Transport Museum to Charge (1 Viewer)

[Nick]

Coventry Transport Museum to charge entrance fee amid funding problems

I do like the Transport museum for a wander about every so often, if I saw it was £14 each I don't think I'd bother though .

 

---

[Deleted member 5849]

tbf when you consider Gaydon is twenty quid, it'd be worth it.

When City of Culture's around the corner, however, it shows how the cash isn't going to the things we already have - they're being taken for granted.

 

[hill83]

£14 is for the year to be fair, but I think they would be better off charging a fiver per visit. Not enough there for me personally to go more than once every 3 years never mind a year.

 

[Nick]

£14 is for the year to be fair, but I think they would be better off charging a fiver per visit. Not enough there for me personally to go more than once every 3 years never mind a year.

Yeah but the year thing is a bit silly as it's usually the same for most of it so you aren't going to be going back every few months.

Fiver as a one off would be better.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

you aren't going to be going back every few months.

I do

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Also, just what is this Go CV thing? I've checked the CCC website and it's not exactly illuminating as to whether you have to pay for it or not. Is it just Coventry, or for Warwickshire too?

Go CV card | Go CV card | Coventry City Council

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

From nothing to £14 per visit will see visitor numbers PLUMMET! I would pay a fiver but not £14, and people from outside the city (i.e. those who might come as part of City of Culture) will not need the mutliple visits thing, and will stay away in droves.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

Also, just what is this Go CV thing? I've checked the CCC website and it's not exactly illuminating as to whether you have to pay for it or not. Is it just Coventry, or for Warwickshire too?

Go CV card | Go CV card | Coventry City Council

City only, i think

 

[Nick]

From nothing to £14 per visit will see visitor numbers PLUMMET! I would pay a fiver but not £14, and people from outside the city (i.e. those who might come as part of City of Culture) will not need the mutliple visits thing, and will stay away in droves.

That's the thing, people might plan a day in Coventry with the transport museum, herbert and a walk around the cathedral. When you make it £14 a pop to go into the Transport museum then people will stop going or take it off their list.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

City only, i think

Hmm, so WCC investing £1mil in City of Culture doesn't count for much, then.

(Link for those who care! Warwickshire households facing another big hike in Council Tax)

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

That's the thing, people might plan a day in Coventry with the transport museum, herbert and a walk around the cathedral. When you make it £14 a pop to go into the Transport museum then people will stop going or take it off their list.

Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.

City of Culture's virtually ignoring what's already there. We also have the problem with the Grammar School, which barely opens now because they can't afford it, not what was intended.

On the plus side, a couple of restorations going on (Drapers Hall and Charterhouse) but they've been farmed out by the council to get them done.

As ever, Coventry doesn't pay attention to what it has, so risks doing a lot of things badly rather than a few things well.

 

[We'll_live_and_die]

I'll quite often take the kids in there whilst the Mrs does a bit of shopping. It's a nice way to pass an hour.

Make it day out type prices and it's unlikely I'll ever go back in.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

No one visits

Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

City of Culture's virtually ignoring what's already there. We also have the problem with the Grammar School, which barely opens now because they can't afford it, not what was intended.

On the plus side, a couple of restorations going on (Drapers Hall and Charterhouse) but they've been farmed out by the council to get them done.

As ever, Coventry doesn't pay attention to what it has, so risks doing a lot of things badly rather than a few things well.

It’s cause coventrians talk about caring about the arts and supporting history but don’t put their money or their feet where their mouths are

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It’s cause coventrians talk about caring about the arts and supporting history but don’t put their money or their feet where their mouths are

It's an old article (the figures have gone up since, I think) but tourism brings in a hell of a lot to the place.

Coventry tourism brings in £84million a year, new figures show

Of course that also generates jobs, increased tax revenues, and therefore less expenditure on benefits too.

But we don't invest in heritage and tourism as much as we should, because it's not 'obvious'.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Anyway, I've registered for a Go CV card(!) Guess I pick that up at the Transport museum, or wherever? The website is 'coming soon', they've never tweeted, and the facebook page has the same image repeated endlessly!

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Agree with the point about a cheaper one-off visit than a year pass, although both options should be available.

For the out of town visitor it's likely only going to be a one-off visit so needs to cater for that but there are quite a lot of exhibits and if you want to take a really close look around it can take a few visits, esp if you've only got an hour or so at a time (or kids whose attention spans rarely last that long so you can dip in and out). But when you have been around it there's not really any reason to go again for quite some time unless you're taking someone round.

