User Tag List

Page 6 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast
Results 86 to 102 of 390
  1. #86
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,903
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default IBF & National Associations should be more proactive

    Yes I agree that the IBF should be more proactive and help the mass media in disseminating badminton news, events, tournaments, etc, at the highest international level. The local national associations should do likewise at the local, domestic or even regional levels. They cannot afford to act only when approached or requested to.

    Similarly, they should actively seek out the sponsors, sell their ideas, excite and constantly engage them. Those who are proactive will certainly do better than others who are lame. As suggested, these institutions should have a department or sub-committee solely engaged in churning out promotion and marketing ideas and interact with as many prospective sponsors as possible. Some already have but are not producing the desired results. Why?

    The US and Japan are the world's biggest and second biggest economies. The best brains and entreprenuers can be found there in great numbers. However, unlike the US, Japan is almost a 'closed' society, homogeneous in many things especially in the Japanese language. Despite this Japanese companies have gone multinational, global and was the first to enchanted the world with its relatively cheap, yet high quality products. I think Japan would have grown much faster if it was well-versed in the English language. And herein lies the difference. Even then, Yonex managed to penetrate the world market and remained No.1 badminton equipment and sponsor for such a long time! No genuine US competition.

    English enables the US to reach out to many more countries, cultures and people. And continued advancement in American technology in the mass media makes it even easier, more appealing and faster. So the US dominates in almost all of man's notable endeavours. Without US participation, there is a big vacuum. Therefore without US participation in world badminton, badminton could never hope to attain the popularity and glory it deserves, however you view it. It will always play second fiddle to big brother tennis.

    I don't think even China and India combined, the two fastest growing economies in the world which are much more interested in badminton than the US, can ever replace or displace US influence. But if China and India decide to pour more money into badminton, it is at least better than nothing.

  2. #87
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    a shortcut way is receiving support from a (or some) rich badminton fans . In vancouver, a rich software founder sold his company for 800 million, is building many soccer fields in vancouver, including one on the waterfront is in the drawing plan.

    Current owner Greg Kerfoot purchases the Whitecaps and Breakers in 2003. Under Kerfoot the Men's, Women's and Youth teams come together to share a philosophy, logo, and name: Whitecaps F.C.

    How did you become interested in the Whitecaps and Breakers?

    [Greg Kerfoot] - I was asked by a friend who knew I was a community minded sports enthusiast to look at helping to keep the clubs alive. I had been aware of the situation but assumed, like most people, that great teams like the Whitecaps and Breakers would find new owners easily. My friend persuaded me that the teams were more likely going to fold if someone didn't step in. The reason I decided to go ahead is because I think Vancouver should have top flight soccer. I think it is good for the community, good for kids and good for players who need that next development level.



  3. #88
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    KL & Sg
    Posts
    5,315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A sport that is similar to badminton in many aspects, but more popular, is table tennis (almost everyone has heard of it and it is not in danger of being dropped from the Olympics). To study why badminton is not as popular as we want it to be, we can compare ourselves to table tennis.

    1. Believe it or not, there is less money in table tennis. It may be sponsored by a big name like Volkswagen but the total prize money available is only maybe about half of badminton's.

    2. Similar to Yonex, the equipment manufacturers (Butterfly etc.) are not big X-factor names like Nike or Adidas.

    3. The domination by the Chinese is even more serious than badminton, but more European countries are in the fray (although it seems Europe badminton is also developing to more than just Denmark and UK). Chinese exports are also a norm.

    4. It is a national-controlled (instead of individualistic) sport. Some people may be turned off by that.

    5. There are no babes or hunks like Kournikova or Agassi.

    6. It is also very passionately supported in some nations (Sweden, China, Japan etc.) but I imagine not as big as badminton in the big 5: Indonesia, Malaysia, Denmark, Korea and China.

    There could be more similarities but you get the point. But what is the difference that makes table tennis more popular?

    Is it the constant fast and furious pace of the ball? Whereas in badminton singles, sometimes the rallies are a bit boring.

    Is it because it has been an Olympic sport for a longer period and therefore had more exposure?

