Birmingham's reputation

[Mister City]

Originally Posted by Qoasis777

It is being done in phases. It used to be a lot worse.

Good to hear it is being done. Birmingham will be a much better city once they have all disappeared.

[Tony Bear]

I think much of the city's problem lies with several decades of poor media representation, starting as far back as Barry in Aufedersein Pet. The real Brummie being Pat Roach.

A concrete rebuild in the 60s set the scene.. with a very poor marketing of the city and a reluctance to respect fully the city's heritage has led to generations of kids thinking Brum is shit compared to elsewhere which in fact is a great shame as the city has contributed massively to Britain's innovation, industry, fashion, art and music though you wouldn't know from walking around the city.. oh, hang on, the walk of stars.

The last decade things have improved though, to be honest I think this is partly down to the internet, where the record can be set straight and it's easier to research "stuff". Knowledge is power and amen to that, but this heritage does need to be reflected more in the fabric of the city's streets as a reminder of how Birmingham came to be.

[Tony Bear]

And I'll add to this, I seem to meet a lot of 'older' people who have ended up in Birmingham who really don't want to be here, or who came and left. They arrive with a negative view and carry that around with them wherever they travel.. I've lost count of how many people when asked where do you live reply words to the effect of "Buurmingham (pull of fish face) I'm sorry to say" and they're usually from elsewhere and racist. This thankfully is changing slowly though, especially with university students who are coming to Brum and staying on after university ends.. it's a cool place to be right now so good luck to them. Brummies need to find their voice and be proud of their city again, I think that's happening.

[Guilbert53]

Originally Posted by Mister City

Birmingham needs to get rid of those flyovers/motorways.

They are trying, but it is not something you can do overnight (and they will never be able to get rid of them all).

You cant just remove major roads or roundabouts without replacing them with something, or offering an alternative. Remember most of thse roads have office blocks or houses alongside them, so you cant just remove the road.

Birmingham USED to have an inner ring road (once called the concrete collar), with many flyovers and underpasses, and while much of it still exists you wont see it shown on a map, as emphasis is now given to the OUTER ring road, to encourgae cars to stay out of the city centre.

One section of the old inner ring road (that runs between New St station and the Bullring shopping centre) has been "downgraded" and while the ROAD is still there it is no longer part of the inner ring road. This "broke" the concrete collar and, in effect, removed the inner ring road.

Here is a modern map of the city centre, and the road (shown by a red line) that cuts through the city centre from North to South USED to be part of the inner ring road (which is WHY it loops off to the left, it also used to loop off to the right to form a circle). But as you can see, no inner ring road is now shown. Emphasis is now given to the outer ring road.

http://www.mapmoose.com/maps/Birmingham.jpg

btw, part of the road you walked under (or over) when you walked from the coach station to Broad Street was this major road running North / South through the city. If you got rid of this road you would just be sending more traffic through the actual city centre, and one of the good things about Birmingham City CENTRE is it is relatively free of traffic.

Probably the biggest recent change to the road layout was the demolition of the huge Masshouse roundabout (near Moor St station) in 2002. This huge ugly roundabout was part of the inner ring road. See picture of old roundabout below (Moor St station the the BullRing are in the top left, the city centre in the top right).

http://rickrobinson.files.wordpress....use-circus.jpg

But even though it was demolished in 2002 the area round it is still being developed. A number of new buildings have been built, and the Eastside City Park has also been built in the area, but there are still areas waiting to be built on. This all takes time.

Here is a fairly recent picture of where the masshouse roundabout USED to be. As you can see, many new buildings, and others being built (the one in the right is now the Hotel La Tour).

As you can see, no flyovers, no underpasses, all the roads on the "level", all in all a much nicer area. But as you can see, the area in the foreground is still waiting to be developed.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Masshouse.jpg

Remember that Birmingham is not a "rich" city and these type of projects can cost many millions, and unless money is forthcoming from central goverment then Birmingham council have to find the money themselves.

To be honest if you had taken another route and walked from the Coach station through the BullRing shopping centre, up New St, across Victoria Square, and in to Centenary Square then on to Broad St you would have avoided all these ugly flyovers and got a far beter view of the city centre.
.