It's not a bad price considering you get to see the two fastest land speed record holders. Especially when you look at the cost of some of the things in London like Shard/Eye.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I understand why people are frustrated about how the council don't spend the money on the historic structures etc which can be of great use tourist wise (though their locations tend to be quite spread out and doesn't make Coventry feel as historic as it actually is and IMO having a variety of things that people want to use in terms of entertainment and shops will be more productive) but at the same time if/when they do they then get lambasted for spending money on old buildings when services etc are being cut. So up the tax rate to pay for both? More criticism (though they can be very wasteful but all public sector/councils/government is - it's not unique to Coventry council.

Loads of historic structures are taken on by heritage organisations or charitable trusts to maintain them and frequently they do an even worse job because they suddenly realise just how expensive it is and how little money they actually make directly as pure tourist attractions and don't want to consider alternate uses as it loses 'context' and 'history'. I think they make great little restaurants etc BUT with health and safety are often unsuitable without significant changes which heritage organisations always block due to a loss of authenticity.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Last point is City of Culture isn't about old buildings - it's about the many varied ways we live - entertainment like theatres to sporting events, art from masters to graffitti, cuisine from high end nosh to street vendors, all the different customs from various countries and religions. The old buildings form part of it and are selling points, but it's only a minor part of the story. If it was it'd be City of Heritage or City of History, not City of Culture.

 

[shmmeee]

Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.

I know it’s me, and it’s seemingly my job to point out the realities of local government on this site, but the fact is there’s no funding for anything. Councils are cutting left right and centre. If you can’t get private industry or grants to pay its in danger.

That said, £14 a pop for the museum is madness and will kill it.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Last point is City of Culture isn't about old buildings - it's about the many varied ways we live - entertainment like theatres to sporting events, art from masters to graffitti, cuisine from high end nosh to street vendors, all the different customs from various countries and religions. The old buildings form part of it and are selling points, but it's only a minor part of the story. If it was it'd be City of Heritage or City of History, not City of Culture.

I never said it was about old builkdings, but they're completely ignoring those parts of it to do with heritage... which is our culture - it's Culture Coventry after all! And that incorporates insights into our culture to be found in its archive, its museum, places such as the Weaver's House for that matter.

You can't just ignore what's already there and margibnalise it for something bright and shiny.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

£14 a pop for the museum is madness and will kill it.

Gaydon does alright. £14.50 that is, so obviously set with that in mind.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I never said it was about old builkdings, but they're completely ignoring those parts of it to do with heritage... which is our culture - it's Culture Coventry after all! And that incorporates insights into our culture to be found in its archive, its museum, places such as the Weaver's House for that matter.

You can't just ignore what's already there and margibnalise it for something bright and shiny.

I'm not saying we should build something new and shiny - I don't think we should build anything at all. I'm saying it should be more about WHAT we do/have done rather than the structures they take place in. Obviously the museums etc are part of that.

But also part of that is that our current culture is one heavy with a city of learning and students, and the changes going on merely reflect that change in culture, just as the factories of old were indicative of a change in culture to industrialisation from the cottage industries and topshops around Spon End etc that preceded it..

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I'm saying it should be more about WHAT we do/have done rather than the structures they take place in. Obviously the museums etc are part of that.

The structures they take place in are integral to what happens in social history, and also cultural history. They're the physical embodiment, and the conduit.

They also enable a sense of place to be magnified, a sense of 'Coventry'.

I'm not saying ignore Coventry now, I'm saying don't trample over whatever's there and ignore it when you have the opportunity, for once, to give it much needed funding and, dare I say it, introduce a legacy.

 

[bezzer]

It's not a bad price considering you get to see the two fastest land speed record holders. Especially when you look at the cost of some of the things in London like Shard/Eye.

You can't compare the Transport Museum to The Chard or The Eye.

Try comparing it to the V&A, The Imperial War Museum, The Natural History Museum, The British Museum, The Science Museum, National Maritime Museum etc. etc. They're all free.

The Transport Museum is shooting itself in the foot.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The structures they take place in are integral to what happens in social history, and also cultural history. They're the physical embodiment, and the conduit.

They also enable a sense of place to be magnified, a sense of 'Coventry'.

I'm not saying ignore Coventry now, I'm saying don't trample over whatever's there and ignore it when you have the opportunity, for once, to give it much needed funding and, dare I say it, introduce a legacy.

