Has London missed a trick?

[jonny jeez]

Cycling in London probably doesn't need to have it's profile raised,.

Agreed, cycling doesn't...But Britain does and London even more.

 

[IDMark2]

To the poster above, Yorkshire did not lose money on the TdF being there

Yes sorry, I left off the 'Welcome to' bit, and having written Yorkshire once found I repeated it when I meant France... so should have been ' the story of Welcome to Yorkshire losing money on the Tour de France overall'.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

While Yorkshire was undoubtedly a success. It's not guaranteed.

With the animosity towards closing the roads in Wales recently, and the annoyance of no tubes during the train strikes in London.

There's a chance that closing off a lot of roads in London, for a cycle race, could do more harm to the Driver vs Cyclist relationship than help raise the profile. With the cost of it also, I think Boris made the right choice.

 

[mjr]

Which reached its climax in London of course.

It went to London too? I see... was the wrecking of Andy Schleck the high point of the event for you?

 

[MichaelW2]

Agreed, cycling doesn't...But Britain does and London even more.

In London you can't swing a cricket bat without taking out a gaggle of tourists. In my book, that counts as too many !!!!.

 

[sleaver]

It should have been coming from the tourism events budgets, not transport.

In London, TfL is responsible for the entire transport infrastructure be it busses, road, rail, river, traffic signals etc. Therefore, as it would be utilising their infrastructure, TfL were the ones who would pay the bill.

I'm not saying it was right or wrong that TfL were paying, just that is the reason why it was the transport budget.

 

[mjr]

In London, TfL is responsible for the entire transport infrastructure be it busses, road, rail, river, traffic signals etc. Therefore, as it would be utilising their infrastructure, TfL were the ones who would pay the bill.

I'm not sure that's the whole story (don't the boroughs control a lot of roads?) but even if so, the London Marathon used to be funded from the old London Tourist Board budget. I don't think TfL have ever been the bit of the London administration funding the Marathon and I'm pretty sure it uses London's roads too. I don't see why cycle races should be transport when foot races are tourism.

 

[sleaver]

The London Marathon is run by the London Marathon charity whose money comes from runners and charities who want places. They also have sponsors and I'm sure Virgin pay a tidy sum to have their name plastered all over the world during the coverage.

You don't see 30,000 pro cyclists paying or sponsors advertising the entire length of the route in a pro race

 

[mjr]

The London Marathon is run by the London Marathon charity whose money comes from runners and charities who want places. They also have sponsors and I'm sure Virgin pay a tidy sum to have their name plastered all over the world during the coverage.

Yes, and the London Tourist Board used to be one of its sponsors. Yet when the Tour of Britain visited London recently, TfL was the headline sponsor, not anything connected to the tourism budget AFAICT.

You don't see 30,000 pro cyclists paying or sponsors advertising the entire length of the route in a pro race

I doubt the invited runners are paying either and the entire length of the cycling route is available for sponsorship, but I don't see what that has to do with whether it's tourism or transport?

 

[sleaver]

Yet when the Tour of Britain visited London recently, TfL was the headline sponsor, not anything connected to the tourism budget AFAICT.

It was TfL and it was TfL last year as well and probably the year before that.

I doubt the invited runners are paying either

No, but the 30,000 I said do

but I don't see what that has to do with whether it's tourism or transport?

Only that the London Marathon is paid for through individuals, charities and sponsorship and so doesn't need key funding from a governmental department. It goes back to TfL covering the cost as they are responsible for the infrastructure that would be used.

You can disagree/question what I've said, but that doesn't get away from what is known

There has also been a change at the top of TfL recently as well and you have the elections next year. While Boris won't be in that election, I'm sure he would want the Conservatives to keep it.

 

[mjr]

Only that the London Marathon is paid for through individuals, charities and sponsorship and so doesn't need key funding from a governmental department. It goes back to TfL covering the cost as they are responsible for the infrastructure that would be used.

But both use the roads and when the London Marathon used to get funding from London's government, it was from the tourism budget (LTB then, which was replaced by London & Partners a few years ago), not the transport one, even though the London Marathon also uses the infrastructure. Why should cycling lose its transport budget to sport when walking didn't?

 

[sleaver]

But both use the roads and when the London Marathon used to......

Your trying to compare the way something used to be done to how it is done now.

As I said, I'm not saying the budget that would have been used was right or wrong. I'm just saying why it was TfL and that is because they are responsible for all transport policy in London. If that is the way things are done now, that is the way things are done.

For what it is worth, I would have loved London to host it as I could have easily got into London to watch as a spectator.

 

[mjr]

As I said, I'm not saying the budget that would have been used was right or wrong. I'm just saying why it was TfL and that is because they are responsible for all transport policy in London. If that is the way things are done now, that is the way things are done.

So your contention is that if the London Marathon is sponsored by government today, it would be TfL? Is there any mass run currently sponsored from a transport budget?

I didn't find one. Most seem to be primarily sponsored, while the Grand East Anglian Run seems to be funded by the Borough Council (which is responsible for tourism) rather than the County Council (which is responsible for transport and whose highway infrastructure they close down for the day).

 

[sleaver]

So your contention is that if the London Marathon is sponsored by government today, it would be TfL?

If that is the way they do things in London, then I guess it would be based on what we know. It isn't though so that is a mute point.

Lets see what we know:

1. TfL are responsible for all traffic policy in London
2. TfL were putting up the funding base of 1.

If you want to know why, your asking the wrong person!

 

[snorri]

In order to justify the massive expenditure on the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow claims were made regarding the longer term benefits in the shape of more people adopting healthier lifestyles following the Games. The powers that be are now failing to come up with any strong evidence of behavioural change among the general population.