[Typhoon2000]

My mate is from Exeter and works for the CBSO says it's his home now and he reckons the place is getting better. Best thing is that his best mate comes up every now and then and he absolutely loves it up here. He managed to get a flat in Hockley and is now going to keep it since he heard the tram will be heading to New Street.

I'm an outsider (London), and whilst I don't have any specific ties here Birmingham will always be my base from 2003 (since being a foundation year student back then), to travelling for a couple of years, to working, to graduating in 2010.. It's my home.

I love Manchester and London but I couldn't live in either now. London is on a different planet and a bit to much, and Manchester is fun, and in some sections really quite desirable but I get the feeling I could get really lazy up there and a friend of mine that used to live there says it can be a bit 'townie' too.

[JayPeeDee]

Originally Posted by Guilbert53

To be honest if you had taken another route and walked from the Coach station through the BullRing shopping centre, up New St, across Victoria Square, and in to Centenary Square then on to Broad St you would have avoided all these ugly flyovers and got a far beter view of the city centre.

Apart from the Digbeth end, once you get to the Bullring you would only cross one further road before reaching Broad Street. It's pedestrianised the whole way and with some of the best Brummie architecture on the way.

[Guilbert53]

Another nail in the coffin of Birmingham's reputation

Eleven members of a Birmingham terror cell that planned an attack to rival the 7 July and 9/11 atrocities have been jailed.

The group's leaders were Irfan Naseer, Irfan Khalid and Askhi Ali. Naseer, 31, was sentenced to life with a minimum of 18 years, Khalid, 28, was given 18 years and Ali 15 years.

The judge said Naseer wanted part of Birmingham to be a "little war zone".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22290927

[Tony Bear]

Originally Posted by Guilbert53

Another nail in the coffin of Birmingham's reputation

Eleven members of a Birmingham terror cell that planned an attack to rival the 7 July and 9/11 atrocities have been jailed.

The group's leaders were Irfan Naseer, Irfan Khalid and Askhi Ali. Naseer, 31, was sentenced to life with a minimum of 18 years, Khalid, 28, was given 18 years and Ali 15 years.

The judge said Naseer wanted part of Birmingham to be a "little war zone".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22290927

No more so than any other city where terrorists lurk, these are a tiny minority, large populations have all walks of life. I haven't felt the media are overplaying this or even feel that Birmingham is being bashed for these idiots. Just glad they were caught really and well done to those involved.

[JayPeeDee]

Originally Posted by Guilbert53

Another nail in the coffin of Birmingham's reputation

Not really... I agree with Tony on this one.

[KHvillan]

Originally Posted by Guilbert53

Another nail in the coffin of Birmingham's reputation

Eleven members of a Birmingham terror cell that planned an attack to rival the 7 July and 9/11 atrocities have been jailed.

The group's leaders were Irfan Naseer, Irfan Khalid and Askhi Ali. Naseer, 31, was sentenced to life with a minimum of 18 years, Khalid, 28, was given 18 years and Ali 15 years.

The judge said Naseer wanted part of Birmingham to be a "little war zone".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22290927

mate you make a massive contribution to this site with your photos but i do wish you'd stop focussing on the negatives. new street, hs2, library, runway, metro. nails in coffin being pulled out IMO

[Guilbert53]

Originally Posted by KHvillan

mate you make a massive contribution to this site with your photos but i do wish you'd stop focussing on the negatives. new street, hs2, library, runway, metro. nails in coffin being pulled out IMO

I want to live in a city I can be proud of.

I do a lot to promote the city on web sites like Trip Advisor. I look at the West Midlands section of Trip Advisor every day and give lots of advice about things to do, places to go and so on. I have been praised by many people on Trip Advisor for giving a lot of helpful and useful advice.

I post lots of "positive" things on this site, including, as you say, many pictures, but also positive comments about all sorts of projects.

I am so exitied about New St station I plan to go up there early tomorrow when the new section opens to see it and get some photographs.

While I think New St station will look great when it is finished I dont like the "silver" covering as I feel it looks cheap and "bling" like, and I think it will age badly.

I also admit I dont like the new library.

But I am not aware I have ever made any negative comments about the new runway or HS2 or the metro, all of which I am in favour of.

But overall I want to be proud of the city and I hate it when its name is dragged through the mud.

