 Poster: A snowHead
|
| admin wrote: |
@Snow&skifan, you are far from alone in that view.
There are loads of snowHeads who are very fond of the SCGB - and indeed some who are nostalgic for aspects of how the SCGB used to be.
When the SCGB is represented here in a friendly and respectful manner, the response is predominantly friendly and respectful. As a fine example of this, see the pages and pages of invaluable market research and suggestions offered in response to @pisteoff introducing himself as a newly elected council member. Yes, there's some cynicism and some 'dry' humour but the club was in a pretty dire state at the time by anyone's measure and the response was pretty wholesome, I thought.
That is until the usual suspect, 'he' got involved and as ever, turned it into an Us v Them discussion.
Maybe there is an agenda or maybe it's the only way 'he' can approach a topic but whenever there is any semblance of agreement or cordiality, 'he' comes along to turn it towards confrontation.
In reality, far more people, snowHeads, SCGB members and those who are both, think like you than 'he'.
But didn't Simon Butler actually win the ultimate legal battle? I thought he did  |
Thank you for replying, I didn’t expect that, I love your far more positive synopsis.
I hope to Ski Freshtracks again, one day. I met fantastic people in the main, great companions skiing and boozing, stories that won’t be forgotten.
Then and also on some ski clinics with very known teachers, I was made mildly aware of the tedious politics in scgb and totally separately basi. Inevitable where egos clash and money’s involved. All boring to me.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 16-01-22 23:46; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| admin wrote: |
| But didn't Simon Butler actually win the ultimate legal battle? I thought he did |
I think he did in the end, but I thought I read that he had to close his business in Megeve. I guess a combination of costs of legal action meant he might not have had the reserves to ride out the poor covid seasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Quote: |
…snowheads scgb trench warfare..
|
See how propaganda works?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@admin, the idea that all the arguments started when I arrived is complete rubbish.
We got all the way to page seven before anything remotely like an argument surfaced.
Of course it was one of the usual anti-Ski Club gang who, on page seven, decided to start making up ‘alternative facts’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Hamilton Academical wrote: |
@admin, the idea that all the arguments started when I arrived is complete rubbish.
We got all the way to page seven before anything remotely like an argument surfaced.
Of course it was one of the usual anti-Ski Club gang who, on page seven, decided to start making up ‘alternative facts’. |
Page 7 of 62 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
" alternative facts" by citing a report written by someone at Durham Biz School with the cooperation of SCGB vs @gerry's angry anecdote.
Even at that stage @gerry was offered the opportunity to make his case with data but as he isn't the brightest of sparks tends to prefer the " you're a gang of liars, those comments are libel" form of interweb hardmanning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
" alternative facts" by citing a report written by someone at Durham Biz School with the cooperation of SCGB vs @gerry's angry anecdote.
Even at that stage @gerry was offered the opportunity to make his case with data but as he isn't the brightest of sparks tends to prefer the " you're a gang of liars, those comments are libel" form of interweb hardmanning. |
All the anecdotal evidence points to snowHeads having a similar demographic to the Ski Club.
Anyway, I wasn't talking about that.
From the same page.
| Quote: |
The SCGB apparently saw snowboarding as a threat, rather
than an opportunity to reach a new demographic.
|
I asked for the evidence that supported that claim but none was forthcoming and that statement was accepted and became part of snowHead lore. That statement is of course completely made up, originating as it did from that well known font of all knowledge, David Goldsmith. It was then latched onto by a few in here who were keen to cast themselves as part of oppressed minority, with the Ski Club again cast as the oppressors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I realise this is futile but this aptly illustrates the way you do more harm than good to your cause with each kneejerk combative reaction you flame out.
Do you understand the word "apparently" and what it is doing in that statement? Regardless it is not a matter of oppression. We were simply saying it was not really a success in drawing in snowboarders ( I snowboarded a lot from mid90s to 2000s and did not ever see or hear anyone mentioning the SCGB as offering anything for them). But apparently you would have it that it was a tremendous success - presumably reflected in today's name of the club and the fact that you once had a snowboarder on council.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, and don't let the fact that one Chair of the Club was exclusively a boarder get in the way of a good rant. The boarding demographic was a difficult one for the Club to attract in the early days because they were mainly young and had peer groups to board with. But still there were a fair few who joined and I never heard any of them complain about the name.
