 Poster: A snowHead
|
@Mr.Egg, if you are black, gay and Muslim as well it would tick all of the other boxes they're probably missing  Though as I say that as a white, straight, atheist, managerial 50-something I accept that this is a little ironic...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
richard sideways ...When their onsnow thing was a thing , I was pleasantly surprised to see SCGB groups out with SCGB Blue Jacketed snowboarders ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Can I just ask; why the obsession with the SCGB?
It just sounds to me like it's the type of organisation which is becoming irrelevant. In fact I bet the most attention it gets is on this message board(!) with people endlessly speculating about its management and their actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@Ryunis, right now the focus is on them here because they recently tried to steal snowHeads' name by applying for a trademark for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@x7, it was a genuine mistake I'm sure no malice or subterfuge was intended. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| boredsurfin wrote: |
@admin has this Trademark issue been resolved now?
Asking for a friend. |
@boredsurfin, I was wondering about that too. In spite of Trademark Tony's assurances that the status of the application would lapse to 'withdrawn' on 4th October the IPO website is still showing the application as 'Examination'. https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003677442
I guess if the IPO updates its system weekly as ansta1 stated then tomorrow we'll know whether the application is indeed 'withdrawn', or whether it has proceeded to 'published', in which case admin's legal battle will have to commence....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@Alastair Pink, Best stock up the popcorn just in case
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@boredsurfin, well since you suggested it.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Not sure if the status will change automatically. They filed "ski club of great britain" in January and that is still "Examination".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Alastair Pink wrote: |
| boredsurfin wrote: |
@admin has this Trademark issue been resolved now?
Asking for a friend. |
@boredsurfin, I was wondering about that too. In spite of Trademark Tony's assurances that the status of the application would lapse to 'withdrawn' on 4th October the IPO website is still showing the application as 'Examination'. https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003677442
I guess if the IPO updates its system weekly as ansta1 stated then tomorrow we'll know whether the application is indeed 'withdrawn', or whether it has proceeded to 'published', in which case admin's legal battle will have to commence.... |
Wow.
What an absolute lady's front bottom of a thing to do.
Saved myself £1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether the online system updates or not, I believe they have to publish updates in the IPO journal I linked to previously, kind of like company notices etc have to be published in the Times or similar things. Guess we'll find out tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Good find. Well I suppose the new location isn't so convenient for the tennis, but at least there's the cricket instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| a spaffing load of dosh |
I came to SH for skiing information but have learned so much more.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Gosh - so in recent years, they've moved from owing a house in Eaton Square, Mayfair, to renting in Wimbledon, and now out to Kennington... It's like sliding down a greasy pole, heading inexorably into oblivion...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| ansta1 wrote: |
| Whether the online system updates or not, I believe they have to publish updates in the IPO journal I linked to previously, kind of like company notices etc have to be published in the Times or similar things. Guess we'll find out tomorrow. |
Well snowheads or any version of it is not listed in today's online journal, not sure if the update it in real-time, but suspect not. Still showing as in examination phase on IPO.gov at this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
hmmm, hindsight......
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Fri 8-10-21 16:36; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Next stop is the Oval. Oblivion is further out. Mornington Crescent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Mornington Crescent.
|
NO. NO. NO! plus some of us are still updating since the new Battersea Power Station addition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
| Quote: |
Mornington Crescent.
|
NO. NO. NO! plus some of us are still updating since the new Battersea Power Station addition. |
Shurely you mean Battersea Power Station Station
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| Have they managed to ditch the Wimbledon lease? Have they coughed up a spaffing load of dosh to get themselves out clean? |
And the answer to my own questions is "yes", they have bought out the remainder of the Connect House lease and not had to pay for dilapidations. Angus MacIver announced this much on Facebook earlier. Now then, there were four years left at £250k per year. The maths majors among you will know that means a liability of £1million. So one wonders what the settlement figure might have been.
If I were the landlord, knowing that office space is a bit sticky at the moment, I think I'd sit there staring out of the window whistling "God save the club" because that landlord could just collect £250k per year and wait until the rental market improves. I guess the figure will be presented in the Treasurer or Chairman's Report due out very soon.
I don't see how it can be less than a year - £250k. Top quality spaffing if it is.
| Ricky B wrote: |
| Gosh - so in recent years, they've moved from owing a house in Eaton Square, Mayfair, to renting in Wimbledon, and now out to Kennington... It's like sliding down a greasy pole, heading inexorably into oblivion... |
Yeah, I have no idea why they chose that location. Workspace and companies like that have many better buildings in better locations, with better connections. Apparently moving there has saved 75% - that makes the annual rent about £60k+, or £5k per month. Obviously it's better and should help them be more competitive but, I agree, bit of a come down.
| Scooter in Seattle wrote: |
| Pruman wrote: |
| a spaffing load of dosh |
I came to SH for skiing information but have learned so much more....... |
Ironic because your country's administration also has spaffing off to a fine art. They used to talk in mere Billions (a 1 with 9 zeros) but now it's Trillions (a 1 with 12 zeros). It's a great word and we have our PM Boris to thank for re-energising it - he hasn't managed too much else mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Pruman,
| Quote: |
Have they managed to ditch the Wimbledon lease? Have they coughed up a spaffing load of dosh to get themselves out clean?
|
The Chairman suggested that the cost to buy out of the lease would be quite a bit less than the £1m for another 4 years. Anyone want to take a guess? £300k?
