Fortier & Harper are Insane: Formula 1 in Montreal

[August1991]

Are we making up numbers now? How exactly do you figure that 2/3 of any investment disappears? How is it that you continue to think promoting an event that's guaranteed to give economic and public relations benefits is something the government shouldn't do? You keep ignoring this by saying that money gets lost or that the project is a wash.

Well, I'm only partially making up numbers. It seems that Ecclestone wants about $30 million from governments in Canada and it appears that Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier are going to figure out a way to do it.

And I suspect that the restos/hotels in Montreal might - on the outside - make $10 million extra profit if the Formula 1 goes ahead.

IOW, if were a resto owner in Montreal, of course I'd want the Formula 1 weekend - if someone else pays to make it happen. What retail business would not want several thousand customers showing up on the sidewalk?

[A small cynical addition: if Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier manage to find a way to use Canadian taxpayer's money to make this happen, you can be sure that Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier will eat for free in any trendy Crescent Street resto of their choice. Such is politics.]

-----

Your phrase "guaranteed to give economic and public relations benefits" made me laugh. If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, "economic spinoffs" is the first claim of a subsidy-seeking charlatan. A piece of advice: if anyone claims that government project X will create Y jobs directly and indirectly, ignore everything they say.

Edited October 26, 2008 by August1991

[August1991]

I guess it was decades ao when you worked for them.

1) Bureaucrats. They might oversee the budget but the marketing decisions tend to come from industry professionals (marketing, media etc) on contract to the commision.

2) Economy of scale. The commision often runs special features in media and invites industry to particpate with them. Little hotel on the corner can buy their ad for $10,000 by themselves....or they can partner with the commission and pay $5000. becuase the commission has already bought at a huge volume discount and passes the savings on to the little guys.

But who will buy the as for the nation? The little guy? "When coming to Canada for the summer, Stay at rogers?

After the sponsorship scandal, how can you post such naive nonsense with a straight face?

Morris, in your own life, are you so naive with your own money?

---

1. Bureaucrats may oversee but politicians make the decisions. These are wonderful contracts for selected advertising firms. Everyone involved, bureaucrats, politicians, advertising execs, are spending other people's money. Ordinary Canadians would be absolutely appalled if they saw what went on.

2. Economies of scale? Tax the tourism business and use the money if necessary. But frankly, I suspect that a local industry association might do a better job. Marineland in Ontario manages to advertise in French in Quebec.

Your "economies of scale" argument amounts to saying that governments should advertise for all industries. Why only tourism? Why not fast food too? And if the concern is the foreign/Canadian angle, why doesn't the Canadian government subsidize foreign destinations as a way to inform Canadian tourists going abroad?

----

Anyway, Canada is not really a tourist destination. We import on the service side of our trade balance largely because we are a frozen wasteland for about 8 months every year. Most people around the world prefer warm beaches for a holiday. It's a fact of life.

The State is not a business and it should not be operated as one. It should concern itself primarily with making possible arrangements that private individuals alone cannot do.

Edited October 26, 2008 by August1991

[Smallc]

Anyway, Canada is not really a tourist destination. We import on the service side of our trade balance largely because we are a frozen wasteland for about 8 months every year. Most people around the world prefer warm beaches for a holiday. It's a fact of life.

The State is not a business and it should not be operated as one. It should concern itself primarily with making possible arrangements that private individuals alone cannot do.

Ummmm ^^^^^^^. It appears that's what they're doing.

Oh and to the frozen 8 months a year and no tourist comments....

[marksman]

Well, I'm only partially making up numbers. It seems that Ecclestone wants about $30 million from governments in Canada and it appears that Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier are going to figure out a way to do it.

And I suspect that the restos/hotels in Montreal might - on the outside - make $10 million extra profit if the Formula 1 goes ahead.

Even if your guess about profits is right your math is wrong. $30million from the government doesn't mean $20million disappears. $10million in profit means at least $30million being spent and that assumes a profit of 1/3. The money doesn't disappear.

IOW, if were a resto owner in Montreal, of course I'd want the Formula 1 weekend - if someone else pays to make it happen. What retail business would not want several thousand customers showing up on the sidewalk?

[A small cynical addition: if Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier manage to find a way to use Canadian taxpayer's money to make this happen, you can be sure that Tremblay, Bachand and Fortier will eat for free in any trendy Crescent Street resto of their choice. Such is politics.]

-----

Your phrase "guaranteed to give economic and public relations benefits" made me laugh. If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, "economic spinoffs" is the first claim of a subsidy-seeking charlatan. A piece of advice: if anyone claims that government project X will create Y jobs directly and indirectly, ignore everything they say.

I prefer common sense over blind mistrust. If we followed your advice we might as well throw out the entire study of economics. We don't have to blindly trust every claim made about government projects but that doesn't mean that all claims are false. You admit that several thousand customers show up on that weekend. Pretending there're no economic benefits assumes that these thousands of people don't eat don't stay in hotels don't use taxis and don't spend any money at all. The only claims that deserve to be ignored are the 1s that don't make any sense or are totally unsupported by reality.

[marksman]

Ummmm ^^^^^^^. It appears that's what they're doing.