The other thing from about the same page was someone innocently asking 'Who owns snowHeads?' Well, the shutters immediately went up! 'Why do you need to know?' was the rather twitchy response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hamilton Academical wrote: |
| .. We got all the way to page seven before anything remotely like an argument surfaced. .. |
Hurling abuse and legal threats at strangers on the internet isn't "remotely like an argument".
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
This was just prior to France winning the ultimate legal battle against Simon Butler, with the ensuing effect on SCGB.
|
Simon Butler won his case ... and reached some sort of deal I understand .... SCGB lost their case and gave up
Agree re Freshtracks btw - they are good holidays, albeit they have got expensive. Outsource seems a simple (and safe) way forward, but this is difficult for SCGB Council who are protective, proud, but largely inexperienced, well meaning volunteers
Having gone on the excellent PSB with Snowheads this season - and the equivalent Freshtracks holiday in the past - I can understand why Snowheads has 3X the take up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
I realise this is futile but this aptly illustrates the way you do more harm than good to your cause with each kneejerk combative reaction you flame out.
|
Totally futile. He seems incapable of understanding that his rants against the elitist, cliquey, rem0aniac, bedwetter, oddball SnowHeads aren’t really helping the cause of his beloved SCGB in gaining new members or goodwill. It’s a bit sad really as he clearly loves the club.
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Mon 17-01-22 12:08; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is becoming like a tribute thread to itself with Gerald Aitken, still SCGB Director per Companies House, trotting out the same old nonsense counterpoints which do nothing to address the actual subject matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
WTF is the profanity filter doing with rem-oan-er = honourable and well respected fellow snowHead
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| admin wrote: |
@Snow&skifan, you are far from alone in that view.
There are loads of snowHeads who are very fond of the SCGB - and indeed some who are nostalgic for aspects of how the SCGB used to be.
When the SCGB is represented here in a friendly and respectful manner, the response is predominantly friendly and respectful. As a fine example of this, see the pages and pages of invaluable market research and suggestions offered in response to @pisteoff introducing himself as a newly elected council member. Yes, there's some cynicism and some 'dry' humour but the club was in a pretty dire state at the time by anyone's measure and the response was pretty wholesome, I thought.
That is until the usual suspect, 'he' got involved and as ever, turned it into an Us v Them discussion.
Maybe there is an agenda or maybe it's the only way 'he' can approach a topic but whenever there is any semblance of agreement or cordiality, 'he' comes along to turn it towards confrontation.
In reality, far more people, snowHeads, SCGB members and those who are both, think like you than 'he'.
/ |
Thank you, agree wholeheartedly with this, and have found Snowheads a friendly, open and very helpful group. The "organic" structure is brilliantly nurtured in my view.
fwiw I posted on Snowheads prior to getting elected, asked for input (which you generously gave) and kept posting (engaging) because I find the input here very helpful and relevant, and of course SCGB needs to engage with skiers who are no longer members or who have frustrations. The group here is knowledgeable and willing to unpick the key issues SCGB Council thinks better hidden (Council are wrong ... as proven in the ridiculous Holt (CEO) debacle, appointed on secret very generous terms, unconstitutionally by Council - then Council stood back while £m's were wasted (some embezzled in my view), hidden from Council who didn't even notice they had no management accounts in Board meetings - then tried to rig an election to keep things hidden. Council, CEO and Chairman always blaming someone else for things going wrong ... while membership falls and the offer evaporates. Sadly this naïve, inward looking, self congratulatory behaviour is repeating. OK we now have some financial sense at top table, this does not mean SCGB have an effective Council which can challenge what needs to be challenged and turn things around. They continue to want to hide things, can't take tough decisions, are beholden to a Chairman, rather than the Chairman being accountable top Council, spend far too much and are far too slow to react - and are happy to let their Directors insult and attack the huge community of skiers that are on Snowheads (and elsewhere) - rather than be open to healthy - and very necessary - challenge. This is not a healthy club serving its members. It needs to change, but Council can't even bring themselves to talk to me or Snowheads in a civil way - instead inventing a unique and unconstitutional category of membership for me (I guess there is something flattering in this!) - despite my undoubted passion and support for SCGB and its membership over many years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
inventing a unique and unconstitutional category of membership
|
Oh to be declared 'Unmutual' - I think that that's the category they reserve us snowboarders at the club too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Quote: |
Oh to be declared 'Unmutual' - I think that that's the category they reserve us snowboarders at the club too.
