|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 17, 2024 0:57:09 GMT
Interesting comments. I don't understand the waste of money comments. A separation of the lines will be helpful and is understandable. I think most would agree. Therefore, renaming them anything would cost around £6.3m. Additionally, this is a very very small amount for public spending. If you have an issue with this being a waste of money (even though it will not be anyway as it will be spent to rename) then you don't live in the real world or you will be shocked by large sums actually wasted with no end product. Personally, don't like all the names but I suspect they will become norm. I doubt they would last 10 years these names and could see any other mayor getting rid of these BS names. I DEFINITELY would NOT be using those stupid names
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 17, 2024 0:58:51 GMT
Interesting comments. I don't understand the waste of money comments. A separation of the lines will be helpful and is understandable. I think most would agree. Therefore, renaming them anything would cost around £6.3m. Additionally, this is a very very small amount for public spending. If you have an issue with this being a waste of money (even though it will not be anyway as it will be spent to rename) then you don't live in the real world or you will be shocked by large sums actually wasted with no end product. Personally, don't like all the names but I suspect they will become norm. For me it isn’t about the cost, I have long since changed my position on the Overground and now agree it needs simplifying. But the names are just pure virtue signalling garbage. The fact that TfL paid an agency over £100k to think these up is abhorrent. They are so tenuous and so loosely linked to their meaning. The agency was probably an affiliation to Khan or a front to the names he already had.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Feb 17, 2024 1:36:57 GMT
LOL to everyone thinking Susan Hall and the Tories had saner ideas. Burberry Line anyone? The money would've been spent anyway regardless of what the lines would be named as part of simplification though very much in character for them to suggest a profit making opportunity (wonder what they said about Burberry/Bond Street a few months ago though)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 17, 2024 3:47:54 GMT
LOL to everyone thinking Susan Hall and the Tories had saner ideas. Burberry Line anyone? The money would've been spent anyway regardless of what the lines would be named as part of simplification though very much in character for them to suggest a profit making opportunity (wonder what they said about Burberry/Bond Street a few months ago though)
The money aspect doesn't bother me so much though I'm surprised why it costs £6.3m in particular - presumably that's factoring in all the publicity that would need changing plus labour costs. The names are what bothers me and not for virtue signalling or woke reasons either - it should also be noted that back in 2015 when the proposal to name the Overground Lines came up, some of the lines ended up with the actual names these lines carry so this argument about "well North London Line isn't publicly used" is neither here or there because it was suggested back then along with a few others like the East London Line and Lea Valley Lines - pbs.twimg.com/media/GGUKfmVXYAA1CWZ?format=jpgDiamond Geezer also has his say on the matter - diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Feb 17, 2024 7:13:07 GMT
I don’t understand why they haven’t used orange for one of the lines still. Since Tube maps are still made using traditional methods, there's not enough Saffron that can be sourced to produce a feasible image
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Feb 17, 2024 12:43:46 GMT
I don’t understand why they haven’t used orange for one of the lines still. Presumably to distinguish LO the mode and the lines? I know it doesn't stop the Central from having a red color and the Pic the blue found in the tube roundel (or approximately the same shades) but that's a well established brand so no confusion there.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Feb 17, 2024 12:44:54 GMT
LOL to everyone thinking Susan Hall and the Tories had saner ideas. Burberry Line anyone? The money would've been spent anyway regardless of what the lines would be named as part of simplification though very much in character for them to suggest a profit making opportunity (wonder what they said about Burberry/Bond Street a few months ago though)
The money aspect doesn't bother me so much though I'm surprised why it costs £6.3m in particular - presumably that's factoring in all the publicity that would need changing plus labour costs. The names are what bothers me and not for virtue signalling or woke reasons either - it should also be noted that back in 2015 when the proposal to name the Overground Lines came up, some of the lines ended up with the actual names these lines carry so this argument about "well North London Line isn't publicly used" is neither here or there because it was suggested back then along with a few others like the East London Line and Lea Valley Lines - pbs.twimg.com/media/GGUKfmVXYAA1CWZ?format=jpgDiamond Geezer also has his say on the matter - diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/All the maps, all the announcements, all the signs... over a large network.
