How Beach Volleyball Can Improve its Marketing | Geena Urango 

100% agreed

I feel like the AVP's Instagram has been awesome this year

Traditionally, European locations like Klagenfurt, Stavanger and Stare Jabłonki were well-organized and popular with both the players and the fans. If, however, the intention is to install annual events that serve as the highlights of every season (like Wimbledon and the US Open in tennis), I'd go for Gstaad, Paris, London, Rome, plus Sidney, Rio de Janeiro, Manhattan Beach, Beijing. That's a (negotiable) powerful group of renowned venues around the globe, sure to attract both fans and media attention. The rest of the season could be structured around them, but these tournaments would have to be held at the same time every year, and without question. (Between 1946 and 2019, Wimbledon was never once cancelled.) Ranking points at those events would be weighed differently; winning gold there would guarantee automatic bids for the next WC or even the Olympics. And most of all, these events would be heavily advertised with a focus on both the locations and the athletes, including player-related merchandise available at the venues, plus free admission for school classes and children in general, to attract a younger, more enthusiastic fan base. Spectators could be seated in rows or blocks styled and named after legends of the game (who would also be invited as guests of honor), which would be the same layout in every arena to connect the individual venues with each other. There could be special titles for groups of those events (like by winning all 4 events held in Europe, or by sweeping the Americas etc.). There is so much the FIVB could do, and so little that is actually being done, to better promote this sport.

@@SadDetonator Would 8 "Grand Slam" level events dilute the prestige? I suspect it would. But for the sake of argument, if you were going to do that many, I'd add Tokyo and New York, and remove London. That way you'd have 3 Euro, 3 Americas, and 3 Asioceana events.

Give me Manhattan, Rio, Gstaad, and somewhere else in Europe (Vienna, Hamburg, etc.)

@@umrobe62 You got a point. I'd say it depends on the size of the overall tour. These past few years, we approached 50 tournaments in total. (Compare this to, say, the 2011 season when half of the 14 events were Grand Slams.) Besides, it's about attractive venues, which is why I suggested London (Horse Guards Parade), Paris (Eiffel Tower) and Rome (Foro Italico). Rothenbaum in Hamburg can't compete with that. At first, I did indeed include Vienna, but didn't wish to be too Euro-centric. (Parity between the continents does not reflect the current balance of influence but should be the long-term ambition.) What really matters: Holding these tournaments must become a question of local and even national pride. That is why tradition is so important. People must circle these events in their calendars for years in advance, plan their vacations around them etc. Then they can be embedded in established tourist attractions, and the prestige of this sport can be increased, drawing more and better sponsors. Alas, I can't suggest a clear path towards this goal. It would require strong relations between FIVB authorities (who so often only seem to serve themselves) and local politicians backed by national funding. It works on occasion (WC and Olympics), and then it is usually a highlight (like the atmosphere at the four-city WC held in the Netherlands in 2015), but we have yet to put all the global pieces together and create a permanent framework for a new and elevated World Tour.