|
I have been declared a 'member of low standing' - which I am oddly proud of. Much rather be standing separately from those that have recklessly, naively and greedily lost/destroyed £4m+ of members assets, and put the Club into a tailspin of declining offer and membership. Who on earth sold the Clubhouse so an out of control Council, Chairman and CEO could grab hold of the cash and throw so much away while choosing member funded 'jollies' over concerted work to address the issues. Then hide this from the membership, and constantly blame outside forces, rather than take responsibility as a Council to do something about it! I was passionate about the Club, and I have called out the failing Council in the past. Why oh why not engage in turning this around?
My unique benefits: Pay full fee, pay for reps training, have repping slots taken away, have libellous content published on the clubs website and elsewhere (now at last removed, but not before I lost a job offer apparently as a result) and not be allowed to see or comment on the Council controlled Facebook page. That last thing is a farcical own goal in many respects - at least the Facebook group I admin is healthy and open.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
If the Club had any sense, they'd be trying to field someone more knowledgable and less rude than Hamilton Academical to engage with pisteoff on this thread. If there is no suitable candidate on the Council, that pretty much says everything about the Council.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I asked SCGB a question yesterday eveing, here is the answer (already!)
Good Morning,
I can confirm Gerry Aitken is no longer a Director (“Council Member”) of the Ski Club of Great Britain. This would have taken effect from the date of our last Annual General Meeting, which took place on Thursday 25th November 2021.
Thank you for raising notice of our inaccurate records; we shall look to have these amended appropriately.
Many thanks,
Henry John
Information & Advice Manager | Membership Communications Executive
Ski Club of Great Britain Limited™
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Quote: |
Oh to be declared 'Unmutual' - I think that that's the category they reserve us snowboarders at the club too.
|
I have been declared a 'member of low standing' - |
No you weren't. You were told your membership wasn't in 'good standing'. Which in your case means that the Club aren't going to send you out repping until you have retuned your membership status to good standing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
…
the Club aren't going to send you out repping until you have retuned your membership status to good standing.
|
He sounds serious chaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
No you weren't. You were told your membership wasn't in 'good standing'. Which in your case means that the Club aren't going to send you out repping until you have retuned your membership status to good standing.
|
Ah well, your super powers are now more limited. Perhaps now you could show your more generous side a little more?
Do you have a view on where SCGB is going? Up or down? Will Council miss you? Do you care?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
"I am always sorry when men tend to show a tendency to turn a disagreement about policy into a personal feud. I have, I hope, many friends on the committee of the SCGB, though I disagree with their views on club matters. And, fortunately, we forget these secondary issues when once the snow begins to whiten the hills. And when we next find ourselves three thousand feet above the valley with six good inches of powder-snow beneath our feet, not one of us would barter the next half-hour for the supremacy of this or that body of ski runners."
Sir Arnold Lunn
Skiing 1913
Times don't change, but perhaps if everybody took a leaf out of the great man's book and took a step back from the keyboard this place could get back to normal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@chocksaway, wise words from the great man as you say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Hamilton Academical wrote: |
| Of course it was one of the usual anti-Ski Club gang who, on page seven, decided to start making up ‘alternative facts’. |
I've had a look back at page 7 and must say I can't see anything on there that should trigger you. If someone puts forward a view, and you don't agree, just say so. No need for histrionics.
| pisteoff wrote: |
| ............. Council stood back while £m's were wasted (some embezzled in my view), hidden from Council who didn't even notice they had no management accounts in Board meetings - then tried to rig an election to keep things hidden. |
The word "embezzled" somewhat jumps out of the page. Presumably you have evidence to back that statement up?
