Covid 19 and footy - season (suspended) now resumed

[mcs]

The SOH receives $70M of government (read taxpayer) money every year and still manages to lose money. They've been charging others
to use the logo for years.

Without knowing the ins and outs of the latest shennanigans, I fail to really understand the general outrage about charging entities, including our Swans, to use a branding/trademark/IP (I don't know what its precise characterisation is - but you get my point I'm sure) that has a genuine commercial value to it.

The SOH is a not-for profit trust entity - if it was meant to make a profit it would be set up as a Government Business Enterprise. That isn't to say it shouldn't seek to balance its books - but profit is not its primary motive. But likewise, it should seek to make money to offset its costs wherever it can - including in spaces like this. And while there are plenty of things where I feel strongly that the Govenrment pisses a lot of money up the wall for very little public benefit, I find it difficult to make an argument that the SOH doesn't make a very large economic contribution to Australia - both with its primary purpose as an arts facility, but also the tourism factor associated with its iconic status. There aren't many iconic Australian landmarks in the built environment (not with a truly global standing), but it is one of them. (noting of course in the current circumstances, that value is limited)

That doesn't mean they should charge exorbinant prices for the privilige of using their IP - but market rates broadly should apply, and despite how much I love our Swans, I see very little true basis for suggesting somehow they are an 'exception'.

[KTigers]

I guess I was saying the SOH charging for use of their imagery/logo is nothing new. It's been limited to more strictly commercial use in
the past but now they want to expand who they charge. As far as international recognition goes the building itself is probably the most
well known Australian landmark/image. That is worth far more than the $70M of taxpayer money keeping whatever is going on inside
the building afloat. I've always liked our jumper, it's very "Sydney". Maybe as the Swans are a bit tight on money at the moment, they
can get a pass on paying the 50K. We are sort of a cultural institution too if you ask me.

[barry]

The swans should be charging the NSW govenment (and SOH) for all the promotion they do for Sydney and the opera house.

Usually the issue of trade mark (which the opera house silouttee is) is to protect the organisation, not to generate revenue. Eg. if the melbourne opera house starting using the logo, or some dodgy business.
The swans arent a competitor to the opera house, and it would be mutually beneficial to both organisations.

However, in tough times, everyones counting their pennies, so stuff like this will come up.

[stevoswan]

I agree. SOHT didn't build it, they didn't pay for it and WE are a billboard for them and a building they were gifted....if they persist with this economic opportunism, we should just drop the logo from our jumper. Stuff them.....

[KTigers]

I think Barry & Stevo have put forward very valid points. How much does QBE pay to be on our jumper? Maybe the Swans should send the
SOH Trust an invoice for the past 30 something years. BTW, the SOH cost $100M to build in the 60s/early 70s. The initial estimate was $7M,
so we can see nothing much has changed with governments trying to work out how much stuff is going to cost to build.

[goswannies]

I wonder how many aged ex-AFL footballers have been lost to Covid so far

I see that we sadly lost Frank Brew (87 games for South Melbourne) to Covid yesterday - Frank was aged 92

RIP

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I see that we sadly lost Frank Brew (87 games for South Melbourne) to Covid yesterday - Frank was aged 92

RIP

Black armbands of course, but I wonder how much it actually means to the current players?
I wonder if the Swans would consider having young Dylan Stephens lead the team out or toss the coin or something - how would he feel about that?

[stevoswan]

Black armbands of course, but I wonder how much it actually means to the current players?
I wonder if the Swans would consider having young Dylan Stephens lead the team out or toss the coin or something - how would he feel about that?

It would mean something to any Swans player who is invested in the Bloods culture.....ie: hopefully every Swans player. As for your coin toss/team lead out suggestion......is that even relevant? Is Dylan related to Frank Brew? Otherwise, this is a pretty pointless question.

[Aaron]

I guess Bell will have the honour to toss the coin!

[Aaron]

Bell leads gift exchange

[Ruck'n'Roll]

It would mean something to any Swans player who is invested in the Bloods culture.....ie: hopefully every Swans player. As for your coin toss/team lead out suggestion......is that even relevant? Is Dylan related to Frank Brew? Otherwise, this is a pretty pointless question.

The link, is that he wears Frank's old number on his back.
Players in the past have remarked on the continuity they feel with other players, particularly those that have preceded them in their jumpers - some of whom have had their names painted on locker doors.

[stevoswan]

The link, is that he wears Frank's old number on his back.
Players in the past have remarked on the continuity they feel with other players, particularly those that have preceded them in their jumpers - some of whom have had their names painted on locker doors.

Now I'm sure you regard the astonishing prolific 900 posts you spew out every year to be of a far higher quality than anything I've ever written in all my years here.

However, your post has clarified things or me.

I have enjoyed RWO over the years, mainly prior to your appearance, and had some amazing conversations. Many of them decidedly left field, or as you put it so pleasantly - "pointless" and insufficiently "relevant"

But frankly these days, rather than an eclectic mix of RWOers engaging with each other and exchanging ideas, RWO seems to contain far too many people simply shouting their strident opinions again and again with no reference to anyone else's thoughts.

Those whose posts simply aim to score petty points or belittle other RWOers are no more enjoyable, and my response has customarily been a PM.

On this occasion I've decided my response will be to take my irrelevance's elsewhere and leave RWO to you and other like minded onanist's for a bit. Bye.

Well, when you return R&R, you may read this. Apologies if my post rattled you, it was not aimed to do that. I do thank you for explaining the link between Brew and Stephens.....but your post probably should have ended there. All that followed was pretty unnecessary. I certainly don't rate my posts any higher than anyone else or aim to upset anyone. Again, I apologise for blindly challenging your previous post.