Associated Press

Johni Broome was a college basketball headliner at Auburn, the Associated Press first-team All-American an undeniable force powering the Tigers to the Final Four.

His NBA journey is coming with less fanfare.

The fifth-year big man went to the Philadelphia 76ers with the No. 35 pick in Thursday’s second round of the draft. If offered an example of how elite college production doesn’t always equate to high-end NBA potential or draft status, particularly when it comes to an older player deemed more of a finished product compared to the youngster with rising upside.

Still, the player ESPN college basketball analyst Jay Bilas described simply as a winner is tough, tested and eager to start his pro pursuit all the same.

“I think what he said was right,” Broome said of Bilas during Thursday’s ESPN broadcast. ”I’m a winner. I get things done, offensively and defensively, so the Sixers got a good one.”

The 6-foot-9, 249-pound Broome — who started his career as an unheralded recruit for two years at Morehead State — averaged 18.6 points, 10.8 rebounds and 2.1 blocks last year for Auburn, which started the year at No. 11 in the AP Top 25 poll but immediately climbed to a top-5 status it wouldn’t yield for the rest of the year behind Broome’s brilliance. That included eight straight weeks ranked at No. 1 from mid-January to early March.

Broome stuffed box scores so thoroughly that he was the player of the year in a rugged Southeastern Conference, which was hands down the nation’s top conference and produced a record 14 bids to the NCAA Tournament. And he finished as runner-up for AP national player of the year to Duke freshman and eventual No. 1 overall draft pick Cooper Flagg in what was a true two-man spotlight this season, with Broome collecting a third of the vote as the only other player named on a ballot.

He pushed the Tigers program to only its second trip to college basketball’s biggest stage, grinding through an elbow injury suffered during the Elite Eight win against Michigan State and then being hampered by it during the loss to eventual champion Florida in the national semifinals a week later.

That all seemingly had him positioned to be a first-round prospect who led Auburn to 59 wins in the past two years alone.

NBA evaluations, however, are different.

Broome lacks elite athleticism. His testing and measurements at the combine didn’t help his first-round chances; he had a 28-inch max vertical leap, tied for second worst at the combine, while only six players posted a lower standing vertical leap (24.0). He also finished tied for fourth-worst in the shuttle run (3.23 seconds) designed to test agility.

Numbers aren’t everything, of course. Maryland big man Derik Queen tied Broome for the second-worst max vertical and still went on to go late in the lottery (No. 13). But Queen is the still-developing prospect growing into his upside at 20 years old and with just 36 games of college experience, compared to Broome being the as-is prospect who turns 23 on July 19 after playing 168 college games.

When it comes to his game, he plays more below the rim and lacks the defense-stretching range essential in today’s game built around floor-spacing.

His jumper is rated as “below average” in Synergy’s analytics rankings, with him making 27.1% to rank in the 25th percentile — with most of those attempts coming in catch-and-shoot situations. That underlying data aligns with his outside-shooting statistics, where Broome made just 31.4% of his 3-point attempts (53 of 169) over the last two seasons and had at least two made 3s in just 15 of 71 games.

He was at his best in post-ups, as a cutter, working as the roll man in pick-and-rolls and attacking the offensive glass, ranking “good” to “very good” in all of those categories in Synergy. He also ranked as “very good” in finishing layups and dunks at the rim, converting 65.9% of those attempts to rank in the 81st percentile.

Metrics aside, there’s a place in the NBA for guys who can rebound and defend with toughness. He’s already proven he can, along with putting in the work going back to being a three-star signee with Morehead State.

“He may not be an above-the-rim big guy, but he carves out space and he gets things done,” Bilas said during the broadcast. “A really productive player that has been overlooked before and has come through.”

___

AP Sports Writer Steve Reed contributed to this report.

___

AP NBA: https://apnews.com/nba

What’s in a name?

The NIL legislation allows college athletes to monetize their personal brands, and players like Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, and Cameron Brink were quick to seize the opportunity. Clark, in particular, is absolutely nasty (gen Z translation: insanely good) on the court. Her generational talent and aggressive style are riveting. When she and Reese went head-to-head, it wasn’t just a game. It was a cultural moment that sold tickets and sparked nationwide conversation.