I know some are suspicious of the sale of the building to a secretive Jersey-based trust with no named Directors. The sheer size of the £471k spend on IT doesn't look right either - the fact that nobody seems prepared to divulge the identity of the IT companies involved would make any cynical old member suspicious. Then there's everything surrounding the coronation of Mr Holt to CEO - his fantastic (ie. some say it's a fantasy) CV, the package, the over generous golden goodbye. And what about the missing of the break clause for the Wimbledon office lease - again, a lot of money involved so needs investigating otherwise people begin to think there's more to it. I think some dots need joining or not as the case may be.
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Do you have a view on where SCGB is going? Up or down? Will Council miss you? Do you care? |
The trend pre-Brexit, pre-Covid, pre-Holt, pre-Piddlesden court case has been generally downwards for many years and there appears to be nothing in place to arrest the slide. Where are the membership benefits that'll make us all want to remain, join or rejoin? The Council have been like rabbits caught in headlights - two lost seasons during which a reinvention could have taken place but the masterplan seems to be 'flog more hols'. The main USP has gone and the skiing public are just saying "meh". If you were going to start a modern membership organisation for skiers and snowboarders, you wouldn't start from here.
I posted this the other day:
| Pruman wrote: |
With the web tools I have available, looking at the last 6 months:
Snowheads
Total visits - 616,000
Average visit duration - 03:15 (minutes)
Pages per visit - 3.14
Skiclub.co.uk
Total visits - 171,000
Average visit duration - 01:44 (minutes)
Pages per visit - 2.66 |
Compared to a few years back the decline in the Club's online importance should be ringing alarm bells!
I know I sound like a broken record but, on the website it says:
[quote] What's On Calendar
There are no upcoming events[/b]
Says it all really. It is meant to be a club! But nobody loves it.
Today I filed a change of registered address and a confirmation statement via Companies House - yet again, updated the public record instantly. I invested a whole 3 minutes of my life to the entire endeavour. According to a highly respected 'former Director' of SCGB, that is notoriously slow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
@Pruman, Doesn't matter Gerry Aitken is still agitating on faceache for Angus Maciver to not engage positively here but insist on some bizarre Zoom# call as if its some interschool scrap and he can call the bikesheds it happens behind. Seems curiously preoccupied with the idea of "saying it to my face".
#"You have no authority here David Goldsmith!". Trevor's iPad "FFS who let that c*** in?" All: "Point of order which c*** are you referring to?"
Plenty of questions have been asked here. SCGB council seem reluctant to answer them. Fair enough it's their car crash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| chocksaway wrote: |
"I am always sorry when men tend to show a tendency to turn a disagreement about policy into a personal feud. I have, I hope, many friends on the committee of the SCGB, though I disagree with their views on club matters. And, fortunately, we forget these secondary issues when once the snow begins to whiten the hills. And when we next find ourselves three thousand feet above the valley with six good inches of powder-snow beneath our feet, not one of us would barter the next half-hour for the supremacy of this or that body of ski runners."
Sir Arnold Lunn
Skiing 1913
Times don't change, but perhaps if everybody took a leaf out of the great man's book and took a step back from the keyboard this place could get back to normal. |
Have to be more like 6000 feet these days or you’d need an umbrella!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
still agitating on faceache for Angus Maciver to not engage positively here
|
Got to keep the hostility up to keep the SCGB members away from here.
I’m intrigued by what’s going on FB, but not enough to join up. Keep posting the interesting bits. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
This thread is so impressively and insightful. Thanks @pruman @chocksaway et al. Ironically Hamilton Gerry also seems to add something, albeit in a broken mirror way, highlighting all that stands in the way of turning around the once great club. Should be compulsory reading for all on SCGB Council, given they have no mechanism for effective debate, insight, constructive challenge and no chance of a brave new vision.
