Jump to content
Print your own personalised forum logo

The Broads National Park? Time to decide!

kfurbank

By kfurbank
in Broads Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 326
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

BroadAmbition
BroadAmbition

That's all very well and good BUT whilst the BA are spending the taxpayers money on 'Re-branding' they are 'Saving' money by closing down board walks, 24 x Hr moorings. tree growth that interferes wit

Wussername
Wussername

I am but a Norfolk boy. Normal for Norfolk is phrase often used. That will be me then! I have several GCE. I failed every one. I don't think I even got the date right on any of the papers. I have a

Mowjo
Mowjo

Geoff and Wendy! some debates here can always get a bit heated because some of the members here are very passionate about certain subjects, sometimes to a newish member it can seem like it's getting a

Posted Images

Timbo

Timbo

Posted
Posted

I hope someone can help me out here as I'm struggling to find the right word for what I mean...so I'm going to use the wrong words. 

 

From the beginning of this 're-branding' nonsense I realised that nothing was going to be re-branded. There is a legal point of law where if something is called by a name for a given period of time, then when it comes to the changing of a legal status it is so much easier to do because it is publicly accepted that the thing 'is' what it is called.

 

A similar thing was done in obtaining permission to build Sunderland FC's Stadium...My ex-wife's town planning business had something to do with this and I can remember thinking at the time it seemed somewhat 'under hand'. 

 

Just to make my position clear...clarity is a rare commodity at my house at the minute...I don't have a beef with the Broads Authority, but I don't want a Broads National Park and there is something not sitting well with me over this flim-flammery. I'm all for conservation & wildlife but as an archaeologist & historian I feel that there are other considerations than the reintroduction of the coughing three toed butterfly and I find the wildlife conservationists understanding of landscape archaeology to be a bit '1066 and all that'.

 

Ye Gods! I don't recommend being inside my head at the minute...took me half an hour to remember the dogs name yesterday so I could call it to heel...by which time it had come back of its own accord.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Polly

Polly

Posted
Posted

It seems to me that it is the resort to effectively misnaming the Broads for apparent political gain that is the most disturbing factor. I think also that much of the objection by "little people" will be totally disregarded; and only a more accountable BA as recommended by the Lords will rectify the situation.

Hope you continue to improve Tim.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timbo

Timbo

Posted
Posted

I don't think Mr Packman was very interested in saving money. I did send him a very comprehensive marketing strategy based around the premise that Broadland is not a National Park. My strategy did not include wasting money on re-branding, legal fees or wasting time & money on public consultations or fixing questionnaires. Just a simple marketing strategy that even included the words 'National Park'.

 

"Broadland: So much MORE than a National Park!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LondonRascal

LondonRascal

Posted
Posted

Ships cat says long post. Get tea:

 

I’ve got to be honest, my first thought when I hear the Broads Authority were coming to Excel was thinking back to a story I heard where someone placed a small painting on the wall of a well known art gallery (complete with little description under it) and waited to see what would happen and how long it would take before it was spotted as not being part of the formal instillation.

 

Taking an opportunity and with some distractions, the artwork (below) is then put on the stand over the proper one – then sit back and see how long it takes for them to see something is amiss.

 

post-534-0-21338700-1423652636_thumb.jpg

 

OK, so in reality that would be very hard to actually do without being ‘caught in the act’.  But the fact is the Broads Authority began slowly, but now are really ramping up ‘the brand’ and to be honest I can see why.  I mean I don’t think those behind this really want to ruin the Norfolk Broads, they actually want to promote it and get more visitors to the area and also juggle the hard task of trying to keep the area welcoming to wildlife and providing a bio diverse habitat.

 

They just happen to be going about the task in the wrong manner.

 

But having spent money, pushing things along and all feeling very pleased with themselves, they now face all this unhappiness from residents, to business owners and surely too in time actual visitors asking questions. I am sure they thought there would be some upset, niggles and a few awkward questions put to them – but nothing quite like this lack of support. They tuned up with their drum to bang expecting a large band but find themselves banging it all alone.

 

They want oh so very badly this to work because there is so much face to loose, let alone the point of the exercise: rebrand the area and attract more visitors.

