A comparison between mainstream and action sport industries in Australia: A case study of the skateboarding cluster
The action sport industry is a high growth sector that attracts the lucrative Generation Y market. Although there is a growing body of literature that examines the characteristics and traits of the Generation Y market as consumers of action sports, little is known about the supply side of the action sports industry. This paper illustrates through the example of the skateboarding sport cluster, that this sector has evolved in an organic, almost chaotic manner very different to that of the mainstream sports industry. Entrepreneurs have taken advantage of the open system, the lack of formal boundaries and the risk loving nature of the market to grow the sector into a very profitable industry. The paper specifically illustrates the differences to mainstream sports in relation to provision of facilities, program development and pathways and the roles of suppliers, councils and program developers.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 12 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/bibliographic|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Shilbury, David, 2000. "Considering Future Sport Delivery Systems," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 199-221, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:spomar:v:12:y:2009:i:2:p:66-78. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.