Past pushes for equity in women’s sports, like Megan Rapinoe’s advocacy in soccer, laid crucial groundwork. But social justice messaging alone doesn’t fill arenas. Equity matters, but entertainment gets butts in seats. Clark and Reese’s rivalry delivered both: raw talent and emotional stakes. And thanks to NIL, players can build brands as students, cementing cultural relevance early and extending influence beyond the court. Clark translated her dominance into off-court star power, securing partnerships with Nike, Gatorade, State Farm, Buick, and more. Her social media boasts over 2.29 million followers across Instagram and TikTok.

The next wave is already in motion. USC’s JuJu Watkins checks the traditional boxes of athlete superstardom, like a major Nike deal, but she’s also expanding what that looks like. As the face of NYX’s ‘Make Them Look’ campaign, she brings beauty and basketball into the same frame.

Then there’s Flau’jae Johnson, the ultimate multi-hyphenate. She balances a rap career under JAY-Z’s Roc Nation with deals from Puma, JBL, Meta, and Taco Bell. Her ability to merge sports and music made her the top NIL earner in women’s college basketball, with an estimated $1.5m in deals.

UConn’s Paige Bueckers has carved out her own brand path, combining big-name sponsorships with purpose-driven work. She’s promoted financial literacy with Intuit and helped launch a free grocery store in partnership with Chegg.

These athletes aren’t waiting to go pro; they’re building brands in real time with fans following every phase of their lives.

The playbook

TikTok has been a major amplifier, turning athletes into influencers. The NCAA Women’s Basketball TikTok channel alone features over 74m posts. Players share highlights, but also personality, style, and everyday life. For gen Z, who wants the full story – not just the final score – this builds real emotional investment.

It’s translating to real-world impact: WNBA attendance is up 48%, while ESPN viewership rose 170%. The Indiana Fever, led by rookie Caitlin Clark, averaged 17,000 fans per game (a 320% surge). While the NWSL also saw record highs with 11,250 fans per match (a 6% increase), the WNBA is operating on an entirely different level.

What does this mean for brands? Firstly, don’t just think of players; think of protagonists. This means, don’t just get in early, get in smart. Look for athletes with talent and a strong narrative. Angel Reese isn’t just a baller; she’s a cultural magnet. Her rivalry with Clark drove national attention and sold out arenas. She flexed this momentum into attending the MET Gala and fronting campaigns for Thom Browne and Coach. That’s not just influence, that’s impact.

Secondly, give athletes creative freedom. Not to be too gen-Z slangy, but “let them cook.” The most resonant content happens when brands step back and let players shape the story. Whether it’s showing off off-court passions or posting raw, unscripted moments, it builds real trust. Gen Z is hyper-aware; they know what’s real and what’s brand-safe filler.

Lastly, be mindful. Remember that with influence comes responsibility. As brands align with younger athletes, there’s a duty of care to consider. These players are still growing on the court and in life. Brands can offer mentorship by pairing athletes with more seasoned ambassadors, or providing access to financial advisors, legal experts, or performance coaches. Even outside the sports world, brands can tailor support – like Intuit helping Paige Bueckers navigate NIL taxes – to match their industry strengths. That’s how you build healthier, longer-lasting partnerships rooted in real care.

Brand-builders

The evolution of NIL laws hasn’t just transformed college basketball. It’s spotlighting young women as some of the most dynamic brand-builders in culture today. These athletes are confident, multidimensional, and deeply connected to their audiences. They move seamlessly between courts, red carpets, and social feeds, bringing their communities with them. Aligning with these emerging stars isn’t just about sports. It’s about staying culturally fluent, emotionally resonant, and ahead of where attention is going next.

May 2024 marked a brand new chapter in the history of Arizona State athletics, with the hiring of alumnus Graham Rossini as the university’s newest athletic director following the departure of Ray Anderson, who served in that capacity for roughly a decade.

Year one brought a whirlwind of unanticipated success for Sun Devil athletics as the school transitioned from its former home in the Pac-12 Conference to the Big 12 Conference in the vast majority of its sports. Despite this significant period of change, many Sun Devil programs saw significant success over the last nine months, winning four conference championships (football, volleyball, men’s, and women’s swimming).

On Thursday morning, Rossini held a press conference, which, among other topics, reviewed the first full sports year for ASU in their new conference.

