Yes, this would be much better
UPDATE Wednesday 23 September: The date & venue for the launch of the ‘Great Alpine Valleys’ brand name has been announced. Click on “more” below for details and my further comment. I think all operators (especially those in Bright) should be asking for this launch to be deferred.
Imagine (if you can) the impact an advertisement like this in a magazine or on TV in Melbourne would have. It would put Tourism Victoria's rather strange Daylesford advertisements to shame.
As I wrote under the post ‘And our new brand is …’ it looks like the Alpine Council and its tourism committee ARTB (both of whom consist largely of people NOT involved in tourism) are about to launch a new marketing brand for the Alpine Shire area being, ‘Great Alpine Valleys’.
But to ignore the opportunity to simply add the words “Bright and” to the start of that brand is sheer stubbornness (and stupidity) in my opinion. If only they would do that, I think they’d find that the operators would support their campaigns to the hilt, and tourism throughout the whole shire would receive an enormous boost.
I strongly urge ARTB and the council to place this launch on hold and put this decision out to the operators. It’s our industry, not yours.
UPDATE Wednesday 23 September:
The date & venue for the launch of the ‘Great Alpine Valleys’ brand has been announced, although they still haven’t officially advised us of the new brand name:
An Invitation
The Alpine Region Tourism Board would like to invite you to join us for the unveiling of the exciting new regional brand for the Alpine Shire. Help us celebrate the launch of the brand, strap line and logo and listen to our guest speaker Chris Buckingham from Destination Melbourne, who will speak of the power of branding ……
Date: Wednesday, 7th October 2009
Time: 5pm – 7pm
Venue: Red Stag Restaurant, Hughes Lane, Eurobin
RSVP: Essential by Monday, 5th October 2009
Alpine Shire (03) 5755 0550
or piak@alpineshire.vic.gov.au
Drinks and canapés will be served.
Comment:
The invitation was sent by email (to all tourism operators I presume). I think this is ‘jumping the gun’ and that what ARTB and the council should do instead is to simply call open operator meetings and get their thoughts on the new brand (and especially the exclusion of the word “Bright” from it) BEFORE they make any kind of commitment of OUR MONEY towards these new campaigns.
It’s our industry, not theirs.
Promoting 'Beautiful Bright'.
Click 
Here, here. It’s pretty clear cut – we must be consulted first.
I’m not in the tourism business as you know Raymond, although an obvious indirect beneficiary of same.
I’ve deliberately stayed out of this debate as with other business related matters as I haven’t got a business directed bone in my body. So perhaps the perspective of a business luddite is warranted to balance your lot.
For what it is worth I understand the relevant gurus deciding on marketing for this region are doing a juggle not to disaffect various lobby groups. For mine, having lived in this town for nearly 30 years, it is apparent that Bright is the jewel in the crown of the North-East and especially the Alpine Shire. No matter where I go, and this is also overseas, whenever I mention our town, people recognise it immediately and with great enthusiasm.
Frankly, I like your logo. Mind you, the omission of any reference to Bright, although possibly not a good move, wouldn’t diminish the appeal of Bright nor probably adversely affect tourism numbers here. But as I said, what do I know about marketing?
Here are the cheap thoughts of moi and I see you already referred to the little genius so the comments above were issued gratis.
Thanks Baldrick. It doesn’t matter that you are not involved in tourism. Your opinion is valued because our customers are not involved in tourism either, and they are the ones we’re trying to reach. I think your comment demonstrates some of the key points here beautifully and I’d like to respond point by point:
For what it is worth I understand the relevant gurus deciding on marketing for this region are doing a juggle not to disaffect various lobby groups.
Yes, they’re pandering to the minority of the Shire’s industry who are not in Bright and who do not want to see Bright as part of the key branding & marketing drive. But over 80% of the shire’s tourism revolves around Bright so they’re just wrong to do that. It’s self-defeating.
it is apparent that Bright is the jewel in the crown of the North-East and especially the Alpine Shire. No matter where I go, and this is also overseas, whenever I mention our town, people recognise it immediately and with great enthusiasm.
That is precisely the reason we need to include the name “Bright” in the marketing brand – because it is so widely known and so highly regarded that it will attract more people to the area, and not just to Bright.
the omission of any reference to Bright (in the marketing Brand), although possibly not a good move, wouldn’t diminish the appeal of Bright nor probably adversely affect tourism numbers here.
Well, you’d certainly hope that no marketing brand reduces tourism numbers. The point is that marketing is supposed to INCREASE tourist numbers and the inclusion of Bright in the brand would, in my opinion, make it far more appealing to consumers and have a much greater impact in the market place.
Thanks for your candid opinion on that. I just wish more people would take this matter seriously.
Ray, if the new branding to be announced is what you say it is, then I must agree with you that it is a completely wasted opportunity. I must also say that I would fully support your suggestion of including the name Bright in any new branding. If there is any dissent from the other towns in the shire at this suggestion then they are only cutting their own throat as the more Bright booms the more spin off they will all get.
Wouldn’t it have been much smarter for the ARTB and the Tourism staff at council to have called a meeting with all interested special rate payers and discussed the proposal and the suggested branding names. By doing this they have firstly involved those that are interested and directly affected by the success or failure of any campaign.These people are the best to talk to as many have the best feel of what is happening as they are dealing directly face to face with tourists on a daily basis and they know what motivates them.
I am a great believer in that the best decisions will usually come from the people that actually fork out the money. Why ? because they know how bloody hard they have to work to earn it and they need to make sure they get value for their dollar. The ARTB and the Council admit that they have detected dissent from the stakeholders in relation to the current branding so why not talk to these same stakeholders in deciding on a new branding. Whatever the new branding is, it had better be good because we are competing with some pretty active tourist towns.
Audax is a classic example of the wool being pulled over the ARTB and councils eyes and failing to achieve the best outcome for the town and businesses. The reality is Audax is going to cost us big time as the traditional tourist is pushed out of Bright in the latter part of January by cyclists who are only focused on one thing. Council had an opportunity to push this event to a date after Australia Day weekend where it could have been a real bonus to the town, but they blew it. Did Council or ARTB call on all the special rate payers for input prior to discussions with Audax – No way, so why would we expect them to call on us now with this branding decision
I couldn’t agree more John. And I’m 99.9% sure the new brand is going to be simply ‘Great Alpine Valleys’ and that we, the ones who pay to fund ARTB and who they are supposed to work for, will get NO SAY in the decision (which has already been made).
The only hope of reversing this bureaucratic and autocratic decision is by outrage from the industry, which mainly exists in Bright. There is a council meeting in Bright on Tuesday 6 October, the night before the brand launch. That might be the appropriate venue in which to express that outrage.
As for Audax … oh my God, it’s a disaster. I’ll be writing a new post about it later.
Like Baldrick, I’m not in the game. Even worse, I don’t even live there.
However, quite rightly, Ray, any industry should have growth as a top priority. And if that industry has public servants as primary decision makers, that’s, to my way of thinking, already sounding a bit clunky as they are not the primary stake holders.
The time to shut the gate is BEFORE the horse bolts and seeing the cry has gone out that the gate is unlatched, NOW is the time to shut the bleeding “THING” properly.