• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

lastminute.com London Eye

I don't remember hearing any controversy when Coke sponsor the Championship and Leagues 1 and 2 years ago...How stupid are these people?! For most children, it's the parents that buy the drinks for them, so it's their own fault.
 
Coca a Cola and McDonalds both sponsor the Olympics too. and Yep, I think good parents educate their children on what the better options are. I was taught to have a preference for diet coke or just no added sugar squash.
 
Well it's no Fanta ;)

But what needs to be remembered is that this is the London Eye, part of London's iconic skyline. Even a little bit of branding is going to cause way more fuss than your average sponsorship deal. It just happens that the fizzy drink debate is quite a big one in the public eye.

And I seem to remember the Olympics did get a lot of stick for Coca Cola and McDonalds sponsorship.
 
But to all London residents, the iconic part of Londons skyline always was and always will be just The London Eye. Most will know it used to be the British Airways London Eye, but never called it that. Nobody really knew it as the EDF London Eye and the only effect of all the talk about Coca-Cola sponsorship is to make more people know about it. No such thing as bad publicity like this really.
 
I don't get the issue with kids seeing it. It's like taking your kids to the chocolate and sweets aisle in Tesco and moaning it promotes an unhealthy diet.

I don't mind the red colour, it's quite nice actually. Guess that's down to personal preference though.
 
This could be avoided if it was owned by TfL. Such iconic structures right in the heart of the capital should not be owned and managed by profiteering corporations.

Parisians would not stand for the Eiffel Tower in private hands.
 
I don't understand why it should be owned by a transport agency? They own a cable car already and get a lot of criticism that what is basically a tourist attraction was built as commuter transport.
Public funding should be spent on museums, galleries etc.

Oh and the Eiffel tower is owned by the city of Paris but the company that runs it is 40% privately owned. Similar to Blackpool tower which is owned by blackpool council but run by Merlin.
 
I have no health issues about the sponsorship, just think the way Merlin have done it isn't sympathetic to the fact this is now a major london landmark.

But Nerlin have never cared about quality.
 
I'm with Dave. It doesn't matter who sponsors it, but the Eye has always been (mainly) blue. Given that they weren't allowed to paint the whole thing orange when EDF took over, I'm surprised they were allowed to do this. The BBC were not allowed to light Broadcasting House in their corporate colour of red, so why should a much more world famous landmark be allowed to do the same?

With any luck it's just a temporary thing for the launch.
 
It's all a big meh from me.

It's owned by Merlin and they get people to sponsor it. The sponsor doesn't really detract from the experience at all usually.

It will grate slightly if always lit in red instead of blue though. Also the logo puts too much focus on the signature Coke bottle rather than the generic Eye logo v
 
Yes that Logo made me laugh, Merlin completely abandoning their own branding for a sponsorship ;)
 
Can't say I'm too fussed by it all. Clearly BA was the most relevant sponsor but this doesn't bother me.

:)
 
They could put VR goggles on people so they could advertise Merlin attractions as well as where in London Coke is sold.

Worlds first fully dedicated VR advertising VR wheel. Not meaning to emphasize the VR much. But it could just be mentioned.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top