'Untapped Resource: Bearing Down on Fares Through Sponsorship'

[WatcherZero]

'Untapped Resource: Bearing Down on Fares Through Sponsorship'

Report from the Conservative party in the London Assembly rejected by TfL which called for £136m in sponsorship to freeze underground fares for one year or a more ambitious £204m to limit rises to inflation for three years that would come from renaming stations including examples such as:

Burberry by Bond Street, Virgin Euston, Knightsbridge, home of Harrods and Nike at Oxford Circus

Even renaming of entire lines as happens in Madrid, Dubai and New York. While the Conservative party says their polls suggest three quarters of the public would support such a move TfL believes that it could damage their brand and identity and remembers the public backlash from free new years eve travel sponsored by Wonga.

http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/news...ed-tube-lines-to-reduce-fares/4006862.article

 

[SS4]

I have to agree with TfL on this one although changing Canary Wharf to Merchant Bankers' Corner has it's attractions

 

[yorksrob]

Why not, afterall, the whole country's been up for sale for years.

 

[edwin_m]

St Pauls Boutique
Old Holborn
Turnham Green by Dulux
Cock Fosters
Acton Man
Kensington Olympus
Canon Ixus Park
Great Portland Cement
iPaddington

 

[Eagle]

Being as this already happens on the national network, I don't see the problem.

 

[WatcherZero]

At least up here those kind of boards tend to be done by the local council to promote the connection rather than the company/institution itself.

 

[Muzer]

...and, crucially, the stations aren't actually renamed. You don't see "Winchester, Home of University of Southampton Winchester School of Art" on all the timetables/maps.

 

[WatcherZero]

McDonalds Winchester, Home of University of Southampton Winchester School of Art

 

[Oswyntail]

I think renaming would be a tad far. But having station signs such as "Ilkley - this station is sponsored by Betty's tearooms", prominent Betty's advertising, and a ban on advertising by Betty's rivals at the station would harm no one.
And, of course, there should only be sponsors that fit in the the advertising aims of the railways in terms of quality. "Kings Cross sponsored by Poundland" might not help. And no football clubs. Any times any Leeds fans passed through "Manchester Piccadilly - sponsored by Manchester United" it would be trashed.

 

[Eagle]

Any times any Leeds fans passed through "Manchester Piccadilly - sponsored by Manchester United" it would be trashed.

As would any time anyone from Manchester passed through :P

 

[bicbasher]

Oval-tine.

 

[EM2]

...and, crucially, the stations aren't actually renamed. You don't see "Winchester, Home of University of Southampton Winchester School of Art" on all the timetables/maps.

For me, this is the crux. The amount it would cost to replace signs, reprint maps and posters etc. would surely negate any income from corporate sponsorship.

 

[jon0844]

I'm sure they'd have to pay for that as part of their sponsorship contract.

I'm not convinced by the idea, but accept it could probably raise a large pot of cash.

 

[SS4]

How would you fit all this on the tube map? It's a pity that this idea has to be floated instead of keeping proper public funding whilst the City runs rampant with our money

 

[jon0844]

I can see it being more a case of selling exclusive sponsorship/advertising rights at key stations (but that's already done at times) and maybe, just maybe, sponsoring whole lines so the only thing that really changes is the key on the maps/route planners.

I can't imagine how you'd want to go as far as changing all the signs at stations for newly named (and renamed when changing sponsor) stations.. although I'd hope to God that if this idea went ahead the sponsorship would be for 5 or 10 years, not a single year!

Question is; would said sponsorship deal be able to keep fares down for that length of time or just a year or two?

How long is the Barclays cycle deal for? That's going to be another costly exercise to rebrand all the bikes and signs if Barclays doesn't renew and it's not part of their contract to remove the branding itself.

 

[Comstock]

I doubt they will raise £136 million from this. That implies there are more than a dozen organisations willing to chuck £10 million at this, and it's only the zone one stations anyone is likely to be interested in.

That said, I don't think too many people would have a problem with 'Knightsbridge home of Harrods' or 'Virgin Euston' (sounds awful 'Euston, home of Virgin Trains sounds better). Somehow I'm less comfortable with Nike sponsorship, perhaps because it's a brand aimed at children and teenagers.

 

[maniacmartin]

I was thinking more along the lines of "Blackhorse Road - for the journey"

 

[transmanche]

I was thinking more along the lines of "Blackhorse Road - for the journey"

Cockfosters - drink it warm.

[youtube]pSOR2jGv2uc[/youtube]

 

[Yew]

Sounds reasonable, might even help visitors to london find their way to landmarks.

 

[whoosh]

Too many adverts already. On the ticket barriers for goodness sake. Looks a mess. Frank Pick must be turning in his grave.


Although I would like to hear the announcement, "A good service is operating on all London Underground lines... except the 'Vick's nasal spray line', which is suffering from congestion."

 

[Tiny Tim]

As far as visitors to London are concerned, the Tube is confusing enough already without messing around with the names. I bet 'Temple' has disappointed a few Buddhists as it is.

 

[Deerfold]

As far as visitors to London are concerned, the Tube is confusing enough already without messing around with the names. I bet 'Temple' has disappointed a few Buddhists as it is.

Confusing?

No idea what you mean...

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article8549654.ece/ALTERNATES/w460/Bank-Tube-station.jpg