“26 sports, 15 of them finished in the top 25,” Rossini noted in his opening remarks. “This last year, we had 10 combined first or second-place conference finishes, four Big 12 championships, which led the Big 12, and four Big 12 runners-up as well.

“I think the nation has started to really understand what we’re capable of accomplishing at Arizona State University. We want to win, we talk about Operation: Rings and Banners all the time, we want to compete at the highest level.”

Rossini credits a large portion of the success of the 2024–25 athletic year to the connectivity of the coaching staff across the department that has worked amongst themselves to foster growth at ASU. Rossini noted that the university coaching tree at ASU feels more intertwined now than it did back in May 2024.

“We no longer have these 26 sports that operate largely like independent contractors,” Rossini noted. “They’re connected, they’re collaborating, they’re pushing each other in ways that are healthy and competitive.”

With the additional success comes added fandom and excitement in the Valley toward Sun Devil football. Much of Rossini’s remarks looking ahead to the 2025–26 athletic year were related to the boom of popularity and resources ASU has earned heading into the fall, starting with football, as the ASU craze has made Tempe the new hotspot for Saturday afternoons in the Phoenix metropolitan.

“Seven thousand new season tickets for next football season as of today,” Rossini stated. “We expect to exceed 7,500 new season tickets by the start of the season. That puts us at the most total season tickets in well over a decade.”

As the rapidly changing environment of collegiate athletics continues, the Sun Devils feel comfortable in their foundation to this point. Revenue for the university has seen exponential growth starting in August 2023, when Sun Devil Stadium, the home of ASU football, agreed to a naming rights deal with Mountain America Credit Union worth over $50 million at the time.

“I think it’s still the largest investment in college football history. That really started our evolution of building out a better business within Sun Devil Athletics,” Rossini remarked. “That’s continued with the partnerships that we’ve started to create. We have a number of new partners coming in at seven-figure levels, really focused on ticket selling and fundraising.”

As money flows through the veins of college athletics, changes in NCAA rules, regulations, and guidelines for NIL and other compensation for college athletes continue. The summer of 2025 is no different than many in years past, as the NCAA settles on new financial decisions meant to aid in monetary regulation.

This time around, the NCAA has settled upon a maximum of $20.5 million that each university can supply in revenue sharing for its student-athletes. This decision is based on the percentage of the school’s commercial-driven revenue through athletics. Due to the fact that Arizona State is expanding its number of scholarship athletes across its sports to meet the max numbers, it will actually have roughly $18 million this year to distribute in revenue share funds to all of its scholarship student-athletes. This figure is expected to increase by 4% annually to keep pace with rising living costs.

It is essential to note that this is not a salary cap on the amount a collegiate athlete can receive through NIL contracts. However, it does impose a restriction on the amount of money that can be received directly from the university. For Rossini, this was an anticipated step in the direction of college athlete compensation, as the NCAA continues to look for a permanent solution to the chaos surrounding name, image, and likeness (NIL).

“I think the overall benefit is that there are steps toward uniform guidelines,” Rossini commented. “And at least in terms of rev share and NIL and roster caps, we understand that environment. I think we’ve got a long way to go as an industry in terms of officiating and some of the sport-specific rules that need to be unified at a Division I level or an NCAA level. I don’t think each conference should have different interpretations of competitive rules. I think we need to really focus on balancing out that landscape.”

The balance of the landscape is set for now, but the NCAA doesn’t regulate where each school spends its annual revenue share funds. Proposed distribution models across the country for colleges that have a football program suggest that roughly 75% of the annual revenue share funds will be allocated to football. The majority of the remaining 25% will be allocated to men’s basketball, with the remaining funds distributed to the rest of the collegiate athletes at any given university.

Ultimately, Rossini stayed far away from floating numbers or percentage points on Thursday, and no figures were implied on how much ASU will spend per program. The monetary structure is centered on scholarship growth while unifying the athletic department and all 600 student-athletes at Arizona State, ensuring they are adequately compensated.

“We’ll be spending off about $18 million on the rev share,” Rossini said. “So, the available dollars are $20.5 million. If you follow the documents, there are two separate deduct categories. There’s up to $2.5 million in additional scholarship. We’ve blown beyond that number, adding 200-plus, so we hit that threshold no problem.

