Posts by Michael Holt
-
Sorry about that. Checked links and all that and realised that my close bracket has distorted the link.
Try this: http://www.gardyneholt.co.nz
-
Print on Demand seems the only logical approach for such a concept. Why print in advance, hoping to sell them all and tying up capital in the meantime?
We did this site: http://www.elsewhere.co.nz/ and Graham said he's very happy with it. We (http://www.gardyneholt.co.nz) are also interested to talk about this idea.
Feel free to contact me directly. :-)
-
"I can say that, right? Coffee-coloured? I love coffee. Who doesn't?"
Actually I don't like coffee at all.
Although some coffee-coloured things, and people too, can be quite nice.
-
Steve, its so easy to be negative, cynical, sarcastic and carp against everything isn't it?. "City of Fails?" Ok, whatever dude. The jaundiced idealogy of the resentful few regarding those in some kind of position of power... frankly, when displayed as you have done is just ugly. As I say, its easy just to bay and whinge, rather than stand FOR something.
Sacha had an opinion and offered it, and thats fair enough. I agree that we want a city to be diverse and all that, but who are you to decide what is "tasteless"?
It has been a fundamental element in all of human society to have symbols that represent them... even if they were just banners to die under in the wars of more powerful men. A symbol for a new city is not necessarily a bad thing, its just not been well defined yet exactly how it'd be used. Actually its one of our most common themes... our continued search for self-expressed identity. -
Not even a designer would suggest that a logo is going to address all Auckland's ills. However, if the city is saying "we want a logo", in the same way as say "we want a new parking building", or "a waterfront promenade", then why not get a pro to do it properly? Whether the city 'needs' a logo or not is a different discussion...but if the city decides it does, then a good designer will simply say "okay, so what are the requirements... what must the logo attempt to do, for whom and to whom?" Perhaps that's the area best left for public engagement: developing the brief.
Something as diverse as a city is a pretty tough assignment as well, and no matter what is created, by whomever does it, the outcome will be derided and criticised... by many in this country (and PA forum) who seem to take a considerable amount of glee in criticising almost everything.
One thing that NZers often take pride in is our creative community and how both art and design is well developed across a broad spectrum of amateur and professional forms. However, this needs better care and better regard from Auckland city, in this and other aspects... especially given their poor recent record in managing creative projects.
Michael Holt http://www.gardyneholt.co.nz -
Great post, really nicely summarised. Well done and thanks for the good read.
I prefer Key over the alternatives, but I'm waiting for the leadership (over administration) also. Good luck with getting any government, much less a Nat one, to even talk about decriminalisation though. Glad its not the only idea on your list. And umm... how does any government get the politics out of the classroom when the teachers unions are one of the most politically active (left) organisations there are?
-
Does anyone know what the legal aid bill for this was? What is Kerr's hourly rate? And her teams? Would the defence team have been influenced by the amount they could charge to legal aid for running it in the way they did?
-
"Words that are seldom spoken, I suspect. ;-)"
"It'll be a 'long, cold night' before they're used again. Boom-tish. ;)"
Au contrare. I happened to be at an event recently where Moore spoke, and it was one of the better speeches I've heard. (Perhaps he bought it online??) Anyway, he spoke really, really well about NZ's competitiveness abroad... and he managed to invoke, amongst other things... the Magna Carta, the American Constitution, ancient Greek city states and the Scottish reformation. T'was very aspirational. I was impressed, and thus, I mentioned him...
-
I agree with Paul. I've don't expect politicians to do anything except politics. At least until they've stopped doing politics. Mike Moore, for example, makes more sense now than he did when he was a politician.
To be a small exporter is to embrace a different lifestyle to some extent. Who does that for a country? You do it for your own reasons, but the fact that it aligns with a broader set of interests should properly trigger a range of support mechanisms.
These exist, but in our world, we gotta find those for ourselves. I actually don't mind that to some extent. Someone in this group said it'd be nice if there is a list of tips and pointers... well there are! Maybe not printed in your newspaper.. but they are there... just look harder :-)
And we gotta get over the NZ Inc mindset. For the most part, I've found the Aussies and Americans etc to be quite helpful and supportive. They generally like us and frequently offer assistance. Perhaps we should be talking about joint deals alongside Amcham and Austrade etc.
David is right... the problem is our mindset... just get out and do it. Setting up a sales office in Shanghai is not more expensive than setting up a branch in Hamilton. And stop expecting politicians to do anything other than the thing they got into office doing...
-
Ah well there it is then Emma. I'd have thought of myself as being fairly reasonable in my views, not at all judgmental and I offered a comment only surrounding the value of telling someone "fuck you". In doing so, I seem to have attracted your ire. I'm sorry about that, but not in saying that I think abuse tends to lead to more abuse and further, it doesn't attract supporters in the main. I understand what others have said too, and am not in a position to disagree with anyone. But if you can take issue with me over a fairly reasonable comment in a place like this, then I can only say that this supports my earlier point... that you're already at war and the only person you'll agree with, is the person that agrees with you.