 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
--
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Fri 11-01-13 0:37; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Comedy Goldsmith,
| Quote: |
1992 Annual Report: 31 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: "approx 15,000". Number of new members recruited by reps: 1108.
2011 Annual Report: 34 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: 5281. Number of new members recruited by reps: 229
The cost of the SCGB repping service: 1992: £85,406 ... 2011: £263,451
|
Don't know about anybody else, but I do find those figures interesting/telling.
| Quote: |
But it's a bit disturbing that a current SCGB director is sending me emails threatening my expulsion (I joined in 1962), falsely accusing me of dishonesty and mental health issues
|
Agreed. That is unacceptable, particularly the last bit.
| Quote: |
It would be useful to know if that's the measurement on the lower slopes or the upper slopes.
|
Again, don't know about anybody else, but I think that's funny.
Frosty the Snowman, are you accusing me of posting dogshit? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Comedy Goldsmith wrote: |
there's a "19 inch thick file" about me in the clubhouse.
|
That's interesting, can I just walk in and read through it if I fancy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
davidof, crikey, it's a bit of a long way for you to travel, however interesting it may be. On the other hand, it's only 10 minutes or so up the road for me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Pedantica wrote: |
| davidof, crikey, it's a bit of a long way for you to travel, however interesting it may be. On the other hand, it's only 10 minutes or so up the road for me... |
I was just curious, I know they make a lot of their documentation available. Maybe you have to be a member to read the DG file? Maybe you could pop in and ask them if it is available, do film it if you do and put it on youtube.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
davidof, sorry, I'm not currently a member.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pedantica wrote: |
Comedy Goldsmith,
| Quote: |
1992 Annual Report: 31 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: "approx 15,000". Number of new members recruited by reps: 1108.
2011 Annual Report: 34 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: 5281. Number of new members recruited by reps: 229
The cost of the SCGB repping service: 1992: £85,406 ... 2011: £263,451
|
Don't know about anybody else, but I do find those figures interesting/telling.
|
Just for reference 86K in 1992 would be around 150K today. Of course if the pound has devalued compared to places where repping is carried out the effects would be greater. 229 new members would generate 14,885 in revenue in the first year. They would therefore have to remain with the ski club for 18 years to break even (assuming no other costs than the repping service).
Of course this is absolutely none of my business but up to the current members of the SCGB to decide if they are happy with the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pedantica wrote: |
hibernia,
| Quote: |
GrahamN's two posts are the only two posts that forensically deal with the issues concerning the Ski Club, avoids trolling,
|
I think that's a little unfair. For example, fatbob's post may be shorter, but it clearly addresses some of the issues and is not a troll.
|
to be fair I did put in a little hypothesis about it being a bit of a gravy train for reps 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
1992 Annual Report: 31 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: "approx 15,000". Number of new members recruited by reps: 1108.
2011 Annual Report: 34 SCGB rep resorts. Number of people who skied with a rep: 5281. Number of new members recruited by reps: 229
The cost of the SCGB repping service: 1992: £85,406 ... 2011: £263,451 |
Those figures are appalling, It's costing £1,150 to recruit each member by rep? That's not a sustainable model. I'd say the club needs a putsch and a serious look at what is laughably its marketing, recruitment and public face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Or, looked at another way, they're getting a season's skiing in for only £7750 per head. That's not too bad a price given they have a tendency toward the posher resorts.
As most of the members don't know or care what happens to their membership money (or perhaps even remember they're paying it) and so don't make any demands on the Club, I guess they're thinking, "Might as well spend it on going skiing".
It's no wonder though that the reps are all up in arms and flustered any time anyoneusually David Goldsmith has the temerity to challenge the status quo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
admin, The 'Emperor's Clothes' analogy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Masque wrote: |
| It's costing £1,150 to recruit each member by rep? That's not a sustainable model. I'd say the club needs a putsch |
That's only unsustainable if a) it's the only mechanism for recruiting members and b) that that recruitment is the only income stream of the club. I (and many others I have met) joined specifically to go on one of their trips - so would not have been included in that figure. As said above, I (and most of those I've skied with on trips) remain a member primarily because of the rep/leader service, although I have only used the resort leaders (as opposed to the holiday leaders) for maybe 30 days in my 10 years of membership. The cost of the repping/leader service then becomes relevant spread over those who use either the resort reps or holidays, so quite a different sum.
