Adidas to discontinue table tennis products

Sad that Adidas is pulling out.....
IMO, they product price was a bit steep and margin was low for the resellers - meaning room to be competitive was very limited.

I think they choose the wrong product segment to complete in - trying to target the high end market/price point of the Stiga/Butterfly, but they had not much Professionals backing them

Compared to another new player to the market - Xiom, Xiom has they luxury line up, as well as the mainstream line up (which got them market share)

I would thought that Adidas should rather focus on recreational first - and own the market there, and have a mainstream and a few luxury and add more luxury after 10 years or so - than oppose to only focusing on the high end segment.

Good luck to the Adidas TT guys - Director Allen and co

Cornel said:

Kaizoku, on TableTennisDB, Xiom Sigma II Europe also stands as a non-tensor. In fact there is clearly shown on the topsheet of the rubber itself that the Sigma II euro IS a tensor. Also take a look that T05 also stands as a non-tensor. And there are lots of other examples.

In fact, i think all the euro/jap rubbers that came on market after the speed glue ban are tensors(please correct me if I am wrong).

Click to expand...

Not ALL of them, but prolly a great deal of them.

My forehand rubber, Tibhar Aurus is not a tensor and came out well after the glue ban.

One look at the presence of a tensor symbol will tell you... most of the time. Yasaka Extend HS doesn't have that stamp, but is reputed to be an early gen Tensor.

Thats disappointing its a shame adidas didnt try harder to stay at it really for such a big company it looks as though they are just trying to become the best in the industry and not actually offering much to the sport as a whole

RIPPER said:

Thats disappointing its a shame adidas didnt try harder to stay at it really for such a big company it looks as though they are just trying to become the best in the industry and not actually offering much to the sport as a whole

Click to expand...

The table tennis licensee of Adidas did indeed offer a lot to the sport - more than many brands I would say

Der_Echte said:

Not ALL of them, but prolly a great deal of them.

My forehand rubber, Tibhar Aurus is not a tensor and came out well after the glue ban.

One look at the presence of a tensor symbol will tell you... most of the time. Yasaka Extend HS doesn't have that stamp, but is reputed to be an early gen Tensor.

Click to expand...

Aurus is definitely a tensor.

Tony's Table Tennis said:

Sad that Adidas is pulling out.....
IMO, they product price was a bit steep and margin was low for the resellers - meaning room to be competitive was very limited.

I think they choose the wrong product segment to complete in - trying to target the high end market/price point of the Stiga/Butterfly, but they had not much Professionals backing them

Compared to another new player to the market - Xiom, Xiom has they luxury line up, as well as the mainstream line up (which got them market share)

I would thought that Adidas should rather focus on recreational first - and own the market there, and have a mainstream and a few luxury and add more luxury after 10 years or so - than oppose to only focusing on the high end segment.

Good luck to the Adidas TT guys - Director Allen and co

Click to expand...

Good points and I agree that they choose wrong when trying to compete with both Butterfly and Stiga when they are new at the market with not close as many good sponsored players. But Adidas is overall a high quality brand with good quality and "high" prices and I don't think they wanted to change that even when it came to the TT market, and I think that is the reason they are now pulling out. They did wrong in overestimating their brands name.

raazzz said:

Good points and I agree that they choose wrong when trying to compete with both Butterfly and Stiga when they are new at the market with not close as many good sponsored players. But Adidas is overall a high quality brand with good quality and "high" prices and I don't think they wanted to change that even when it came to the TT market, and I think that is the reason they are now pulling out. They did wrong in overestimating their brands name.

Click to expand...

I think they use they brand name in the wrong area.

For the non TT folks, Adidas is a big brand (recreational range)
For the TT folks, Adidas is basically in the same price bracket as Butterfly - who will buy Adidas then

Obviously the licensee fee was too expensive - which possibly pushed up the price a lot.
As the TT guys are not Adidas themselves, but a Taiwanese company who has the global licensee rights to the brand.
Quality is defiantly there, but not the over pricing (more expensive than Xiom, Tibhar, Andro, Donic, Yasaka, etc)

IMO, everything Adidas was expensive - and consider the huge choice for consumers, Adidas just didn't had the pull effect.

Tony's Table Tennis said:

I think they use they brand name in the wrong area.

For the non TT folks, Adidas is a big brand (recreational range)
For the TT folks, Adidas is basically in the same price bracket as Butterfly - who will buy Adidas then

Obviously the licensee fee was too expensive - which possibly pushed up the price a lot.
As the TT guys are not Adidas themselves, but a Taiwanese company who has the global licensee rights to the brand.
Quality is defiantly there, but not the over pricing (more expensive than Xiom, Tibhar, Andro, Donic, Yasaka, etc)

IMO, everything Adidas was expensive - and consider the huge choice for consumers, Adidas just didn't had the pull effect.

Click to expand...

And on top of that all, they did not achieve enough market penetration - there was just a single online shop in UK that sold Adidas stuff. TT11 also does not carry Adidas.

vvk1 said:

And on top of that all, they did not achieve enough market penetration - there was just a single online shop in UK that sold Adidas stuff. TT11 also does not carry Adidas.

Click to expand...

So true

To comment on how Xiom did it (one of the newest big brands - and they started the Xiom brand around the same time Adidas TT came to the market)

They came from Korea (Champion brand) and target the Japanese market, develop China only products for the Chinese market, Establish a Chinese office.
Establish Germany and USA office to focus on Europe and American market
Target all the big etailers and retailers around the world
Had a good product vs price value proposition

Few years ago, the Vega Pro even become a top 10 seller in Japan - betting European brands and some Japanese brands.

