Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 1:26 pm  

Horatio Yed wrote:

"London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (Locog) told the project organisers the stall wasn’t going to be possible, with “commercial sponsors” cited as the reason."


That is the most sickening part of that story.

Some head of some corporate giant got wind of some locals making cushions and actually thought, no i'm not having that, put a stop to it.

This planet, us humans, i despair.

I doubt very much it will have come from any sponsor, it will be the legal/licencing team from LOCOG, or from the delivery group.

The Olympics is the single biggest brand exercise ever, of course Beryl and Betty weren't going to be able to give away a few cushions, they were pretty daft to believe they would be. I spent many an hour at venue's covering branded items with tape so the logo wouldn't make it onto the TV/press coverage. Are people really this naieve, it's not right, but it's the way it goes.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 1:38 pm  

Anyway you look at it though, it's pathetic.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 1:46 pm  

Horatio Yed wrote:

Anyway you look at it though, it's pathetic.

it's not pathetic, it's just how it works, without the huge corporations these events wouldn't happen.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 1:55 pm  

Standee wrote:

it's not pathetic, it's just how it works, without the huge corporations these events wouldn't happen.

If they can't include everyone, then maybe no bad thing, it's becoming on big advert for the businesses rather than sport.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 1:57 pm  

Standee wrote:

it's not pathetic, it's just how it works, without the huge corporations these events wouldn't happen.

Some people actually think that the government are footing the bill for everything and completely forget about the revenue streams the Olympics brings (and needs).

Since Montreal in 1976, every Summer Olympics has made a profit (except for maybe Beijing, although we'll never kno either way).

It really grinds my gears hearing people and journalists whinge about how much the Olympics is costing, without even sparing a thought for what's coming the other way.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 2:08 pm  

Barnabus wrote:

Some people actually think that the government are footing the bill for everything and completely forget about the revenue streams the Olympics brings (and needs).

Since Montreal in 1976, every Summer Olympics has made a profit (except for maybe Beijing, although we'll never kno either way).

It really grinds my gears hearing people and journalists whinge about how much the Olympics is costing, without even sparing a thought for what's coming the other way.

but that's the rub, it's far too easy to hate big business (for the sake of it) and lamping them for everything they do, people bemoan McDonalds but never mention the millions of pounds they invest with the FA (UK alone), people hate TESCO despite them employing tens of thousands of people. It always makes me laugh when some peope on here lambast business, the very business that they rely on for their pension.

Capitalism works, communism doesn't.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 2:35 pm  

Standee wrote:

people bemoan McDonalds but never mention the millions of pounds they invest with the FA (UK alone)

But people can't complain about the irony of purveyors of fast food products sponsoring major sports events? This is their attempt to detoxify their brand the same way tobacco brands and drink brands tried before them, if you can't see that then you are not looking.

London 2012 had no say in these headline sponsors, doesn't make it right though.

Standee wrote:

people hate TESCO despite them employing tens of thousands of people.

No people hate Tesco because of their employment practices, the way the treat suppliers and there constant mendacious price fiddling.

Standee wrote:

Capitalism works, communism doesn't.

Remind me, what state is world finance in at the moment?

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 2:38 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

No people hate Tesco because of their employment practices, the way the treat suppliers and there constant mendacious price fiddling.

And even though they are a multi billion pound business they still participated in this governments work programme expecting JSA claimants to work for free, not giving them an interview at the end of the placement and then onto the next round of JSA claimants. Lets not forget that fiasco.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 2:39 pm  

Barnabus wrote: Some people actually think that the government are footing the bill for everything and completely forget about the revenue streams the Olympics brings (and needs). Since Montreal in 1976, every Summer Olympics has made a profit (except for maybe Beijing, although we'll never kno either way). It really grinds my gears hearing people and journalists whinge about how much the Olympics is costing, without even sparing a thought for what's coming the other way. So, as a London taxpayer, precisely what bang am I getting for my buck? And no: increased profits for already massively profitably corporations doesn't count. Small businesses are missing out or set to.

Barnabus wrote: Some people actually think that the government are footing the bill for everything and completely forget about the revenue streams the Olympics brings (and needs). Since Montreal in 1976, every Summer Olympics has made a profit (except for maybe Beijing, although we'll never kno either way). It really grinds my gears hearing people and journalists whinge about how much the Olympics is costing, without even sparing a thought for what's coming the other way. So, as a London taxpayer, precisely what bang am I getting for my buck? And no: increased profits for already massively profitably corporations doesn't count. Small businesses are missing out or set to.

Re: Olympics : Mon May 21, 2012 2:41 pm  

See Graeme's question.