Min:24 °C Max:32 °C
» Weather Details
November 23, 2009 Monday

ST Breaking News | Blogs | ST's Sports Arena
Terrence Voon
Sports Reporter
Why did SIA sponsor an NZ team?
September 05, 2009 Saturday, 06:23 AM
Terrence Voon explains why Singapore's Dragon Boat Association needs more marketing.

THE furore over Singapore Airline's sponsorship of a New Zealand side at the recent World Dragon Boat Championships has raised the hackles of some Singaporeans.

But to criticise the airline for not funding the Republic's youth team instead may not be the fairest thing to do.

Questions must be raised about how the sport is run and what kind of official funding, if any, was made available to the young dragon boaters in the first place.

Singapore junior dragon boat team
Singapore's junior Dragon Boat team in training. ST PHOTO

Mr Dennis Tan, the father of one of the Singapore rowers, painted an emotive picture of how he and his child struggled to raise money for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, only to be confronted by a Kiwi team emblazoned with the SIA logo at the event.

His disappointment is heartfelt, if not understandable.

Earlier this week, I spoke to officials from the Singapore Dragon Boat Association (SDBA), a national sports body which had previously only made the news after five national rowers perished in a tragic accident in Cambodia two years ago.

The SDBA's stark financial reality is this: As one of the 10 sports ranked in the fourth tier of the Singapore Sports Council's annual funding review, they receive between $100,000 to $200,000 from government coffers each year.

Sending the 49 student rowers to Prague for the World Championships would have drained these funds completely.

To be fair, the SDBA boasts two big-hitting sponsors: Singapore Pools and the Singapore Tourism Board.

But it is not known how much the two organisations contribute to the sport in terms of actual cash.

What we do know is that the SDBA can only afford to upkeep a senior national team and that all it did was to "endorse" the juniors' participation at the World Championships.

For a sport which has now delivered international honours, it is criminal to simply continue giving young talented rowers a pat on their back and sending them on their way — without forking out a single cent.

The SDBA needs to regroup and find a way to maintain a formal national youth squad, and not rely on schools, parents and students to do the hard work for them.

They also need to take a more aggressive approach to securing sponsorship — witness how sports like netball produce glossy brochures and customised marketing proposals to woo potential sponsors.

Armed with a world title and a little more marketing savvy, it shouldn't be too hard to make sponsors — even those at SIA — to sit up and take notice.



Tags: , , ,

 
Total comments: 38
officeboyatst
September 18, 2009 Friday

Terrence Voon: "But to criticise the airline for not funding the Republic's youth team instead may not be the fairest thing to do."
A sensible enough statement and true.
Singapore Airlines is in the business of promoting itself for ITS cause. Not Singapore's.
The sooner we get this into our head the better.



comment 6902 | Offensive? Report this comment
foreignercitizen
September 17, 2009 Thursday

This blog has attracted 37 replies.
Does anyone really, really, really think that SQ cares a fig what you, me and the dog named Boo, thinks and says?
It's like talking to a flamin' wall!!



comment 6893 | Offensive? Report this comment
George
September 17, 2009 Thursday

foreignercitizen:' Would you advertise your product in the The New Paper and it be fish n chips paper the next day..or have it in the Mirror newspaper of the UK .where some 20 million people are going to see it and remember it. '

Is the above a fact or is it just a figment of your imagination?

'Simply..the kiwi team is better known than ours. Its got more commercial value and has wider appeal. '

More of your fertile imagination, or is it simply an admission of
an innate partial mentality of some westerners/Brits that they
are superior?

One small detail: in the event, the 'better known' kiwi team got nowhere
in the competition whereas the Singapore team brought home golds and bronzes. I am sure the Singapore team is now known for what it has
been able to achieved compared to the 'better known' kiwi team.

Anyway, my point being commercial consideration should in no way
stand in the way of SIA looking after its own people. Quite a separate
point really, i.e. it can do both, hence the example of MM Lee's wife
I quoted.

comment 6887 | Offensive? Report this comment
foreignercitizen
September 17, 2009 Thursday

George: You say..For that matter, what tangible commercial advantage
has resulted for SIA through its sponsorship of the Kiwi team."
Simply..the kiwi team is better known than ours. Its got more commercial value and has wider appeal.
Would you advertise your product in the The New Paper and it be fish n chips paper the next day..or have it in the Mirror newspaper of the UK .where some 20 million people are going to see it and remember it. The very people that SQ wants..to fly their airline.
Where would you spend your advertising and sponsorship budget?

comment 6886 | Offensive? Report this comment
George
September 16, 2009 Wednesday

foreignercitizen,
It's a matter of opinion, isn't it?
Obviously, I am aware of the commercial consideration of SIA.
But, who are you to say SIA commercial consideration cannot co-exist
with a support your own country consideration?

Are you aware that SIA specially medically equipped one of its plane to fly to London with doctors and nurses to bring home the sick wife of MM Lee? What of the commercial consideration? In truth, it all boils down to a matter of who you are and your connection? For that matter, what tangible commercial advantage
has resulted for SIA through its sponsorship of the Kiwi team. I will take my hat off to you if you are able to produce an iota of tangible evidence to prove your point.



comment 6884 | Offensive? Report this comment

Your comments are welcome. The following rules apply:

(1) Stay on topic;
(2) No abuse, please;
(3) No personal attacks;
(4) No curse words;
(5) Don't SCREAM in ALL CAPS!

To encourage a meaningful and pleasant dialogue, comments may be deleted. We look forward to your participation!

Best viewed at 1152x864 resolution with IE 6.0 or FireFox 2.0 and above Copyright © 2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn No. 198402868E | Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions