Search found 32 matches

by Whimwham7
3 Aug 2020, 4:41pm
Forum: Proposed Membership Changes - Discussion
Topic: Membership rates
Replies: 241
Views: 58903

Re: Membership rates

If any other demographic group within the membership (based on ethnicity, colour, gender etc) were to be singled out like this, all hell would be let loose. But it seems that it's OK to discriminate against the old.

As an earlier poster said;

Remember that charities are managed by young professionals, who do not see any value in those with less disposable income, and a wealth of experience that might contradict the professional world view.

Other than being seen as a cash cow, us oldies (aka cycle tourists who remember the CTC as being touring oriented) have no place in the modern, dynamic, whiz bang world of the young.

Bye bye CUK,

PS - The letter, received today, states 'As you may have read in Cycle magazine ...' . What magazine? I haven't received a magazine yet this month. To send out this letter before the members receive the relevant magazine hints at managerial ineptitude. Sorry Georgina, but another vote of 'no confidence' in CUK management.
by Whimwham7
15 Apr 2016, 7:27pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Marks out of ten please
Replies: 2
Views: 19886

Re: Marks out of ten please

gaz wrote:
Whimwham7 wrote:...
Also do you think that issuing the Trustees report for the year ending 30th September 2015 in April the following year is likely to gain "trust and respect" from the members?
...

That arrangement predates the Charity conversion, IIRC it predates the wobbly bike. It is part of our heritage :wink: .


That may be so, but that was not the question(s) I asked.

W
by Whimwham7
14 Apr 2016, 3:39pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Marks out of ten please
Replies: 2
Views: 19886

Marks out of ten please

I have just received (by post) a copy of the Cyclists' Touring Club Annual report and Financial Statement dated 30th September 2015.

On page 8 is an interesting statement under the heading "Our Values" -

"We conduct ourselves ethically and with integrity; our relationships and activities are based on trust and respect, cooperation and companionship. We work together in a way that is supportive, constructive, participative and democratic. We strive for continuing growth, learning and development of individuals, groups and communities."

On a scale of 1 - 10 (10 being highest) how well do you think that the Trustees (Councillors) have met these values in respect of the re-branding?

Also do you think that issuing the Trustees report for the year ending 30th September 2015 in April the following year is likely to gain "trust and respect" from the members?

W
by Whimwham7
14 Apr 2016, 3:26pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Name Change
Replies: 135
Views: 79934

Re: Name Change

Bicycler wrote:To give them credit, it's Cycling UK which has included the Winged Wheel. It's at the bottom of every page on the website http://www.cyclinguk.org , including the club pages it hosts for member groups.


Yes, at the BOTTOM of the page, where hardly anyone will see it having found what they wanted higher up. I believe this location is known as a "footer" where all the mandatory rubbish such as "T & C's apply" are dumped, or, more appropriately in this case, "the afterthought"

W
by Whimwham7
14 Apr 2016, 3:18pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: The slippery slope continues
Replies: 42
Views: 42289

Re: The slippery slope continues

mjr wrote:
Whimwham7 wrote:A note of caution about relying on home insurance for TP cover - CHECK THE DETAILS OF COVER.

My home insurance (contents) cover gives me and my family TP cover away from home for leisure pursuits, BUT the cover is limited to £2 m, as opposed to the CTC (CUK) cover of £10 m. Also cover is limited to UK, Channel Islands and I. o. Man. So I would not have been covered for last year's riding in the R. o. Ireland, or on previous trips to France.

I'm covered by my travel insurance rather than my home insurance for cycling outside the UK, but it is a good idea to check the cover details and if it's not as much as you want, then ask if you can increase it, else consider looking for another policy. £2m seems pretty common for home policies, LCC has £5m, CUK and BC have £10m.

What's the most expensive successful claim against a cyclist, anyway?


I have just checked the cover in the annual travel insurance that we use. Again only £2 m, but worldwide cover. Cycling is allowed as a non-hazardous activity, but NOT off road. Mountain biking (presumably their interpretation of "off road") is covered for an extra premium, but ONLY on recognised trails and when wearing a helmet.

So cycling, helmetless, on a main dual carriageway is covered, but to go on a traffic free cycle path I must pay extra and wear a helmet. Doh! :?

Most expensive successful claim ... well I can envisage a negligent/incompetent cyclist causing a coach to crash resulting in life changing injuries to multiple casualties. Unlikely, I know, but possible.

I don't know whether you have read Mark Waters' article in the West Surrey CTC magazine about the history of the current CTC situation, http://westsurreyctc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/2016Q2.pdf (page 10 onwards of the mag) (compulsory reading in my opinion for all CTC members) but he mentions that there were a couple of massive claims against the CTC insurance, resulting in increased premiums (page 15). I have no idea what they were nor how much was involved, but it must have been a lot and it had serious repercussions.

