Branding does not mean proprietary.
By David Kjeldsen

I have been a proponent for twenty plus years of APTA branding. For years, I have spoken at length to members of the APTA board of directors about the importance of branding and how it should be done to get the APTA name and their good deeds and services out to the player population.

I believe the APTA should have its logo and its name on all applications for APTA sanctioned tournaments. I believe APTA banners should be displayed at all APTA functions. I believe a member of the APTA board of directors should attend all national ranking events and give a quick 30 second speech about what the APTA does at all gatherings. I am happy to say that after many years of absence, the APTA logo appeared on the front cover of the last issue of Platform Tennis Magazine.

All the above said, I fear in the name of self promotion that a vital and important service is being delayed because of a squabble about the proprietary nature of sponsorship. It has come to my attention that discussions about the APTA funding teaching videos potentially produced by the PPTA (the organization of platform tennis teaching professionals) and its members have hit a snag because the APTA who is putting up seed money for production is seeking to make the videos proprietary for the first several months after production and the PPTA is seeking to disperse the teaching videos to any and all that wish to view them immediately upon completion. (It should be noted that to the credit of both great organizations, neither the APTA nor the PPTA wishes to produce teaching videos as a “for profit” venture. Both are committed to disseminating these educational materials on a “no charge” basis.)

To be frank, I understand how folks putting up money for any project or event want to maintain some control over additional sponsors, naming of the event, or the distribution and timing of content release. In the name of furthering one’s “brand” this is standard operating procedure. That said, I would hope the governing body of the sport would not want to throttle distribution to the masses of what is planned to be no-charge educational content that will surely help the sport’s participants learn the game faster and play better because they view their monetary contribution as a license to be proprietary.

If the APTA puts up the funds for an educational project or production, absolutely, the APTA should require that their banners be placed around the courts and prominently displayed in any video. And, yes, the APTA name and logo should be front and center in the sponsor list that might be a part of any presentation. For all of this is branding. But, in my opinion, as the governing body of the sport the APTA should always try to disseminate as much educational information as possible about the sport to the widest possible audience irrespective of the venue of distribution, and this obligation should over-ride any thought of making such information proprietary even for a short amount of time.

For our very small sport to grow and our current participants play better, our governing body should always take a lead role in educating the populace about this great sport. The wider the audience that is made aware of the sport, the more growth the sport will see.

what do you think? let me know! info@platformtennisnews.com

Click HERE to Return to September ’s articles