Tourism Director on KCUR
Posted 11 May 2010 - 10:35 AM
Posted 11 May 2010 - 10:46 AM
Amazing that she was allowed to say that the economic impact numbers aren't correct, but when asked what the correct numbers are she couldn't say. Completely disingenuous.
danner's assistant: 573-751-3051
Posted 11 May 2010 - 10:50 AM
i agree, if not used for the Tour, they should just take it away. They approved it for one thing, and one thing only, if not used for that, take it back.
Posted 12 May 2010 - 12:47 PM
Having been on-site last year at the race myself, there is absolutely no way there were 71,000 people in Jefferson City (or along the race route that day, for that matter) for the finish of that stage. So when you fudge the numbers on something that's fairly clear to estimate accurately, it calls into question other figures generated by the economic impact report.
I'd like to see this race return. But I don't see it happening without a corporate title sponsor.
Posted 13 May 2010 - 09:11 AM
I also agree that long-term a corporate sponsor needs to be courted, but considering that one of the biggest benefactors is the state of Missouri, it makes sense for its Division of Tourism to be a sponsor as well. I think that it would be easier to attract corporate sponsors if there were a long-term plan and commitment from the state, e.g., have a 3 year plan where they provide $1M this year, $750k next, $500k the year after. This would demonstrate to corporate sponsors that their investment would be long-term as well.