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

[robgul]

... Is there another Cycling Touring Club we can join ...

The Touring Cyclists Club - gauging interest since May 2010. Still something of a fledgling organisation.

I think that was a spin-off from the Save the CTC activity that was going on - the charity thing happened and the idea was shelved at that time - the name is different too.

The new Touring Cyclist Club initiative already has massive traction after just 2 weeks indicating that the time is probably right .... loads of ideas have been sent - next stage is to refine the plan and get going.

Rob

[Velocio]

I may be silly ...but cycle touring with others in our Club is my favourite pastime ...and these changes will take quite a time to get over ...if I decide to stay in the Club I enjoy so much.

So you are thinking of leaving a club which gives you access to cycling you enjoy so much just because its changing its logo? What do your club mates force you to do? Ride with the logo pinned up in front of you? Be real. The roads will be the same, the rides will be the same, the people you ride with will be the same. There's nothing on the rides that the logo will change. So why on earth would you stop riding with them just because the logos changed

It reminds me of one rebranding I did where someone wrote in to say it was a disgrace The old logo was the only reason they had bought our product and they would now never buy another one. Except we looked up their records and the logo at the time when they made their purchase was something entirely different from the old logo they claimed had been responsible for that purchase decision.

I didn't join Cycle UK. I joined the Cyclist's Touring Club ...because cycle touring is what I do! Our Club's heritage, history and tradition mean a lot to me, and I'm sure, to a lot of other members. I don't stand in the path of progress ...I don't think changing our name is progress ...and just hope it's not too late to keep our name at least...?

[PH]

With regarding to the new brand name, I gather about 2000 were asked for some opinion, there are about 70,000 members, so one in 35 was asked for an opinion is this about right? about 3% of membership.?

The information I saw said 2,000 people had been consulted, it didn't say how many of them were members.

[PH]

You mean the charity that the membership voted overwhelmingly to become?

Yes, well that tiny proportion of the membership that voted supported it. We can draw our own conclusions about what the rest of the membership think, but you can't say they overwhelmingly did anything except not vote.

[gaz]

... Is there another Cycling Touring Club we can join ...

The Touring Cyclists Club - gauging interest since May 2010. Still something of a fledgling organisation.

I think that was a spin-off from the Save the CTC activity that was going on - the charity thing happened and the idea was shelved at that time - the name is different too. ...

Yes, there's no doubt that post and the link in it is from the time of Save the CTC activity. The name is different, but the old link takes me to the current site. May I congratulate you on completing a succesful rebrand .

[Philip Benstead]

Yet members are still shocked and surprised that a rebrand is now taking place.

Whilst you are quite right to say that it has hardly been a secret, I think that it is equally fair to say that it hasn't featured prominently in communication with members

So why didn't PB who sat through those two/three years of Council deliberations and decisions say anything about it here during all that time? He seems overly eager to talk about it now and how wrong it is after three years of radio silence on the subject while Council went through all the steps gaz outlined above to communicate what it was doing to members.

TonyR I did tell some CTC members about it but not you you appear to be unable to read my text above.
[ COMMENT : Graham : PB, I suggest that you quote specific text to help the reader rather than a vague reference to "text above". ]

[EDIT : Graham : Reference to trolling removed /EDIT]

If you read facebook you would get some other views

[Philip Benstead]

With regarding to the new brand name, I gather about 2000 were asked for some opinion, there are about 70,000 members, so one in 35 was asked for an opinion is this about right? about 3% of membership.?

The information I saw said 2,000 people had been consulted, it didn't say how many of them were members.

CTC MEMBERSHIP SURVEY
According to CTC CEO Through the rebrand process we engaged with over 2000 members, supporters, partners and local and national government departments across the UK.
That numbers come from the governance survey, it used loaded questions

I received these results from anonymous source

THE SURVEY RESULTS

Groups Contacted Quantity Successfully Sent Respondents % Response Rate
CTC Member Groups 120 112 57 50.9
Affiliated Groups to CTC 499 491 127 25.9
Inclusive Cycling Centre 47 43 11 25.6
Non Members 1000 982 194 19.8
CTC Right to Ride Campaigners 413 370 149 40.3
Key External Stakeholders 47 43 21 48.8
Totals 2126 2041 559 27.4




These are the matters on which opinions are being sought.

