National Versus Regional Sports Marketing: An Interpretation of 'Think Globally, Act Locally'
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few would question that one of the most significant determinants of growth in the sport industry — from a sport management, marketing, and sponsorship perspective — has been the inf luence of globalization. Product expansion and communication messages have targeted the 'global consumer,' and the recognition of a 'global brand' has come to epitomize successful sport marketing. Or, has it? Although global management practices present the possibility of expanded consumer markets, a number of marketing strategists have recently begun to question the use of standardized global marketing campaigns that lack national or regional distinctiveness. At issue, is the positioning of 'regionalism' within global sport marketing strategies. This paper will investigate the role of 'regionalism' in sport marketing through; a) an examination of the regional sport marketing strategy of a leading Canadian all-sports television cable network (Rogers Sportsnet) that targets four distinct regions across Canada, and b) a survey of Canadian Generation Y youth sport participation and spectatorship trends across four regions. Implications for regional positioning within sport marketing strategies will also be discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".