Somehow the blame will probably fall on the consumers again who want things "cheap"/cheaper all the time. At least that came to light in one program featuring a factory in Bangladesh producing for H&M. But when you look at the margin between the store price and what H&M is paying for it you know where the money got "stuck" . Good question and one that will probably not get anything other than the standard respons ... http://www.thenation.com/blog/170443/universities-dump-adidas-over-labor-disputes http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-behind-londons-ethical-olympics-7644013.html
Carlton are still big with club players in the UK (particularly the older ones) - second only to Yonex in terms of brand recognition and reputation (no other manufacturer even comes close). Adidas are considered cheap and tacky, and just about the single chavviest brand around (except for maybe Kappa), and I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't be seen dead with any of their products (especially the type of people who play badminton). I really don't see their badminton range doing at all well over here...
well since Adidas git rid of 300 factories in China they will probably be doing similarly in the rest of Asia... Makes your question a bit moot. what you mention later has got nothing to do with working with competitors. That's just how flexible sponsorship contracts are or aren't .
Anyone here know when Adidas will release these apparels in the US? I'm anxious to get a pair of their shoes!
Just because they close all their factories in China does not mean that they will close all of them...But perhaps you're right and they're trying their best to get rid of that reputation. When did the closing of the Chinese factories begin? And for the last one, yeah, you're right. Bad choice of words on my part. But in badminton there still is no such thing as flexible sponsorship contracts, you play with your brand, racket clothing and shoes, or am I wrong? Perhaps the arrival of adidas might change that, for better or worse.
Some Japanese players have non-Yonex rackets although wearing Yonex apparel. Their shoes probably are a different brand as well.
Ah, I stand corrected once again...Thank for that information. Can you tell me if any of the A-team players have multiple sponsors? Players like Lee Chong Wei and Lin Dan?
Japanese players wear mostly Mizuno shoes. Apparently the whole ntl. team gets free Yonex rackets and Mizuno shoes if they don't have an individual contract/preference. Ikeda is likely to switch to Adidas rackets soon as they posted a picture of his shoes welcoming him to team Adidas - his contract with Wilson is probably running out some time soon...
Ah thank you, I'm not sure what I meant with my question. I guessed that the top players have more than one sponsor, with Lee Chong Wei getting so many cars etc. What I really wanted to know if adidas might agree to perhaps an apparel only sponsorship. Because even though Lee Chong Wei is sponsored by other companies he only uses Yonex clothing and gear, right? I think, for a badminton player, the stuff that player actually uses in a competition is more important than their other sponsorships. But yeah, if kwun wants to ask this he shouldn't use the words I used.
Probably, but Carlton are a British company, and for a very long time sponsored all the top English players (Nathan Robertson, Gail Emms, Simon Archer, etc), who are far more famous than any foreign player. I guess they're like Black Knight in Canada - they make some very good rackets (I had a BK NanoFire myself), but outside of their own country, noone really knows them. Anyway, I think we're a little off-topic...
I wasn't aware they had such a reputation and I can't imagine them paying much differently to nike or Li ning. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
http://www.waronwant.org/news/press-releases/17603-adidas-reels-under-olympics-sweatshops-protests http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1860217.stm https://www.oxfam.org.au/explore/workers-rights/adidas/inside-adidas-indonesian-factories Source for the BBC article I think. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9399363/Cambodian-workers-on-10-a-week-making-Olympics-fanwear.html www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/exposed-the-reality-behind-londons-ethical-olympics-7644013.html The links may be of varying relevance and quality. The working conditions does not seem very good. And to them not paying much differently to Nike doesn't really say that much...It's probably just as easy to find stuff like this from Nike also. Notice that adidas have(or had) factories in INDONESIA. That's why the question about the worker wages might be good. Because I think those conditions are more common in Asia than, let's say, Europe. And badminton is very popular in Asian countries. If it were working conditions like this in Europe(which I don't think it is, I might be wrong though) many football players would be outraged and demand change, because it would hit close. So adidas walking into the badminton scene can have huge consequences for the workers in whole of Asia, hopefully very good ones. Maybe. Actually I have no clue about how Li-ning pays their workers. Hopefully that's a good sign that they don't have as bad working conditions as adidas but honestly I have no idea.
From one of the articles it seems they pay for a certain amount of workers but the subcontracter has painted a prettier picture than is actually possible to achieve with that amount of workers and in turn actually employs a lot more people than they are officially paid for. But like it also said the inspections are announced ahead of time, leaving the opportunity to present a pretty picture to the inspection. Still, no excuse to keep turning a blind eye to all the reports over time by now ... Nike does actually have some of their own factories (edit: apparently also not directly owned by them, remembered reading about the opening of a new factor in Vietnam quite a few years ago) in which the conditions are pretty reasonable but the majority is still done by subcontracters with similar stories to Adidas above and plenty more brands.
"Nike has its own history of being criticized for worker conditions at the factories that makes its shoes and apparel. In the 1990s, the company began addressing the issue. New Approach The company’s initial approach was to monitor factories. That didn’t work because factories would improve conditions for the monitoring and then regress afterward, Jones said. Nike is now trying to persuade contract manufacturers that better labor practices and sustainability improves productivity with lower worker turnover and reduced costs, she said. The move is part of a company-wide focus on using its prowess as an innovator to drive sustainability, said Jones. “Our young consumers expect this,” she said. The new standards were introduced as part of Nike’s latest report on sustainability and worker issues. Nike gave “A” ratings to 4 percent of its factories in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2011, compared to 6 percent in 2010. Factories with “B” grades increased to 45 percent from 33 percent. Under the new rating system, “A” and “B” grades will be a bronze rating with silver and gold above that. Nike has the goal of all its contracted factories reaching the bronze level by 2020." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-03/nike-raises-factory-labor-and-sustainability-standards.html
hmm, somehow I managed to not hear about any of the olympics stories. One of those links is over 10 years old, though... I thought all the factories were as bad as each other so I was curious why adidas were being singled out.
I would be much more interested in the answer to "why badminton now?" I suspect they've just smelled Yonex's blood in the water...