W
by Whimwham7
10 Apr 2016, 5:01pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Name Change
Replies: 135
Views: 79934

Re: Name Change

steady eddy wrote:If - as it seems - Cycling UK - lets forget the stupid "we are" bit for the time being - is a "wholly owned subsidiary" of the CTC then why cant the CTC remain as the umbrella organisation rather than the other way round? Then we could have Cycling uk - the campaigning arm of the CTC or Cycling UK the training arm of the CTC.
That way the tourists keep their cherished identity and the campaigners have the identity they feel they need to make an impact at a national level. The CTC has always been a campaigning organisation - lets not forget that but it mustn't be at the expense of its original identity.


Another radically sensible suggestion.

In the vain hope that members of Council, CEO, or anyone at CTC Towers in Guildford actually READS these posts. may I humbly request that this idea be taken on board as a POSITIVE WAY FORWARD out of the mess that Council has unnecessarily created.

CTC is the organisation - Cycling UK is (or should be) part of that.

W
by Whimwham7
9 Apr 2016, 5:11pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Could someone please explain
Replies: 23
Views: 30254

Re: Could someone please explain

gaz wrote:The October 2013 Membership Survey is still available to view. This is not the survey linked from the August Cycleclips, it is one of the more general type as mentioned by Vorpal. Council does use the results of such surveys to inform policy choices. I think the results were published in Feb/March 2014 Cycle but I don't keep back issues.


I have re-read this survey's questions, and I see that as the heading page says - As part of our on-going review of the services and benefits that CTC offer we're keen to learn more about you and your experience of CTC. All the questions were indeed about me and my cycling activity. I could not see ANYTHING about my impression of the CTC name or logo and whether I thought they should be scrapped for something new. I recall completing that survey as I (mistakenly it would seem) believed that I was helping Council to understand the character of the Cyclists' Touring Club membership.

I tried to re-open the Cycleclips survey that Gaz also referred to, but that is now unavailable, so I can't comment on that. I can't say that I remember it, but Cycleclips is hardly my priority reading anyway. Those that I have read contained little if anything of touring interest to me.

As far as the (brief) note reproduced from the 2013/14 issue of Cycle, the few lines highlighted give no clue as to Council's intention to even consider scrapping the CTC name and logo as the primary presentation to the public. All that I inferred from that was that a "marketing exercise" might be forthcoming to publicise CTC to a wider audience. No suggestion whatever of a root and branch re-naming.

The results were published in the Feb '14 Cycle (I do keep back issues - sad I know, but sometimes useful to refer back to topics of touring interest). The final highlighted panel says - "WHAT SHOULD CTC BE DOING? Planning/infrastructure and government spending were the two most important issues that members thought that CTC should be working on". Absolutely NO mention of any suggestion that the members thought the name/logo/branding needed to be changed.

So, I still fail to see where Council gets the idea that the members wanted to change the name of the club.

W
by Whimwham7
9 Apr 2016, 10:48am
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Could someone please explain
Replies: 23
Views: 30254

Could someone please explain

The current Cycle magazine includes the minutes from the 2015 AGM. Motion 6 at that AGM stated that "CTC Councillors shall take the wishes of the membership into account when interpreting the Articles of Association of the club and when deciding how to implement the objectives of the club". This motion was carried (almost unanimously).

How then have the Councillors taken the wishes of the membership into account over this issue of completely changing the focus and image of the club, when they have not actually bothered to ask what those wishes are?

Has Council not simply ignored the approved motion carried in 2015?

Please explain.

W
by Whimwham7
8 Apr 2016, 4:09pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Touring in Cycling UK - a modest proposal
Replies: 10
Views: 20982

Re: Touring in Cycling UK - a modest proposal

Richard Fairhurst wrote:But it's clear that two constituencies who in many ways were the mainstay of CTC, the "Saturday ride" constituency (aka member groups) and the touring constituency, feel disenfranchised by the change.

I don't know anything about member groups or club cycling and wouldn't seek to pronounce on them. But I do think this furore is a great opportunity for Cycling UK to reaffirm its commitment to touring.

Cycling UK could, and should, be at the heart of this.

One of CTC's biggest strengths was the knowledge of its members - as this wonderful forum demonstrates time after time. People here will give you a better answer on UK (and often European) cycle touring than anywhere else on the internet.

Rather than letting people think (rightly or wrongly) "We are Cycling UK, we're no longer about touring", shout loud that "We are Cycling UK: touring is one of the most fun ways to get on your bike, and here's how to do it".

Touring is enormous fun, and the Cyclists' Touring Club of 133 years should be the best-placed organisation to champion it. There's a real opportunity here.


At last, a positive suggestion for a way forward, leaving all the politics and back-biting behind.

Firstly my apology, Richard, for taking some of your post "out of full context", but I believe these paragraphs are the key to resolving the current problem.

The new title, logo and slogan all point to the campaigning side of the activities. There is no headline connection to cycle touring. The Chair and CEO have stated that the name CTC and the winged wheel logo will survive, but no mention has been made as to HOW this will happen.

Emphasis needs to be added to the home page of the website, to the magazine cover and to all communication material (letter-heading, e-mail headers etc.) that CTC is an integral part of the new brand and that cycle touring is an integral part of cycling in the UK (and elsewhere). The public and official bodies, as well as existing members, need to SEE the continuity. A good start would be to re-introduce the winged wheel and CTC name alongside the new logo.

