User Tag List

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 35 to 51 of 87
  1. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London/HongKong
    Posts
    421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Carlton and Dunlop used to be the market leaders before Yonex.

    Besides from China, Korea and Indonesia, the three badminton strongholds, you can find most players from other countries, namely, Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan, Hong Kong, GB etc etc are sponsored by various manufacturers. Which is the way to go, I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoppy View Post
    Im not old enough to say this, but i heard that Carlton was the market leader before YY overtook them in the 70s. Right or wrong YY has enjoyed so many years of domination and ofcourse $$$ so its about time market share to be really shared.

    I can see Badminton sponsorship to go to the tennis direction whereby players have different options to choose from. Im not againts the sponsorship of national team (especially if they play in national team comp) but players should have freedom about who they would like to be sponsored.

  2. #36
    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 Yoppy View Post
    Im not old enough to say this, but i heard that Carlton was the market leader before YY overtook them in the 70s. Right or wrong YY has enjoyed so many years of domination and ofcourse $$$ so its about time market share to be really shared.

    I can see Badminton sponsorship to go to the tennis direction whereby players have different options to choose from. Im not againts the sponsorship of national team (especially if they play in national team comp) but players should have freedom about who they would like to be sponsored.
    Quote Originally Posted by colekwok View Post
    Carlton and Dunlop used to be the market leaders before Yonex.

    Besides from China, Korea and Indonesia, the three badminton strongholds, you can find most players from other countries, namely, Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan, Hong Kong, GB etc etc are sponsored by various manufacturers. Which is the way to go, I agree.
    those are idealistic view. Team sponsorhisp benefit more players and while specific sponsorship reward only a few players. Who doesnt want to be like tiger wood and federer but fair is fair, they didnt milk gov't /taxpayers money to get where they r today. So, u r advocating gov't/taxpayers foot all the training, food, medical, accomdation, travel expense until a player become international pro and then let them cut own deal with sponsors? Ha, LOL

    Look at canada, US, yonex sponsored certain individual players. Wow, we are international badminton powerhouse lol. Oh look, team sponsorship for INA, KOR, china, MAS and look where they are

    btw, yonex makes most of their money from golf and tennis. Most of their badminton profit went into helping to foster badminton worldwide. I wouldn't say badminton is their core profit center. SH can correct me if i'm wrong but that's how i remember it.
    Last edited by cooler; 04-17-2010 at 05:28 PM.

  3. #37
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    btw, yonex makes most of their money from golf and tennis. Most of their badminton profit went into helping to foster badminton worldwide. I wouldn't say badminton is their core profit center. SH can correct me if i'm wrong but that's how i remember it.
    Yonex core revenue streams is badminton. Tennis benefits more directly from this than their golf division.

    Yonex is a small player globally in tennis

  4. #38
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,658
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In Europe and North America, tennis is subsidizing badminton because Tennis market is much bigger in these 2 markets for YY. In Asia, badminton is def subsidizing tennis because of reverse. The truth is, in Asia, Babolat and wilson took up more than 50% of tennis market share. Yonex use to have 25% of market share in late 80 and through out 90s. We are still waiting for the next Martina N. to be born...
    At the end, it is a wash out for each region on subsidizing.

  5. #39
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,876
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    those are idealistic view. Team sponsorhisp benefit more players and while specific sponsorship reward only a few players. Who doesnt want to be like tiger wood and federer but fair is fair, they didnt milk gov't /taxpayers money to get where they r today. So, u r advocating gov't/taxpayers foot all the training, food, medical, accomdation, travel expense until a player become international pro and then let them cut own deal with sponsors? Ha, LOL

    Look at canada, US, yonex sponsored certain individual players. Wow, we are international badminton powerhouse lol. Oh look, team sponsorship for INA, KOR, china, MAS and look where they are
    Yes its a bit more tricky in badminton. Top players need to train with top players all the time to maintain/improve playing level. Often its also the case that joining the national team is the only way for national level player to improve and become best in pro. Lets take INA Pelatnas camp for example, its simply the ultimate holly ground for INA club players to aim for if they want to compete in the highest level. Club can only bring these player to a certain level and then they will be passed on to the Pelatnas (in a selection process) for the next level.

    Now does it mean that these players should be bound to any sponsorship contract written pior to their joining in? As a matter of fact shouldn't be the contract between YY and national team have a limitation to only when national team is performing? Shouldn't it also be that the greatest financial burden lies in the hand of PBSI/Govt it self?

    IMO, a country like INA depends too much on YY funding which as a result has limit INA player to receive bigger portion of the funding. PBSI is just too lazy to find other mean of income for the organisation.

  6. #40
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To me, joining the national team is like signing a contract. The players are fully aware of the pro and cons before get their feet into the door. If they think they can deal with the cons, do not complain afterward. If they do not like it, do not join, train by yourself, and face the result like a man, do not whinning.

    To me, the worst kind is to try to sqeeze the better part of both, and think the world has to go around themselves. They take the taxpayers $$$, enjoy all the freebies, getting paid, even though 99% of them never really get to the ultimate stage. However, once they become somebody, they suddenly getting greedy, and cover their greediness with a fake mask of "freedom"... well, well, well...

    Be a man, choose your side, and face it. There's no perfect solution, and you are not going to be guaranteed to be on the better side each time.