As regards what members get for their membership - a secondary consideration for me, now that Direct Travel has left the building, I also found their insurance gave me the best deal - Snowcard refuses to cover any form of race training on any annual policy, and DogTag was about 80% more expensive than the SCGB for off-piste/touring cover (if I'm already paying the membership). Others join for the discounts, which may or may not be a justifiable reason; plenty of members have enumerated the amounts they have saved, which IIRC generally works out very much in your favour if you are a family making longish haul trips, but that may be changing as the feasibility of DIY holidays continues to change. So the sums are a lot more complex than are being simplistically presented above.
| Quote: |
| ....and a serious look at what is laughably its marketing, recruitment and public face. |
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Masque wrote: |
| admin, The 'Emperor's Clothes' analogy? |
No, just thinking that if I were to find myself in the fortunate position of being involved in the running of some kind of ski club, I'd probably be trying to make sure I got a fair bit of skiing in
Nevertheless I should still be ready to answer, with humility and in good conscience...Am I worth my powder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
GrahamN, I understand that the Reps are loss leaders . . . but that certainly wasn't the case in the past. It's clear that skiing as a recreation has changed wildly in the last 20 years. The rep system doesn't seem to have kept pace or it would still be a significant part of member enrollment. There's room for a significant change in how that's presented but given legislation and anti competition practices on the hill regarding 'hosting/leading' I would hazard that the whole rep program be shut down and the club look to have an employed presence in suitable resorts who are either licensed in a way to lead or just as sales/PR/member assistance for all the little crap that goes on in resort . . . a REP and not a ski buddy.
As for the grading system for vacations as a piece of marketing it is elitist shite that irritates the crap out of people. Not because it requires you to be of a standard but because so much is made of that in the promotion 'bassackwards' marketing.
The Club is a dead man walking kept animated by commercial sales and with more of us electing to sort our trips out for ourselves their vacation market may be shrinking with their demographic.
Is it salvageable? Don't know, don't care any more. But it certainly has a finite lifespan in its current guise. Bet the books are interesting 
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Mon 7-01-13 2:05; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
admin, all you can sniff? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Masque, I believe the figures you refer to are the number physically signed up in resort by reps and exclude the number who ski with a rep and join by post or online as a consequence, or those who join online or by post specifically to ski with reps. The increased ease of signing up online is I suspect the main driver for the recruitment figures you mention.
But it is good to see someone take up D/E/C Gs baton in over-interpreting the figures.
I really don't see why people give a toss anyway. It's a consumer choice, not a religion, if you don't like it , don't join. Or in the case of some, why not just leave?
It ain't much use to me this year, so I'm not a member. Next year? who knows.
The thread is a pathetic attempt by the club to get their forum talked about, followed by some historical revisionism by at least one person who knows why MO day really happened, when his main SCGB enemy on this thread actually tried to prevent it happening, and then some obsessive over-analysis which tells us more about the posters than the truth.
FTS has it right. Nothing new to see here. But its good to see Hibernia again. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| admin wrote: |
Or, looked at another way, they're getting a season's skiing in for only £7750 per head. That's not too bad a price given they have a tendency toward the posher resorts.
. |
That's just the petty cash, don't forget meals, accommodation etc are paid for by the resort in exchange for positive spin on the snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| davidof wrote: |
| admin wrote: |
Or, looked at another way, they're getting a season's skiing in for only £7750 per head. That's not too bad a price given they have a tendency toward the posher resorts.
. |
That's just the petty cash, don't forget meals, accommodation etc are paid for by the resort in exchange for positive spin on the snow reports. |
No good moaning here. If you are concerned, check the figures with SCGB and complain to them.
I say check the figures because as we all know, figures in isolation can be very misleading indeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Who cares? last time I checked, this site was called snowHeads. People are more than welcome to discuss figures for another organisation's commercial activities on their site.
If this thread won't fall off the radar and die, can't someone please stimulate its permanent death?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Masque wrote: |
Is it salvageable? Don't know, don't care any more. |
For someone who doesn't care, you write an awful lot about it
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Unless badly provoked this is my last post in this thread.
Just to say what a very odd animal the so-called chat forum is on SCGB. For example, after 30 days of inactivity a thread is archived and although you can view old posts you cannot resurrect any archived threads. There is a 'reply' button but it doesn't work.
There is also a distinct lack of many features common to other forums. One would have thought that they could have offered a more user-friendly product after all this time. Can't see it taking off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
Last edited by After all it is free  on Fri 11-01-13 0:37; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Masque, I think the idea that a single club can really lead, form or shape a diffuse pursuit like skiing, in an age where we all want different things and have so many sources of information, is a misconception.
Maybe if skiing was only a competitive sport, or only an adventure pursuit, or only done by a very narrow social/demographic group, a club could do that.
