Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Ski Club of Great Britain Chief Exec resigns

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
admin wrote:
Yes there are some who appear preoccupied with the notion of competition between snowHeads and the SCGB
Davina Goldballs wrote:
We're dealing here with a snowHeads -v- SCGB comparison.
QED rolling eyes
ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
SnowHeads of Great Britain & Northern Ireland?? Cool
snow report
 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?
Davina Goldballs wrote:
On 29 June Pruman wrote:
The Interim Chairman's report is now laughably late.


On 6 July Pruman wrote:
The Interim Chairman's report is now laughably late ...
Now laughably late + a laughable week.


On 18 July Pruman wrote:
The Interim Chairman's report is now laughably late ... Here's a bit of a non-update. Last weekend I was told that the report was written and "just being proof read", which, somewhat naively, I took to mean the publication was imminent - but I suspect "proof read" was code for "it's with the lawyers".


That is a viable conclusion. The other is that the report has been fed to the family dog.

My own theory is that publication of the report is now being further delayed (to August?) to coincide with an announcement of the SCGB's 2020 AGM, or maybe even delayed further (to October?) to accompany the 2019-20 annual report and accounts. Constitutionally (as I recall) the Club has to give notice (3 months?) of the AGM date and should properly invite members to put themselves forward for election to the board/council.


As it is the end of the month I thought I'd chime in to say that it is now 4 months since the CEO left, the Chairman's report on the whole omnishambles is now a full 3 months late and the proof reading of said report has so far taken 3 weeks. I think Tolstoy had War & Peace proof read in considerably less time. Any mentions of all this on 'the other forum' are being met with silence.

That is a good point about the announcing of the AGM and giving sufficient notice. I would think that time must be right on top of us so, if there is ever to be a report, it will surely have to be published very soon.


Other chatterings to report - general consensus is that Fresh Tracks hols are now really over priced when compared to other 'equivalents' on the market who have managed to hold prices in line with last year. Why then can't the Ski Club? I think the answer there is that it's all about overheads being far too large. Some will pay the price without a second glance but many others (I fear too many) will shop around.


AL9000 wrote:
On bashes you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. You must be cautious!! snowHead

Sounds like I'll fit right in, where do I book?
ski holidays
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Pruman wrote:
AL9000 wrote:
On bashes you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. You must be cautious!! snowHead

Sounds like I'll fit right in, where do I book?


Sadly you may not be able to while you are "down a crevasse" - I think this means admin hasn't got a valid email address for you, something you may wish to correct. snowHead
ski holidays
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Alastair Pink, Woooosh. I don't want to go on a bash or a Fresh Tracks holiday any more for that matter. Out of the two though, a bash looks more appealing. Being down a crevasse happened by accident but I quickly realised it is actually a good thing and I'm happy to keep it that way otherwise I'd spend too much time on here I think.

Meanwhile I had an email from someone earlier today telling me that the Ski Club Chairman's long overdue 'name and shame' report has been with the Club's solicitors since last Tuesday 21st July. It must be close to the bone if it needs to be sense checked like that. To me it just exposes the club to more expense and ridicule. Just because the legal opinion is that something is OK to publish, does not stop someone named and shamed from taking action. It's like rubber-necking a car crash - you can't help having a look but you wish you hadn't had to.
latest report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
AL9000 wrote:
......

On bashes you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. You must be cautious!! snowHead


Oh. I have stopped going on them* so I thought the tone would have improved Toofy Grin

*Just ski at Les Deux Alpes, pandemics permitting.
ski holidays
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
achilles wrote:
AL9000 wrote:
......

On bashes you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. You must be cautious!! snowHead


Oh. I have stopped going on them* so I thought the tone would have improved Toofy Grin

*Just ski at Les Deux Alpes, pandemics permitting.


2 words: Awd Boys!

They've really lowered the tone... it's more my level of 'humour' now snowHead
ski holidays
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Pruman wrote:
I had an email from someone earlier today telling me that the Ski Club Chairman's long overdue 'name and shame' report has been with the Club's solicitors since last Tuesday 21st July.


The report has now been in and out of the lawyers for a month - I can hear the "keeerrrrchiiiing" from here. The report is the best part of 4 months late but the club have found time to announce the AGM and start the hunt for 3 new Directors, a Chairperson (although they use the term 'Chairman' just to ensure we know the requirement!) and a Treasurer. Quite how anyone can put themselves forward without knowing the full picture baffles me.

