Still smarting a bit from being told that I wasn't going to get any NGO-assistance to move to a revenue-generating model because... I didn't yet have enough revenues.
That's up there with the one a few years ago that rejected my application because it was 'too left filed and nothing like it had be doen before'. It's name? The Creative Innovation Fund.
I was pondering this as I watched today's BBC Breakfast local/Midlands section, with a report on a Birmingham Council carshare initiative (no link I can find, thanks to the woeful BBC online search - subject to confirmation, it might be referring to this).
Any road up, seems that this initiative has been in place a while now (and I'm betting with a few more folk and a few more involved than any that has come my solo, mostly self-funded way), and has netted... 60 sign-ups. This puts me in mind of a press release for a national green online effort recently that was trumpeting 50,000 monthly hits . That's... not great, bearing in mind I'm gunning for 500,000 unique visitors, which is a lot different (and tougher) measure.
The platitude offered was that such things are 'slow-burners'. Well yes, that's what I have been saying about us, but this slow burner seems to be doing a lot better than many, yet can't get arrested, yet bazillions get poured down green holes to a very questionable enviROI+ degree at the drop of an inter-departmental hat... er.. memo.
The even more annoying thing is that I have in the wings tripsplitters, which is a whole new take on car sharing that I really think could work and make some serious money, and acts in complement to the Junkk.com local postcode facility.
To get this off the ground I would need help, mainly in time (but that is, at the end of the day, still money). But considering the effort to reward ratio of applying for help from these bodies, and where their heads are at as to what you get and how they connect you with the right folk to help the ideas person turn it into a business, I am not so keen any more.
If ever there was a system designed to drain the creative soul out of an innovator, these seem to be perfectly crafted for the task.
Junkk.com promotes fun, reward-based e-practices, sharing oodles of info in objective, balanced ways. But we do have personal opinions, too! Hence this slightly ‘off of site, top of mind' blog by Junkk Male Peter. Hopefully still more ‘concerned mates’ than 'do this... or else' nannies, with critiques seen as constructive or of a more eyebrow-twitching ‘Oh, really?!' variety. Little that’s green can be viewed only in black and white.
Showing posts with label CAR SHARING TRIPSPLITTERS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CAR SHARING TRIPSPLITTERS. Show all posts
Friday, January 18, 2008
Monday, November 19, 2007
It's November; it's extraordinary'
So say the blonde and the bouffant on BBC breakfast this am, about the fact that there was snow last night. I merely ask...'is it?'. If so that is worthy of note in the MWCC issue. If not, it sets up the BBC for a fall.
Because the segue for this piece was Declan and the 'low carbon family' now car sharing. Seems that, having for no good reason taken two cars to drive side by side daily, they now have realised they can go in one.
I was moved to write:
'Car sharing is... can be a great thing in carbon mitigation.
However, I have just watched you and the 'family' agree that busses are none too effective, even when prevalent, at 'fitting in' with the family schedule.
How many people, even within the same family, can leave or, much more pertinently, ensure they return at the same period within the same location and/or timing?
I think you portray an idealistic scenario in this piece.
Perhaps some thought needs to be given to coordinating better such sharing (Midlands Today has just announced dedicated lanes for sharers, so there are incentives) ways to DO this by way of public service campaigning/information.'
I am now, of course, inspired to list these as our national broadcaster is not that worried about such things, though I bet their excellent online site is littered with advice... point at them guys! We need information, not propaganda (though the cause of bus travel took a knock).
And I'll also raise the small notion I have created that needs some help (time and money) to get off the ground. It will not address daily commutes (though it can in complement to others), but it will be a big step on 'one-offs').
Because the segue for this piece was Declan and the 'low carbon family' now car sharing. Seems that, having for no good reason taken two cars to drive side by side daily, they now have realised they can go in one.
I was moved to write:
'Car sharing is... can be a great thing in carbon mitigation.
However, I have just watched you and the 'family' agree that busses are none too effective, even when prevalent, at 'fitting in' with the family schedule.
How many people, even within the same family, can leave or, much more pertinently, ensure they return at the same period within the same location and/or timing?
I think you portray an idealistic scenario in this piece.
Perhaps some thought needs to be given to coordinating better such sharing (Midlands Today has just announced dedicated lanes for sharers, so there are incentives) ways to DO this by way of public service campaigning/information.'
I am now, of course, inspired to list these as our national broadcaster is not that worried about such things, though I bet their excellent online site is littered with advice... point at them guys! We need information, not propaganda (though the cause of bus travel took a knock).
And I'll also raise the small notion I have created that needs some help (time and money) to get off the ground. It will not address daily commutes (though it can in complement to others), but it will be a big step on 'one-offs').
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)