this may actually benefits the CUSTOMERS. look at any new products, demand is high. Yonex pressure maybe to prevent price gouging by retailers. I assumed RRP equivalent to MSRP here in america look at VISA today, the RRP/MSRP was 44$/share. Wish i could bought some at full RRP/MSRP price but all were sold out in less than 1 minute after i got the notice from the broker, all 17 billion$ worth of them. I'm sure the rich clients all got them because the auction is fixed. Is this fair? Very similar to the so call brand fixing by yonex and match fixing by LYB.
I didn't even need to look at the number of signatures. You know the validity of the petition is questionable when the thread got hijacked by a discussion on Finish bread?!?!
^lol, but seriously, if yonex is running the event then they should have exclusive rights to sell their own stuff and limit other companies. Its like how when you're a kid, and you live with your parents, they get to boss u around because they own where u live.
Simply put, this is the rule of law. If you submit and win a tender in a government auction to rent a retail space for a fixed period of time to sell your goods, the law allows you exclusive use and legal right to it. The same with Yonex in the AE. This claim of so called "unfair business practice" has the hallmark of a new Robin Hood.
This kind of remind me of the rule in some of foodcourt I've been to, no food or drink from outside are allowed. where it seem to be "unfair business" but it just make sense, those people who sell the food in foodcourt has to pay for the rent and it just fair they won't allow people from outside to bring in their food/drink. This almost identical to Yonex and AE case. By the way, where is the threadstarter. disappear without trace?
If other brands want to compete and change the current situation, they should invest and make improvement from their own ends. If they are willing to put into more investment, they will be entitled to more tournament, and therefore, they will be the ones to make the calls. The intend for sponsorship is to promote the title sponsor's product. It's business, but not a charity work for all other "small brothers".
No yonex,no today's badminton.There are still so many other countries that needs companies like yonex to sponsor their badminton sport activity.Last time,there is NZ.They really need yonex or others to sponsor them.At least after yonex got what they want,they still contribute to the sake of the sport.That's all we need rite now..nothing much.
Well, to be fair he said "no Yonex no badminton". Don't forget tennis and golf both are pretty big sports. If anything Yonex exclusivity of AE should be embarassing to Charlton. Such agreements are not unusual. Try buy a pepsi at Vancouver International Airport (I may have this reversed). I'm of course talking about the vending machines, you can always get your preference at the 7-11 at YVR.
It is a fair and normal business practice. And no one is pressured to sign anything and it is all based on a fair bid. If I have a billion dollars then I can be the title the sponsor as well and call it "Wong8Egg All England Open" and limit the booths only to sell eggs any nothing else. But you guys should be thankful that I don't have that billion dollar yet while Yonex is doing a better job than I am.
Well, badminton is older than Yonex "No Yonex, no badminton" is quite far out. Try much of Europe or China for starters
You are of course right but in my opinion Yonex has done alot to advance the sport of badminton. Keeping to the topic of the post, the bottom line is that these types of exclusivity agreements are common place. They don't really have any effect on the overall market for badminton raquets. I would hazzard a quess that racquet sales at events like the AE account for less than 5% of all sales (yes I pulled the 5% out of thin air but I told you it's a guess). Therefore I doubt that this practise has a significant effect on the over all market.
I just want to second the lovely Polar Bear's comment with more solid number on the racquet frame sale. Usually, Yonex will carry about 15~30 frames of each current frame models at a given event. ie. 20 AT900-t, 20 AT900-p, 15 At700 and others. However, for the new product, it is time for the rep and event club to make money, they usually stock up to 50~60 frames for the new models. In this case, 40 ARC40 and 60 ARC10s. They are selling them at MAP, not full retail price. Whatever the rep did not sell, club buys them at dealer price or rep take them beck to office. Yonex made maybe $40,000 from the booth out of entire event. Really, it does not even cover the cost of sponsorship.
Lets not forget Yonex is a company here to make money off John and Jane Does. You might consider it unfair business practice but if they PAY for EXCLUSIVE rights, namely a title endorsement then they get what they pay for. If another company wants to pony up the money good, but until then Yonex gets to do what they want. Additionally just because other companies arent buying exclusive rights doesnt mean they have no influence either. Their mere presence in the market is what sets the price Yonex must offer the tournament directors for the appropriate deal and funding. I believe we call it economics. Its a matter of business and frankly you should come to the USA and see if business is ever fair. Not only that but it also doesnt necessarily benefit the industry. There are tons of companies that hop into an industry, or market, make their bucks, hurt the entire economy and as the ship sinks they abandon boat, just research the American mortgage crisis going on rite now. OP you're entitled to your consumer rights as in boycotting and petitioning however you have bigger obstacles to tackle, in viewing yonex rather than focusing on one tournament. ps, why does it matter anyways what they are charging for merchandise, you go to tournaments to buy rackets, apparel, shuttles, other supplies? The only things that mite be over priced would be limited tournament t-shirts and novelties, but everyone knows that stuff is expensive and doesnt fall into this complaint.
The All-England is a prestigious event because of its colourful history. But before the Super Series was formulated, the AE was lagging behind many of its Asian counterparts, some even new to the scene, in prize money and it was an irony of sorts that it should remain a premier event. IMO the AE was in danger of being relegated to second class had nothing been done to increase its prize money to continue to attract the world class players from Asia. Unfortunately, despite its commanding position in the badminton world, it would seem to me that the AE did not seem to atttract sufficient sponsors from even the UK companies for many years, so Yonex continued to carry the financial burden as its main sponsor and with the SS, Yonex has to increase the prize money just not to exclude the AE from the circuit. So the AE continues to retain its glamour and prestige cultivated long ago by its founding fathers, all because Yonex, maybe for selfish reasons, made it a point to carry on. We should thank Yonex for all their years of support and commitment and not brand them as brandishing bad business practice and enjoying all financial benefits to the exclusion of others.
It is interesting that derekrobinson59 has stopped posting after starting this thread. I agree with most of you here that Yonex was the main sponsor at AE so they can do what they wish. But for the world of badminton, it is not good to have one dominate sponsor. Lacking competition isn't good for the sport.