“We are discontinuing the Alston program (education-related financial awards provided directly by universities for academic-related expenses) that we’ve had for the last three or four years, which allows us to maintain $18 million going into rev share. Again, our scholarship investment is significant, but we’re convinced that it’s the right way to put our dollars into our department.”

Rossini’s long-term vision for the athletic department differs from that of the majority of Power Four programs. Fourteen of ASU’s 26 athletic programs are women’s sports, and the school is focused on building a culture that uplifts every team in the athletic department.

It was announced in May 2025 that multiple Division I universities, including UTEP and Cal Poly, would be dropping women’s tennis, along with swimming and diving. In the Valley, Grand Canyon’s men’s volleyball team is also on the chopping block, with monetary reasoning at the forefront of the unprecedented waters that athletic departments now have to navigate.

Arizona State’s 26 sports tops all Big 12 teams, and the conference has only two other teams exceeding 20 sports (Arizona at 22 and TCU at 21). It’s possible that this new college sports landscape could ultimately force some schools in this league to go through a program attrition process, yet that does not appear to be an even remote possibility in Tempe.

“We’ve added scholarships to all 26 (sports),” Rossini proudly stated. “There are a lot of schools that are maybe incrementally adding a small number or pulling scholarships out of sports, giving them to football to go from 85 to 105, or giving these two extra men’s basketball scholarships. I’d be nervous if I were at that school. If I’m a sport that’s not a big revenue driver and it is a cost center, you better have some incremental value to the university. So, we’re looking at ways to just resource our programs.

“There’s a pathway where eventually every athlete at ASU could be on some form of athletic aid. And we’ve added operational budget to all 26 sports. So, we’re continuing to invest in all 26. This isn’t an isolation around football and men’s basketball. They’re certainly heavily involved in the rev share distribution, but all 26 have a place at the university, and we really try to be as diligent and aggressive in resourcing all of them as best we can.”

Every NIL deal an ASU student-athlete earns will need to be approved by the university before it can become official—a process that is already in place but with slight variations for future use.

“Our athletes are used to disclosing their NIL deals,” Rossini remarked. “There have been different tools that we’ve used for that, but we’ve always encouraged that. It’s been part of our process. Where it benefits moving forward is the new NIL Go (a Deloitte-run clearinghouse) process that we’ll be using. Deloitte is involved in managing that. And again, a lot of people are maybe skeptical about the reality of holding up to these new guidelines.”

Deloitte’s NIL Go system is becoming the newest standard in NIL structure. The accounting giant launched the program on June 11, 2025, and numerous Division I programs will use it entering the new athletic cycle. It requires all students to submit NIL deals worth $600 or more for review by a third party, in order to streamline the regulatory process.

An ASU athlete who will likely utilize NIL Go frequently is Sun Devil quarterback Sam Leavitt. The redshirt sophomore enters his second year in Tempe as a player in the upper echelon of collegiate quarterbacks, with Heisman Trophy potential being floated by analysts. Perhaps more remarkable than his playmaking on the field is his selflessness off it. While other universities tangle in bidding wars for their star signal-callers, Leavitt donated his 2024 season earnings back to the Sun Angel NIL Collective, along with $15,000 donation to the Pat Tillman Foundation.

At the head of Rossini’s vision for ASU athletics is a team leader such as Leavitt who is willing, able, and excited to replant fruitful seeds in the program for others to benefit from.

“I love the kids who are in our department. Sam Leavitt is really taking on massive leadership at ASU, not just for football, but for all of ASU,” Rossini said. “I think when you see a check like this where he’s donating his NIL money back to the Pat Tillman Foundation, it just tells me that they understand the legacy of our institution. They understand what it’s like to be a Sun Devil. They understand the spirit of giving back, and that’s what NIL is for.

“I think college has historically been very selfish. It’s ‘help us because we’re inefficient at running the industry ourselves. We need a handout for people to come and give us resources.’ We want to give that back. We want to build a better business, but we want to be very community-oriented, where we’re affecting causes that are important in the Valley.”

ASU’s 2024 football campaign is forever ingrained in the history of Sun Devil football, finishing with the second-highest win total in program history. However, Thursday marked an incredible day for the team that still holds the all-time record. Led by legendary head coach Frank Kush, the 1975 ASU football team finished the season 12–0, culminating in a Fiesta Bowl victory over Nebraska, marking the only undefeated season in school history.

