Topic: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers (Read 8874 times)

jonpinson · « **on:** January 09, 2011, 09:02:36 PM »

Not wanting to derail, thought I'd start my own.

A comment made in his thread got me wondering about pros having bats made at a particular place. Let us imagine a scenario.

Pro player X is sponsored by Kookaburra/GN/GM (you get the point) but actually pays to have his bats made by Salix/H4L/SAF (you get the point). The bats are of course labelled up as the sponsor's product.

The small batmaker who is paid by the pro selects his best willow to go into the pro's bats. As desribed, low density, high performance, short life.

Pro gets some top bats and is happy.

Now, here's the thing. Assuming that the real identity of the batmaker is kept secret as part of the contract, so the batmaker cannot profit from using the name of the pro is his marketing, what does the batmaker get from the deal? How does it differ any more from you or I ordering a bat from him? Why is the batmaker so determined to keep his best wood for the pro when he benefits no more from it than a normal sale?

I must say it grinds with me a bit when I hear a batmaker saying he holds back his best for the pros. Is their money better than ours? Why should we not be given the option of the best materials?

Before someone points it out, I realise the situation is very different is the small batmaker does indeed sponsor the player. It makes more sense in that circumstance.

uknsaunders · « **Reply #1 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:09:29 PM »

Have to say I was under the impression that Pro's didn't pay for their bats very often - in which case this wouldn't happen. They'd also get their sponsor to copy their old bats so they didn't have to continue to pay for bats elsewhere.

Anyone care to correct me?

procricket · « **Reply #2 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:10:14 PM »

Good question

Maybe the prestige around the circuit and other areas

Maybe the fact most pay RRP for there bats.....

Maybe it the fact batmaking in general is a dark art which us mere mortals do not understand and little shred i have seen seems full of people bigging up there brands ...

I can confirm some pro pay for there bat

There sponsorship is given in different ways surely a brand will explain better but some brands give limits to a player ie 2k on equipment and so on

I

peplow · « **Reply #3 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:11:21 PM »

yeah its like getting less for your money (nothing on show) in effect, a good point jon! Would be itneresting to hear what they say...

I suppose if they didnt keep the best willow the pro wouldnt come to them and so they'd miss out on money that way, as the best willow is limited they want to keep it for them and not use it on any folk. maybe?
its more they dont want to lose pro business by not having the wood than not wanting to sell to public?

procricket · « **Reply #4 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:12:52 PM »

ego

Tom · « **Reply #5 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:13:36 PM »

Vanity would be one of the main reasons. Look how many claim to make bats for Tendulkar.

Canners · « **Reply #6 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:18:38 PM »

H4l have sold pro bats on here before I seam to remember.....

A couple of absolutely huge 2.9's

jonpinson · « **Reply #7 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:20:45 PM »

Quote from: uknsaunders on January 09, 2011, 09:09:29 PM

Have to say I was under the impression that Pro's didn't pay for their bats very often - in which case this wouldn't happen. They'd also get their sponsor to copy their old bats so they didn't have to continue to pay for bats elsewhere.

Anyone care to correct me?

I've certainly heard of pros paying for bats because they rate the maker so highly. Thinking about it sensibly, if you were a batmaker would you be happy to make bats for free and get nothing in return (i.e someone else stickers on your bat?) I'd imagine most have to pay in this circumstance.

I believe M&H were very proud in the early days of never giving a bat to anyone for free. All the pros that used them came and paid, based purely on their performance.

procricket · « **Reply #8 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:21:39 PM »

Tom do you buy into low density clefts and there legitimacy Natural or Man made?

or a mixture of both

yvk3103 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:22:03 PM »

Thanks for starting his Jon, I was going to get some replies off the podshavers and then hit the nail on the head with same questions you have raided.

Well if I am paying �250-�350 for my bat compared to a pro who is getting them from free or half that price, then why should I as a customer have to pay more for a (probably) inferior bat and also to pay the Pros fees???

jonpinson · « **Reply #10 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:22:14 PM »

Quote from: procricket on January 09, 2011, 09:10:14 PM

Good question

Maybe the prestige around the circuit and other areas

Maybe the fact most pay RRP for there bats.....

Maybe it the fact batmaking in general is a dark art which us mere mortals do not understand and little shred i have seen seems full of people bigging up there brands ...

I can confirm some pro pay for there bat

There sponsorship is given in different ways surely a brand will explain better but some brands give limits to a player ie 2k on equipment and so on

I

Tom · « **Reply #11 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:23:27 PM »

Quote from: procricket on January 09, 2011, 09:21:39 PM

Tom do you buy into low density clefts and there legitimacy Natural or Man made? or a mixture of both

You buy clefts - you don't buy low density or heavy clefts. It's all the luck of the draw and one of the main reasons why they're so prized.

peplow · « **Reply #12 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:24:41 PM »

i think he was asking what you think about them tom..

jonpinson · « **Reply #13 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:25:57 PM »

Quote from: procricket on January 09, 2011, 09:10:14 PM

Good question

Maybe the prestige around the circuit and other areas

Maybe the fact most pay RRP for there bats.....

Maybe it the fact batmaking in general is a dark art which us mere mortals do not understand and little shred i have seen seems full of people bigging up there brands ...

I can confirm some pro pay for there bat

There sponsorship is given in different ways surely a brand will explain better but some brands give limits to a player ie 2k on equipment and so on

I

All that you say makes sense, but I really don't understand the determination by some makers to set 'pro' willow apart from 'standard' G1. I could understand it much more if the small batmaker was sponsoring someone, you'd want your best gear on show. That makes sense. But in the situation I first described, I just can't see the positives.

Indeed, surely it could be argued that a maker would want his best willow to go into bats that will carry his logos. I.e the bats that you and I will buy and use.

procricket · « **Reply #14 on:** January 09, 2011, 09:26:53 PM »

yes sorry i did not mean DO you buy them

Author Topic: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers (Read 8874 times)

jonpinson

Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

uknsaunders

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

procricket

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

peplow

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

procricket

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

Tom

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

Canners

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

jonpinson

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

procricket

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

yvk3103

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

jonpinson

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

Tom

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

peplow

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

jonpinson

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers

procricket

Re: Re; Yash's thread, another question for the batmakers