Anyway, if you are brave enough https://www.skiclub.co.uk/news/ski-club-news/2020/08/ski-club-agm-notice-2020
latest report
 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.
Help me DG1-Kenobi, you’re our only hope!
ski holidays
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
AL9000 wrote:
Help me DG1-Kenobi, you’re our only hope!


Well obviously, whatever it means.

Just bumping this because it’s the end of yet another month. 5 since the CEO left and 4 since the report into the whole financial calamity was promised for. Can only assume it has hit legal buffers – will we ever see it?

In the meantime I happened to go onto the Club’s insurance page today and was greeted with this:

Quote:
Great news! Ski Club will be launching a fantastic new Insurance package this October ready for the 2020/21 Season.
The new Insurance product in our opinion is the best in the snowsport industry, with it’s clear and adaptable policy. This means the current Ski Club Insurance product will not be available to purchase during September.


I’m not quite sure what to make of it. Is it really ‘Great News’ that there is no Ski Club insurance available at least for the whole of September? What about people with annual policies expiring who want continuation of cover? - and they aren’t quoting an exact launch date so it could easily be for longer than just September if you are familiar with how these IT things have a habit of dragging on. Are they staying with the same provider or going somewhere else? I suspect the latter otherwise why the gap and, if so, having such a haitus at the start isn’t a great sign in my opinion.

According to the accounts, outside of subs, insurance was the only positive contributor to the coffers so I would think losing a month or more of sales is not a good idea commercially and they can’t blame that one on the old board or management. September must be a key time for booking trips, wanting to renew annual policies, generally shopping around like I am.
latest report
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Pruman, David Goldsmith 4 CEO! Only s/he can repair the damage.
ski holidays
 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, two named individuals in the report have been allowed to read prior to publication as per legal advice.

Gap in insurance sales due to a change in provider. Historically the SCGB hardly sells any insurance during September.
snow conditions
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Thanks Gerry for this update, although it is rather odd that as a SCGB Council member you choose to share this only on the Snowheads forum - excellent though it is it only has a limited number of SCGB members. We now have an active facebook group for SCGB members, past present and future. I note that you have removed yourself from that - please do rejoin and engage with members there. (please avoid the personal comments you have a tendency towards)
My own view is that SCGB Council is struggling to embrace the change and openness needed, and ends up defending the indefensible (eg the £100'ks we spend on the finance function and a generous pay off for the CEO) rather than focusing on how to rebuild the on-snow offer for members. This is the key reason you stood for Council, is this something you still believe in? Getting active Ski Club group skiing in France again would make an enormous difference to members.
Snowheads readers who are also past present or potential future Ski Club members are very welcome to join the Facebook group - called "Ski Club of Great Britain members and Council". We're trying to engage council/members more, and discuss priorities and see what we can do to help re-instate volunteer led group skiing, particularly in France.
ski holidays
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Gerry wrote:
@Pruman, two named individuals in the report have been allowed to read prior to publication as per legal advice.


Marvellous. The report was written - according to the public statement of the SCGB's chair of council - last April. When did these "two named individuals" receive the report? If it's a factual and true account of how much money went where and when, documenting any relevant decisions then - sure - it can be sent to the "named individuals" for comment, but there's no reason for yet more legal shenanigans.

Gerry wrote:
Gap in insurance sales due to a change in provider. Historically the SCGB hardly sells any insurance during September.


When was it decided to change the provider? 6-12 months ago? Why isn't the new provider in place? Supermarkets don't spend a month with no milk because they've changed supplier. Trains don't cease to exist for a month because of a change of operator. There's no need to turn the SCGB into Spin Composers of Great Britain.

By the way, we've been waiting a decade or more for the SCGB to explain where all the 'Respect the Mountain' environmental levy money went. Any update on that? [question 6 in the link below]. Those were quasi-charitable funds, and there has to be an explanation of how that money was allocated.

