![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
networkn:
There are DOZENS of projects every year that cost considerably more than $17m that result in less or equally non productive outcomes.
tdgeek: I agree James and a good point. Much of the cost will re circulate into the economy by way of wages earned, services provided by the private sector, and an amount of the private to public money movements will be spent by the earners in the economy.
I like the flag.
1. It seperates us from Australia, a very similar flag
2. Black is NZ's icon colour, fern is not as iconic as the kiwi but its close. Southern Cross shows some link to the old flag.
New flag? No. Its an update to the old flag, removing Union Jack, adding NZ fern and black colour to make it a NZ flag not a Commonwealth flag
Geektastic:
I was 38 when I moved here. I'm fairly well educated and of above average intelligence.
Yet if you'd shown me a fern before I moved here and asked what country it reminded me of, I would have said "Sorry, no idea."
It may be iconic to new zealanders but don't kid yourself it carries immediate association anywhere else.
Geektastic:tdgeek: I agree James and a good point. Much of the cost will re circulate into the economy by way of wages earned, services provided by the private sector, and an amount of the private to public money movements will be spent by the earners in the economy.
I like the flag.
1. It seperates us from Australia, a very similar flag
2. Black is NZ's icon colour, fern is not as iconic as the kiwi but its close. Southern Cross shows some link to the old flag.
New flag? No. Its an update to the old flag, removing Union Jack, adding NZ fern and black colour to make it a NZ flag not a Commonwealth flag
Everyone claims the fern is "iconic" but is it really?
I was 38 when I moved here. I'm fairly well educated and of above average intelligence. Yet if you'd shown me a fern before I moved here and asked what country it reminded me of, I would have said "Sorry, no idea."
It may be iconic to new zealanders but don't kid yourself it carries immediate association anywhere else.
I am hoping enough people feel the same way.
michael001: The flag selected is exactly what one would expect from the process. I think it looks cheap, unprofessional and most embarrassingly, not a flag.
That aside, I look around my home office now and I see many items carrying an image of the New Zealand flag. Items that would require replacement should the flag change. I think a flag change, would cost me personally in excess of $500.
Looking towards business, the cost of the change alone will be measured in several development iterations - conservatively, that's about $60K. That's without changing a lick of printed material around the office.
So if I now consider just one item at a national level - the NZ drivers licence bears the NZ flag. What would be the actual cost to the taxpayer for change there?
Two things are absolutely certain for me:
- I will be voting in the next flag vote.
- I will be voting for no change.
I am hoping enough people feel the same way.
networkn:Geektastic:tdgeek: I agree James and a good point. Much of the cost will re circulate into the economy by way of wages earned, services provided by the private sector, and an amount of the private to public money movements will be spent by the earners in the economy.
I like the flag.
1. It seperates us from Australia, a very similar flag
2. Black is NZ's icon colour, fern is not as iconic as the kiwi but its close. Southern Cross shows some link to the old flag.
New flag? No. Its an update to the old flag, removing Union Jack, adding NZ fern and black colour to make it a NZ flag not a Commonwealth flag
Everyone claims the fern is "iconic" but is it really?
I was 38 when I moved here. I'm fairly well educated and of above average intelligence. Yet if you'd shown me a fern before I moved here and asked what country it reminded me of, I would have said "Sorry, no idea."
It may be iconic to new zealanders but don't kid yourself it carries immediate association anywhere else.
Unsure of your age, but I am guessing you have been here at least 10-15 years.
I'd suggest in the past 10-15 years the Fern has become very well known because of the punching above our weight in a fair number of sports. The AB's have been completely dominant and I'd say in my past 10 years of travels, NZ and the fern are a lot more indentified in places like the USA/UK/Canada/Asia Pacific.
Beyond that, the flag needs to mean something to ME, which the current offering and the new offering do, which is enough.
michael001: The flag selected is exactly what one would expect from the process. I think it looks cheap, unprofessional and most embarrassingly, not a flag.
That aside, I look around my home office now and I see many items carrying an image of the New Zealand flag. Items that would require replacement should the flag change. I think a flag change, would cost me personally in excess of $500.
Looking towards business, the cost of the change alone will be measured in several development iterations - conservatively, that's about $60K. That's without changing a lick of printed material around the office.
So if I now consider just one item at a national level - the NZ drivers licence bears the NZ flag. What would be the actual cost to the taxpayer for change there?
Two things are absolutely certain for me:
- I will be voting in the next flag vote.
- I will be voting for no change.
I am hoping enough people feel the same way.
Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos
Rikkitic: Personally I would rather dump the queen than the flag. There would be more value in that. We could have a president, get rid of those silly knighthoods, make Charlie and Cam come as normal tourists and pay their way like everyone else. Now that would be productive.
Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation
sidefx: I wasn't a big fan of red peak either and disliked the way it got added... but I will say one thing about it - it does scale nicely. Even the slight downscaling on that preliminary results page makes almost all the choices except red peak look like jaggy pixelated messes (though whoever resized them did a particularly bad job and jpeg...) Whereas red peak looks decent and identifiable even very small:
(sorry this has probably been hashed out elsewhere already but it was very noticable to me on that results page)
dclegg:sidefx: I wasn't a big fan of red peak either and disliked the way it got added... but I will say one thing about it - it does scale nicely. Even the slight downscaling on that preliminary results page makes almost all the choices except red peak look like jaggy pixelated messes (though whoever resized them did a particularly bad job and jpeg...) Whereas red peak looks decent and identifiable even very small:
(sorry this has probably been hashed out elsewhere already but it was very noticable to me on that results page)
I wasn't a fan either, but I came around once it was explained, along with explanations of what makes a good flag. And that's why it never really stood a chance. It was up against two nearly identical flags that contained the Silver Fern that Kiwi's know and love, and the Southern Cross design lifted from our current flag. That symbology, and what it means, is easily identifiable.
But in my opinion, it looks far more like a corporate logo than a flag. So I'll definitely be voting to keep our existing one. I was actually seriously considering voting for a change to Red Peak, if it had won this round.
networkn:
I'd suggest in the past 10-15 years the Fern has become very well known because of the punching above our weight in a fair number of sports. The AB's have been completely dominant and I'd say in my past 10 years of travels, NZ and the fern are a lot more indentified in places like the USA/UK/Canada/Asia Pacific.
Beyond that, the flag needs to mean something to ME, which the current offering and the new offering do, which is enough.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |