Things that cost €30 million

problemchimp

Nijmegen wrote: »

There's a fundamental science to how marketing works.

But to boil it down, you repeat a message at a customer time and time again, over many mediums and with different levels of intensity. And eventually some of them buy.

I spend a couple of million on marketing every year, and would like to think I know a bit about it. And the Queen's visit, translated into marketing terms, is a primer. You prime an audience and I daresay the Irish tourism board in London has campaigns ready to run in the UK in the coming weeks as people decide on a location for a summer break.

The move to Cork is really smart, showing that Ireland is about more than just Dublin and the stag weekend.

You prime the audience to think of Ireland. Then you hit them with repeated specific ads.

Bord Failte's own report on prospects for 2011 states:

Britain: Presents a significantchallengebut increasing Ireland’s share of the British market is essential if we are to return to real growth.

It's a priority area.

I don't doubt your experience in marketing and in my experience of dealing with British people arriving in Dublin every day, they all say Ireland is great craic but just too bloody expensive. The advertising done in previous years worked but eventually the British copped on to us and now spend in places where they can get value for money. There is only one way to get tourists from Britian back here and bringing the queen over is not the answer. It's all about value for money so getting rid of that stupid tourist tax and the V.A.T. reduction is a start.

kippy

Nijmegen wrote: »

You must be right. Would you like a job as my new Marketing Director? Because clearly we've been doing it wrong all these years, working off of the principals of marketing and sales when we could have spent our money much more efficiently, instead of wasting it on efforts liking integrated marketing campaigns with priming involved.

I think the people here saying the €30m can't be justified are trying to prove a negative, and want the kind of facts and figures that it's best go ask a professional agency involved for, not punters on a general discussion board.

All I can add to this discussion is my experience in business, marketing, and with the IDA. For the figures, go talk to the professionals deeply involved in this effort.

We're all speaking from our experience.......and we're all punters to some extent yourself included - I dont know you from adam.
Granted, you might be in marketing and you may have more experience than a lot of people on this thread - that doesnt however make your opinion infallible.

I've spoken from from own experience. I've never based my holiday plans on the visits of our state leaders to other countries and don't intend to start doing so - integrated marketing campaigns or not.
I amnt asking for figures off you, I just know its exceptionally difficult to put a tangible number on the amount of people that will visit this country as a result of the visits of Barack Obama and The Queen apart from those that have traveled here in their entourage, as security or as foreign media. After that its very difficult to put a number on it and I believe any attempt to do so is complete pie in the sky/trying to justify expenditure.

Exchange rates, weather, value for money, safety are far more important to the tourist and indeed the repeat tourist than any level of visits by foreign states people.

You mark my words though - if tourism does increase this year, it'll be because of these visits and NOT because of decreasing prices, hopefully better weather in the summer and exchange rates. Those things never have any impact in tourist numbers studies..........

monkeybutter

This is a pointless thread, you have just picked a position backed by how much you reckon it is going to cost, 30m, right, so there is no way to back up with facts a different position, as to any benefits, if they were to materialise would be in the future and very difficult to quantify.

Thus this is pointless, much like most of your posts.

The only point is are state visits necessary, if so, then this is necessary.

Mary Mac visited them last year, this is payback.

later12

Nijmegen wrote: »

What do I look like, the IDA?

...You're looking for numbers that it would take a professional working in government to provide

No, I'm not. I'm pointing out that these figures cannot be produced, realistically in response to your own claim that they have a measurable impact. Quantitatively speaking, this is not very readily the case, nor is it something that we routinely do .

Many who comment on this board, the IE forum in particular, have real life experience in some financial or commercial realm, hence the initial interest in the forum. But we don't base our arguments upon our supposed credentials, because this is the internet, and that doesn't count for anything.

Either the points you are making are evidence based or not, failing that, either there is a logical basis or not.

You're failing to answer the questions, most curiously the one about foreign tourist agencies, but also in relation to the danger of negative news items, in particular coverage of protests.

later12

monkeybutter wrote: »

Thus this is pointless, much like most of your posts.

