bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

additionalInfoBoxes

quizIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

The e-mail forum

Q Is too much being spent on the Harbour Fest?

So Prince is now set to open the Harbour Fest musical smorgasbord. What a coup ... er, but of what relevance is this artist to the majority of people in Hong Kong?

Have the organisers of this bun fest done any real homework to gauge the popularity of these international artists they keep trotting out?

If so, could they share their findings with us all? Though a fan of an artist like Prince, my great concern is that this so-called festival will simply turn into a 'big day out' for Hong Kong's small expat community.

Over the past week alone, I have heard (rightly or wrongly) that other names associated with this event include Neil Young (huh?), Jewel, James Brown (huh?), The Jordanaires (whaaaa?), Limp Bizkit, etc, etc.

If true, who on Earth came up with this line-up? And why? Surely these are not simply names that are part of the organisers' personal CD collections?

How is Hong Kong supposed to benefit by bringing in this very strange  line-up of artists?

Why not have just brought in U2, Santana and the Stones and stopped right there?

Have the organisers actually checked on the Hong Kong record sales of an artist like Prince et al?

If there is to be a TV special of this event and it is screened overseas, will it be looked upon as something almost approaching the surreal?

Think about it, folks: a TV special  including the Rolling Stones, Prince, James Brown, Westlife, Jewel, Neil Young, the Jordanaires, Craig David, Santana.

Exactly who is the target audience? And, more to the point, who will air this in the US?

If the organisers of this festival really wish to do something for Hong Kong - and not just for themselves and a few of their mates - they should really consider turning this into an event where the world of music comes together for a reason.

And what better reason than a gathering of some of the biggest names in music at the request of the  government - and the people - of Hong Kong to fight music piracy, which is rampant in Asia.

Let's hope common sense prevails and the organisers of this event get their collective acts together and create an event that has a definite strategy, and, more importantly, a clearly defined objective - and which is shared with the people of Hong Kong.

Full and complete disclosure is what's needed at this late stage of the innings. Right now this entire event is reminiscent of a combination of Monty Python, the Ringling Brothers and the Keystone Cops. It's a bumbling 'mega mega' mess. Hans Ebert, executive director, EMI Music South East Asia

I'm finding this all quite amazing. Not only has InvestHK backed a festival featuring acts already scheduled to come to Hong Kong for much less money, it has elected to leave the event to a group that has no idea how to organise it, totally disregarded local professional promoters, and all for an estimated loss of between $30 million and $80 million.

And what role does this recently established company, formed by ex-finance types, have to do with the event? It all seems a little strange.

The Stones and others who were already scheduled to come to Hong Kong, I am sure, would have got world media coverage anyway, so surely this can't be their main reason for spending the money. One can only wonder why the Sars recovery fund was not, in part, allocated to other projects around Hong Kong, while  using the rest to work with local promoters to continue their work in bringing in international events, and create more local festivals with international appeal throughout the year.

Lastly, a word of warning to the organisers and the government.  I did a million-dollar outdoor event in Hong Kong a couple of years back  and we were lucky enough to have a typhoon come in that day, so make sure you have disaster insurance - it will only cost you a couple of million! Karl Whelan, Mid-Levels

It amazes me that a government that talks about cutting funding for education and those on welfare assistance, effectively handicapping our future and further subjugating those least able to support themselves, can spend so much of our tax revenue on feel-good ventures.

How much did Real Madrid cost - $820,000 and that was after the Football Association waived its usual fee of some $2 million. The Rolling Stones are rumoured to be demanding US$5 million - good for them if they can get it but how much will it ultimately cost the taxpayers?

Will these events bring more money into Hong Kong? Probably not. Will the bulk of taxpayers benefit from it? Probably not. Will we have to suffer more cuts to important services? Almost certainly, yes - and, as usual, the group to pay the highest price for all this will be the taxpaying middle class. Nick Bilcliffe, Lamma Island

The Harbour Fest is another example of this government blundering by not bothering to look to public opinion before leaping. With such high unemployment, businesses still failing, continuing pay cuts, increasing taxation, a huge public spending deficit and  a shaky economic outlook, such profligacy by the government through InvestHK is shameful, insensitive and unwise.

There has been discussion for years that 'Asia's World City' does not have a venue capable of appropriately staging 'world city' entertainment, so why do the taxpayers  have to subsidise a handful of people to watch concerts in a temporary public car park?

The claim by Mike Rowse, of InvestHK, that the Harbour Fest will provide such beneficial publicity for Hong Kong that the cost of this advertising adventure will be fully justified is fanciful and conveniently not subject to accountability.

Let's get the basics in place before we venture into extravagance. Name and address supplied



talkback