Why currently some nations are more successful than others in badminton

Just reading all the muddled infantile whining  in the

kiddies and mentally challenged badmintonforums on

how to create world beating individuals and teams in

the sport badminton prompts me to propose the following

hypotheses:

1) Badminton is still in its infancy as a commercial sport
and does not offer the same rewards as soccer or tennis.
It is extremely difficult for individuals or teams to be sustained
without the use of public funds.

2) China the most successful team is top not because of
its population or talent pool (players are mainly elite national
athletes ,not members of private clubs).China dominates team
events especially those that do not offer prize money because
it is willing to invest tons of public money to enhance the prestige
of its team,something most nations cannot afford to.The same is
probably true of Korea.

3) Affluent capitalist nations like Japan, Denmark and Germany can
produce individuals excelling in prize awarding open tournaments
because their private sectors can afford to sponsor and subsidise their
players who earn some prize money as well to supplement their income.
These players are true professionals.India is trying to join this club.

4) There are other nations whose governments are not rich and who
have very weak private sectors who don't sponsor sports.Malaysia,
Thailand and Indonesia are prime examples, they have big ambitions
but cannot sustain big teams but can only focus attention on a select
few individuals who dominate Opens and work hard to earn prize
money.These countries can dominate once in a while in modern times
in times of plenty when there is plenty of money to go round.

5) In the final analysis most countries have about the same talent
irrespective of their population numbers,neither is it about passion
or fighting spirit.

It is about productivity of the people that translates into their athletes,
and whether the government can afford to foot the bill or whether there
exists a private sector strong enough to sponsor the athletes to
supplement their prize money.
It is also to some extent the level of Technology of the country,whether
the people are generally disciplined, properly educated and competitive
enough to compete in the world stage.

It doesn't take a genius to deduce that the successful countries in
badminton excel in many other fields in the world because of their human
capital.
Sad to say ,the mentioned laggards in badminton,are also laggards in most
other fields.So other than economics and productivity, history and culture
also play a part in the success factors.

In the case of Malaysia current and future economic and political trends
will compel the BAM to downsize its organisation with less players and
support staff.Most of the players will be outsourced from private clubs
to represent the country in team events.
For a country that is neither here nor there in terms of Technology and
Economics the ideal blend would be a small tax-funded National
Association keeping a few loyal players and staff,supported by players
from more efficient private and productive clubs when performing national
duties like Thomas Cup.That was already in place in the early 2000s when
Malaysia had players like Ong Ewe Hock,Wong Choon Han, Lee Tsuen
Seng,James Chua, Choong Tan Fook and Lee Wan Wah,Chew Choon
Eng and Chan Chong Ming, and Roslin and Hafiz Hashim all in the same
team.Indonesia appears to have adopted this model.
Its all about money and economics,stupid.