It's City of Culture 2021 - ie culture in the present day. It's not about what we USED to do, it's about what we do NOW. By all means adding a bit of cultural history in to show how it's changed over the years is great, but it shouldn't be the main focus.

I'd prefer to see the money used to attract more restaurants/cafes, a variety of entertainment and performers as that will have a far more lasting effect. If we ever become City of Heritage or City of History I'll be front of the queue demanding the money we get for it being spent on some of the wonderful old structures we have.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It's City of Culture 2021 - ie culture in the present day.

No, it's City of Culture, in the year 2021.

And culture in the present day still involves Culture Coventry! To suggest otherwise is madness! Especially if we're gojng for a narrative of multiculturalism (fine) then the whole reason Coventry is this melting pot of different cultures with different backkgrounds is because of their past, and the city's past. Culture *is* history, and history can be the tightrope walk for the millenium for that matter!

And 'past' doesn't have to be hundreds of years ago! It's not synchronic slices of time, it's a diachjronic sedimented narrative. One can't play without the other.

Culture is history, history is culture - they're not mutually exclusive!

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I agree with you completely about history and culture but that's not the point I'm making!

I'm making the argument of what to spend the funding for the city of culture on. We could spend the lot on tarting up a building or two or on actual activities and things to do.

Do a building up and visitors will visit it once, go "that was nice" and then not come back because they've seen it now. Give them a variety of restaurants/eateries and a decent offering of various things to do or performers to see and there's a reason to come back and spend more money. I go into the city a fair few times a year to see stuff at the Belgrade or eat out with people. Not been to places like the cathedral, Motor Museum, Guildhall, Undercroft etc for years because I don't need to - I've seen them. And those are ones you can enter, let alone all the structures which are closed and you can just walk past.

As I've said above, I'd love to see these old buildings utilised as it's the only way they'll actually stand any chance long term. But all we seem to want to do it tart them up for posterity and then let them rot again rather than use them because it's 'not in keeping with the history'. That's madness and totally unsustainable.

 

[Nick]

Surely the whole idea of a city of culture isn't to just put a few shows on and open a few places to eat?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I agree with you completely about history and culture but that's not the point I'm making!

I'm making the argument of what to spend the funding for the city of culture on. We could spend the lot on tarting up a building or two or on actual activities and things to do.

Do a building up and visitors will visit it once, go "that was nice" and then not come back because they've seen it now. Give them a variety of restaurants/eateries and a decent offering of various things to do or performers to see and there's a reason to come back and spend more money. I go into the city a fair few times a year to see stuff at the Belgrade or eat out with people. Not been to places like the cathedral, Motor Museum, Guildhall, Undercroft etc for years because I don't need to - I've seen them. And those are ones you can enter, let alone all the structures which are closed and you can just walk past.

As I've said above, I'd love to see these old buildings utilised as it's the only way they'll actually stand any chance long term. But all we seem to want to do it tart them up for posterity and then let them rot again rather than use them because it's 'not in keeping with the history'. That's madness and totally unsustainable.

But it's not just the buildings is it? it's the staff who come up with the activities in the archives, in the museums, in the Transport Museum.

Or, as at present, the lack of staff, so lack of activities!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Surely the whole idea of a city of culture isn't to just put a few shows on and open a few places to eat?

There's at least one person on this board who'll be able to correct my timeline but Liverpool, in conjunction with European City of Culture, and also a general regeneration of its urban space, revitalised its art galleries, museums, and other historic and cultural spaces. They still put the money in, they still get the rewards.

And yes, they did other things too!

 

[Gazolba]

Charges hit families the most.
It's not too bad for one person but for two people plus kids it mounts up.
And when people are paying that, they'll be less likely to buy the books and souvenirs they also make money from.

 

[Liquid Gold]

I've taken a few people there when coming to the city for extended times around games and we always chuck a few quid each in the collection things. Would never pay £14 for it, stupid idea.

 

[dutchman]

But it's not just the buildings is it? it's the staff who come up with the activities in the archives, in the museums, in the Transport Museum.

Or, as at present, the lack of staff, so lack of activities!

My experience with the staff in the Transport Museum was that they completely ignored me even when I showed a strong interest in a particular exhibit. They may as well have stationed cardboard cutout characters around the building. Took me less than five minutes to take in everything on show.

So did I feel like making a voluntary contribution on leaving, did I hell.