MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502143696 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n16p183

Brief Probe into the Brand and Marketing Strategy of NBA

2015· article· en· W1502143696 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhongfeng Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSports marketingMarketingPromotion (chess)BasketballBusinessAdvertisingLeagueMarketing strategyMarketing mixMarketing managementPolitical scienceRelationship marketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sports marketing one of many marketing ways which integrates the sports culture and brand culture through sports activities. Sports marketing have two explanations, one regards sports as a commodity, and the other is to regard the sports activities as the carrier of brand marketing. In this paper, we use the second kind of explanation that sports marketing is regarded as a carrier of brand marketing.Nowadays, with the constant development of all kinds of sports, many sports have reached a certain height through their own development strategy and marketing strategy, and form various league and sports leagues, but there isn't one international sports media group like the National Basketball Association (NBA) that is popular all over the world. Marketed through the stars and the surrounding products, the unique marketing strategy is gradually referred to by other league and activities. This article will firstly introduce the current situation of the NBA, expound the importance of sports marketing to brand promotion and sports promotion, then analyze sports marketing strategy, and finally put forward the conclusion of this article and give a summary to this article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207