City Of Culture Bid (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter torchomatic
- Start date
Alternative like who?
BT have absolutely no links to the culture - so that means they shouldn't have been able to put a sponsorship offer forward?
Are you trying to suggest companies should only sponsor things if they have links to the event at hand?
What links do Carlsberg, Coca-Cola, Continental, Hisense, Hyundai–Kia, McDonald's, Orange, SOCAR and Turkish Airlines have with football?
They shouldn't have been allowed to sponsor the Euros?
Nick
Administrator
I think if somebody is going to sponsor something to do with culture then it should actually have something to do with the city's culture shouldn't it?
Completely different to a football match or tv coverage isn't it?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I have an issue because Wasps are not *my* idea of culture and heritage.
What they are, is an example of the commodification of such things.
OK, who?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Ah, big difference here. Wasps are not a Coventry club, but are trying to be accepted as such and therefore creating a falsehood.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
If we're talking 'a city of culture' then isn't it rather tawdry to have a sponsor, full-stop?
Since when is culture about finance?
But hey... the Higgs charity would be a half-decent option, in which case... or similar organisations.
What Wasps as headline sponsors do, is contradict savagely the message of what a city of culture *is*.
You're choosing to ignore what sponsorship is actually about, which is fine - but still haven't answered the question: Who should it have been? Who fulfils the criteria you're citing?
How is it a big difference?
Sponsorship is about providing money for something to be moved forward.
Why does the sponsor have to have any link with the matter at hand?
Nick
Administrator
Because of the fact it's bidding about culture? Maybe the edl could start sponsoring Muslim events? It's not just about providing money is it?
Nick
Administrator
And you are choosing to ignore what culture are all about.
There are plenty of companies around the city who could have all gone in, Christ even jlr have the jaguar link to the city.
What about the unis? What about the care home company building by the butts? Even Coventry sports trust
Last edited:
If there is no sponsor how do you expect the bid to be progressed? The council to finance it with the potential of no return if the bid isn't successful - I'm sure that would have gone down well!
Sponsor provide money for something to be progressed or take place. There is absolutely no requirement for them to have any links or involvement with the subject at hand.
Nick
Administrator
I think you are still missing the irony in the whole culture thing.
The fact it's about culture has nothing to do with it.
It's completely just about providing money - the kickback being they get their name out there.
Sponsoring a culture bid doesn't equal you are saying or trying to say you're culturally linked to that area.
Nick
Administrator
It is everything to do with it if is sponsoring the culture of the city.
Can you really not see why people would point it out? Honestly?
Having wasps sponsor it is shouting that the culture is something moved in from Wycombe 2 years ago.
OK, what is culture about? What constitutes culture for you?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
There is a return.
Heritage and culture brings in masses of tourist income, and actually makes a net profit for councils if done properly. It is, however, a soft target for budgt cuts because politicians wave the either/or of hospitals and schools... or heritage in front of it. This is notwithstanding the social benefits that go into making a society function, the goodwill, the cohesion and sense of place. It is, tbf, what heritage and culture doesn't do overly well, is showcase what it brings to a place. Part of this is because the people who work in it aren't commercially driven but... that's its USP too, the fact that people who work around these areas work because they *care* not for cash.
Sponsorship too does require a fitting with brand values, for wont of a better term. It's why, after all, certain organisations stopped sponsoring CCFC when they moved away from the city. The Coventry Building Society couldn't sponsor them then because they were attached to the space and place of Coventry, their sponsorship depended on CCFC being the same.
Ditto the Wasps sponsorship. This is a Coventry City of Culture bid. It should be highlighting the fabulous history, traditions and arts that have powred Coventry and its social life during the ages. Wasps can't help that brand identity in the slightest, as they can't bring the archive footage of Dai Duckham, they don't have a Harry Walker to wheel out... Hell, even BMW would have more of a link, given they still own the Triumph brand.
