Common sense doesn't seem to apply when comes to city authorities doing things that benefit their own taxpayers. Outdoor Advertising predominates in most cities around the world but it has little benefit for the host city.
If you want to advertise in a shopping centre or on a cinema screen you have to share some fees to the location.
It may be part of the overall placement fee, but the location will receive a revenue.
So why does this not apply to outdoor billboards in city's?
Two companies dominate (the World) JCDecaux of France & Clear Channel (of TEXAS USA)
The French company's owner was sentenced by a French court for wrong doings involving the Mayor of Paris, and in the USA Clear Channel provided lots of billboard space for the two G. Bush junior campaigns.
If you want to advertise in a shopping centre or on a cinema screen you have to share some fees to the location.
It may be part of the overall placement fee, but the location will receive a revenue.
So why does this not apply to outdoor billboards in city's?
Two companies dominate (the World) JCDecaux of France & Clear Channel (of TEXAS USA)
The French company's owner was sentenced by a French court for wrong doings involving the Mayor of Paris, and in the USA Clear Channel provided lots of billboard space for the two G. Bush junior campaigns.
Do unspoken things happen on a local lever.HHHmmmmm makes you think.
SPLODGE has been digging around!
Are Politicians, Councilors etc getting payments in kind like posters for political campaigns? Or something worse?
In a world of normal doings the city would charge big fees for outdoor advertising locations or better still put in and own their own and rent them out to advertising companies, whereas what we have is things operating the wrong way around.
If the city owned and operated them, or say an independent agency or none profit company then the fees, the right level of fees, not just a free toilet (that junkies mostly use, or a bench or a flower bed, or a free bus shelter. Yes these are some of the things that these huge profit making juggernauts make : HUGE ones its like the Aladdin's Lamp story with the viewers of the adverts the local TAX payer getting a bad deal. Especially so when cut backs are taking place certainly this is an issue that should have a greater public profile
Are Politicians, Councilors etc getting payments in kind like posters for political campaigns? Or something worse?
In a world of normal doings the city would charge big fees for outdoor advertising locations or better still put in and own their own and rent them out to advertising companies, whereas what we have is things operating the wrong way around.
If the city owned and operated them, or say an independent agency or none profit company then the fees, the right level of fees, not just a free toilet (that junkies mostly use, or a bench or a flower bed, or a free bus shelter. Yes these are some of the things that these huge profit making juggernauts make : HUGE ones its like the Aladdin's Lamp story with the viewers of the adverts the local TAX payer getting a bad deal. Especially so when cut backs are taking place certainly this is an issue that should have a greater public profile
Billboard Advertising
Outdoor or location based advertising is very profitable and it is dominated by just a few companies. They have their advertising displays all over the world in multiple locations in city centres airports shopping centres and many other locations were the public or the motorist passes or congregates.
As other media such as TV radio newspapers and magazines fragments and loses audiences, outdoor becomes increasingly the single effective low cost medium to reach the general public especially so in city centres.
Outdoor or location based advertising is very profitable and it is dominated by just a few companies. They have their advertising displays all over the world in multiple locations in city centres airports shopping centres and many other locations were the public or the motorist passes or congregates.
As other media such as TV radio newspapers and magazines fragments and loses audiences, outdoor becomes increasingly the single effective low cost medium to reach the general public especially so in city centres.
In the past organising, producing locating and changing the large scale labour intensive and infrastructure expensive operations has been the expertise of the companies with the experience and skills and overtime they have agglomerated by various means to become today's giants of the industry.
However technology is able to change and upset this balance and provide the locations generating large scale revenues, with a fairer return; back to the cities that give away these locations for virtually nothing.
In the past the city, airport or other location owners had little option but to let in these organisations control things as it was thought that the infrastructure and operational requirements and the selling of the advertising content was a specialist and a very high cost venture, a risk to far for such locations and often beyond the remit of a city.
Now THINGS HAVE CHANGED.
However technology is able to change and upset this balance and provide the locations generating large scale revenues, with a fairer return; back to the cities that give away these locations for virtually nothing.
In the past the city, airport or other location owners had little option but to let in these organisations control things as it was thought that the infrastructure and operational requirements and the selling of the advertising content was a specialist and a very high cost venture, a risk to far for such locations and often beyond the remit of a city.
Now THINGS HAVE CHANGED.
Technology in the shape of digital screens and software control systems can easily replicate the quality of printed posters, and can display these on digital display platforms, thus cutting out the operational overheads and outdated methods of the past.
Cities, airports, train stations theme parks venues and shopping centres, can obtain a greater share if they adopt a new approach and control or better still own these display networks. Thus reversing the roles, so that the fair benefits from advertising in a city go some way to assisting the community purse, likewise in commercial locations shopping centres and airports a better return will support underlying profitability margins.
So why do cities and airports etc continue with allowing the incumbent advertising and network infrastructure operators to continue into with the same old, same, old, into the digital generation of outdoor and place centred advertising? Which will provide them with even more progfitability?