I can't help but notice that you have six posts so far, and a number of them seem to have taken a particularly unimpressed interest in me and my beliefs. I am v. flattered.

kippy

Main story on ALL the English based TV channels this morning:
Two viable devices found near/in Dublin in past 24 hours. One on public transport, another on a private bus. Marketing Win.........?
All talk is of targeting the Queen, Terror and bombs. Nice picture to paint.

monkeybutter

later10 wrote: »

I can't help but notice that you have six posts so far, and a number of them seem to have taken a particularly unimpressed interest in me and my beliefs. I am v. flattered.

This just shows how easily flattered you are.

So answer the question, do you believe state visits should happen, did you questions Mary Macs visit to England last year as necessary and the timing of such a visit? Is Barry O'Bamas visit necessary?

If so, this is necessary. End of conversation.

swampgas

kippy wrote: »

Main story on ALL the English based TV channels this morning:
Two viable devices found near/in Dublin in past 24 hours. One on public transport, another on a private bus. Marketing Win.........?
All talk is of targeting the Queen, Terror and bombs. Nice picture to paint.

This is the most significant risk to the state visit. How much we spend on security is irrelevant compared to this.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

kippy

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I agree, however it'll do far more damage to our image than not. As I said in first post on his thread - if the queen and ourselves wanted to do a symbolic visit, do it on the QT/Downlow - report on it afterwards.

ardmacha

QEII and Mary McAleese were wearing one lot of frocks at lunctime and another at 3pm. Who pays for this vanity? I'll bet you Eamonn Gilmore wore the same suit all day.

later12

monkeybutter wrote: »

So answer the question, do you believe state visits should happen

Not unless they are trade based, or actually ameliorate poor relations between peoples. There is no problem with British-Irish trade (and nobody would suggest this is a trade delegation). Further more there is no significant problem between our peoples - just a small group on the sidelines who will never change their minds.

The problem is that people are denying that this is all based on symbolism, which is little more than hocus pocus, and suggesting it is tourism based. Pretty strange to base a tourism drive on stories that you just know will feature video clips like appeared on the bbc earlier with 200 protesters fighting the gardai on Henry St, and stories like this which may somewhat cancel out the hope and good cheer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13421393

A bomb has been made safe in the Republic of Ireland just hours before the Queen's visit.
It was discovered on a bus outside the Glen Royal Hotel in Maynooth, County Kildare at 2130 BST on Monday.
It was later made safe by an Irish army bomb disposal team.
An Irish army bomb disposal unit is dealing with a suspect device at Dublin's Phoenix Park. A suspect package found earlier near the Luas tram line at Inchicore was a hoax.
A suspicious device found at Fairview Park in Dublin also turned out to be a hoax.
The alerts came ahead of the Queen's historic trip to the Irish Republic.

, did you questions Mary Macs visit to England last year as necessary and the timing of such a visit? Is Barry O'Bamas visit necessary?

I don't remember the particulars of Mary McAleese's visit, and if you bothered to read this thread, you would discover it is actually about Obama's (rather pointless) visit too.

End of conversation.

Bye then.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RichardAnd

ardmacha wrote: »

QEII and Mary McAleese were wearing one lot of frocks at lunctime and another at 3pm. Who pays for this vanity? I'll bet you Eamonn Gilmore wore the same suit all day.

I would hazzard a guess that the President buys her own cloths from her own wages? I personally do not care what the the Queen chooses to do with her own wardrobe.

I'd also add that turning the change of dress into an issue is a very silly, and very Irish, thing to do.

Kaneda_

Can someone here tell me how much if anything Ireland have recieved from the UK as part of the bail out agreement? Or was just Money from the IMF? Im pretty clueless when it comes to these things....

bamboozle

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

very valid point, however just to warn you, logical comments are ignored by the OP of this thread.

kippy

Kaneda_ wrote: »

Can someone here tell me how much if anything Ireland have recieved from the UK as part of the bail out agreement? Or was just Money from the IMF? Im pretty clueless when it comes to these things....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/22/ireland-bailout-uk-lends-seven-billion
7 Billion.

As for the "trade mission" - yeah, thats fine - call part of it whatever you want. I am sure some things will be announced after the trip that will be put down to this and probably correctly so.