What we won't have is the Herbert putting on an exhibition of Wasps winning the cup in 1999, because it doesn't have the resonance with the city's culture, heritage, tradition that CCFC winning the FA Cup did. Hence the latter gets its exhibition.
So, Wasps end up piggy-backing onto this bid in an attempt to naturalise their position as part of Coventry's culture and heritage. Unfortunately the reverse approach means COventry's culture and heritage is slightly tarnished, as it privileges the superficial immediacy ahead of that which has given the city depth. It may offer a short term cash input, but it won't help long term with an association of Coventry as a city of culture.
It's not - it's all about money.
Where is it documented that to sponsor a bid around culture means you have to be the culturally linked to that area?
I'd suggest the fact Wasps are sponsoring it demonstrates this isn't the case.
They're simply financing the bid, not claiming any cultural link to the area.
Nick
Administrator
I was going to say exactly that as well!
Otis
Well-Known Member
Because of what NW and Nick have just said. It is about a city of culture, so all about that particular city.
Any sponsorship money should come from companies and organisations within that city surely!
Can't compare it to other stuff because this is very specific and very individual.
Having Wasps sponsor it leaves a bad taste I feel and goes against putting yourselves up for a city of culture, as they have just been shipped in and are not a Coventry club.
They may well get accepted as such in time, but for now they have no association with the city.
There wouldn't be a return if the bid was unsuccessful and had the bid been financed directly by the council, as my post was making reference to, the constraints already present would have been deepened.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
And of course, if I were Wasps this is exactly why I'd have been looking to sponsor this too.
Can't help but feel the consequence of said sponsorship is that if Coventry were to win the bid, it would be *despite* of their choice of sponsors, not *because* of them. Wasps however can't lose, even if the city loses its bid. It's a very wise move on *their* part...
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
There would, because as part of the bid we get an uplift in what the city will actually *do* in the runup.
Budgets get slashed in this area every year, until they're at virtually nothing and this is crazy. Now it's all about lottery funding and short term bid winning to keep things going, rather than council funding and this...is crazy.
The fact it's about culture simply doesn't come into it - that not how sponsorship works. It might morally seem right, but which business are run on morals?
However, let's go with your position that it should be a company from Coventry. Who would this be? Who has enough links with Coventry for them to be deemed acceptable to you? Why didn't they come forward?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
It does when the whole point is selling the most appropriate city to a judging panel.
You're showcasing what makes Coventry a city of culture, and openly McDonaldising it with its headline sponsor runs counter to that. By taking the Wasps cash, they potentially jeapordise far *more* cash in the future.
It could be guaranteed that the uplift would definitely bring in monies be above the outlay? Surely it's better to let someone else take that potential hit?
You honestly think the sponsor of the bid would impact the decision making? Really?!
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I wasn't talking specifically money. There are also studies that show wellbeing can increase exponentially with a vibrant cultural and heritage delivery. As for physical money... I'd be prepared to suggest that tourism increases would indeed do that, but it's always hard to tell where that specifically came from.
If you *must* sponsor however, it would be very wise to pick sponsors that don't run counter to the message sent out by your other cultural instituions around the city. Wasps do that... which is why they want to sponsor in the first place.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I do, for the message it sends out. If Coventry win this it will be *despite* their choice of sponsor, not *because* of it.
Believe me, usually(!) a lot of thought goes into which are appropriate partners for heritage and cultural services. I'm not convinced in this instance much thought has been seen.
Sponsor like who? So far Higgs and JLR have been suggested. Any others? Why didn't they come forward? I'm sure it would be possible to have more than one sponsor.
Nick
Administrator
I.listed a couple more than that. You are making out wasps Are and were the only option
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I listed one too. Not ideal... but better. Pay me a salary, and I'll research you a list of sponsors to approach, too. To suggest I cme up with them off the top of my head is the crazy talk that comes with a 'who would replace them?' conversation whenever a manager comes under pressure. Make it my job, and it's my responsibility to find them...
FWIW, I can think of a fair few in *my* patch that would be appropriate, but they're maybe not *as* appropriate for Coventry.