[Guilbert53]

One extra thing.

This topic is about "Birmingham's reputation" and my original append above was about the reputation of the city.

Maybe you are not aware of how things like the news item above affect the city, not just in the UK but world wide.

My daughter and her boyfriend spent a year in Perth, Australia in 2011.

When they arrvied at Perth airport a taxi driver picked them up, a Polish man who had lived and worked in Perth for 10 years.

When he asked them where they came from they said Birmingham, England and he replied "Oh that's where all the Muslim terrorists come from isn't it".

That Polish taxi driver does not care about the new library in Birmingham, or HS2, or New St station, or the Metro.

All he sees about Birmingham on Australian news (and they get a LOT news about the UK on Australian news) is that awful news I posted above.

THAT is why news items like above are so damaging to the city.

But you can go on believing that a longer runway or an extension to the Metro is going to improve Birmingham's image around the world.

[Tony Bear]

Originally Posted by Guilbert53

One extra thing.

This topic is about "Birmingham's reputation" and my original append above was about the reputation of the city.

Maybe you are not aware of how things like the news item above affect the city, not just in the UK but world wide.

My daughter and her boyfriend spent a year in Perth, Australia in 2011.

When they arrvied at Perth airport a taxi driver picked them up, a Polish man who had lived and worked in Perth for 10 years.

When he asked them where they came from they said Birmingham, England and he replied "Oh that's where all the Muslim terrorists come from isn't it".

That Polish taxi driver does not care about the new library in Birmingham, or HS2, or New St station, or the Metro.

All he sees about Birmingham on Australian news (and they get a LOT news about the UK on Australian news) is that awful news I posted above.

THAT is why news items like above are so damaging to the city.

But you can go on believing that a longer runway or an extension to the Metro is going to improve Birmingham's image around the world.

When I hear of the stories similar to the Terrorist one, I don't think it reflects badly on Birmingham, more so on the Muslim faith. Particularly the many peadophile gangs which seem to be targeting young white children. I read this and felt sick http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-22316359, and the story in Oxford was even worse and main headlines for a good while, but really I did't think "Oxford shit hole" I just thought, there will be more good honest Muslim people holding their heads in their hands at these men. Both these subjects need to be tackled by the Muslim community which has tradionally been quite closed off due to lack of trust in the British police. If people want to think Brum is full of terrorists then it's more likely a racial problem for them and they most likely have a problem with any city with a large Asian population like Leicester, Bradford, Oldham and parts of London.. they're going to think these places are "shit holes" whether there's good or bad news being reported.

[Tony Bear]

and I'll add to that many of the Eastern European people I have met in the UK do not speak fondly of the Muslim faith or people of Pakistani origin.

And yes Guilbert53 you do contribute some great info to this forum.

[KHvillan]

of course Im aware of how negative press harms the city's image but to suggest that that news is a nail in the coffin is bollocks. do you think Boston will suddenly have no tourist industry after the recent bombs?

Im not suggesting that you've slated the referenced projects either. i was simply making the point that brum is currently the subject of infrastructure improvements which other citecan only dream of - such infrastructure is what influences major investment decisions and we haven't seen the likes of this in decades

i know you care deeply about our city but posting pics of littered wasteland and graffiti covered signs gets me down

[JayPeeDee]

Originally Posted by KHvillan

i know you care deeply about our city but posting pics of littered wasteland and graffiti covered signs gets me down

Littered wasteland and graffiti that you see in any major city. London, Paris and Barcelona are no better. Doesn't mean Birmingham can be different though.

[Qoasis777]

I'm so worried about what one polish taxi driver in Australia thinks I literally can't sleep.

Get some perspective

[Tony Bear]

Originally Posted by JayPeeDee

Littered wasteland and graffiti that you see in any major city. London, Paris and Barcelona are no better. Doesn't mean Birmingham can be different though.

My last trip into Euston enlightened me to how very dirty London is in parts, made me feel slightly better about travelling through Northfield by train, there i sno excuse for how people have made a complete mess of the redeveloped housing on the high street side of tracks.

[Butterfield]

Originally Posted by JayPeeDee

Littered wasteland and graffiti that you see in any major city. London, Paris and Barcelona are no better. Doesn't mean Birmingham can be different though.

