I was recently presented with the following argument against Urban Gondolas:
“If it’s such a good idea, why aren’t there any famous urban cable cars?”
Firstly, fame does not equal quality. There’s plenty of famous products, people and ideas that have been or are famous now but likely won’t see the light of day a decade from now. How many people remember Pet Rocks? Or Jimmy Walker? Microsoft, meanwhile, is about as famous as they come but their software is buggy, difficult to use and prone to crashes. The company’s hemorrhaging customers.
Fame is fleeting and no mark of quality or competence.
Secondly, we’re closer to the beginning of this whole endeavor than we are to the end. Concerns about fame don’t matter right now. What matters now is learning, sharing, educating and spreading. How fair would it have been 15 years ago to say Kobe Bryant wasn’t going to be a star basketball player just because he wasn’t famous?
Thirdly, just because you haven’t heard about something doesn’t mean it’s not famous. There are degrees and shades of fame. Ideas don’t always travel in the same circles. In some circles, the Medellin MetroCable is famous; the Roosevelt Island Tram made an appearance in one of the Spiderman movies (don’t ask me to remember which one); and then there’s the San Francisco cable cars . . .
Fame is subjective. And irrelevant.
1 Comment
i believe you have to make good advertising for a product to make it popular.
if your product is really good and everybody understands it and wants it then there is no need for to advertise it.
but at least you have to show it.
examples: in tv they show us all the products we might want to have or they make us want it. yes, it makes kind of sense in the end, because otherwise i wouldn’t have heard about … whatever i might want in near future or what i missed my whole life.
apple for instance just shows their product once and not even everybody has to see that show, but when people see that product – maybe shown by jobs or waiting there in the retail store… it’s kind of sexy and you kind of want it.
why is that so? because for the first time apple made computers sexy – or attractive. they made computers and other electronic devices a product, not just a medium – and they are even using the same technology or material or sometimes even quality.
but in case of kobe bryant you had others – like grant hill – which were sold as super stars (but somehow weren’t in game because of injuries or whatever) and there were others again – like jason kidd – which weren’t that much promoted at first but by far the better solution.
fame is not really subjective and definitive not irrelevant. (michael jackson, porsche, apple …)
fame needs proof! presence. and of course audience.
so in this case: a product is needed, that you want to use. you will have to see immediately what it is good for without any question and it has to be good. and if you really want to make it popular it should be in a place lot’s of people see/hear about. (once the start is done and recognized as a good working alternative solution, maybe even the best – well, the job is done)
and if there are installations – gimmicks like the london eye or cpt-installations “just” to bridge a river for olympic games then it is the wrong way.
so i would like to see a design and route that amazes me. it will have to function (in the real scale – urban or suburban) as it will have to look like it was meant for that place/situation.
i’m sure such a product will automatically turn into fame.