Few sprinklers in Wellington high-rise social homes; Christchurch surgery wait worsens; Wood accused with Cabinet Manual breach over Airport shares; Singapore chooses homes over horse races
Morning, Bernard- interested in the results so far of opening up the full newsletter to non-subscribers but absolutely not surprised by the results. The problem with the everything free all the time approach is that it instantly erodes the value of the paid subscription to your subscribers. i’m not saying you shouldn’t do it; just that you will fare better financially if you are judicious about it. I speak as a former publisher.
But of course it all depends on your motivations.
Now, have you seen Dileepa Fonseka’s excellent piece this morning on Big Neighbour and his/her chilling effect on better urban planning? Published on Business Desk and one of those pieces that justifies the subscription. Very insightful. Worth inviting Dileepa on to the Hoon this Friday, I reckon.
The mixed bag, perhaps $1 (once 10c 😅) mixed lolly bag, of NZ politics continues on hey.
Aware it's touched on above, but curious as to everyone's thoughts on the electoral commission recommendations? Or what/how some or all of these recommendations coming to light could/would look like.
I began as a peruser of freely available material and became a full paying subscriber (a) once i decided this was the nz independant journalism I wanted to support in full, and (b) when i wanted to access importent content that was only available to paid subscribers (fomo is hopefully a strong force you can leverage). i strongly believe in paying for quality indepentant journalism and collation, but also happy as a paid subscriber to support opening up public-good content. your process to find the right balance seems sensible. wishing you well with it.
I've been slammed with 'move to Tasmania NZ dental professional' ad's, I am not a dental professional, and I've already lived in Tasmania, algorithmic chaos!
I think it's very worthwhile to attempt to get your excellent pieces and subscribers' very worthwhile comments more widely read.( As long as comments are not opened up to the meltdown brigade). If turns out that it is financially disadvantageous to you, Bernard, you should not continue to share with all. I, for one, don't want to lose you
I really like the idea of adding social housing to race courses and golf courses. If done in a dense, mixed use way, where you could have cafes, small supermarkets and shops in the bottom floor and maybe five stories of apartments of all sizes above, they would be excellent. There might even be room to keep the existing use in some form. And many are already owned by Councils. Additional ones that spring to mind for me are Greerton Race Course in Tauranga, which is conveniently placed next to a Council owned golf course, and New Plymouth race course. But why stop there? How about apartments incorporated in every local and central government owned space (excluding greenspaces of course)? It is absolute rubbish to say we don't have enough land and need to build more Greenfield's. We are just terrible at using the space we have.
The recommendations in Deborah Hart's report are what we need, I think. As you say, they won't happen now but that they're there to be seen in a succinct list make the recommendations possible. I hope and believe all the changes will eventually happen.
Your comment about keeping the race course and putting up the housing anyway, amused me. I am sure it can be done, but I had visions of ladies in stilettos and fascinators rushing from one apartment to the next to catch the end of the race through someone's front window. My kids loved to listen to tapes of Bill Cosby while on long journeys in the USA. I recall him relating stories from his tough inner city childhood, playing street baseball: "Frank would hit a ball and I had to catch a no 5 bus and get off at Franklin and 10th to catch it."
Morning, Bernard- interested in the results so far of opening up the full newsletter to non-subscribers but absolutely not surprised by the results. The problem with the everything free all the time approach is that it instantly erodes the value of the paid subscription to your subscribers. i’m not saying you shouldn’t do it; just that you will fare better financially if you are judicious about it. I speak as a former publisher.
But of course it all depends on your motivations.
Now, have you seen Dileepa Fonseka’s excellent piece this morning on Big Neighbour and his/her chilling effect on better urban planning? Published on Business Desk and one of those pieces that justifies the subscription. Very insightful. Worth inviting Dileepa on to the Hoon this Friday, I reckon.
Anne
Mōrena koutou,
The mixed bag, perhaps $1 (once 10c 😅) mixed lolly bag, of NZ politics continues on hey.
Aware it's touched on above, but curious as to everyone's thoughts on the electoral commission recommendations? Or what/how some or all of these recommendations coming to light could/would look like.
I began as a peruser of freely available material and became a full paying subscriber (a) once i decided this was the nz independant journalism I wanted to support in full, and (b) when i wanted to access importent content that was only available to paid subscribers (fomo is hopefully a strong force you can leverage). i strongly believe in paying for quality indepentant journalism and collation, but also happy as a paid subscriber to support opening up public-good content. your process to find the right balance seems sensible. wishing you well with it.
I've been slammed with 'move to Tasmania NZ dental professional' ad's, I am not a dental professional, and I've already lived in Tasmania, algorithmic chaos!
I think it's very worthwhile to attempt to get your excellent pieces and subscribers' very worthwhile comments more widely read.( As long as comments are not opened up to the meltdown brigade). If turns out that it is financially disadvantageous to you, Bernard, you should not continue to share with all. I, for one, don't want to lose you
I really like the idea of adding social housing to race courses and golf courses. If done in a dense, mixed use way, where you could have cafes, small supermarkets and shops in the bottom floor and maybe five stories of apartments of all sizes above, they would be excellent. There might even be room to keep the existing use in some form. And many are already owned by Councils. Additional ones that spring to mind for me are Greerton Race Course in Tauranga, which is conveniently placed next to a Council owned golf course, and New Plymouth race course. But why stop there? How about apartments incorporated in every local and central government owned space (excluding greenspaces of course)? It is absolute rubbish to say we don't have enough land and need to build more Greenfield's. We are just terrible at using the space we have.
The recommendations in Deborah Hart's report are what we need, I think. As you say, they won't happen now but that they're there to be seen in a succinct list make the recommendations possible. I hope and believe all the changes will eventually happen.
Love the cartoon!
Your comment about keeping the race course and putting up the housing anyway, amused me. I am sure it can be done, but I had visions of ladies in stilettos and fascinators rushing from one apartment to the next to catch the end of the race through someone's front window. My kids loved to listen to tapes of Bill Cosby while on long journeys in the USA. I recall him relating stories from his tough inner city childhood, playing street baseball: "Frank would hit a ball and I had to catch a no 5 bus and get off at Franklin and 10th to catch it."