My friend is a vendor

The proposed amalgamation of two existing vendor markets raises several concerns that need to be addressed before moving forward.
Firstly, the petition lacks a plan for how duplicate vendors—those offering the same or similar products—will be handled. Without a fair system in place, this could lead to direct competition between vendors, potentially hurting small businesses and creating unnecessary tension.

Secondly, the suggested location does not have adequate space to host the combined number of vendors from both markets. Limited space could result in overcrowding, reduced visibility, and even exclusion of some vendors. This not only affects individual businesses but also compromises the overall quality and accessibility of the market experience.

Lastly, the process has lacked transparency and proper consultation. The petition was launched without presenting a clear operational plan or engaging all stakeholders. Key questions about vendor selection, space allocation, and market management remain unanswered.

Without addressing these issues, the amalgamation risks being unfair, impractical, and divisive. A successful market depends on thoughtful planning, open communication, and equitable opportunities for all vendors—none of which have been adequately demonstrated in the current proposal.

There is already too much competition with winery tours and events in Picton. One main market at Wellington United will not only help vendor sales but local businesses and art studios in Wellington by increasing foot traffic.
There is a fair amount of confusion about “which one is the Wellington market” amongst tourists. It feel it’s counterproductive to have local vendors competing against each other by having 2 markets running the same day and time when it’s actually an incredibly supportive market community.