I've actually grown fairly tired (in 24 hours) of the commentary on the visit. We're building bridges, we've "grown up as a nation" etc etc. Most of us have gotten over that kind of thing many many years ago and ironically the only ones who haven't gotten over it are the ones protesting. I couldn't give a crap, as I said, if the quenn came over on a top secret visit and did all those things that she is doing and if the British representatives just made a few phone calls to their Irish colleagues over trade. It's not as if they don't meet up every few weeks anyway........is it?

As for the tourist side of things, I really cant see how ANY of this will help improve tourist numbers - might knock them back if anything but you cant accurately work it out either way.

Laminations

Things that cost €30billion?

Security threats from dissident nutjobs?

All I know is courteousness is free

Monty Burnz

30 million is peanuts compared to the billions spent on dole money for the apes who were protesting, plus the billions spent on imprisoning the same type of apes when they commit crimes against their fellow citizens, plus the economic damage of having so many scangers sponging off relatively few (and now, heavily indebted) taxpayers.

30 million is also peanuts compared to the cost in terms of security and in reputational damage that this country has sustained from decades of terrorism.

Perhaps a little more attention should be paid to these giant logs in our national 'eye' than the mote of dust that Lizzie's visit represents?

dvpower

ardmacha wrote: »

QEII and Mary McAleese were wearing one lot of frocks at lunctime and another at 3pm. Who pays for this vanity? I'll bet you Eamonn Gilmore wore the same suit all day.

We're now down to counting their clothing. How petty can we get?

dvpower

kippy wrote: »

Personally, based on the amount of security, the cost and the lack of almost any commoner actually being within an asses roar of the queen, I'd have been happy if the whole visit (and indeed that of Obama) was kept on the down low and was something we only heard about after the fact.

Like those trips President Bush used to make to Iraq at the height of the war. Probably not the image we're after.

later12

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes... so why not double it? Treble it? Have the air corps dump bags of it?

This is not how a stimulus ought to work, in my opinion.

Firstly whether a stimulus is to be contemplated at all is dubious.

Secondly the notion that this would be an efficient means to distribution of such a package is quite incredible. Far more likely to return the injection to the local economy in an immediate way would be its dispersal via welfare recipients by trebling the intership programme for this year, for example. There is in the first instance the benefit that we would be putting welfare recipients into the workforce gaining up to date experience for employment history. But in terms of a Keynesian mulitiplier effect, we know how welfare recipients tend to return money to their local economy as a matter of necessity, do we have any such information on 7,500 reasonably well paid public servants? It would seem logical that the higher the public wage, the more likely the individual is to be concerned about savings, and the lesser the multiplier effect of temporarily increasing that wage will be on the overall wage, thereby diminishing the stimulus.

If one is going to argue for this as a stimulus, one should certainly not argue for it as an efficient means of economic stimulus, unless there is some actual information that backs up a greater multiplier than would be logical, prima facie, compared to another means of distribution targeting consumption.

We should also note that the Queen's visit has also seen other high-profile figures from the British government visiting Ireland, such as William Hague and David Cameron. Both of these men are explicitly talking about the need to enhance trade between the two nations.

Well quite bizarrely, I'm sure you will agree, Cameron and Hague could come here quite comfortably without there being much of a security concern in relative terms, and perhaps that might be a more effective basis to discuss trade.

And whatever about William Hague, whose role is in foreign affairs, I would say something positive of it were Vince Cable or George Osborne were visiting these shores in a meaningful way. Surely a €30m spend on security alone is not an efficient means to engage in communications... I ask this somewhat facetiously, but do politicians never skype?

I fear this comes back to symbolism.

Monty Burnz

So the government pays (mostly public servants) something like 30 million for this nice bean-feast, which will hopefully have some positive tourist and business benefits.

Fianna Failure - to feather their own nests, and the nests of the people they worked for (not the voters obviously) - have cost us in the region of what, 150,000 million? And what positive spin-offs or business benefits can we expect? Aside from mass emigration, economic collapse, suicides, school closures, health service collapse and probable sovereign default that is.