Is it apathy, is it lack of knowledge, lack of insight or something worse?
Cities, airports, train stations theme parks venues and shopping centres, can obtain a greater share if they adopt a new approach and control or better still own these display networks. Thus reversing the roles, so that the fair benefits from advertising in a city go some way to assisting the community purse, likewise in commercial locations shopping centres and airports a better return will support underlying profitability margins.
So why do cities and airports etc continue with allowing the incumbent advertising and network infrastructure operators to continue into with the same old, same, old, into the digital generation of outdoor and place centred advertising? Which will provide them with even more progfitability?
Is it apathy, is it lack of knowledge, lack of insight or something worse?
Surely every city authority & every advertising focused location should be at the very least investigating alternatives: to bring in much needed revenues in a fare share for the tax burdened and service cutting cities.
Technology and new techniques and equipment now allow for a role reversal to take place.
Why should a location, a city, an airport turn over its 'Aladdin's Lamp' for little in return and sign up for very long term contracts, when the same services can generate significant income, for the location owners.
Technology and new techniques and equipment now allow for a role reversal to take place.
Why should a location, a city, an airport turn over its 'Aladdin's Lamp' for little in return and sign up for very long term contracts, when the same services can generate significant income, for the location owners.
This role reversal is simple to move too, its just a small shift in perspective.
The location should purchase the technology platforms and own such infrastructure themselves as their property then re-sell the space to the advertising companies, in many cases this will be a more direct operation downgrading the current monopolies to intermediary service providers.
TV advertising radio and newspapers and magazine advertising is all linked to some positive value for the viewer and the reader, be it entertainment mixed or serious articles etc. The programme the article has value for the consumer and the advertising is interleaved within and around it: often interruptive but within surrounding value.
Now outdoor posters offer nothing in real terms to the public who view them
But they do provide huge revenue returns for the display owners.
The location should purchase the technology platforms and own such infrastructure themselves as their property then re-sell the space to the advertising companies, in many cases this will be a more direct operation downgrading the current monopolies to intermediary service providers.
TV advertising radio and newspapers and magazine advertising is all linked to some positive value for the viewer and the reader, be it entertainment mixed or serious articles etc. The programme the article has value for the consumer and the advertising is interleaved within and around it: often interruptive but within surrounding value.
Now outdoor posters offer nothing in real terms to the public who view them
But they do provide huge revenue returns for the display owners.
Maybe in the sweetener deal to get the city council to give site location permissions they may get a bus shelter, a toilet, a bench or a flower bed or maybe something under the carpet? Whatever it may be there is no perceived value for the public, who pay local taxes, have their pathways & views obstructed and purchase the advertisers products.
A Few Bikes to keep the people quite
Dublin gave away lots of locations to JCDecaux in exchange for a few Free public bikes.
A Few Bikes to keep the people quite
Dublin gave away lots of locations to JCDecaux in exchange for a few Free public bikes.
Here are a few articles notes and websites that show up what I mean:
And then blocked the view of the road ahead, endangering cyclists with their adverts! Click Here to see the Photos and the forum!
And then blocked the view of the road ahead, endangering cyclists with their adverts! Click Here to see the Photos and the forum!
J C Decaux "street furniture"
City Centre Scams:
J C Decaux "street furniture"
From a Bradford Newspaper - May 1 1998
In one of the most unbelievable deals brokered by the City Centre Management team, 80 pieces of J C Decaux "street furniture" were installed in Bradford over the last 2 years, bringing a fortune to the Belgian company and not one penny to Bradford rate payers.
The "street furniture" consists of advertising hoardings and columns, with all the revenue from the advertising going straight to Decaux.
The only benefit to the public are an occasional "seat" at the foot of some of the advertising columns, and a few street maps displayed on some of Decaux sites free of charge. In return Decaux have been guaranteed an "on street" advertising monopoly for at least 20 years - previous advertisers had their contracts "terminated" by the council to ensure this. 2 J C Decaux "advertisement supported" pay "superloos" were also installed at public expense - but proved to be a disaster and had to be removed.
Yet this scam is not unique to Bradford. Decaux have secured similar deals across the country, thanks to the Town Centre Management network.
Birmingham council forked out a quarter of a million pounds in the late eighties for 500 pieces of "free street furniture". And in Madrid, the erection of 1500 items led to mass protests.
Not surprisingly, questions as to how these deals came to be made have been raised. In 1992 the Belgian Mayor of Liege was convicted for accepting millions of francs worth of "campaign funds" in return for granting the company contracts. The millionaire recluse Jean-Claude Decaux received a year in jail, suspended, for his part in the scandal. 4 years later a Belgian Decaux manager was convicted for providing fraudulent invoices to finance politicians. Tales of the wining and dining of politicians in return for contracts across the globe are legion.
Meanwhile, in Darley Street, Bradford, a row of popular trees were recently dug up at public expense to make way for more J C Decaux garish and highly profitable "furniture".
Perhaps a close look at some of the recent extravagances of our local politicians might be in order.
No comments:
Post a Comment