  7. #41
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentheart View Post
    In Europe and North America, tennis is subsidizing badminton because Tennis market is much bigger in these 2 markets for YY. In Asia, badminton is def subsidizing tennis because of reverse. The truth is, in Asia, Babolat and wilson took up more than 50% of tennis market share. Yonex use to have 25% of market share in late 80 and through out 90s. We are still waiting for the next Martina N. to be born...
    At the end, it is a wash out for each region on subsidizing.
    The tennis division is definitely NOT subsidizing the badminton division in North American. The tennis market share that Yonex receives is far too small (WAY behind Babolat, Wilson, Head, Prince, Dunlop). The USA is the largest individual market for Tennis and Yonex STRUGGLES in that market.

  8. #42
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,876
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    To me, joining the national team is like signing a contract. The players are fully aware of the pro and cons before get their feet into the door. If they think they can deal with the cons, do not complain afterward. If they do not like it, do not join, train by yourself, and face the result like a man, do not whinning.

    To me, the worst kind is to try to sqeeze the better part of both, and think the world has to go around themselves. They take the taxpayers $$$, enjoy all the freebies, getting paid, even though 99% of them never really get to the ultimate stage. However, once they become somebody, they suddenly getting greedy, and cover their greediness with a fake mask of "freedom"... well, well, well...

    Be a man, choose your side, and face it. There's no perfect solution, and you are not going to be guaranteed to be on the better side each time.
    Only few will complain later on, its not the main issue. Its not about being a man or gay. I can not find any profesional sport other than badminton that have the same constraint and the contractual issue that badminton pros face.

    A footballer can be sponsored by Addidas at club level while he will be wearing Nike for the national team. Roger federer uses Wilson racket while wearing Nike shirt, whereas LD can not wear a YY shoe because CHN nat team is sponsored by LN. In badminton, once you signed, from head to toe you are covered.

    Well I just think that badminton pros deserve to get more, thats all. The national teams have been in the past made YY advertising easy and cheap. It was possible cos YY was "the only" company, but i guess things have changed and IMO national teams around the world should have a bigger bargaining power in negotiating with YY.

  9. #43
    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 Yoppy View Post
    Only few will complain later on, its not the main issue. Its not about being a man or gay. I can not find any profesional sport other than badminton that have the same constraint and the contractual issue that badminton pros face.

    A footballer can be sponsored by Addidas at club level while he will be wearing Nike for the national team. Roger federer uses Wilson racket while wearing Nike shirt, whereas LD can not wear a YY shoe because CHN nat team is sponsored by LN. In badminton, once you signed, from head to toe you are covered.

    Well I just think that badminton pros deserve to get more, thats all. The national teams have been in the past made YY advertising easy and cheap. It was possible cos YY was "the only" company, but i guess things have changed and IMO national teams around the world should have a bigger bargaining power in negotiating with YY.
    'should' only works in your idealized world. Since badminton isn't yet a mainstream pro sport, u,national team nor players can not go around asking sponsors they 'should' do this and that.

  10. #44
    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 adidascanada View Post
    Yonex core revenue streams is badminton. Tennis benefits more directly from this than their golf division.

    Yonex is a small player globally in tennis
    i said 'profit'. Business exist because of profit. Business with great revenue but without profit don't last too long...

  11. #45
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    24
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yonex will still have its loyal fans

  12. #46
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yonex's net profit for the year ended Mar 31, 2010 was US$6.5 million.
    Li Ning's net profit for the year ended Dec 31, 2009 was US$138 million.

  13. #47
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London/HongKong
    Posts
    421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Yonex's net profit for the year ended Mar 31, 2010 was US$6.5 million.
    Li Ning's net profit for the year ended Dec 31, 2009 was US$138 million.
    If you trust the figures.......

  14. #48
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    i said 'profit'. Business exist because of profit. Business with great revenue but without profit don't last too long...
    You are correct but without revenue profit is not possible....

  15. #49
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,876
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    'should' only works in your idealized world. Since badminton isn't yet a mainstream pro sport, u,national team nor players can not go around asking sponsors they 'should' do this and that.
    well they can now. im sure LN is eager to sponsor more nat team, if they can provide more than YY, why not?

  16. #50
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Yonex's net profit for the year ended Mar 31, 2010 was US$6.5 million.
    Li Ning's net profit for the year ended Dec 31, 2009 was US$138 million.
    6.5m net profit is a very small figure for a company like Yonex.
    Li Ning's figure is small for it's kind of establishments in China. I would expect them to profit at least between 200m - 400m. But i guess there is many figures that the floating around.
    Last edited by ants; 04-18-2010 at 10:19 AM.

  17. #51
    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 adidascanada View Post
    You are correct but without revenue profit is not possible....
    Both Yonex and Li Ning are limited companies, one traded in Tokyo the other in Hong Kong. Every shareholder knows their financial statements.
    BTW, Li Ning's profit increased 33% over last year, but Yonex's declined.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Where to buy Yonex socks in US market
    By batrachian in forum Market Place
    Replies: 2
    : 09-08-2006, 06:59 AM
  2. Market share of badminton companies?
    By sihker in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 3
    : 07-27-2006, 05:30 PM
  3. The demise of the forehand serve in doubles
    By taneepak in forum General Forum
    Replies: 15
    : 03-24-2004, 03:28 AM
  4. Market Share
    By Traum in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 18
    : 04-29-2003, 09:19 PM
  5. 5 x 7 demise
    By Cheung in forum General Forum
    Replies: 24
    : 01-20-2002, 08:27 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
  •