Go to Geneva in Switzerland. There is graffiti EVERYWHERE - all over exposed walls and over every motorway bridge. I saw more graffiti in Switzerland than I did in New York!

Originally Posted by Qoasis777

I'm so worried about what one polish taxi driver in Australia thinks I literally can't sleep.

Get some perspective

In an Australian city no one knows anything about and I don't think has exactly churned out many famous people.

[morestoreysplease]

A load of defeatist drivel - I'm going to write to the Post....

With Manchester United winning the Premier League with games to spare and Aston Villa suffering the worst season in decades, the difference between the two conurbations’ footballing achievements has never been more stark. Professor John Samuels, of the University of Birmingham and author of The Beautiful Game is Over investigates why.

So now we know Manchester United will finish this season as Premier League champions, and Manchester City will be runners up. The positions were reversed in the previous season.

Where are the clubs from Birmingham, the city which likes to think of itself as Britain’s second city?

Aston Villa have finished this season fighting for their Premier League survival, as they did the previous term. Birmingham City were once again a mid table club in the second tier of football – only West Bromwich Albion, the club with a small part of its grounds in Birmingham, were a team the region could be proud of.

The relative status of football in the two cities has not always been like this. Not that long ago, in 1980/81, Aston Villa were champions of the old first division. In that year there were five West Midland clubs in the top tier. In 1982 Aston Villa won the European Cup, and in the first year of the Premier League they finished second.

Why have things changed so dramatically? Will the position in the future be any better for the Birmingham clubs?

Unfortunately the answer to the second question is no. The present competitive imbalance in the game will get worse.

Success in the football business now depends on access to money because winning on the pitch in the long run depends on attracting the best players.

The best players, with the help of their agents, receive the highest wages and all the evidence shows that a club’s position in the Premier league at the end of a season is very closely correlated with the size of the club’s wage bill.

Given a club’s expenditure on wages it is possible to predict with reasonable accuracy that club’s final league position.

In the three years (starting in 2007/08) when Aston Villa finished sixth in the Premier League, their wage bill was the seventh highest in the league.

In 2010/11 they still had the seventh highest wage bill, and finished in ninth place. But other clubs were overtaking them in terms of the size of the annual revenue they could generate.

Villa could not afford to continue to pay the 2010/11 wage levels – 90 per cent of their annual revenue was spent on salaries. They decided that in order to survive they needed to downsize, to reduce their wage bill, and as would be predicted they slid down the league table.

Can their stated plan of developing a youthful and progressive squad bring them success? The fans would hope so, but the evidence is not encouraging.

The plan might have worked in the past when there was a maximum wage and perhaps players were more loyal before the Bosman ruling. Now clubs find it hard to keep their good young players.

They can be lured away by the high wages being offered by the handful of elite clubs who need to build up their squads in order to be able to compete in lucrative competitions.

The new UEFA Financial Fair Play rules and the proposed Premier League Financial rules will not help restore competitive balance. In fact they could well make the inequality worse.

The rules favour the existing elite clubs, they will entrench the top clubs dominance. The half baked Premier League regulations will hit smaller clubs proportionately more than the large clubs.

They will not help the Birmingham clubs to break into the elite group.

The reason the Midland clubs cannot afford to pay higher wages is because they cannot generate a high enough annual revenue and they cannot attract a needed “benefactor.”

In 2010/11 Manchester United’s annual revenue was £331 million, Aston Villa’s was £92 million, and that of West Bromwich Albion £59 million and Birmingham City £56 million. This is a very big difference, and this can only become even greater.

In 2011/12 Manchester United generated £117 million from commercial and merchandising; more than that year’s annual revenue of Aston Villa from all sources, including match day receipts and TV income.

If the new Premier League rules are introduced commercial income will become more significant. It is not proposed to control how increases in income from this one source are spent, and they could well be spent on higher wages.

Like it or not, football is now primarily about making money. The fans do not like it, but the owners and players clearly do. Football clubs are now primarily vehicles, either for selling products or for increasing the status of the owners.

The success of a club is dependent on the annual revenue it can attract or on the money put into the club by the owners.

There are three main sources of annual revenue, commercial and sponsorship, television and other media, and matchday receipts.