Gerry has asked me to 'come clean' and share what my position on this was when I was on Council - so here goes for those that are interested:
Us new guys were appalled to find in Nov 2019 what previous Council had committed the club to on the expensive Wimbledon lease, and huge vanity cost of refurbishment. Unaffordable and unneeded. Council had missed a break clause a month before we were appointed - not that they had noticed. I supported a couple of Council members with a proposal that we negotiate tough with the landlord, and if unsuccessful should accelerate consideration of closing Winter Arrangements (the Freshtracks company) which was the lessee. I also argued there was a strong case to outsource Freshtracks holidays to a TA. This also had other overhead benefits - eg the finance admin costs were too high. I suggested Council should review this as a serious option for reducing overheads and allowing the club to focus on being a members club, with holidays still offered, but provided via a third party.
Had Council decided this was the right way forward this would have saved perhaps £600k or more compared to the route eventually chosen - which was to lease for a further 18 months then buy out.
In many ways I am glad to say this is no longer my problem, and it is good the Club has managed to remove the millstone of the lease, even if they are still wedded to FT overhead. Just so sad best part of £6m of members funds have been blown over the last few years, without putting the club in a strong position to deal with a changing world. Don't think my radical ideas for that were liked either 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
| The Chairman suggested that the cost to buy out of the lease would be quite a bit less than the £1m for another 4 years. Anyone want to take a guess? £300k? |
Per the above post my guess is one year @ £250k but let's not argue over £50k here and there.
| pisteoff wrote: |
| I supported a couple of Council members with a proposal that we negotiate tough with the landlord, and if unsuccessful should accelerate consideration of closing Winter Arrangements (the Freshtracks company) which was the lessee. |
Oh, I see, ditch the debt, walk away, the classic group company switcheroo. Nice one Cyril. Technically it can be done but it always comes with consequences, mainly for the Directors who were in post at the time and now would have a purposefully crashed company on their record. It's not a good look and can affect their future business dealings. People think it's easy but, in my experience, it isn't consequence free especially if it isn't the result of actual bad luck. The other issue would be the Club's desire to continue selling a regulated product like travel insurance - crashing a group company would be notifiable. End of insurance. Sorry but your plan was an obvious non-starter.
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Had Council decided this was the right way forward this would have saved perhaps £600k or more |
'A saving' is when you work on the business and move the profit & loss from loss to profit, not when you recklessly lease a building, overspend on the refurb and then sh*t all over the landlord when you discover just how out of control the finances are. What you describe is just posh mob behaviour, not 'the right way'. Jesus.
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Just so sad best part of £6m of members funds have been blown over the last few years |
This figure seems to grow every time it gets quoted. Not long ago there was a £2m black hole, then it was declared as £4m, now you are saying £6m. Are you now saying that the full £4m of White House sale proceeds plus a further £2m has been spaffed? Impressive if true, even by SCGB standards, but I remain to be convinced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, Yup, that's about the nub of it.
Not sure I would feel that sympathetic for the plight of the landlord of swanky offices in Wimbledon, they can cope. It is though a fair point to make. Council can and should have included this in their deliberations.
However the responsibility of a Director (Council member) is to the Company, and its members. Council / Chairman (and the CEO they had appointed on a cosy deal) had made some horrid decisions and were frankly asleep on the job - something needed to be done. We couldn't carry on losing £1m ++ pa and members at 10-20pc pa. Closing Winter Arrangements was a legitimate option to consider, and would have reduced costs by c£600k, (and in practice would have meant a deal could be done with the landlord in all likelihood). The personal implications for Directors are not that significant - however this personal aspect of Board decision making (or lack of) is and probably continues to be a core challenge for Council, which they are not well equipped to deal with. Council needed to act in the interests of the Club, but were not able to do so because of personal positions and the fact they are volunteers, mostly lacking experience at this level. That's not meant to be a criticism of the generous members of Council that give their time for the good of the club. Ultimately my strongest argument for outsourcing Freshtracks is that a £6m holiday company needs professional oversight / board, focus and realistic view on business risk and opportunity - a club can be run by volunteers.
| Quote: |
This figure seems to grow every time it gets quoted. Not long ago there was a £2m black hole, then it was declared as £4m, now you are saying £6m
|
OK, fair cop, it is (I hope) an exaggeration. On top of the £4m+ announced to members there is the loss over the last 18 months, this loss on the lease and further reorganisation costs, plus anything more to write off on things like the 'generous' purchase of Mountain Tracks. Of course there are also losses previously "absorbed" on marketing and IT especially. Much can be confused by the value of investments - however this should be excluded. It was far better when there was a property rather than shares which are all too easily sold (or borrowed against) to fund losses.
