Caulkheader wrote:I have been a member off and on since the mid 80's and have worked in the public sector with local and national government departments.
I have a life long interest in cycling history and on a personal level was disappointed to see the rebrand. But on balance I can see that change was necessary. In the past I have come across the CTC in consultation processes and to be honest it was embarrassing, no professional presence whatsoever and several missed opportunities to influence transport policy. The organisation would have been lost in the wilderness if it didn't change.
That isn't really a branding issue though is it? The same policies prevail. The same people will be engaging in the same consultation processes, in all likelihood missing the same opportunities. You seem to support every aspect of the rebranding except the rebranding! Yet, the rebranding is all there is. Quite a lot of the positive comments we've heard about the rebrand haven't been directly about the rebrand, but the need for some aspects of the CTC to change. There has been a lot of "I support change; the rebrand is change, therefore I support the rebrand."
I think the need for a more effective CTC/CUK is fairly universally agreed upon but, for the reasons you gave, I just don't think the rebranding was a step in the right direction, nor is there any reason to see it as an indication of worthwhile changes to come.