It was announced Thursday that the 1975 team would be inducted into the Sun Devil Athletics Hall of Fame, 50 years removed from its unforgettable run.

“We knew that this 50th anniversary was significant, and they’re going to be a member of the Hall of Fame class this fall, which is also the 50th anniversary of the Sun Devil Athletics Hall of Fame,” Rossini noted. “So, we only have two other teams that have ever been inducted into the Hall of Fame. The ’75 football team will be the first football team, and it very well deserves to come in.”

DUBLIN–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The “Sports Market Place Directory 2025 Edition” book has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com’s offering.

Sports Market Place 2025 provides a one-stop resource for this billion-dollar industry. This will be an important resource for large public libraries, university libraries, university athletic programs, career services or job placement organizations, and is a must for anyone doing business in or marketing a product or service to the vast U.S. sports industry.

Sports Market Place is the classic sports reference work that has served the sports industry for over 50 years, offering full coverage of 103 sports – from Air Sports to Yachting – including data on fast-growing segments such as cycling, fitness, gymnastics, martial arts, running, swimming, and weightlifting. Over the years, this work has grown to include nearly 2,000 pages of valuable content, including professional, college and youth leagues and teams, sports media, events, facilities, sponsors, manufacturers, and professional services.

With this directory on your desk, you have a comprehensive tool providing current key information about the people, organizations and events involving the explosive sports industry at your fingertips. Sports Market Place provides must-have contact information (nearly 13,500 listings) including: 11,484 websites, 6,047 email addresses, and nearly 40,000 key executives.

• Single Sports has over 2,109 sport-specific organizations, leagues and teams that comprise over 100 specific sports. It includes professional, major and minor leagues, coaches, managers, and an alphabetical index.

• Multi Sports includes 12 specific categories, including athletic foundations, Olympic teams, halls of fame and youth sports organizations. It includes a total of 835 and an alphabetical index.

• College Sports has 1,697 listings with associations, conferences, degree programs, and division I, II and III schools. You’ll find a comprehensive list of coaches and sports management programs, and an alphabetical index.

• Media includes prominent newspapers and radio and television sports programming. Listings include editors, commentators, show hosts and an alphabetical index.

• Sports Sponsors includes 119 sponsors that support most major sports, including college bowl games, and an alphabetical index.

• Professional Services comprises 13 categories, from executive search services to ticket services, for a total of 1,684 listings, and an alphabetical index.

• Facilities has 1,365 listings and includes seven categories from arenas to facility concession services. You’ll find stadiums, race tracks, architects, management services, and an alphabetical index.

• Manufacturers & Retailers include 1,929 listings, with a separate section for Software Manufacturers. Listings include valuable contact information, including key executives, plus products and brands. This chapter includes two indexes – one by sport and one by subject.

• Events, Meetings & Trade Shows include 1,060 listings, of which 130 are trade shows. Events and trade shows are listed separately by both sport and date. This section also includes two alphabetical indexes, one for trade shows and one for events.

Key Topics Covered:

1. Single Sports

• Alphabetical Index

• Air Sports Organizations

• Archery Organizations

• Arm Wrestling Organizations

• Auto Sports Organizations

• Auto Sports Racing Leagues/Teams

• Badminton Organizations

• Bandy Organizations

• Baseball Organizations

• Baseball, Professional Leagues/Teams: Major

• Baseball, Professional Leagues/Teams: Minor

• Basketball Organizations

• Basketball, Leagues and Teams

• Biathlon Organizations

• Billiards Organizations

• Boating Organizations

• Bobsledding Organizations

• Bowling Organizations

• Boxing Organizations

• Broomball Organizations

• Canoeing Organizations

• Climbing Organizations

• Cricket Organizations

• Croquet Organizations

• Curling Organizations

• Cycling Organizations

• Cycling, Leagues/Teams

• Dart Organizations

• Diving Organizations

• Equestrian Organizations

• Equestrian, Commissions/Pari-Mutuel

• Exercise/Fitness Organizations

• Fencing Organizations

• Figure Skating Organizations

• Fishing Organizations

• Football Organizations

• Football, College Bowl/Classics

• Football, Professional Leagues/Teams

• Frisbee Organizations

• Golf Organizations

• Greyhound Racing Organizations

• Gymnastics Organizations

• Handball Organizations

• Hockey, Field Hockey Organizations

• Hockey, Ice Hockey Organizations

• Hockey, Professional Hockey (NHL)