1. Currently members can vote for Councillors (charity trustees) within their local regions. We are considering changing this to enable members to vote for all of the elected CTC Councillors. As a member of CTC, would you like the opportunity to vote for:

One or two Councillors (charity trustees) in your local region / All of the elected Councillors of CTC / No preference

2. I believe that all CTC Councillors should share equal responsibility for CTC's activities across the UK.

Strongly disagree / Disagree/ Uncertain / Agree / Strongly agree

3. The elected Councillors should be able to appoint an additional 1 or 2 trustees to join Council (the board of trustees) to fill gaps in the skills, knowledge or experience of the elected Council.

Strongly disagree / Disagree / Uncertain / Agree / Strongly agree

4. The contribution of experienced CTC volunteers should be recognized with a formal role that enables members with particular skills or experience to support the work of CTC and help energies volunteers locally and/or nationally.

Strongly disagree / Disagree / Uncertain / Agree / Strongly agree

5. It is a principle of good governance that Trustee Boards should not be so large as to be unwieldy. Council currently comprises up to 26 members. The governance working group has concluded that the board should be substantially smaller to ensure efficient and effective decision making.

Do you...
Strongly disagree / Disagree / Uncertain / Agree / Strongly agree

6. It is proposed that the Council should have a maximum of 12 members.

Do you...
Strongly disagree / Disagree / Uncertain / Agree / Strongly agree

7. Which one of these statements best describes your opinion of the present system of governance and whether it enables us to deliver our mission?

It is very effective and could not be improved / It is effective but could be improved a little / I don't have a strong opinion either way /
It is ineffective and could be improved quite a bit / It is very ineffective and needs a great deal of improvement

8. If you have any ideas for improving the governance of CTC which you would like the governance working group to consider, please add them here.

[enter response]


Note: This survey is anonymous so we will not be able to respond directly to your ideas, although your input will be considered within this review.

[gaz]

...According to CTC CEO Through the rebrand process we engaged with over 2000 members, supporters, partners and local and national government departments across the UK.

That numbers come from the governance survey, ...

The number of respondents to Campfire's "rebranding" consultation is recorded at "over 2000" in Council Minutes for October 2015: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=78803&p=981288&#p981288

Campfire's governance survey did not take place until December 2015: viewtopic.php?f=45&t=101766

[PH]

The number of respondents to Campfire's "rebranding" consultation is recorded at "over 2000" in Council Minutes for October 2015: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=78803&p=981288&#p981288

But do we know how many of those 2,000 were members?

[gaz]

But do we know how many of those 2,000 were members?

Can't help you, I don't have an anonymous source to rely on, just what's been published.

[Philip Benstead]

But do we know how many of those 2,000 were members?

Can't help you, I don't have an anonymous source to rely on, just what's been published.

see above

[Steady rider]

CTC Member Groups 120 112 57 50.9
Affiliated Groups to CTC 499 491 127 25.9
Inclusive Cycling Centre 47 43 11 25.6
Non Members 1000 982 194 19.8
CTC Right to Ride Campaigners 413 370 149 40.3
Key External Stakeholders 47 43 21 48.8
Totals 2126 2041 559 27.4

Looking at these figures, 1000/982 non members v (120/112 + 413/370 for known CTC members), 982 v 482, it appears that non-members may have been higher in number.
assuming a 50/50 split,
1021 out of 67000 members gave some opinion, 1.5% but not sure,

[gaz]

The forum does not handle tables well. If I quote the post and straighten it out a little I get this:

Survey.jpeg

Which shows there were a total of 559 respondents to the governance survey. The responses have nothing to do with the rebranding consultation.

The 2000+ figure for the rebranding consultation was reported to Council in October 2015. The governance survey was not undertaken until December 2015.

Edit 1: Posts elsewhere by Barred1 suggest that the above results do relate to the rebrand consultation. In which case it is disingenuous to portray 559 responses as consulting with over 2000 people.

Edit 2: Further posts by Philip Benstead suggest the results relate to work by Forster Communications.

I am now somewhat confused as to the context of these figures .

[TonyR]

The forum does not handle tables well. If I quote the post and straighten it out a little I get this:

Survey.jpeg

Which shows there were a total of 559 respondents to the governance survey.

If I read it correctly those were groups they were sent to not just individuals. So 120 member groups and 499 affiliated groups as well as 413 Right to Ride campaigners.

[gaz]

The governance debate has hardly started yet, although I do have some anonymous sources for that one , although the information may be a little dated by the time we get going.

It's hard enough keeping pace with the re-branding issue.