    Is it a class thing? Countries good in table tennis are China, Korea and European countries like France and Germany, countries that are strong and high-class and have lots of international clout. Whereas who are Malaysia and Indonesia? Even Denmark is not considered in the snob-class in Europe. (I don't mean to offend the rest of Europe here )

    Or maybe the reason is that major table tennis tournaments are held all over the world with a reasonably fair distribution. Whereas in badminton, outside of Asia, only Denmark stages a 5-star or better tournament. Which means top-class badminton is mostly exposed to places where badminton is already popular.

  4. #89
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    3,342
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hcyong
    Is it a class thing? Countries good in table tennis are China, Korea and European countries like France and Germany, countries that are strong and high-class and have lots of international clout. Whereas who are Malaysia and Indonesia? Even Denmark is not considered in the snob-class in Europe. (I don't mean to offend the rest of Europe here )
    I think you need to explain your use of the word "class". It seems that you apply the concept of class to countries, something that certainly does not make sense to a European. To me, "class" is a social concept. Here in Sweden, for instance, the stereotype would be that tennis is an upper class sport, badminton is essentially a middle class sport, whereas table tennis is lower middle class or working class sport. Luckily, not many label people (or sports!) in terms of class anymore.

  5. #90
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    KL & Sg
    Posts
    5,315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mag
    I think you need to explain your use of the word "class". It seems that you apply the concept of class to countries, something that certainly does not make sense to a European. To me, "class" is a social concept. Here in Sweden, for instance, the stereotype would be that tennis is an upper class sport, badminton is essentially a middle class sport, whereas table tennis is lower middle class or working class sport. Luckily, not many label people (or sports!) in terms of class anymore.
    I am applying "class" to countries. But really, it is a perception thing, I guess. Generally speaking, sports that are popular in "higher-class" countries are more easily accepted by the people in "lower-class" countries. So, these sports spread easily worldwide, not specifically in participation but also in viewership. Hence we get baseball and American football (and sometimes even Australian-rules football) on our telly. Inversely, sports that are popular in "lower-class" countries may find it hard to break out into the global market. Anyway, this is only a speculative theory.

  6. #91
    Regular Member ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Malaysian Citizen of the World
    Posts
    13,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    One of the way to have more interactive with media and even spectators is to have a Off court interview right after the game with the players and also a press conference with the winner and of coz the loser. Like what other games like Basketball, Tennis , Golf , Motor Racing etc does.

  7. #92
    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 hcyong
    Is it the constant fast and furious pace of the ball? Whereas in badminton singles, sometimes the rallies are a bit boring.
    badminton is way more diversified in term of speed, power, and tactic. I cant say badminton double is slower than table tennis. TT look faster because of distance between players are shorter. If you give me a 1/8 court lift(single or double), what is the chance of you retreiving my smash? 0.000001% chance. Chance of defending a ping pong ball smashed from 8 ft away by equally skilled players? the chance is very very good , > 50%. A badminton player is way more physically fit than a TT player of the same level (testimony came from an accomplished TT player after seeing some badminton).

    In term of slowness, try golf, soccer, baseball, tennis, bowling, billards, etc which are all slower than TT but how come these sports are way more popular than TT in both participation and media?
    Last edited by cooler; 04-21-2005 at 04:09 PM.

  8. #93
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think that the terms Developed, Industrialized and Undeveloped are more appropriate to discuss "class". We can also use First World, Second World . . . etc.

  9. #94
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,989
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default some thoughts

    First off I think the dominance of Yonex probably is part of the problem more than part of the solution. We can't blame Yonex for this, they make sound business descisions, as they should! But I think IBF, national badminton organisations etc could do alot more to promote healthy competition..
    Just as an indication of this we can see that the malaysian team mos likely got much better terms from their current Yonex sponsorship (after having had their previous contract with Gosen) than if they wouldn't hade signed for a competitor the years before!!

