Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

joebean

Members
  • Content Count

    225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

333 Excellent

About joebean

  • Rank
    MF Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

708 profile views
  1. OK, that's all very good. How many tourists did the expenditure attract? How many tourists does the IOM actually attract, outside of Motorsport events and other special events? What I am trying to get to is the figure for tourists that come, principally for the Heritage "attractions". Does this information exist? It is well and good talking about the expenditure that goes into making the Island a tourism destination but that expenditure cannot be evaluated as being a good investment, without some information about the actual number of tourists actually attracted by it. A few years ago I read that the approximate number of visitors, annually was 300,000. Of these, 100,000 were visiting friends and family; 100,000 were business related and 100,000 were tourists. Of the 100,000 say 40,000 came to the TT, 10,000 to the Classic TT/MGP and another 5,000 to the Southern 100, car rallies or simply to visit the Island on motorcycles and car clubs. That leaves somewhere around 45,000 other tourists. What percentage of these arrived here because they would get to sit on a horse tram or steam railway? I don't know the answer to these questions and I suspect the likes of Mr Harmer don't know either. However that does not stop him from saying that criticisms or, at least questions about the value for money the losses on these services are misconceived. It would be true progress to have politicians who could explain their decisions with facts, rather than merely insulting the intelligence of those that dare to question.
  2. Mr Harmer is another Minister who tells us that our opinions are misconceptions but is utterly unable to give a convincing explanation of why. Apparently we just don't understand that running loss-making "services" is actually beneficial. Now, I could understand that running the trams at whatever their annual loss is, actually brings more money into the economy by attracting x number of tourists, spending x amount of money IF these facts were made available. But I suspect that there is actually no survey of visitors that identifies the main reason, or at least a significant reason for their stay is heritage transport and no data to demonstrate the "attraction" of heritage transport actually exists. As such, no data will exist to support the contention that the loss is balanced by additional visitor spend. Nevertheless, we are expected to believe that maintaining taxpayer support of these losses is worth it. I suppose that Mr Harmer is right in one regard; why are we making a fuss about a £700 loss over 2 weeks? This is utterly insignificant in comparison to the ongoing waste across Government during these 2 weeks and the remaining 50, each year.
  3. It is quite possible that Manx Radio has had a review of its Radio TT playlist and decided to move it on a generation or two. I spoke in the past tense as I gave up listening to anything other than the race commentary about two years ago. I remain happy with that decision.
  4. You need to go away and read up about IP law. DfE will have the TT mark registered in relation to categories of commercial products used in relation to the IOM TT races. Clearly, it could not be registered for any use of the letters TT used together for any other purpose.
  5. If you care to follow the history of Gary Thompson at the TT, he has never put bikes out on the course in wet weather. He was the first Clerk to ever cancel the Senior TT race due to poor conditions. The TT has never had a CoC who has been more concerned with rider safety. The final warning suggestion is just bullshit.
  6. I suspect the level of coverage has more to do with the amount of money MR wanted, above the subvention, to continue to provide the past level of programming. What we now have is the coverage that DfE could afford, without MR ruining it, as they do with their normal service, with repetitive and mind-numbing advertisements. Every year I cringed at Manx Radio TT and their presumption that everyone who owns a motorcycle is a greaser that loves rock music. I think the last time they surveyed the preferences of their TT customers was about 1973. In my opinion the race commentary is excellent and Chris Kinley is a real asset. Most of the other Manx Radio TT content was pretty average, at best.
  7. Your point about being proportionate is wrong in the context you use it. It’s about being proportionate in your response, not about taking action or not. A disproportionate response in this case would have been legal action but OFT appear to have acted appropriately.
  8. But the point is that you either protect Intellectual Property or you don’t. There is no halfway. When a big retailer comes along and uses IP without permission any case against the infringement is weakened if you allow others to use it without permission. Everybody would like common-sense to prevail but this is about IP law. The Rights Holder has no choice, particularly when they have taken money in licence fees. Or perhaps the moaners would like Government to forego their commercial income and let the taxpayer pick up all the TT costs so Looneys and other locals can make a few bob on the side?
  9. joebean

    Beer Tent

    No £5 I am afraid. Just a taxpayer who earns a lot less than Mr Bushy and does not want to subsidise his money making opportunity.
  10. joebean

    Beer Tent

    And your guess is?
  11. joebean

    Beer Tent

    No I am not saying that. I am saying that others, like Motorsport Merchandise, who make money on the back of the TT and the use of its branding also contribute large amounts of money to the event. It’s not just Mr and Mrs Taxpayer who have the responsibility to invest in making it happen so others can profit. But keep on supporting Bushy’s devine right if you wish.
  12. Strange how some like to use “Thatcherite” as if it was a derogatory association. If you live in the UK and other places impacted by what happens there, you would probably be wishing Mrs Thatcher was around now to sort May’s mess out.
  13. joebean

    Beer Tent

    I know that Bushy’s is regarded as a TT institution and part of the TT experience for some. Mr Bushy does quite well out of it, I am sure. It might be worth asking him how much he actually invests in the TT event, upon which his business does so well on the back of. My guess is zero £.
  14. joebean

    HORSE TRAMS

    There is a distinct difference in what attracts some visitors now and what you invest in to attract visitors in the future. Coach loads of older visitors are fine but they represent a shrinking market. Victorian quaintness is not necessarily attractive to our future visitors. Investment needs to be based on research and evidence-based strategy. I just don’t see half a million pounds annually sitting very well in such a strategy, if return on investment is a consideration. And it should be.
  15. joebean

    HORSE TRAMS

    The opportunity of ceasing the horse trams was given to Tynwald when DBC took the brave decision to stop funding a legacy transport and tourism service. The decision was then put to politicians who listened to the heritage lobby and decided to keep shoveling taxpayers money into the service. I very much doubt whether any significant number of residents actually use the horse teams as a means of transport and I assume, therefore that they are regarded as a tourist attraction. Did any research take place to demonstrate that people came to the Island to get on the horse trams? I expect not. Outside of MNH does anyone honestly believe that the long term future of tourism on the Island is best served by continued investment in quaintness? Is that what future generations of IOM-bound tourists will be looking for? I suspect that the continued capital and revenue investment in horse trams was based more on decisions to avoid short-term controversy than any long-term investment strategy based on returns or value for money. That’s not untypical, of course.
×
×
  • Create New...