

    Imagine the badminton equipment brands doing the same thing as those guys but for outcool-ing the other in badminton equipment... That would be THE cool situation that will improve the popularity of badminton!
    Krisna, you still do not get it. Companies and brands are not market makers. They only come into action when there is a market, and even that it must be a worthwhile market.
    Show me the market and I will show you the brands and the sponsors for they will come like flies.
    Re Olympics sponsors see one www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26107649/

  3. #343
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    If anyone thinks Rule 51 is just a rule and that it can be bent or flouted, think again

    Before the Games begins, the IOC arranges for squads to go around and mask every visible logo at not just the competition venues but also at every other official venue (including the residential quarters, the media centre, the technical zones and the administrative areas).

    You'd be surprised to know that they mask every brand name or logo that hasn't paid for the right to be seen there. As a result, you see logos and names masked on anything and everything from elevators, washroom taps and liquid soap dispensers to switches, fire-extinguishers and urinals!

    Even the media isn't spared - no branded T-shirts, no branded caps, etc - any visible logos on the cameras and even on the production crews' IFB/PL headsets are masked before use.

    The extent of their zealousness is best illustrated by this clause:

    "No Authorized Identification may appear on or near the neck or the collar, on the body (e.g. tattoo) of any person participating in the Games or on any of the following Items: contact lenses, earplugs, mouth guards, noseclips, water bottles, umbrellas."


    Tattoos, contact lenses, earplugs...

  4. #344
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's the Wall Street Journal on this tangential topic

  5. #345
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Alright..

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldhand View Post
    I won't attempt to explain any of taneepak's posts.
    Only he can do that... and it's quite beyond me too
    ...
    The clauses are clear and self-explanatory.

    The '12 sponsors' could have paid big money for on-air advertising during the Olympic broadcasts in a particular country or area or for outdoor advertising or for merchandising - but certainly not for advertising within the venues
    ..appreciate for doing a bit of research on that!..
    Yes, i thought of the same thing (the last paragraph), but how come it wasn't made clear until now??..hmm..

    Btw, still waiting for taneepak to explain his point of discussion and the view opposite of his. Krisna already put forth his point of discussion and what he thought is the opposite of his...Or are they just pure ramblings??..
    Last edited by ctjcad; 02-13-2009 at 11:21 AM.

  6. #346
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's an opinion on marketing badminton from Prakash Padukone.


    Indore, Feb 11 (PTI)

    Badminton officials in the country can learn a thing or two about marketing from the BCCI (Board for Control of Cricket in India), said the legendary Prakash Padukone as he lauded the cricket body for the way it has promoted the game in the country.

    "I have always been a fan of the BCCI and the manner in which it markets cricket surely deserves to be praised," Padukone told reporters here today.

    The badminton authorities in the country should not shy awqay from having an IPL-style (Indian Premier League) tournament that is being conducted by the BCCI, he said.

    The former All-England champion said the badminton world should learn from the BCCI on how to improve the game.

    ---------------------

    In other words, it's the BWF (and not the sponsors) that should take the lead in this regard

  7. #347
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    ..appreciate for doing a bit of research on that!..
    Yes, i thought of the same thing (the last paragraph), but how come it wasn't made clear until now??..hmm..
    that's because evil empire don't like to project their image as evil, and IOC is even more evil than yonex.

  8. #348
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    ..appreciate for doing a bit of research on that!..
    Yes, i thought of the same thing (the last paragraph), but how come it wasn't made clear until now??..hmm..

    Btw, still waiting for taneepak to explain his point of discussion and the view opposite of his. Krisna already put forth his point of discussion and what he thought is the opposite of his...Or are they just pure ramblings??..
    All of us (in my industry) have a copy of the IOC's Rules.
    It's must reading for anyone who works on any part of the Games.

    It's also handy in case you want to argue a point at the venue

  9. #349
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    5,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    As I have said before sponsors are not market makers; they merely meet a market's needs. If there is no market there will be no sponsors.
    Yonex is a small potato and just simply doesn't have the muscle or in simple words, money, to make the game of badminton more popular. It is also not a market maker; it merely tries to meet the needs of the market. There are more badminton players in China than all the rest of the world put together; and Chinese racquets outsell Yonex racquets worldwide, more so in China. Even they are not market makers, just meeting the market's demand.
    Sponsors are not market makers? 1960s-70s-paradigm! Outdated-thinking...! Most business experts now clearly know that sponsorships and marketing efforts count a lot towards the choices made by consumers... I now sincerely hope BWF people do not share the same paradigm. I am afraid they do have that kind of paradigm... thus they cannot see the crux of the matter on badminton's popularity stagnation...

  10. #350
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default I meant..

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    that's because evil empire don't like to project their image as evil, and IOC is even more evil than yonex.
    ..why it took Oldhand to do the explaining rather than the member who made that comment earlier...

    "Only the names, slogans, logos, and advertisements of these 12 sponsors were allowed."

    Allowed where??..