 

It also puts local businesses in a predicament.  If they get behind the brand they of course are doing so knowing full well that it is just that, a brand.  Unlike promoting ‘Britain’s Magical Waterland’ helping promote or be behind ‘The Broads National Park’ is rather different. 

 

A magical waterland is just an opinion, a catchy slogan – you could have even branded it ‘Europe’s Magical Lakes’ and not a lot can be said for or against it for it is after all something to ‘sell’ the area and just a slogan. 

 

A National Park is totally different, it is not something one can just label an area to drum up more trade – only that is what the Broads Authority have decided to do which frankly beggers belief.  It is not something that is an opinion is it. It is not saying ‘I think it is a magical waterland’ – you may have an opinion ‘this area really should be a National Park’ but I can’t help feel there Broads Authority at the very least are being misleading.

 

If it is a brand, then to promote and market it for a product (the Broads) surely is akin to miss selling?  And if a Boatyard then gets behind the National Park brand and puts it on their website, their brochures and so on then they too take the risk of misleading their customers into believing something has changed on the Broads, when in fact really nothing has.

 

Since it is a brand, they should of spent the money on an actual advertisement agency not a ‘Brand Guru’ – it could have worked to what some say is a hidden agenda to make the Broads a truly, legal National Park but at the same time drummed up business.  I don’t know my slogan from my sloe gin but here are three efforts:

 

“The Norfolk Broads – can you believe it’s not a National Park?”

 

“The Broads what National Parks should be like”

 

“The Norfolk Broads - the relaxing holiday. We’ve got with the lakes without the mountains to climb”

 

But nope they have just gone right on in with ‘The Broads National Park’.

 

Alas I fear that despite the unhappy feeling and thoughts as to this, the Broads Authority will churn out more of this brand, pressure will come on the local businesses to follow suit and by the end of this year when boatyards are getting ready for the next season and new additions to their websites and the like, it will be splashed all over the place as being a National Park and the problem there is ‘the brand’ will have worked, and it will have become de facto a National Park.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BroadAmbition

BroadAmbition

Posted
Posted

 

The Broads National Park.jpg

 

they actually want to promote it and get more visitors to the area

 

 

That's all very well and good BUT whilst the BA are spending the taxpayers money on 'Re-branding' they are 'Saving' money by closing down board walks, 24 x Hr moorings. tree growth that interferes with rag-n-Stick operations (Not to mention lack of views) and waterways that need dredging.  Then there is the farcical situation of waste disposal sites being removed and public loos being closed down.

 

So if the BA are successful and get more visitors to the area (Surely that is the responsibility of the tourist board) when these extra visitor numbers arrive they are faced with limited public loos, nowhere for lolly wrappers, overcrowded moorings (Those that are still left and in existence). the loss of waterways like Daisy Broad, Sutton 'Broad' is no more than a glorified dyke. cockshoot - still closed despite promises broken, Hoveton - scandal imho and there are plenty more examples. The BA should be directing OUR money better than re-branding! :mad:

 

I don't have a degree in anything other than 'Life' experiences (And I got that one for nowt) not even a GCSE in maths but even the likes of me can work it out (no change that, no need to work it out) - even the likes of me can see that staring me right square in the dish is that if you expect the Broads to have increased visitor numbers you should FIRST maintain and increase/improve the bloody infrastructure BEFORE they arrive.  Not see increased numbers that don't come back because the lack of facilities ruined their visit experience

 

Ye Gods - you couldn't make it up!

 

A average primary school pupil knows that a litre won't fit into a 500ml bottle

 

 

I make no apologies for ranting - and maybe not over :mad:

 

 

Griff

 

(Oh and I 'Liked' it myself - which is a first   :blush:  )

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kfurbank

kfurbank

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In 2012 Chelmsford in England, Perth in Scotland and St Asaph in Wales were all granted city status. I know because Chelmsford is local to me that there was quite a lot of publicity around this, and quite rightly so, Chelmsford council is now known as Chelmsford City Council. Rebranding has taken place in the borough and across their publications and website etc. Colchester in Essex is a town. What stops it from rebranding as a city? Maybe because it a town and not a city? Now how might this be applied to an area that is NOT a National Park? Well Colchester is a part of the family of settlements that form Essex, but it is still NOT a city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Sponsors

    Norfolk Broads Network is run by volunteers - You can help us run it by making a donation

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.

  I accept