Cycling UK Forum

Here the link to the Cycling UK Branding kit


http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/fil ... nd_kit.pdf

What do you think of it now you can see it in its full glory?

Is this the longest post on the forum ever ?

Brand Kit. It loses a lot in a cut and paste translation .

Edited highlights:

...
Adopting our new name

If you don’t feel you can adopt our new name at this time, please consider adopting the line: ‘Part of Cycling UK’ as part of your group descriptor. For example CTC Reading, part of Cycling UK. Thank you.
...
The Winged Wheel

We will continue to make it possible to obtain classic kit and Winged Wheel badges – and we plan to develop further items drawing on the charity’s rich heritage. The Winged Wheel will be retained as part of its own heritage brand. Watch this space for more developments.
...

From my own point of view there are no surprises in there. Sustrans Volunteers have similar guidance on the use of the brand, including colour, size and placement of logos, form of language to be used in communications, etc.

If such guidance is new to CTC Volunteers it is overdue.

Of course there is already the Policy Handbook, page 9. It sets out the statutory legal notice (updated above) required on MG websites and communications.

Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC) a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England No 25185, registered as a charity in England and Wales Charity No
1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541. Registered office: Parklands, Railton Road, Guildford, Surrey GU2 9JX

IME its usage, despite being statutory, is inconsistent.

Getting Volunteers to do what you want them to, it's a bit like herding cats .

Is this the longest post on the forum ever ?

It is in need of a marketing agency to give it a once over to ensure that it actually gets the message across before people turn off.

Two and a half years work to capture the "essence" of the post, then wield the moderation axe to cut it down to size.

Followed by outrage and a petition for a Poll of the Whole Forum to restore the original heritage post .

gaz wrote:Two and a half years work to capture the "essence" of the post, then wield the moderation axe to cut it down to size.

Followed by outrage and a petition for a Poll of the Whole Forum to restore the original heritage post .

Interesting that you use the word "essence" - have you seen the presentation slides that Campfire used for the Council meeting?

It's entitled "Brand Essence" . . . . with lots of marketing-speak and inconclusive charts with percentages that don't add up.

B1

Barred1 wrote:... Interesting that you use the word "essence" - have you seen the presentation slides that Campfire used for the Council meeting? ...

No, have you?

I've only read the Council Minutes, as quoted previously.

gaz wrote:

Barred1 wrote:... Interesting that you use the word "essence" - have you seen the presentation slides that Campfire used for the Council meeting? ...

No, have you?

I've only read the Council Minutes, as quoted previously.

Yep - secondhand .... it's on the net somewhere

Publishing it here, it's all "what they want to hear" stuff, would be counter-productive with forum posters quoting selectively and creating more confusion and pointless discussion (if that's possible). Council purchased a pup.

B1

You lost me at pantone 143

Isn't that a shampoo? Perhaps it's good for helmet hair .

Sorry Phil, But you have done a great disservice to your cause with this inane posting!
But it does remind me of a Church Minister who said "Preaching similar to drilling for oil only shorter, "If you don't strike oil in the first 10 minutes, STOP BORING"!
Get his drift? TTFN MM

merseymouth wrote:Sorry Phil, But you have done a great disservice to your cause with this inane posting!
But it does remind me of a Church Minister who said "Preaching similar to drilling for oil only shorter, "If you don't strike oil in the first 10 minutes, STOP BORING"!
Get his drift? TTFN MM

sorry if I have upset you, but I did not put all of ithe branding kit on some on this forum would. suggest I was trying to his something or distort. Due to limitations of this forum I am unable to attach the whole doc. I have tried to remove some repetitive text. I am on the way to south France and trying to edit from a smartphone is prone to errors. When I get back in Blighty I will resubmit this from a pc.

Looking forward to it. If my bandwidth will cope [emoji6]

If this is a recent release it is "worrying" as the entire re-brand is subject to a vote of the membership. and that should put the entire process on hold as the membership has to have its say before more money/resource is spent on something the membership might reject.

Ian

If anyone that wants to see the actual document that CTC sent they are at http://www.heartofenglandcyclingclub.org.uk in the Library section under "Conversion" (they're there for our (dwindling number) of CTC members to see the actual facts)

.. this should get you straight there : http://www.heartofenglandcyclingclub.or ... conversion

Rob

You've lost me as well. What's this thread about?
If you're objecting to the re brand going ahead despite the poll, you should say so, you probably already have in another thread. if you're asking what people think of the new name/brand then ask, but i can't see what it has to do with the above.
What you've copied and pasted here is the instructions on how to present the brand, if (When) it's going ahead that's entirely as I'd expect. There's no point having a brand if everyone using it then starts presenting it differently. Are you asking if anyone has a view on the instructions? They look clear and easy to follow to me.
I don't like the new name, or the new logo, I'm disappointed by the lack of member involvement in the process and a few other things besides, but I see all of these as part of CTCs conversion to a charity, the battle was lost.
On a local level, I don't think much will change, except we seem to be being offered more support in promoting ourselves if we want it, that's good. I can't see us changing our name, though using the strapline "part of Cycling UK" is IMO better than the current "member group of CTC, the National Cycling Charity"