The point is that Council has operated away from effective oversight and a once very healthy club has been allowed to burn members assets (cash) on nonsense, while the core offer has diminished, and membership is flowing away. Council is not able to debate tough issues robustly, reverting to easy decisions - note for example the announcement re Freshtracks which is to be retained rather than outsourced so it can contribute profits. (risk? overhead? distraction? - who was brave enough to challenge?). It is sadly all too easy for Council to return to the blinkered view of old "must protect head office and hide the dirty washing - lets present a rosy picture and say - there were problems, but this was the fault of the old guys new Council has addressed the problems and now all is on track, aren't we good? Anyone who challenges this is disloyal and should be hounded out".
In my view this is just not going to work ... not my problem now, but sad to see for all of us that still care for a once great club.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
…Anyone who challenges this is disloyal and should be hounded out"
|
They needed a little pet terrier to perform that role; I wonder who they used for that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Ultimately my strongest argument for outsourcing Freshtracks is that a £6m holiday company needs professional oversight / board, focus and realistic view on business risk and opportunity - a club can be run by volunteers. |
I think you're suggesting that they ought to outsource what they once specifically insourced, because they're poor at running it.
That sounds probable.
Imagine if a commercial tour operator sent its directors over here to abuse people; or set other directors to try to steal
the brand of this site. It simply would not happen because they're focused on their business, not personal vendettas.
However it begs the question: why did a club insource a commercial tour operator in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
However it begs the question: why did a club insource a commercial tour operator in the first place?
|
I guess they saw (dreamt?) how much money they were making and thought it would be the solution to their financial challenges. Presumably all done of course without understanding the reality of running the operation and the challenges that were coming from technology and the way holiday bookings would change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| olderscot wrote: |
| Quote: |
However it begs the question: why did a club insource a commercial tour operator in the first place?
|
I guess they saw (dreamt?) how much money they were making and thought it would be the solution to their financial challenges. Presumably all done of course without understanding the reality of running the operation and the challenges that were coming from technology and the way holiday bookings would change. |
But others have said that Freshtracks was struggling and barely making any profit - yet SCGB bought it and installed CST as CEO as an additional reward. Inevitably installing such a CEO would mean that members spending £££ on Freshtracks would find most grace and favour (and be treated as a cash cow - anyone seriously believe the spiel about what excellent value the hols now are - seems like its about milking price insensitive members or keeping out the less structurally wealthy, maybe both)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
@olderscot, I’ve always found that Freshtracks works well and is a good fit with the club. However the club does have many other problems that need fixing
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
At a simple level, the strategic fit between the two makes sense. We can improve the clubs finances by providing services to our members, it's worked well for insurance and should work well for ski holidays too.
I don't see anything wrong with that. The question for me would have to be whether the SCGB had the capabilities to recognise the future challenges they would be facing and the skills to deliver on the premise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
I’ve always found that Freshtracks works well and is a good fit with the club.
|
Agree - the holidays, range and type are a core feature of the club. Historically they have also been good value in my view, and the holidays themselves excellent. The problem has been the challenge it brings to management, and in particular the Board. Council are volunteers, mostly with little or no experience in companies of this size. The exec and head office becomes dominant, and when that goes wrong Council are unable to control / sort it. So you get nonsense like losses of >>£1m pa, CEO on jolly's and Council not even aware they are not getting management accounts (as occurred in 2019)
In the mean time the club / member services get less attention, and end up subsidising a large, overhead - which has been out of control. It looks like this is now in control, partly by removing much of the value for members (so eg popular holidays are now much more expensive). This leaves a real Board / governance challenge - not least the complete failure to understand business risk / financial control, and failure of the Club to react effectively to a changing market / expectation / social media etc. So we end up with a club which serves only the aging demographic (so in the last ten years the average age of members has increased by ten years) and an inflexible / poorly performing overhead base looking after a holiday company.
By outsourcing Freshtracks you could maintain the great Ski Club / holiday fit, without having to manage the business aspects of a TA ... which in turn means Club and Council could focus on how to reverse the aging demographic and loss of membership. For example todays younger market expects a meaningful free membership deal (reduced offer perhaps, but still worthwhile and part of the club) - what chance that eh? (not the odd youth offer it used to have, that was a huge money drain).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I was looking for parallels, and found that the CTC ("Cycling UK") has run holidays via a
connected company which as it happens is closing this month:
https://www.cyclingholidays.org/announcement/
I've not bothered to check how important that was to them financially although that data will be out there.
"neilson" is in both markets, with a tag line which suggests that they see their niche as "active holidays".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank f*** for that ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well there is still the issue of Trademark Tony's integrity and who put him up to it? At least @gerry seems to have pissed off so maybe worth it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
A happy conclusion for SH but a PR disaster for SC(tm)GB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
