What is your favourite brand?

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
New Member
Dec 2018
1
0
1
Butterfly products are so expensive. I have fallen in love with home golf simulators and gone for Nittaku Fastarc P1 (FH) & C1 (BH) e(2.0mm) rubbers on Nittaku Lattika blade. My second setup is Andro Hexer Powegrip (FH) and Grip (BH) 1.9mm on Tibhar Akkasd blade.
Nothing wrong with DHS. I actually like them. Not my absolute favorite though, which is Butterfly.
 
Last edited:
says Spin is Control.
Butterfly - for both. Blade and rubbers.
Reason - Quality control and the center weight balance of the setup after gluing rubbers to the blade. I haven't seen this kind of balance in any other brand be it Donic, Stiga or Xiom. Amongst all the three (Donic, Stiga and Xiom), Xiom was by far the best in weight distribution and center balance after adding rubbers to the blade.
From the ball feel point of view, Stiga Clipper wood offered best feel but still the entire setup was way too heavy for me.
I don't deny the fact that the same center balance could also be achieved by a careful selection of wood and rubbers from other brands, but I don't want to try new setups anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suga D
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,764
2,607
8,133
Read 8 reviews
Yeah why were they around for auch a short time?

As I understand it, corporate strategy was based on the analysis of a global niche market being up for grabs, where the strength of the brand would more or less make Adidas a dominant force swiftly and easily. So it entered as a premium brand, exacting premium prices and expecting near-immediate dominance. I guess it didn't turn out that way.

I own an Adidas v1.3 blade, and it's a great blade - with minor quips about the head size and shape. Have played against players using P7 whose crazy bending spins I could not block, at least back then. Every now and then the loss of P7 is mourned by these.

Capitalism thrives on structural destruction in many ways. Here's one.
 
This user has no status.
As I understand it, corporate strategy was based on the analysis of a global niche market being up for grabs, where the strength of the brand would more or less make Adidas a dominant force swiftly and easily. So it entered as a premium brand, exacting premium prices and expecting near-immediate dominance. I guess it didn't turn out that way.

I own an Adidas v1.3 blade, and it's a great blade - with minor quips about the head size and shape. Have played against players using P7 whose crazy bending spins I could not block, at least back then. Every now and then the loss of P7 is mourned by these.

Capitalism thrives on structural destruction in many ways. Here's one.
Hmmmm you’d have expected them to pay a lot to sponsor more top players... maybe it was the lack of signature equipment which is a fairly big part for EJs...?
 
says 2023 Certified Organ Donor
says 2023 Certified Organ Donor
Well-Known Member
Sep 2011
12,752
13,097
30,172
Read 27 reviews
I think Adidas realized finally there really isn't a ton of money in the sport right now. Not worth their effort for so little money.

What a shame as the first company who finds a way to connect with all those millions and millions of basement and social players and is the first outfit in front of that movement will be very handsomely rewarded when those millions and millions all begin to buy equipment at current prices... which turns into billions of USD
 
This user has no status.
I think Adidas realized finally there really isn't a ton of money in the sport right now. Not worth their effort for so little money.

What a shame as the first company who finds a way to connect with all those millions and millions of basement and social players and is the first outfit in front of that movement will be very handsomely rewarded when those millions and millions all begin to buy equipment at current prices... which turns into billions of USD
Stiga make badminton equipment too don’t they?
 
Top