this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
11 points (100.0% liked)

Vancouver

1431 readers
1 users here now

Community for the city of Vancouver, BC

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
11
The 2024 Vancouver Mayor’s Budget Task Force Report recommends selling naming rights and running sponsorship campaigns for Vancouver Assets (bc.ctvnews.ca)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A volunteer-run group tasked by the City of Vancouver to analyze its budget is suggesting the city generate revenue from city assets through selling naming rights and running sponsorship campaigns.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Sponsorship I can get behind; naming rights has always seemed like a bad idea.

I do think that city-owned assets should be properly labelled though, and putting a “maintenance of this made possible by sponsorship of xyz” on a plaque makes sense to me. But sponsorship should be a subscription, not a one time payment.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

putting a “maintenance of this made possible by sponsorship of xyz” on a plaque makes sense to me. But sponsorship should be a subscription, not a one time payment.

An important thing to add to this, I think, is that it's important that the sponsorship has no final say in the direction, or management of the asset. It should just be treated as an advertising/philanthropic opportunity for the sponsor.

One concern that I do have is over-reliance and dependence on the sponsor. It would not be great to have a situation where the City is beholden to some corporation.

[–] Nogami 4 points 5 months ago

When you build it yourself you get to name it. When it’s city (public) money you don’t.

Sonsorship subscriptions are fine though. I’d even suggest that a certain portion must be set aside in a fund that generates interest or investment revenue.