The 2024 Vancouver Mayor’s Budget Task Force Report recommends selling naming rights and running sponsorship campaigns for Vancouver Assets
The 2024 Vancouver Mayor’s Budget Task Force Report recommends selling naming rights and running sponsorship campaigns for Vancouver Assets
bc.ctvnews.ca
Vancouver Mayor's Budget Task Force recommends selling naming rights to increase cash flow
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.
- "Vancouver Mayor's Budget Task Force recommends selling naming rights to increase cash flow". Isabella Zavarise. 2024-01-24T03:45Z. CTV News Vancouver (https://bc.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-mayor-s-budget-task-force-recommends-selling-naming-rights-to-increase-cash-flow-1.6739602)
- Archive
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.
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.
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.