As to how the new body (I hesitate to call it an organisation or a club, I don't think it fits either description at present) goes about championing cycle touring is something that Council and CEO need to address immediately.

W
by Whimwham7
8 Apr 2016, 3:33pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: The slippery slope continues
Replies: 42
Views: 42289

Re: The slippery slope continues

Mick F wrote:I reckon I'll be chatting to our house insurance people to see what they say.



A note of caution about relying on home insurance for TP cover - CHECK THE DETAILS OF COVER.

My home insurance (contents) cover gives me and my family TP cover away from home for leisure pursuits, BUT the cover is limited to £2 m, as opposed to the CTC (CUK) cover of £10 m. Also cover is limited to UK, Channel Islands and I. o. Man. So I would not have been covered for last year's riding in the R. o. Ireland, or on previous trips to France.

At present I will let my membership roll on (on probation only) until next renewal date for the insurance and free Incident helpline benefits. After that I will see what is then on offer from Robgul's embryo "club" or anywhere else.

W
by Whimwham7
7 Apr 2016, 4:37pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: The Rebrand is Essential to our Future
Replies: 142
Views: 75789

Re: The Rebrand is Essential to our Future

I'm not a huge fan of the new logo (it's rather Early Learning Centre) but anything's better than that cartoon bike thing.


Well, I suppose the slogan is marginally better than "Cyclists R Us", :oops: or "Every1 4 Cycling" :( or some other childish wording.

A suggestion - can we run a forum competition for the most ridiculous alternative name that the marketing consultants might have come up with? No prizes, just a bit of fun :D

W
by Whimwham7
7 Apr 2016, 4:25pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Don't mention the CUK
Replies: 86
Views: 72260

Re: Don't mention the CUK

geocycle wrote:In the late 16th century a cuk or cuck was a slang term used as an insult, short for cuckold. I seem to recall Malvolio in Twelth Night but I can't look it up at the moment.


But that word (cuckold) utilises the hard "C" sound as in "comfort" or "confectionary". "Cycling" uses the soft "C" sound, as in "cymbal". Therefore, the acronym CUK should be pronounced with a soft "C" as in "suck", for example, "it CUKs" (to use a rather uncouth Americanism) :wink:

W
by Whimwham7
31 Mar 2016, 7:31pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: Can we can just ignore it?
Replies: 17
Views: 1832

Can we can just ignore it?

I have just received the latest “CTC Club Shorts” missive from CTC Towers, in which Julie Rand (who I understand to be a figure of some authority) has written -

All Member Group Secretaries and Publicity Officers have now been sent a set of materials so they can, if they choose, rebrand under our new name of ‘Cycling UK’, which will be officially launched next Tuesday 5 April. (my emphasis to her words)

My reading of this is that whether or not to adopt the re-branding is now a matter of choice. The obvious corollary is that those who do not wish to rebrand, simply do not have to.

I can continue to call myself a member of the Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC). I can also continue to wear my Club jersey and jacket adorned with the winged wheel and wobbly bike logos and the large “CTC” emblazoned across the back. Furthermore, I can simply IGNORE the Gnomes of Guildford and their diktats telling me that I am now “part of Cycling UK”.

Or, am I missing something?
by Whimwham7
14 Mar 2016, 9:03pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: The new logo?
Replies: 71
Views: 65405

Re: The new logo?

Just a thought, but I wonder how these folk -

http://www.cyclesuk.com/en/About-Us/cc-1.aspx

will think about the (former) CTC picking up a title so similar to theirs? Or will the (new) CTC, sorry Cycle(ing) UK be mistaken for a rival bike shop?

W
by Whimwham7
8 Mar 2016, 3:25pm
Forum: The Cycling UK brand refresh
Topic: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club
Replies: 703
Views: 295803

Re: It's all in the name - Cyclists' TOURING club

Barred1 wrote:
gaz wrote:Posts on thread suggest the rebrand may be the end of our heritage and the Winged Wheel - Cries of "you are abandoning our heritage".

CTC sends a mailing demonstrating the continued use of our heritage and the Winged Wheel - Cries of "how dare you use our heritage".

Damned if they don't, damned if they do :mrgreen: .


I really can't agree with your last sentence - it just shows the lack of co-ordination, desperation and a total lack of professionalism emanating from "whatever it's called today" at Guildford.

For any organisation the brand must be consistent - by that I mean the corporate brand (before someone goes back to the post about Unilever having n "brands" - they are product brands ... that's different)

Is it the wheel, the wobbly bike, or the kid in Year 3's drawing that's the brand?

B1


Having gone through several re-brandings with my former employers, due to mergers, takeovers etc., I know from experience that re-branding has to be an ALL or NOTHING process. Either keep what you have, or totally change everything. It also has to be done positively, and be something that conveys confidence to the staff and customers.

Council seem to want to have their cake and eat it, i.e. retain the winged wheel and all the history and tradition, and the funny bike logo, whilst at the same time adding yet another new logo and a new name. It simply reeks to me of a recipe for confusion, both to members and to those who the club wishes to influence.

I believe that this whole matter needs to go back to the beginning and start again.

W