Ten countries have confirmed participation, including the Philippines, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam, alongside Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia and Nepal. More countries may join in the coming months, organisers said.

As part of the process, each participating country will hold its own national selection to choose an entry before the Bangkok final, 

This move coincides with Eurovision’s 70th anniversary, which organisers say provided a natural inflection point for expansion. 

Martin Green, director of the contest at the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), described Asia as “rich in culture , creativity and talent,” adding that the timing was “especially meaningful” for opening a new chapter.

Celebration of pop music

The Asia edition will follow the core format of the original contest, where performers present original songs and are judged by a mix of expert panels and public voting. While final rules are yet to be confirmed, organisers said the event would be “a celebration of original pop music” where “every vote will count.”

The expansion reflects growing commercial and cultural interest in Asia’s music industry, driven by rising incomes, social media reach and the globalisation of regional genres such as K-pop and Thailand’s T-Wind.

Bangkok was selected as host city partly for its position as a regional cultural hub. Thai tourism official Chuwit Sirivajjakul said the capital “has always been a place where cultures come together, where music fills the air, and where celebration is part of everyday life.”

Notably absent from the initial line-up are major markets such as China, Japan and India, though organisers have indicated that participation remains open.

The Asia launch follows previous attempts to expand the Eurovision format beyond Europe, including the American Song Contest in 2022, which was not renewed after one season.

With more than 600 million people represented by the initial participating countries, organisers are positioning Eurovision Asia as a potential flagship platform for cross-border pop music in the region.

The 2026 Winter Games, officially titled the XXV Olympic Winter Games, brought together nearly 2,900 elite athletes from over 90 nations in northern Italy. Across 116 medal events in eight core sports, the competition delivered thrilling moments and historic breakthroughs. Norway Leads with Record Golds

Nordic skiing specialists led the charge for Norway, a nation long synonymous with Winter Olympic excellence. With 18 golds, 12 silvers, and 11 bronzes, Norway set new benchmarks for both individual and team success. The tally surpassed its previous Winter Olympic record of 16 golds, first set in 2022.

Highlighting the Norwegian campaign was Johannes Høsflot Klæbo , who delivered an extraordinary series of gold-medal performances, including victories in multiple cross-country events. His remarkable haul helped propel Norway’s overall ranking and carved his name into Winter Olympic lore.

The United States finished second on the final medal table with 12 gold medals and 33 total medals, marking its strongest Winter Olympics in terms of gold medals in more than seven decades. American athletes shone in a variety of competitions, from figure skating to speed skating and ice hockey, the latter sealing a dramatic gold in overtime against Canada on the closing day.

Standout American performances included record-setting outings in both individual and team events, showcasing a depth of talent across alpine, skating, and snow sports.

Several nations delivered memorable performances. The Netherlands and host nation Italy each claimed 10 gold medals, with the Dutch strong in speed skating and Italy setting its own national record for total medals at a Winter Games. Germany, France, Sweden, and Switzerland also posted double-digit medal hauls, illustrating the high level of competition across Europe.

Among historic firsts, Brazil’s Lucas Pinheiro Braathen captured the country’s first-ever Winter Olympic medal and gold in alpine skiing, a milestone moment for South American winter sports. Georgia and Kazakhstan also reached the Winter Olympic podium for the first time, underlining the expanding global reach of winter athletics.

On environmental responsibility, Aqua stands apart from the field with 50.3%. The gap to second place is not marginal but structural. Le Minerale follows at 35.4%, leaving a 14.9-point distance that no other attribute in the study replicates.

A dense mid-tier then gathers tightly, with Nestlé Pure Life at 28.7%, Cleo at 25.9%, Vit at 25.0%, Hydrococo at 25.0%, Ades at 24.9%, and Pristine 8.6+ at 24.6%. Below them, Crystalline records 23.6%, Club 22.4%, Super Q2 21.8%, and Equil 21.7%.

At the bottom of the category, Qasis posts 18.9%, Total 8+ 18.6%, Amidis 18.4%, and Sanqua 17.5%. What this really means is that sustainability leadership is no longer contestable without a step-change in credibility. Aqua owns this space decisively.

Value for money is competitive

Value perception tells a different story. Le Minerale leads with 39.2%, but unlike sustainability, the category compresses quickly behind it. Cleo follows closely at 36.8%, while Ades records 35.6% and Aqua 34.7%.