My thoughts exactly.

Oh and to the frozen 8 months a year and no tourist comments....

I remember reading an Australian magazine that had an article about the best places in the world to ski. Canada was 1 of the 1st places it talked about. Being a frozen wasteland isn't all bad.

[Smallc]

I remember reading an Australian magazine that had an article about the best places in the world to ski. Canada was 1 of the 1st places it talked about. Being a frozen wasteland isn't all bad.

Oh I agree, but most of the country isn't frozen 8 months a year....and he should know that there are many different types of tourist industries in this country and some are doing quite well despite the lack of sandy beaches.

[William Ashley]

Tourism Canada (or whatever it's called) should be abolished.

What good does it serve?

Tourism Canada does serve a purpose. Canada has a lot of historic and park sites on public payroll. Adequette advertising/marketting of Tourism sites is a marketing necessity. If no one knows about these sites in Canada, then who will be able to find them.

I think that the departments themselves could coordinate with the various other agencies, such as parks Canada and Canada Heritage, and the various consulates around the world.

I think they could beneifit from setting up vacation packages, as a way to generate revenue and manage parks usage etc..

However this program need not be huge, it just needs to properly target areas like Japan, the Northern US, Europe, Asia etc..

Canada has a lot to offer, but people need to no where they can go.

Looking at carnival cruise lines or other tourism companies for a good example of site marketing.

A lot of these places are nearly invisible to people.. they need to have a reason to go.

[William Ashley]

Tourism Canada does serve a purpose. Canada has a lot of historic and park sites on public payroll. Adequette advertising/marketting of Tourism sites is a marketing necessity. If no one knows about these sites in Canada, then who will be able to find them.

I think that the departments themselves could coordinate with the various other agencies, such as parks Canada and Canada Heritage, and the various consulates around the world.

I think they could beneifit from setting up vacation packages, as a way to generate revenue and manage parks usage etc..

However this program need not be huge, it just needs to properly target areas like Japan, the Northern US, Europe, Asia etc..

Canada has a lot to offer, but people need to no where they can go.

Looking at carnival cruise lines or other tourism companies for a good example of site marketing.

A lot of these places are nearly invisible to people.. they need to have a reason to go.

Also target domestically, such as legion halls, historic societies, other organizations.

Offering a package to them, is the key I think. Or even administering a Canada Parks and Heritage Club Card

that offers free admission to Canadian Heritage Sites, and a reduced fee on parks, etc.. this is good for many reasons.

[William Ashley]

Also target domestically, such as legion halls, historic societies, other organizations.

Offering a package to them, is the key I think. Or even administering a Canada Parks and Heritage Club Card

that offers free admission to Canadian Heritage Sites, and a reduced fee on parks, etc.. this is good for many reasons.

something like:

http://www.pc.gc.ca/voyage-travel/carte-pass/index_E.asp

but I think having free historic site entry... as one of the cards options should be there.. and for a LOW fee.

the annual park thing is another matter completely.

Also getting local communities and provinces on board the pass.. or even discounts from local businesses etc.. would be a bigger step toward getting people to get the card.

Edited October 26, 2008 by William Ashley

[M.Dancer]

Your "economies of scale" argument amounts to saying that governments should advertise for all industries. Why only tourism? Why not fast food too? And if the concern is the foreign/Canadian angle, why doesn't the Canadian government subsidize foreign destinations as a way to inform Canadian tourists going abroad?

Because tourism represents incremental monies. Tourism, and its cousin, economic development create money where there was none before....ie...the tourists, or manufacturer, brings it with them to spend here. The fast food, or vacuum cleaner plant are selling to an existing market, tourism is creating a market.

[M.Dancer]

Anyway, Canada is not really a tourist destination.

I beg to differ. Part of our business is representing US magazines to Canadian advertisers and one of te largest segments of that is tourist destinations. While the numbers have dropped with the rise of the dollar, we present to the clients a market (US tourists) that comes to canada easily and spends a whack of money here. One of the main reason Canada is high on the US destination list is becuase there is so much of it that is unique.

Calgary Stampede.

Halifax Buskerfest

Quebec Winter Carnival

Just For Laughs

Newfoundland

Caribana

Shaw Festival

Anne of Green Gables /PEI

Evangline Trail

Winterlude

Ice Wine festival

Toronto Indy

Montreal F1

.....etc etc etc

Tourism is a multi billion dollar business and it would be irresponsible of te governement not to do what is reasonable to nuture and promote it.

[Oleg Bach]

T O maybe a bit flaky - but within that flake is some cutting edge culture. Put our pale face mayor aside for a moment - Toronto has some bright and beautiful people that have gathered from all parts of the nation and world. Montreal is a non-starter. Montreal is a one cultural event - Toronto has no solid culture to speak of so it is an open door policy and all are welcome. It used to be said that Americans would bring film projects to Toronto because of the low dollar - The reality was is that we had the finest most percisioned film crews on the planet - the best! As for letting the French take our buisness in Montreal - NOPE....they are second rate - at least we like everyone - the french just like the french - Take Paris for instance - all tourist complain that the city of lights is cold - that it is not a warm attraction - just a big old reputation that fails to deliver the love...