    Btw, cooler, could you attempt to explain, briefly, Mr. T's point of discussion here and the views opposite of his?..
    Last edited by ctjcad; 02-13-2009 at 11:35 AM.

  11. #351
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's something for you to chew on:

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldhand View Post
    [...]The Summer & Winter Games bring in around USD 5 billion in marketing revenue during a modern-day quadrennium (the 4-year Olympic cycle).
    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    that's because evil empire don't like to project their image as evil, and IOC is even more evil than yonex.
    92% of this money mountain goes to the Games Organising Committee, the National Olympic Committees and International Federations and Associations of the many Olympic sports (yes, the BWF too gets a share).

    The remaining 8% goes to the IOC's administrative expenses.
    Just 8 percent?
    Yup.

    That's USD 400 million!
    Ahem, I'd sure like a job with the IOC

  12. #352
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    ..why it took Oldhand to do the explaining rather than the member who made that comment earlier...

    Btw, could you attempt to explain, briefly, Mr. T's point of discussion here and the views opposite of his?..
    You're going to be worrying this bone for a long time, chris
    Nothing is likely to come of it though!

  13. #353
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default ^^Not even..^^

    ..from the member who's made all the posts, opposite those of Krisna's??....Are they just ramblings??..ayeyaiyai...

  14. #354
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Krisna, you still do not get it. Companies and brands are not market makers. They only come into action when there is a market, and even that it must be a worthwhile market.
    Show me the market and I will show you the brands and the sponsors for they will come like flies.
    Re Olympics sponsors see one www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26107649/
    it is chicken and egg paradox.
    Queation is what is a worthwhile market? better yet what do u mean by 'marrket'? Since badminton is believed to be 2nd most participated sport in the world and yet badminton is not a mainstream sport? Yonex had the badminton market cornered for decades and only just recently LN,victor are muscling in and likely gonna take badminton to the next level in popularity. Doesn't this say LN, yonex, victor were/are the market makers?

  15. #355
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    5,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Krisna, you still do not get it. Companies and brands are not market makers. They only come into action when there is a market, and even that it must be a worthwhile market.
    Show me the market and I will show you the brands and the sponsors for they will come like flies.
    taneepak, sponsors and marketing driving activities in building brands are market makers... I am not saying that a defected product and lousy service can be sold. No. But... market driving strategies influence the choices consumers make. They influence what is cool and uncool. Thus what people choose to do or not do. Markets are there to be created by several competing brands...

    The concept of the 'market-driven' strategies have largely been left to the history books. The basic tenets of that kind of conceptual thinking have many inherent flaws. I can give one whole lecture about the difference... and why people now are practicing market driving strategies. But BC forum is not the place for that. Please go to your nearest top notch business school and have a discussion with their top Management, Marketing, Business gurus...

    If you do not believe in the academic aspects of it, then I suggest talking to people in successful companies like Nestle, Procter & Gamble, etc. I don't suggest you talk to natural resource people like coal and oil companies people or finance people... many of them [though not all] have limited or narrow minded knowledge on how market-making really work in this world. Even though they can be good operational people and competent finance executives, many are terrible marketers.

  16. #356
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Krisna, I did have a marketing background being a marketing director before becoming a CEO. In my tenure in marketing I wouldn't say I made any new markets but I came close with new applications, i.e replacing traditional natural resin in batik printing with petroleum resin, using epoxy resins to mend airport runways which at that time was unheard of, and making a solvent chemical from a much cheaper petroleum stream that was unheard of at that time. Thinking hard about it, I did make a new market and in quite substantial volumes too, but it is something I am not proud of in retrospect because of its huge carbon footprint. Back then carbon emission was not such a dirty word.

  17. #357
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To go back in time, badminton was even very popular in SE Asia in the 1950s. There was no Yonex. Racquet and shuttlecocks were made by Slazengers, Dunlop, Silver Grey, Blue Bird and RSL. Sponsors did not really exist, players paid their own expenses to compete in the AE.
    Today the game has extended to China and Korea, both relatively newcomers. Now more Asians play the game. The Asian market has grown larger, and with its increasing size comes the new guards in the name of Yonex and others. The larger the playing badminton population the more sponsors come on the scene and the more they have to be competitive.
    This is classic "show me the maket and I will show you the sponsors".

Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. badminton popularity in the US
    By LiNingSucksA$$ in forum General Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 09-22-2010, 08:56 AM
  2. Shortcut to Badminton Popularity
    By cooler in forum General Forum
    Replies: 34
    : 03-10-2010, 07:07 PM
  3. increasing badminton's popularity
    By Mini Me in forum General Forum
    Replies: 18
    : 05-15-2009, 12:48 PM
  4. Fashion Appeal - The KEY to badminton popularity!
    By Trance in forum General Forum
    Replies: 106
    : 08-25-2008, 11:31 AM
  5. Badminton Popularity - Rants
    By Chun in forum General Forum
    Replies: 13
    : 07-01-2007, 07:13 PM

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
  •