Pristine 8.6+ sits at 34.5%, Nestlé Pure Life at 34.2%, Vit and Club both at 34.1%, and Crystalline at 33.0%. Hydrococo posts 32.4%, Qasis 31.7%, and Super Q2 30.7%.

The lowest tier remains competitive, with Amidis and Total 8+ both at 29.1%, Equil at 28.8%, and Sanqua at 28.7%. The takeaway is clear: value for money is broadly shared, making it a weak lever for long-term differentiation unless paired with other strengths.

Innovation, taste, and health reward focused challengers

Innovation shows one of the tightest leadership races in the study. Le Minerale leads at 28.5%, followed by Hydrococo at 27.5% and Crystalline at 27.1%. Cleo records 26.3%, Pristine 8.6+ 25.2%, and Nestlé Pure Life 24.6%.

Taste perception reinforces this pattern. Le Minerale leads at 33.2%, narrowly ahead of Hydrococo at 32.1%. Crystalline follows at 26.6%, Aqua at 26.1%, and Nestlé Pure Life at 25.6%. Sanqua again sits last at 17.9%.

On health perception, Le Minerale posts 38.8%, followed by Aqua at 36.0% and Hydrococo at 35.1%. Together, these results show that consumers reward brands that commit clearly to functional and experiential benefits rather than spreading their messaging thin.

Trust, quality, and familiarity define modern leadership

Perceived quality is increasingly polarised. Aqua dominates with 50.9%, closely followed by Le Minerale at 48.8%. The next tier drops sharply, with Nestlé Pure Life at 38.4% and Hydrococo at 37.2%. Sanqua records the lowest score at 27.6%.

Safety and trust show near parity at the top, with Le Minerale at 34.3% and Aqua at 34.2%. However, brand awareness gaps quietly shape outcomes. Le Minerale shows the lowest uncertainty at 3.5%, followed by Aqua at 3.8%. In contrast, Sanqua faces a 27.3% “don’t know” rate, limiting its ability to convert any positioning into equity.

For weaker brands, the first challenge is not persuasion but visibility. Consumers cannot trust what they cannot confidently evaluate.

About the research

The findings are drawn from the 2025 Bottled Water Consumer Survey conducted by Impactum Insights. The study was carried out using an online quantitative survey method, with computer-assisted web interviews conducted between 10 September and 10 October 2025. A total of 1,094 Indonesian internet users aged 18 and above participated in the research, providing a nationally representative view of consumer perceptions across 16 major bottled drinking water brands.

Other expensive countries include Cameroon, where broadband costs hover around $57 to $58 per month, largely driven by major network providers like MTN.

Kenya and South Africa follow at about $48, while Morocco averages $35 and Nigeria about $22, with names like Maroc Telecom and Spectranet leading the charge.

The high cost of internet services in Africa is mostly attributed to several interlinked factors, including weak infrastructure, limited competition among service providers, and heavy reliance on imported bandwidth.

This challenge, some analysts believe, could be subdued by Elon Musk's Starlink's presence in Africa.

"Due to Africa’s geographical size and the still weak terrestrial infrastructure, the company could play a prominent role in providing last-mile access to communities across the continent," Diplo states in its Status of Internet Access and Connectivity in Africa report .

Unlike continents with dense fibre-optic networks, much of Africa relies on satellite connectivity and undersea cables , both costly to build and maintain.

In countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, and Malawi, local internet service providers (ISPs) must pay high wholesale prices to access international bandwidth, costs that are inevitably passed down to consumers.

Monopolistic tendencies within certain markets also prevent healthy competition. In other words, in many countries, just a handful of major network providers in Africa control the market , keeping prices high and competition low.

In comparison to the West, people in Switzerland pay about $68 with Swisscom; Australians $52 with OC Broadband. Germany’s average is $36, Canada’s $58, and the UK sits around $39, all for much faster, more reliable connections.

Additionally, the World Population Review reports that "Residents of the United Arab Emirates pay the highest average internet cost at $98.84 per month worldwide, followed by nearby Qatar at $92.04 monthly. There’s a substantial drop to third place, Oman, where people spend an average of $76.99 per month on the internet. Honduras takes fourth place ($72.28), followed by Saudi Arabia ($70.75). The United States sits in sixth place at $67.57 per month. Of the ten most expensive nations, half are located in the Middle East."