Obviously they also have some problems in product roadmap, but in terms of market penetration, they did it pretty well imo

Funny enough, Adidas has/had more pros sponsored than Xiom....

Tony's Table Tennis said:

So true

To comment on how Xiom did it (one of the newest big brands - and they started the Xiom brand around the same time Adidas TT came to the market)

They came from Korea (Champion brand) and target the Japanese market, develop China only products for the Chinese market, Establish a Chinese office.
Establish Germany and USA office to focus on Europe and American market
Target all the big etailers and retailers around the world
Had a good product vs price value proposition

Few years ago, the Vega Pro even become a top 10 seller in Japan - betting European brands and some Japanese brands.

Obviously they also have some problems in product roadmap, but in terms of market penetration, they did it pretty well imo

Funny enough, Adidas has/had more pros sponsored than Xiom....

Click to expand...

Xiom's early approach to equipment was almost the same as Adidas - German ESN rubbers, blades made by 3rd parties. Their business model was much better though, and they did a good job of making their equipment feel unique and distinct from the other stuff on the market (black sponges on the rubbers, for example), while remaining keen on pricing.

And now they've got enough traction in the marketplace to make their own blades in Korea and aim a bit more upmarket. The comparison is interesting.

AndySmith said:

Xiom's early approach to equipment was almost the same as Adidas - German ESN rubbers, blades made by 3rd parties. Their business model was much better though, and they did a good job of making their equipment feel unique and distinct from the other stuff on the market (black sponges on the rubbers, for example), while remaining keen on pricing.

And now they've got enough traction in the marketplace to make their own blades in Korea and aim a bit more upmarket. The comparison is interesting.

Click to expand...

Even the product model was the same, the pricing model was not.

Xiom had the mainstream product in terms of Vega rubber series - they biggest seller being the Vega Pro
The blades from Xiom are also pretty high quality at a very affordable price (it is only now with the new high end blades that we are seeing steeper pricing - the made in Korea ones)

I agree on the equipment unique and distinct part.

Just a bit of reshuffle in Xiom HQ, so a lot of Xiom's marketing is nil at this stage.
Glad to see Team Korea is now sponsored by Xiom, but the shirts are not cheap shoes is even more expensive

Yup, correct. Xiom built a reputation up first before adding more "premium" stuff to their range. And they also had a flair for design with unusual touches - you can still see that today with their mad packaging for their seamless balls, and including grinding sticks with their blades. Adidas had excellent products, but workmanlike design (there's on;t so much you can do with black, white, 3 stripes).

Adidas (or Greenmaster...) seemed to want to lean too heavily on the brand name too early. I wonder about their pricing too - I get the impression that they had different pricing policies for different areas, possibly related to how well known Adidas were geographically. Prices were high in Europe, but lower in Asia for example.

I remember when Adidas first appeared - I used a V1.1 blade for a while (really good blade, bought from an Indian webshop for less than half of what the UK vendor was selling them for). I showed it to everyone at the club and their first response was always "Adidas, they just do bargain basement stuff and premades". It was hard to get the idea across that this was "proper" TT gear. They were always fighting against that preconception. Xiom's smart move was to avoid the use of the Champion brand, and go with a fresh, more "specialist" branding approach.

That's sad. Adidas blades are well made and I like them a lot.

I just bought an Avenger Carbon, it's a pitty that these products will no longer be made. Tried it for less an hour and i really liked it. Decent speed, very good control, some vibrations (not that much, i like it), and the craftsmanship is excelent (almost as good as butterfly), and it's one of the better looking blades i've ever seen (well, that was one of the reasons i choose it, i admit it )

TT is a poor people sport, unlike golf and tennis players can afford expensive gear.

Greetings,

I've always thought of Adidas as a sports clothing manufacturer, rather than a sports equipment manufacturer.

I was somewhat astonished that they tried to compete with the TT manufacturers' with blades and rubbers with little to no credibility in the market - to my mind that the wrong approach.

They should have secured top players through their clothing - then look at making bats/rubbers for these sponsored players as a means of entering/competing in the equipment sector of the TT market. With big names using their clothing, if not their blades/rubbers, they'd have stood a chance to compete.

Kindest regards,

James

Just so people know, Adidas was never in the TT market as a company. There was a third party who paid royalties to Adidas, hence the steep prices on both wholesale and retail. Great equipment though.

Dragan Glas said:

Greetings,

I've always thought of Adidas as a sports clothing manufacturer, rather than a sports equipment manufacturer.

I was somewhat astonished that they tried to compete with the TT manufacturers' with blades and rubbers with little to no credibility in the market - to my mind that the wrong approach.

They should have secured top players through their clothing - then look at making bats/rubbers for these sponsored players as a means of entering/competing in the equipment sector of the TT market. With big names using their clothing, if not their blades/rubbers, they'd have stood a chance to compete.

Kindest regards,

James

Click to expand...

The perceived lack of "credibility" is hilarious. The number of posts on tt forums titled "Adidas P7 was perfect, what do I use now" is only dwarfed by the posts titled "T05 is perfect but too expensive". Also, anyone who reviewed Adidas blades, heaps praise on them.

Adidas P7

Mr. RicharD said:

Just so people know, Adidas was never in the TT market as a company. There was a third party who paid royalties to Adidas, hence the steep prices on both wholesale and retail. Great equipment though.

Click to expand...

Adidas is only a marketing company , they have stuff made in cheap chinese factories and sell it with high margin.
They were only into this sport for the money, and when it turned out they didnt win enough just stopped.
As said before, Adidas did absolutely nothing for our sport, no innovations whatsoever, totally useless for us players.