Concerns over ambush marketting and the Olympics

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1

On the heels of our previous discussion I thought some people might be interested in this article.

One thing that struck me is that VANOC raised $760 million in domestic sponsorship! Most of that money has been spent in Vancouver, which has a huge payoff in terms of economic activity.

"Most of that money has been spent in Vancouver"

Really? I find that a questionable assumption.

I don't really expect you to take my word for it, here's their budget. So much of the expenses simply aren't portable (staff, operations etc.) while others surely could be.

thanx. I was mostly wondering where the ad creative and what-not gets sourced from, and I
wonder if the technology expenses are being flowed into local high tech?

A similar argument can be made in terms of the Security. I good deal of the Security budget is HR costs. RCMP, Vancouver Police, Security People, Supervisors, etc...All working overtime, all being paid what probably skews into individuals disposable income (i.e. income above what they would expect for the year in the course of normal business) and thus this money will be spent even more freely in the economy.

So will the Olympics pay for itself? No. Will much of the money being spent be spent and then re-spent in the BC/Canadian Economy? Yes.

The party is coming, lets have fun!

m2c

"A similar argument can be made in terms of the Security. I good deal of the Security budget
is HR costs. RCMP, Vancouver Police, Security People, Supervisors, etc...All working
overtime, all being paid what probably skews into individuals disposable income (i.e. income
above what they would expect for the year in the course of normal business) and thus this
money will be spent even more freely in the economy"

And we could have had the exact same outcome in the exact same demographic with a
concerted effort to deal with the many crime and social problems our province faces... with
the end result being a safer, more humane society, fewer children going hungry or lacking
educational opportunities, and less money wasted on rushing through time-sensitive
construction projects. Instead we got snowsports insfrastructure and gov't officials partying on
our dime, amirite?

Like it or not, the Canadian public didn't want to spend over a billion extra dollars on that. They
did on the olympics.

Welcome to democracy. Its most wonderful trait is also its biggest flaw: it places power in the
hands of the people.

"Like it or not, the Canadian public didn't want to spend over a billion extra dollars on that. They did on the olympics. "

Really? Where's the evidence for that statement.

The provincial / federal election results.

"The provincial / federal election results."

^ This.

Olympic spending was barely even an issue in the elections (actually I'm not sure that it even
made it onto the radar of any of the parties).

Politics will make a mountain out of any mole-hill of an issue if they think there's the slightest
edge to be gained.

You're fantasizing if you think the majority of Canada doesn't support the olympics.

"You're fantasizing if you think the majority of Canada doesn't support the olympics."

A google search using the following:

public support for 2010 olympics national poll

doesn't bring up any results that would support this statement. I'd be curious to know how
you've arrived at this belief. Perhaps it was the unbiased and critical news media? Maybe CTV, or
the Vancouver Sun or some other sponsoring media outlet with absolutely no vested interest in
the outcome?

my job is research:

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=98395

"Survey shows overwhelming Canadian support for bid to host 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games"

Official results of COV's vote:

Keam, thank you for illustrating my point. Did you even read the two previous messages?

There may be no national poll or referendum. Feel free to take from that whatever you need
to justify whatever it is you need to believe. (Note: similar googles for 'beer', 'ice cream',
'not killing puppies' yielded similar results. I'm not sure what you draw from that.)

Perhaps some politicians tried to make the olympics an issue. I couldn't find it when I looked
at their platforms. Maybe it was the Evil Media that hacked all their internets and prevented them
from posting such info (or speaking about it). (Wait don't you work for that Evil Media? Are you
even to be 'trusted'? Isn't there a gun to your head telling you what you can and can't say?)

And that Evil Media would have been absolutely loathe to run a story about how the party who
ran with an anti-olympic spending platform was crushed in the election. Yes, had that even
happened, there's no way that profiteering and coal-hearted media would have drawn
attention to that.

You've convinced me. This is like 1984! En masse, Canada has been duped, DUPED into
believing that they want the olympics! Where can I sign up to battle against this injustice!?

(Edit: YourMom posted a national poll showing 91% support while I was tippy-typing. 'Oh
snap', as the kids say. Though you'll counter that it was before the budget increases, or that
it was not scientifically valid, or other such nonsense, whatever it takes to believe that
maybe, possibly, hopefully Canada doesn't stand behind the olympics).

games support has dropped to 50% in BC, because we can see closer what is going on unlike the rest of Canada. Surprisingly this was reported in a local newspaper last week. (province)

Actually I read a similar poll which said 50% of BC residents felt that the games would "bring
more benefits than drawbacks to the Country", while overall 72% of Canadians felt that way.
It also said that 52% of BC residents felt that the games would "bring more drawbacks than
benefits to the province".

http://www.canadaeast.com/news/article/819398

Is that the poll you are referring to? If so, it's misleading to say that that poll queried
"support" for the games.

I doubt I'm alone when I think that the games have a lot of drawbacks (not the least among
those is the tax burden, years of construction inconvenience, and the general mayhem that
we are going to have to deal with come games time). As a BC and especially Vancouver
resident, I will share drawbacks to the games that others outside the region will not. Still, I
support the games.

An interesting note from that poll is that the two highest percentages of respondents which
felt the games will have more benefits than drawbacks to the country were Alberta and
Quebec, the two provinces that have previously hosted the games.

"my job is research:"

Your polls are nearly seven years old as far as I can tell.

"Like it or not, the Canadian public didn't want to spend over a billion extra dollars on that. They
did on the olympics."

I don't remember the pre-2010 debate being framed as a choice between the two. In fact, I
recall pro-2010 advocates stressing the fact that the money wasn't there for any other option...
it was a spend it or lose it proposition. I put it to you that if faced with the option of a billion
dollars being spent on schools, police, and hospitals OR a one-month sports festival, the majority
of people would choose the former.

Keam: "I put it to you that if faced with the option of a billion dollars being spent on schools,
police, and hospitals OR a one-month sports festival, the majority of people would choose the
former."

Despite evidence to the contrary. The money went to the olympics. Should the public have
risen en-masse and demanded the billions go towards that, it would have happened.

The Canada you live in might not be the Canada you want to live in. The greater good does
not dictate the will of the mob. The inertia of apathy is a powerful force. Shiny baubles like
the olympics win out in the public support battles. Lest you forget public support = power in a
democracy.