Why so closed from them? Sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| According to a highly respected 'former Director' of SCGB, that is notoriously slow. |
Perhaps he tried to be obnoxious and threatening to them too?
| AL9000 wrote: |
| ... Got to keep the hostility up to keep the SCGB members away from here. |
I think it's the other way around.
If SCGB Ltd™ enjoys insulting prospective package holiday customers, why would anyone in a similar business area want to moderate them away?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
Why so closed from them?
|
An excellent question.
I suspect a fear of barks and the threats of bites (certainly by unknowing members).
Got to maintain the animosity and ‘them v us’ mentality in order to keep control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
But it’s not them doing the insulting 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| pisteoff wrote: |
| ............. Council stood back while £m's were wasted (some embezzled in my view), hidden from Council who didn't even notice they had no management accounts in Board meetings - then tried to rig an election to keep things hidden. |
The word "embezzled" somewhat jumps out of the page. Presumably you have evidence to back that statement up?
|
Trevor Campbell Davis stated in his report that he could find no evidence of fraud. Obviously, you have been extremely rude about Trevor Campbell Davis, so I doubt you'll take his word for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
This thread is so impressively and insightful. Thanks @pruman @chocksaway et al. Ironically Hamilton Gerry also seems to add something, albeit in a broken mirror way, highlighting all that stands in the way of turning around the once great club. Should be compulsory reading for all on SCGB Council, given they have no mechanism for effective debate, insight, constructive challenge and no chance of a brave new vision.
Why so closed from them? Sad. |
In 18 years of reading stuff about the Ski Club on here, I've never noticed anything but trite, meaningless statements. The main one seems to be 'You should listen to us, we have all the answers and we are truly representative of the whole.'
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| @Pruman, Doesn't matter Gerry Aitken is still agitating on faceache for Angus Maciver to not engage positively here but insist on some bizarre Zoom# call as if its some interschool scrap and he can call the bikesheds it happens behind. Seems curiously preoccupied with the idea of "saying it to my face". |
Angus prefers verbal over non verbal communication. I told him you'd all run scared of a zoom meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
| If the Club had any sense, they'd be trying to field someone more knowledgable and less rude than Hamilton Academical to engage with pisteoff on this thread. If there is no suitable candidate on the Council, that pretty much says everything about the Council. |
Absolutely right. Council should have stopped Gerry years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hamilton Academical wrote: |
| pisteoff wrote: |
This thread is so impressively and insightful. Thanks @pruman @chocksaway et al. Ironically Hamilton Gerry also seems to add something, albeit in a broken mirror way, highlighting all that stands in the way of turning around the once great club. Should be compulsory reading for all on SCGB Council, given they have no mechanism for effective debate, insight, constructive challenge and no chance of a brave new vision.
Why so closed from them? Sad. |
In 18 years of reading stuff about the Ski Club on here, I've never noticed anything but trite, meaningless statements. The main one seems to be 'You should listen to us, we have all the answers and we are truly representative of the whole.' |
You've been wasting your time then for eighteen years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Hamilton Academical wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| @Pruman, Doesn't matter Gerry Aitken is still agitating on faceache for Angus Maciver to not engage positively here but insist on some bizarre Zoom# call as if its some interschool scrap and he can call the bikesheds it happens behind. Seems curiously preoccupied with the idea of "saying it to my face". |
Angus prefers verbal over non verbal communication. I told him you'd all run scared of a zoom meeting. |
What do we have to run scared over? That we'll ask some questions and Angus will get upset? Or pee pants as Hardman Gerry (civilian) tells us what's what? It's more the suggestion that "we" need a call at all that seems bizarre - he should be offering an AMA to all members and potential members if he wants to engage, and then tackle it honestly and transparently.
You seem to live in some fantasy where thinking that you'll score some big libel victory on facts arising from Trademark Tony's "error", which is even more bizarre given you're apparently not even involved with the SCGB anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, the reality is that you’ve got nothing to worry about but there’s no way you’ll take up Angus’s offer, not in a million years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