    "Gosen's five-year deal was in the form of US$200,000 (RM760,000) and equipment which was said to be close to RM1 million a year but Yonex's deal is said to be far more lucrative.
    Sunrise Sports promotional manager Alice Lee confirmed that Yonex has already submitted a proposal to BAM and is expecting a final decision by the end of the month. Singapore-based Sunrise Sports is the sole distributor of Yonex products in South East Asia, East Asia, India and Sri Lanka.
    Although Alice refused to give further details on the deal, it is learnt that Yonex's total annual sponsorship (in cash and kind) will be worth close to RM2 million. "
    As IBF has sold the rights on all IBF tournaments to be more or less exclusive for Yonex marketing (check out http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/docu...Guidelines.pdf ) competition is pretty much killed... Which I suspect lowers the sponsorship deals, prizemoney etc in the long run (once again I think Yonex is doing the right thing here, Hovever i think it's fair to question wheater it is in the long term interst of the sport for IBF not trying to ensure that there is as much competition as possible amongst equipment and clothing manufacturers for it's events..

    also as many of the other posters pointed out.... Marketing is everything...
    Exposure has to start with Players.. Players has to be seen, inteviewed, known to the public..

    It's impossible to market "the game", to a wide audience.. What has to be done is to market one (or of course the ideal would be a two carismatic antagonists :-) ) Big name. If people dont' know any player they will not take interest in the game.. But on the other hand if they where interested in a player they would likely have an easy time to pick up on the rules etc..

    Think Tiger Woods, Kournikova, McEnroe, Dennis rodman, David Beckham... here... It's not only the oncourt performance that counts.. marketing wise :-)

    just some thoughts on this subject...

    /Twobeer

  10. #95
    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 twobeer
    First off I think the dominance of Yonex probably is part of the problem more than part of the solution. We can't blame Yonex for this, they make sound business descisions, as they should! But I think IBF, national badminton organisations etc could do alot more to promote healthy competition..
    Just as an indication of this we can see that the malaysian team mos likely got much better terms from their current Yonex sponsorship (after having had their previous contract with Gosen) than if they wouldn't hade signed for a competitor the years before!!



    As IBF has sold the rights on all IBF tournaments to be more or less exclusive for Yonex marketing (check out http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/docu...Guidelines.pdf ) competition is pretty much killed... Which I suspect lowers the sponsorship deals, prizemoney etc in the long run (once again I think Yonex is doing the right thing here, Hovever i think it's fair to question wheater it is in the long term interst of the sport for IBF not trying to ensure that there is as much competition as possible amongst equipment and clothing manufacturers for it's events..

    also as many of the other posters pointed out.... Marketing is everything...
    Exposure has to start with Players.. Players has to be seen, inteviewed, known to the public..

    It's impossible to market "the game", to a wide audience.. What has to be done is to market one (or of course the ideal would be a two carismatic antagonists :-) ) Big name. If people dont' know any player they will not take interest in the game.. But on the other hand if they where interested in a player they would likely have an easy time to pick up on the rules etc..

    Think Tiger Woods, Kournikova, McEnroe, Dennis rodman, David Beckham... here... It's not only the oncourt performance that counts.. marketing wise :-)

    just some thoughts on this subject...

    /Twobeer
    I've waited and waited (since i joined BC) and finally someone got the right answer (congrats twobeer) It is IBF's own doing, they've sold their soul to yonex. That's why i keep hammering (hinting) the point ibf need to lead, and not to be leaded. U cant blame yonex, they r just executing their best business model for now. U think yonex hasnt crunch their number ? U think yonex don't have a business plan and wander around hopelessly? It is well known that JP corp. has 1, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100 year business plan. It's a business and ''they r mastering" it. Coining from badminton jargon, clinically brilliant
    Last edited by cooler; 04-21-2005 at 06:14 PM.

  11. #96
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,945
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler
    I've waited and waited (since i joined BC) and finally someone got the right answer It is IBF's own doing, they've sold their soul to yonex. That's why i keep hammering (hinting) the point ibf need to lead, and not to be leaded. U cant blame yonex, they r just executing their best business model for now. U think yonex hasnt crunch their number ? U think yonex don't have a business plan and wander around hopelessly? It is well known that JP corp. has 1, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100 year business plan. It's a business and ''they r mastering" it.
    why didn't you just say that out loud in the first place?

  12. #97
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    2,214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, the whole "I know something, and now you try to guess" thing is, uh, a decidedly, uh, different.

