1. You would single out HK and SGP and apply a special set of circumstances to them just because they are small populations? That really would be a slap in the face. You make them pay to BWF yet you would not ask other SS tournaments to do so? What sense of fairness is that?? 2. I speculate but Macau Open probably gets its funding from its government. It's a way of raising the profile and name of a country/region/city. HK (except for one year) and SGP has been able to continually attract good names and good sponsorship for their tournaments. I haven't been to Singapore but as a spectator, I think HK is very good and its popularity reflects this. It's organised, and the atmosphere is very intimate. I very much remember the Thomas cup final 1998 in HK - Msia vs Indonesia and the s/final of China vs Indonesia. Fantastic. However, Macau is a recent city on the scene. Again, incentives....if they continually offer attractive prize money, players will come. Yes, but I do not think awarding grandslam status to Brazil or Russia will do much for popularity in those countries. Upgrade their tournaments, yes, that's OK, but elevate to grandslam status? No. Why? Because you cannot guarantee they can even fill the stadium consistently... Here in this scenario, we have to separate the issues. Grandslam is to elevate the status of the sport as a whole (don't neglect your core European countries or you might lose them - for example Sweden).. SS and money to increase interest in others. Yes, that would the best thing but (always some catch), it would depend on sponsorship and bids from countries. If a country's association doesn't bid for the event, you cannot force them to hold the event! And then, for the bids, BWF has to consider the sponsorship and logistics as well.. We see the same problem with the Masters final as we had many years ago with the old World Grandprix finals. Associations cannot commit because they cannot guarantee the 'star names' will come. And they need those names to attract the local sponsors.... here's a typical case if I was the local company. Association: We'd like to ask you for sponsorship Businessman: What's in it for me? Association: Publicity Businessman: Who you got going? Asocciation: Dunno yet, it depends? Businessman: My main market is in "(insert name of country)", why do I want some other country's players to get winner? I can't use them for my local marketing and PR. Their country is not my main business market so I get limited benefit. Nah, wait till later and I'll see if our local player(s) are likely to play. Then I can put up some sponsorship...
what i meant was this: any country (not just HK or SGP) which wants to host a Grand Slam ought to pay royalties of some sort to BWF.... BWF can generate profit for itself in one of three ways: (1) the host pays BWF a fixed sum like US$100k per year, (2) the host pays BWF a percentage of gross sponsorship and/or ticket sales, or (3) the host needs not pay anything, but BWF owns the TV broadcasting rights.... If the above is implemented, financial arrangement of SS should be changed too... Oh yes... the other purpose of Grand slam is to revamp the annual BWF calendar.. it is now too tight... too many events.... as a result, top players now pick and choose to participate in less than half of the 12 SS events... as a result of that, top players do not get to meet in Semi-finals and finals... as a result of that, the games are not as exciting as fans would like to it to be and less fans would watch them.... as a result of that, NO more sponsorships!!!!! Chinese and Korean teams are now sponsored by Li-Nang and Victor respectively, not Yonex anymore.... But does Yonex want Chinese and Korean players to come and play in a Yonex-sponsored evetns???? Does Yonex want Li Dan and LYD to come and play in Hong Kong Open? does Yonex want Li Dan to play against LCW in the final??? any thoughts on these?
I acknowledge your point but it's not what I quite meant. Cast a wider net of potential sponsors, not just equipment manufacturers Perhaps I should put another analogy. The SS finals were played in Malaysia. Sponsored by Proton and 100 plus amongst others. Thanks goodness some Malaysians got to the final stages. If they hadn't, can we be sure those two companies would have been forthcoming with their sponsorship of the tournament in Malaysia? Would these two companies be willing to sponsor the SS finals in HK or China? There lies the problem of the SS finals. We need to find multinational companies like Aviva and previously Konica for consistent sponsorship of grand slams.
da way i see this,as long as badminton doesn't penetrate and generate enough interest in da western marekt,we won't be seeing major international companies,like Nike,Gatorade,Adidas, Reebok, throwing their money for consistent sponsorship at major badminton tourneys.they may sponsor certain natioanl teams for a certain period,but not continuous tourney sponsorshhips.
That's exactly what BWF wants today... They clearly state they want more non-badminton-equipment as the main sponsors... Exactlllyyyy!!! And when we say 'Western' market, it means: the USA, Europe [including Russia], and Brazil.... Thus, badminton better invest a lot of time and money there, not elsewhere.....
Counterargument -conversely, emerging markets may be the one to go for. Go to where the money is. If I was another company like Aviva, do I put my money fighting it out with other multinationals in US/Europe or do I try to establish my branding in emerging (and growing) economies?
