News » Whistler

Letters to the editor


Whistler's 2010 Winter Olympic bid watchers may be interested to learn South Korea is aggressively advertising the merits of vacationing in Korea on CNN's African broadcasts. A winter ski resort serviced by a modern expressway and fast trains is the dominant destination theme. To target potential visitors from the African continent, where most economies are in disarray and few residents have ever seen snow let alone ski, is puzzling.

Considering that only three weeks remain before IOC members vote to select the winning 2010 bid city, could it be possible that Africa's IOC delegates are the intended audience?

Mark Rebagliati



I thought the Pique’s abuse of editor trust/privilege was just limited to the municipal elections but it seems it has no bounds.

For instance I never mentioned the word museum when I was condemning and comparing the fast ferries fiasco to the library but the Pique has edited my letter to the point where it changes the intent while leaving spelling mistakes like the word "navel", which is "a depression in the middle of the abdomen that marks the point of former attachment of the umbilical cord", when it should be "naval", which is "of or relating to ships or shipping a: of or relating to a navy b: consisting of or involving warships."

The damage is already done because people who read your version of my letter have it planted in there brains that I am against the museum. While the local businesses/taxpayers and I are inclined to support a museum for the following reasons if combined with the Tourist Welcome Centre: It will provide guaranteed traffic and gives the visitor a better understanding of Whistler, our culture and so on. The Tourist Welcome Centre will have way more resources at their disposal to promote local tourist attractions as well as reduce their overhead.

Instead you have the library riding on the coattails of the museum. The synergy effect of combining the museum/Tourist Welcome Centre are far greater than the library/museum. Remember, we are a tourist-based economy; a museum if conveniently and professionally presented is of interest to them. With walk-in traffic to both there is greater potential for increased income for the museum, Tourist Welcome Centre and local business.

So instead of the publicly-funded library building (not the museum) offering services that compete with local business to get traffic and try to justify their existence and the $10 million building, with the museum/Tourist Info Centre business model there is no competition with the private sector. It is a good example of the public and private sector working together in mutual respect and benefit. A library is for locals, Tourist Info Centre is for tourists and after the locals visit it once or twice the museum will be primarily for tourists.

Add a comment