    -dave

  13. #98
    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 kwun
    why didn't you just say that out loud in the first place?
    In a way, reasons and solutions offered by everyone else before weren't really incorrect. It is thru this long discussion that we all understand why badminton is what it is today, both good and bad. Why i didnt say it out loud before? If i did, people immediate reaction will be all negative against yonex which i feel it wouldn't be fair. Because of yonex nurtured badminton to what it is today but on the same breath, because of yonex, badminton is what badminton is today also Think of ibf like being a pet dog/cat. This pet is fed and protected by the owner so it stay around. However, it could run away and look for playmates (sponsors) but it risk losing this cozy tie with the owner.

  14. #99
    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 wood_22_chuck
    Yeah, the whole "I know something, and now you try to guess" thing is, uh, a decidedly, uh, different.

    -dave
    dave, yonex and ibf didnt tell me all these things so it's just my theory. As in any new theory, many theorists get trashed for saying thing so different. (IBF could sue me defamation and yonex for misrepresentation) Only thru discussion and time, would a theory be accepted as norm.

    ex. in the past, scientists have been killed for saying the earth is round. Now, we dont think about falling off the edge driving to disneyland.
    Last edited by cooler; 04-21-2005 at 06:49 PM.

  15. #100
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    S. Pasadena
    Posts
    193
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer
    First off I think the dominance of Yonex probably is part of the problem more than part of the solution. We can't blame Yonex for this, they make sound business descisions, as they should! But I think IBF, national badminton organisations etc could do alot more to promote healthy competition..
    Just as an indication of this we can see that the malaysian team mos likely got much better terms from their current Yonex sponsorship (after having had their previous contract with Gosen) than if they wouldn't hade signed for a competitor the years before!!



    As IBF has sold the rights on all IBF tournaments to be more or less exclusive for Yonex marketing (check out http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/docu...Guidelines.pdf ) competition is pretty much killed... Which I suspect lowers the sponsorship deals, prizemoney etc in the long run (once again I think Yonex is doing the right thing here, Hovever i think it's fair to question wheater it is in the long term interst of the sport for IBF not trying to ensure that there is as much competition as possible amongst equipment and clothing manufacturers for it's events..

    also as many of the other posters pointed out.... Marketing is everything...
    Exposure has to start with Players.. Players has to be seen, inteviewed, known to the public..

    It's impossible to market "the game", to a wide audience.. What has to be done is to market one (or of course the ideal would be a two carismatic antagonists :-) ) Big name. If people dont' know any player they will not take interest in the game.. But on the other hand if they where interested in a player they would likely have an easy time to pick up on the rules etc..

    Think Tiger Woods, Kournikova, McEnroe, Dennis rodman, David Beckham... here... It's not only the oncourt performance that counts.. marketing wise :-)

    just some thoughts on this subject...

    /Twobeer
    All of this goes to show a very simple point. IBF cant do much anymore besides trying to change the game or the scoring since they already sold all the rights to the major tournaments. It's sad since there are much bigger sponsor out there such as Coke, Pepsi, Gatorade, Nike, McDonalds,.. ETC. ?At this point Yonex ultimately has much more control than IBF for the overall trend of badminton so its pointless to count on IBF to make badminton more popular.

  16. #101
    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 Jumpalot
    All of this goes to show a very simple point. IBF cant do much anymore besides trying to change the game or the scoring since they already sold all the rights to the major tournaments. It's sad since there are much bigger sponsor out there such as Coke, Pepsi, Gatorade, Nike, McDonalds,.. ETC. ?At this point Yonex ultimately has much more control than IBF for the overall trend of badminton so its pointless to count on IBF to make badminton more popular.
    I think ibf still has sufficient power and flexibility to promote badminton greatly without contravening its contract wif yonex. Yonex doesnt hold rights to broadcasting, video distributions to name a couple. There are still lotta creative ways ibf can do things. From my brief look of the contract, yonex holds

    1. rights to shuttlecock and court equipment names shown within stadium
    2. rights to certain block of area of advertisment.


    on page 23, ibf is free to advertise sponsors from other industry, including other SPORT EQUIPMENT MAKERS. Even allow logo of equipments not supplied by yonex on the court (clothing, racket, strings, shoes). I have many ideas but then i'll be working for IBF for free Surely ibf official knows more than a racket bender like me
    Last edited by cooler; 04-22-2005 at 03:32 PM.

  17. #102
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    2,214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmmmm ... if this postulation is correct, shouldn't we be lobbying YONEX instead of IBF?

    -dave

Page 6 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 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
  •