The Superloop signage/publicity costs surprised me too, but guess that's just the cost of labour here... now multiply by that from the scale of a few bus stops to a whole rail network and bingo.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 17, 2024 14:11:05 GMT
If anyone has stood high up on the platform at Peckham Rye will know why it is called the Windrush Line! Based on that station it could've been called, "We're the Sweeney son and we haven't had any dinner" Line....that area being where Jack Regan said that famous line from 70's cop show The Sweeney. It wouldn't be any more ridiculous than the Windrush Line...unless as others have mentioned its routing was via Brixton.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 17, 2024 14:26:10 GMT
If anyone has stood high up on the platform at Peckham Rye will know why it is called the Windrush Line! Doesn't change the fact that Peckham Rye is more known for it's African connections whereas Brixton is well known, even beyond the UK's shores, for it's Caribbean culture - there are reasons why the two areas have long been seen as rivals just like the historical beef between some African & Caribbean communities have. Brixton literally has Windrush Square on the site of the old Grey Green depot which was created when the petrol station closed in the mid 90's because of the historical importance whilst some of the Windrush passengers originally stayed in ex war shelters in Clapham South. So as I said before, I'd have no issue with this if the Victoria Line had originally been called the Windrush Line or if TfL ever got their hands on the Victoria to Orpington stopping service and rebranded that as the Windrush Line as at least history and logic would align The Victoria Line would have been ideal to have started off as the Windrush Line if it had opened quite a number of years later. For London of the 1960s however it's highly unlikely that name would've gone down well.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 17, 2024 14:33:41 GMT
Interesting comments. I don't understand the waste of money comments. A separation of the lines will be helpful and is understandable. I think most would agree. Therefore, renaming them anything would cost around £6.3m. Additionally, this is a very very small amount for public spending. If you have an issue with this being a waste of money (even though it will not be anyway as it will be spent to rename) then you don't live in the real world or you will be shocked by large sums actually wasted with no end product. Personally, don't like all the names but I suspect they will become norm. For me it isn’t about the cost, I have long since changed my position on the Overground and now agree it needs simplifying. But the names are just pure virtue signalling garbage. The fact that TfL paid an agency over £100k to think these up is abhorrent. They are so tenuous and so loosely linked to their meaning. It should have generally been opened up for the public for decision of names. Granted there would be other ideas which are even more ridiculous (many taking the mic) but we'd definitely would've gotten much more sensible suggestions than what we have now.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 17, 2024 14:44:19 GMT
For me it isn’t about the cost, I have long since changed my position on the Overground and now agree it needs simplifying. But the names are just pure virtue signalling garbage. The fact that TfL paid an agency over £100k to think these up is abhorrent. They are so tenuous and so loosely linked to their meaning. It should have generally been opened up for the public for decision of names. Granted there would be other ideas which are even more ridiculous (many taking the mic) but we'd definitely got much more sensible suggestions than what we have now. You sure we would not end up with the Trainy McTrainface Line?
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 17, 2024 16:15:16 GMT
Now I have read the origins of the Harlequin Line name I support that even more. I always thought it was derived from the name of the shopping centre. The shopping centre was in fact named after the line, which in turn is a play on Harlesden and Queens Park. Seems it is a proper line name after all.
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Feb 17, 2024 16:24:42 GMT
The names are so overly politicly correct that I think the PC principal from South Park must be working for Khan. It’s cringe.
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Feb 17, 2024 20:11:09 GMT
I can’t muster up any anger for the names quite frankly. They’re fine and will set over the years. If it were up to me the Goblin would be official but many will disagree. The ire these names have caused is quite funny tho.
I just wish one of the lines was orange.
Harlequin is ok but could be construed as a joke. Trainy mctrainfwce, duck off that joke was old ages ago
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 17, 2024 22:42:30 GMT
LOL to everyone thinking Susan Hall and the Tories had saner ideas. Burberry Line anyone? The money would've been spent anyway regardless of what the lines would be named as part of simplification though very much in character for them to suggest a profit making opportunity (wonder what they said about Burberry/Bond Street a few months ago though)
Much more saner than that pathetic nonsense from your local neighbourhood leftist buddy.
|
|