• Hockey, Professional, Minor Leagues

• Hockey, Roller Hockey Organizations

• Horseshoe Organizations

• Inline Skating Organizations

• Jai-Lai Organizations

• Kayaking Organizations

• Kiting Organizations

• Lacrosse Organizations

• Lacrosse, Leagues/Teams

• Luge Organizations

• Martial Arts Organizations

• Motorcycle Organizations

• Mountainboard Organizations

• Netball Organizations

• Orienteering Organizations

• Pentathlon Organizations

• Petanque Organizations

• Platform Tennis Organizations

• Polo Organizations

• Racquetball Organizations

• Ringette Organizations

• Rodeo Organizations

• Roller Skating Organizations

• Rowing/Crew Organizations

• Rugby Organizations

• Running Organizations

• Sailing Organizations

• Scuba Organizations

• Shooting/Hunting Organizations

• Shuffleboard Organizations

• Skateboard Organizations

• Skiing Organizations

• Sled Dog Organizations

• Snowboarding Organizations

• Snowmobile Organizations

• Soccer (Futsal) Organizations

• Soccer Organizations

• Soccer, Leagues/Teams

• Softball Organizations

• Softball, Leagues/Teams

• Speedskating Organizations

• Squash Organizations

• Surfing Organizations

• Swimming Organizations

• Table Tennis Organizations

• Tennis Organizations

• Tennis, Leagues/Teams

• Track & Field Organizations

• Triathlon Organizations

• Tug of War Organizations

• Volleyball Organizations

• Water Polo Organizations

• Water Skiing Organizations

• Weightlifting Organizations

• Windsurfing Organizations

• Wrestling Organizations

• Yachting Organizations

2. Multiple Sports

• Alphabetical Index

• Athletic Foundations

• Disabled Sports

• High School Sports

• Military Sports

• Olympic, International Federations

• Olympic, Organizations

• Olympic, United States Major Governing Bodies

• Professional Organizations

• Sports Commissions/Convention Visitors Bureau

• Sports Halls of Fame, Libraries, Museums

• State Games Organizations

• Youth Organizations

3. College Sports

• Alphabetical Index

• College Associations

• College Athletic Conferences

• NAIA I Colleges

• NCAA Division I Colleges

• NCAA Division II Colleges

• NCAA Division III Colleges

• Sport Management Degree Programs

4. Media

• Alphabetical Index

• Newspapers

• Magazines

• Sports Business Directories

• Media Production

• Sports Radio Networks

• Sports Radio Programs, Local

• Sports Radio Programs, National

• Sports Satellite Radio

• Sports Radio Stations

• Sports Television, Cable & Broadcasting

• Sports Television Pay Per View

• Sports Television Programs, Local

• Sports Television Programs, National

• Sports Satellite Television

• Sports Television Stations

• Sports on the World Wide Web

5. Sports Sponsors

• Sponsor by Sport Index

• Sports-Related

6. Professional Services

• Alphabetical Index

• Executive Search Services

• Event Planning & Services

• Event Security

• Financial Services

• Marketing & Consulting Services

• Technical Services

• Sports Agents

• Sports Attorneys

• Sports Medicine Services

• Sports Travel Services

• Statistical Services

• Student Athlete Recruiting Services

• Ticket Services

7. Facilities

• Alphabetical Index

• Arenas & Stadiums

• Race Tracks – Auto

• Race Tracks – Equestrian Downs & Parks

• Race Tracks – Greyhound

• Facility Architects & Developers

• Facility Management

• Facility Concession Services

8. Manufacturers & Retailers

• Company by Sport/Subject Index

• Equipment & Product Manufacturers

• Software Manufacturers

• Retailers

9. Events, Meetings & Trade Shows

• Alphabetical Trade Show Index

• Meeting and Trade Show Calendar

• Alphabetical Events Index

• Events by Date

• Events by Sport

10. All-Volume Indexes

• Entry Index

• Executive Index

• Geographic Index

For more information about this book visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/fkhjzi

Source: Grey House Publishing Inc

About ResearchAndMarkets.com

ResearchAndMarkets.com is the world’s leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends.