+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Waterloo Region Economy (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: North (formerly Thalmic Labs, now Google) (/showthread.php?tid=363)
RE: Thalmic Labs - kitborn - 10-27-2018
This was painted on the side of the building adjacent to demolished Mayfair Hotel.
RE: Thalmic Labs - Rainrider22 - 10-27-2018
(10-27-2018, 06:56 AM)kitborn Wrote: This was painted on the side of the building adjacent to demolished Mayfair Hotel.
Looks cool
RE: Thalmic Labs - KevinL - 10-27-2018
Normally I'd object to that kind of space being made into a billboard, but given it's for a local company headquartered a block away I guess I'll keep quiet.
RE: Thalmic Labs - Viewfromthe42 - 10-29-2018
Shouldn't this thread be renamed
North
or
North (formerly Thalmic Labs)
RE: Thalmic Labs - danbrotherston - 10-29-2018
(10-27-2018, 08:21 PM)KevinL Wrote: Normally I'd object to that kind of space being made into a billboard, but given it's for a local company headquartered a block away I guess I'll keep quiet.
While I agree with what you say, I do want to point out the internal contradiction
.
RE: Thalmic Labs - Spokes - 10-29-2018
(10-27-2018, 08:21 PM)KevinL Wrote: Normally I'd object to that kind of space being made into a billboard, but given it's for a local company headquartered a block away I guess I'll keep quiet.
I think I'm ok with it because it seems to distract, just a little, from the vacant lot next to it.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - Lens - 10-29-2018
But couldn't we have some actual art there instead? I do like that it's a local company and they're actually producing a product here but really, how many folks locally will even be able to afford them / want to purchase them? Though I guess it's more interesting than having nothing there.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - Chris - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 01:08 PM)Lens Wrote: But couldn't we have some actual art there instead? I do like that it's a local company and they're actually producing a product here but really, how many folks locally will even be able to afford them / want to purchase them? Though I guess it's more interesting than having nothing there.
I can't afford a Mercedes and don't want to purchase one, should we take down their billboards?
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - ijmorlan - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 01:08 PM)Lens Wrote: But couldn't we have some actual art there instead? I do like that it's a local company and they're actually producing a product here but really, how many folks locally will even be able to afford them / want to purchase them? Though I guess it's more interesting than having nothing there.
All we need to do is leave it there for 100 years, then it will be historical and illegal to paint over or otherwise destroy!
Personally, I like locally-relevant painted murals like that. I don’t want to see national brands all over everything, but the occasional wall that refers to a local business is called “character”.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - Spokes - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 01:08 PM)Lens Wrote: But couldn't we have some actual art there instead? I do like that it's a local company and they're actually producing a product here but really, how many folks locally will even be able to afford them / want to purchase them? Though I guess it's more interesting than having nothing there.
Art would be great too, but this, I'd imagine isn't a long term solution. Nor is the empty lot.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - Lens - 10-29-2018
The difference for me isn't as much about it being an ad as it is painting a giant downtown wall. The temporary park that was pitched was shelved and the site has been an eyesore for a few years now. I would have liked to have seen a mural (or something/anything) there a long time ago but now all we get is a massive ad.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - tomh009 - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 09:20 PM)Lens Wrote: The difference for me isn't as much about it being an ad as it is painting a giant downtown wall. The temporary park that was pitched was shelved and the site has been an eyesore for a few years now. I would have liked to have seen a mural (or something/anything) there a long time ago but now all we get is a massive ad.
The property owner would have had to pay for the creation and painting of a mural (maybe not inexpensive, given the size of the wall). In this scenario, North paid the property owner for painting the ad on the wall. Can you blame the owner?
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - panamaniac - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 08:46 PM)Spokes Wrote:(10-29-2018, 01:08 PM)Lens Wrote: But couldn't we have some actual art there instead? I do like that it's a local company and they're actually producing a product here but really, how many folks locally will even be able to afford them / want to purchase them? Though I guess it's more interesting than having nothing there.
Art would be great too, but this, I'd imagine isn't a long term solution. Nor is the empty lot.
Such an optimist ....
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - Lens - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 09:25 PM)tomh009 Wrote: The property owner would have had to pay for the creation and painting of a mural (maybe not inexpensive, given the size of the wall). In this scenario, North paid the property owner for painting the ad on the wall. Can you blame the owner?
I'm sure the BIA and or the City could have contributed to the cost of a mural as both had/have an interest in seeing the site beautified and developed ASAP. Based on the owners other holdings I don't imagine the revenue from North paying for this would even make a drop in the bucket.
RE: North (formerly Thalmic Labs) - tomh009 - 10-29-2018
(10-29-2018, 09:35 PM)Lens Wrote:(10-29-2018, 09:25 PM)tomh009 Wrote: The property owner would have had to pay for the creation and painting of a mural (maybe not inexpensive, given the size of the wall). In this scenario, North paid the property owner for painting the ad on the wall. Can you blame the owner?
I'm sure the BIA and or the City could have contributed to the cost of a mural as both had/have an interest in seeing the site beautified and developed ASAP. Based on the owners other holdings I don't imagine the revenue from North paying for this would even make a drop in the bucket.
If we want property owner X to spend money to beautify a neighbouring lot owned by property owner Y, then we better make some bylaws to force.
And if your neighbour's house is a run-down eyesort, will you then spend money to beautify it?