The Midland clubs are not good vehicles for selling products either globally or nationally and so have lagged behind with sponsorship, the TV income from Premier League games is reasonably well distributed but of course the Midland clubs have not benefited from the TV income from European games and their home grounds are quite small and not often full.

For various reasons the Midland clubs have not attracted the ‘right’ type of wealthy investor.

Why have the Birmingham clubs been left behind by their Manchester rivals and does it matter? It would have been very difficult to keep up with Manchester United: those running the club from the 1950s made some wise decisions in terms of investment in people and property.

Even they, however, have come close at times to some disastrous decisions over managerial appointments, near dismissals and new owners.

Manchester City’s success can be put down to luck, but in truth it was more than that.

When Sheikh Mansour purchased the club in 2008 he gave as two of his reasons for buying that particular club the fact that they already had the use of a large modern stadium, and the fact that the name Manchester was, all around the world, associated with sporting success.

Manchester City had the use of a stadium – paid for largely with £78 million of lottery money and £49 million of Manchester City Council funds – because those who governed Manchester City Council were being smarter (or more willing to take risks) than those who managed Birmingham City Council.

They attracted the Commonwealth Games to Manchester. They said the Games would be self-financing, they were not.

The leaders of Birmingham’s council had tried for a long time to add to their global image, by being known as a city for sport, and to be home for a world class stadium or arena.

They bid for the 1982 Commonwealth Games. In 1986 they were selected ahead of London and Manchester to bid for the 1992 Olympics – but failed in the final selection round.

They were beaten in 1990 by Manchester in the choice of the UK city to bid for the 1996 Olympics, Manchester failed to obtain the Olympics, but the experience gained was important in helping them attract the 2002 Commonwealth Games. These games boosted that city’s profile, as well as resulting in a number of modern sports facilities.

Perhaps risk taking is the key to the success of the one city and not the other. Birmingham’s council leaders must be given great credit for regenerating the city, in particular, the Symphony Hall, the ICC, the NIA and the NEC. But since then they have had little success.

With Centenial money Birmingham built Millennium Point – which few people visit.

In Manchester or close by was built the Lowry Gallery and the Imperial War Museum.

Manchester has 37 kilometres of tramway, Birmingham have yet to build one kilometre. Birmingham does have a new library costing £190 million, but the Manchester area has attracted the BBC and now has the very impressive National Football Museum. Birmingham has talked about building a major sports stadium but for various reasons little has happened.

To return to football, the main responsibility for the failure of the Birmingham clubs must lie with those who have made decisions at club level over the last 50 years.

They have failed to cash in on the phenomenal growth in interest in the game globally and to benefit from being based in a city with the second largest population in the country.

The leadership has at various times been bad, and has at most times been prudent.

The failure of the Birmingham clubs does matter, not just to football fans.

It is a missed opportunity to promote the city, to help build up the brand name. The new plans to promote Birmingham emphasise the cultural aspects of the city and its heritage.

What of the competition? Liverpool is already promoting itself as having been a ‘European City of Culture’ and it is now a UNESCO World Heritage City with it is claimed “an unbelievable music and sporting heritage.”

A new study on Greater Manchester has revealed that in 2010/11 football contributed around £330 million in gross value-added to that region’s economy.

The leader of the council referred to “the enormous contribution to the life of the city “made by the football clubs” in a global environment where we are competing with the cities around the World for investment and jobs, this is an enormous competitive advantage.”

The leader of the Birmingham City Council could not at present make the same claim.

Will a future leader be able to do so?

The image of the City of Birmingham could be better.

The perception of the city is not good, partly perhaps because of a bias in the London based media. If the football clubs had been successful, there would be more pride in the region, there would be more glamour.

Like it or not sporting success would increase the value of the brand name. Birmingham is not associated with success. Unfortunately as far as football is concerned it is now too late.

There is not competitive balance in the game.

The European Fair Play rules and the talked about Premier League wage controls will not help close the gap.

The clubs that are now rich will continue to be able to spend more on wages than the other clubs.

The Premier League proposals, if accepted, will help maintain the status quo. That is why the elite clubs are happy to embrace them.

Birmingham will remain a second class city as far as sport is concerned – unless there is an unexpected black swan event.

http://www.birminghampost.net/birmin...5233-33279403/