But those days are gone. There is a move to both more local/small organisation and action, and ways of seeking information or exerting influence which are virtual rather than concrete.
Is their marketing, forum and rhetoric rather poor? Yes.
Is there a magic bullet which will give them >10% of active skiers as members? No.
Let's move into the 21st century... eh? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Comedy Goldsmith wrote: |
| The same could be said about this well-known cruise liner. |
It is considered a 'grave site' now
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| stoat of the dead wrote: |
| Let's move into the 21st century... eh? |
WOT! . . . harumph! . . . If I don't do something stupid like a BASI gap season I shall be spending next season in tweed and leather on wood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Just to innocently stir the pot a bit:
Thanks to this morbidly fascinating thread, I wandered over to the SCGB website and thought to check out their apparently famed reports. Starting with my local hill:
http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/skiresorts/resorttoptips.aspx/Baqueira-Beret
Locals do:
* Eat tapas at après-ski.
* Stay down in the valley.
* Afford visitors an incredibly friendly welcome.
Locals don't:
* Take the Bonaguia pass if driving from Barcelona – they head for the Vielha tunnel instead.
* Dilly-dally if the snow is good. The sun can blast it within hours.
Pros
* Gorgeous valley.
* Good for all levels.
* Fantastic food.
Cons
* Short season, and unreliable snow at the end of the winter.
* A car is pretty much essential to get the best of it.
* Increasing in popularity, so might not be a well kept secret for much longer.
It all sounded a bit familiar, so I popped open my Footprint "Snowboarding the World" by Barr, Moran & Wallace (2006) to find:
Locals do:
* Stay down in the valley - it's cheaper
* Afford visitors an incredibly friendly welcome.
* Eat tapas - get a plate, load it, show it to the barman and tuck in
Locals don't:
* Drive over the Bonaguia pass in the middle of winter. Take the tunnel through Vielha instead.
* Lie in on a powder day - it's relatively low, so you need to make the most of it.
Pros
* Time capsule valley.
* Versatile resort.
* Incredible food.
Cons
* Snow at end of season can be unreliable.
* Need a car to really get the most out of the valley.
* Increasing in popularity, so might not be a well kept secret for much longer.
Somebody's been a bit lazy on the journalism, hmm? I didn't check the SCGB website further, but I can confirm that the whole of Snowboarding the World is written in that style.
SCGB and the authors of Snowboarding the world don't exactly sound like natural bedfellows. Who knows though, they're probably both owned by Unilever or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pyremaniac, It's not unusual to have unusual bedfellows . . . but it does highlight the club's position of pretense in claiming any more value to the skiing public than as a pretentious tour operator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Pyremaniac wrote: |
Somebody's been a bit lazy on the journalism, |
Lazy is the right word. I just checked a local resort (Chamrousse) and the "facts" are not even internally consistent let alone correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
--
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Fri 11-01-13 0:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Pyremaniac - to be clear they might have sourced the content elsewhere, but it is transparent about that: "Our ski resort guide is brought to you by Footprint Travel Guides, available in our online shop from £17.99".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Comedy Goldsmith, When you shoot a gift horse
| Quote: |
| the hugely popular forum |
it take a bloody sight more than a sock clad gibbon to reanimate the corpse.
I have to ask . . . oh crap, I can't believe I'm doing this . . . why is this worth your efforts? The Club as it stands now is an old fart squeezed into skinny jeans, a Jeremy Clarkson without the charm . . . alright, he's polarising but he does it with some self deprecating wit . . . and with none of Clarkson's quality support infrastructure.
Why is this important to you? Do you want it restored to its former glory and importance . . . if that was ever the case? Is it just that a 'history' could be lost forever through seriously 'disconnected from reality' management?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Si, thanks for that. It did seem unlikely that things wouldn't be above board. Still, it's kinda amusing that SCGB use a snowboarding guide as its muse. And it's a nice compliment for the very well written book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
--
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Fri 11-01-13 0:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Is that Sir wotsit Lunge's casting couch I'll take a raincheck on that one thanks . . .
So basically you want to preserve the history and archives of the SCGB?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
--
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Fri 11-01-13 0:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pyremaniac wrote: |
| Si, thanks for that. It did seem unlikely that things wouldn't be above board. |
Hmm, I don't think U can take anything for granted on that front - just ask davidof about his photos, 'beautifully re-cropped' by the SCGB to remove his copyright notices 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
Last edited by After all it is free on Fri 11-01-13 0:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
--
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Fri 11-01-13 0:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comedy Goldsmith, blimey, poor woman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
awful gramma ) like me to shake the shite out of it if it wants to have any relevance to skiing past this next decade.
