LETTERS


ATTRACTING OPINIONS Historical changes


challenge that’s greater than they realise. We all know that the new government


I


is committed to cutting the debt currently being carried by the country. At the same time, local authorities are having their budgets cut and, to make matters worse, the current funding agreements are reach- ing the end of their existence. Put these facts together and it seems


likely that funding for museums, galleries and heritage attractions will be cut sooner rather than later. This is widely acknowl- edged, as is the fact that managers will have to fi nd new sources of money to keep their establishments operational. This is bad enough, but danger also lies


in managers accepting what appear to be obvious solutions to a very real problem. To take a very simple example, a man-


Delayed payment is having disastrous results for many in the industry Money talks Y


our feature on When and how am I going to get paid? [Attractions Management Q3 09] made for inter-


esting reading with its focus on the Middle East. However, this isn’t a problem con- fi ned to that region. No doubt it has been exacerbated by the credit crunch and its pernicious effects, but it certainly pre- dates the recent crisis and is something we all have to deal with, all of the time. Private sector clients in particular


may approach projects with the best of intentions to their contractors and consult- ants, but then fi nd the gap between the moment a bank may nominally agree to provide funding for a project and the point when that funding is actually paid over, to be lengthy and subject to periods of great uncertainty, as the banks take an ultra- cautious approach to a sector that they see as inherently risky. When combined with the bank’s own


traditional inertia and seeming reluctance to embrace modern technology, fund- ing schedules that clients had assumed to be secure become entirely arbitrary in practice. This can have serious knock


8


on effects for those being employed to design, manage and deliver the project, as they each have their own fi nancial com- mitments, which are then put at risk. Additionally, as projects progress, there


is an unfortunate tendency, with which we are all familiar, of clients making the decision to hold on to both their own and borrowed funds as long as possible to underwrite their own cashfl ow often at the expense of that of the contractors and consultants. Payment often goes to who- ever has the critical path in their hands at any given time or who could cause the most collateral damage by ‘downing tools’. This isn’t a healthy or desirable state


of affairs, but is likely to be the case for the foreseeable future. Is this the time for industry-wide acknowledgement of the problem and an action plan on promoting good practice before good contractors and consultants go to the wall?


Keith Thomas, director , Petersham Group


ager may decide the only option is to charge on the door. The manager may then decide that a cash drawer and roll of tickets at the main entrance is all that’s needed. While this may suit some organi- sations, others are likely to fi nd diffi culties only after they have become problems. There are many other areas relating to


charging for either general entry or for specifi c exhibitions that carry signifi cant risks. For example, the need to reduce exposure to fraud and the need to comply with regulations regarding the process- ing of credit cards. Managers often don’t have the experience to identify these risks. The challenge for a manager is that


there are many companies that will offer a universal panacea without explaining the other possibilities. Yet it’s vital to under- stand that there are options at every stage. Managers need to become as well


informed as possible on the whole subject. If they can do that, they’re much more likely to make the right decisions.


Andy Povey, director business develop- ment, RefT


ech Services Ltd


Share your insights, opinions, concerns and hopes with the rest of the attractions industry. Send your letters to Attractions Management, Portmill House, Portmill Lane, Hitchin, Herts, SG5 1DJ, UK or e-mail attractions@leisuremedia.com


Read Attractions Management online attractionsmanagement.com/digital AM 3 2010 ©cybertrek 2010


believe that managers and curators within the British museums and herit- age attractions sector are facing a


© ISTOCK.COM/ DMITRY OSHCHEPKOV


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86