Seriously, you have some nerve complaining about waste.

later12

Kaneda_ wrote: »

Can someone here tell me how much if anything Ireland have recieved from the UK as part of the bail out agreement? Or was just Money from the IMF? Im pretty clueless when it comes to these things....

No, Britain, who undoubtedly is a great and welcome friend to the state, provided money on two fronts



Via the EFSM, the UK has committed €3.2bn

Therefore this breaks down to a total of €7bn, charged at rate of 5,9% on the bilateral loan, and an average rate of 5,8%, subject to review, on the EFSM loan.

The issue that most of us have is that this money was given regardless of a royal visit, and is being paid with interest. No doubt Cameron will be pressed on the issue at Government buildings, and he will possibly capitulate. Although what is doubtful is whether he would capitulate based on the floral ceremonies, or on the sustainability worries surrounding the Irish debt crisis as an important trading partner. You decide.

It is also worth bearing in mind that none of the UK bilateral loan money has so far been drawn down, therefore with the worsening economic situation, the question of an interest rate reduction has been anticipated long before this visit. It is also worth pointing out that any benefit from a 0,8% interest rate reduction would in the immediate term, be wiped out by the security cost of the visits.

later12

Monty Burnz wrote: »

So the government pays (mostly public servants) something like 30 million for this nice bean-feast, which will hopefully have some positive tourist and business benefits.

Hopefully? You base support for a cost like this on hopefully? Do you deny that the money would appear to be a more efficient use of cash were it to be spent on getting the unemployed into work?

Between lost taxes and unemployment aid, the visits' security cost is the approximate equivalent of 1,500 job losses for one year. How many jobs will it, in itself, create in the next year?

View

later10 wrote: »

Well quite bizarrely, I'm sure you will agree, Cameron and Hague could come here quite comfortably without there being much of a security concern in relative terms

The reason why it isn't much of a security concern in relative terms is precisely because UK Prime Ministers and Minsters have routinely visited us both on a bilateral and an EU basis (for Council meetings). It wasn't always like that though - they used to once be major security operations as well. These days though, you'd really want to have little else to do with your day to be hanging around to protest about or watch UK Ministers/Prime Ministers when they come over to visit. Probably in a decade or two, after a couple of more visits, a visit by a UK Monarch will be only marginally more newsworthy here than a visit by a Swedish Monarch (And, having lived in Sweden, Carl XVI Gustaf is a far more interesting person than Elizabeth II to my mind - he is an introvert with a minor stammer who hates public speaking, which is a bit of draw-back in a public facing job).

Monty Burnz

later10 wrote: »

Hopefully? You base support for a cost like this on hopefully?

No I don't. I base it on real politik.

I notice you don't address the 150,000 million (one hundred and fifty thousand million) euros or so of waste that Fianna Failure ran up. How did you justify your support of them while they did it? Was it based on hope? Blind loyalty? Self interest? Not having a clue?

POINTBREAK

later10 wrote: »

Hopefully? You base support for a cost like this on hopefully? Do you deny that the money would appear to be a more efficient use of cash were it to be spent on getting the unemployed into work?

Between lost taxes and unemployment aid, the visits' security cost is the approximate equivalent of 1,500 job losses for one year. How many jobs will it, in itself, create in the next year?

-
The cost of this is not what it seems. Ireland is no poorer because all the money has presumably stayed in the country and is going to be spent by the people who earned it thus boosting the economy.

later12

Monty Burnz wrote: »

No I don't. I base it on real politik.

Meaningless, please give something logical to the debate, or at least answer whether you think this money would not be better spent on employment initiatives. The jobs budget could have done with an extra €30m for the internship or retrofitting programmes, don't you think?

I notice you don't address the 150,000 million (one hundred and fifty thousand million) euros or so of waste that Fianna Failure ran up.
How did you justify your support of them while they did it?

I'm pretty sure you've been confused by this before, and now you're doing it again. I didn't support FF through that, haven't supported anything in their economic policy for a long time, and i'd love to know where you're getting this from.

This is also a bizarre attempt, it would seem, to shift the debate onto something which nobody really supports. How does this cancel out wastefulness on behalf of the current Government? Anyway, it was a FF initiative to begin with.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.