And we've been waiting 14 years for your trumpeted "best ski news in the UK". That was your personal commitment in 2006 - shouldn't you deliver on it? [question 4 in the link below]

Ten questions for Gerry Aitken (4 Feb 2015)
https://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=94856&start=3800#2673652

The SCGB's environmental fund - £66,000 of £100,000 'Respect the Mountain' funds unaccounted for
https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10153526839980761&set=gm.1674410129512419
ski holidays
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Gerry wrote:
@Pruman, two named individuals in the report have been allowed to read prior to publication as per legal advice.

Gap in insurance sales due to a change in provider. Historically the SCGB hardly sells any insurance during September.


My annual renewal date is in September. So I won't be able to include SCGB when I shop around.
latest report
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Quote:

By the way, we've been waiting a decade or more for the SCGB to explain where all the 'Respect the Mountain' environmental levy money went. Any update on that? [question 6 in the link below]. Those were quasi-charitable funds, and there has to be an explanation of how that money was allocated.

I think some of that is still around. Last year at least reps could still get an extra £100 allowance for travel by train from this fund (some reps waved all travel expenses to support the club when asked last year)
snow report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Jehu wrote:
Gerry wrote:
@Pruman, two named individuals in the report have been allowed to read prior to publication as per legal advice.

Gap in insurance sales due to a change in provider. Historically the SCGB hardly sells any insurance during September.


My annual renewal date is in September. So I won't be able to include SCGB when I shop around.


Are you going away in September? The gap in sales is not ideal but we are operating in difficult times.
snow conditions
 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?
@Gerry, You lost me there. Why does the fact that "we are operating in difficult times" justify a month long gap in sales?
snow conditions
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
@esaw1, I have no insight into this, but it would not surprise me if the incumbent provider has stopped selling winter sports insurance, or has gone bust. Lack of a provider at short notice would match the "difficult times" statement.

My own insurer from 2019/2020 has stopped taking new business. Others are struggling, while still more are looking to cover losses and reduce their liabilities in future, so may have wound in their acceptance criteria to exclude frequent travellers, older people and/or those with existing conditions, higher risk activities such as winter sports, and so on - all of which could make SCGB members ineligible.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Quite a lot to unpack here.

Davina Goldballs wrote:
Gerry wrote:
@Pruman, two named individuals in the report have been allowed to read prior to publication as per legal advice.


Marvellous. The report was written - according to the public statement of the SCGB's chair of council - last April. When did these "two named individuals" receive the report? If it's a factual and true account of how much money went where and when, documenting any relevant decisions then - sure - it can be sent to the "named individuals" for comment, but there's no reason for yet more legal shenanigans.


That is how I see it as well. Publish the darn thing.


esaw1 wrote:
@Gerry, You lost me there. Why does the fact that "we are operating in difficult times" justify a month long gap in sales?


It doesn't. Or rather it shouldn't. They’ve dropped the ball I suspect.


Davina Goldballs wrote:
Gerry wrote:
Gap in insurance sales due to a change in provider. Historically the SCGB hardly sells any insurance during September.


When was it decided to change the provider? 6-12 months ago? Why isn't the new provider in place? Supermarkets don't spend a month with no milk because they've changed supplier.


Low sales in September is not a good reason to be comfortable. Presumably it’ll be a new transactional site on the existing URL? It’ll need time for indexing and to iron out any gremlins. Even done perfectly, a changeover costs sales. For the “when it was decided” see below.


ousekjarr wrote:
@esaw1, I have no insight into this, but it would not surprise me if the incumbent provider has stopped selling winter sports insurance, or has gone bust. Lack of a provider at short notice would match the "difficult times" statement.


No, the incumbent was Tif Group and they big players and definitely still in the game.

With my former financial services bowler hat on I can tell you exactly how it works. SCGB are not an insurer, they are an Appointed Representative of an insurer. Essentially it is a badging exercise and SCGB receive a commission on sales generated. Until now, by the looks of it, they would have had an agreement with insurers and insurers would have handled the whole operation. All this is wrapped up in a terms of business agreement. Normally these are for a minimum 3 years, with a notice period on either side of between 3 and 6 months. Companies like SCGB who wish to look at alternative suppliers know they want to do that long in advance of the termination date - it has been common knowledge for ages that Members were voicing their displeasure with the Tif Group offering (especially on the other forum) so one would hope the club had the foresight to go looking for a new partner many months ago, certainly before putting in their notice. Normally you would secure your new insurer BEFORE giving notice to the incumbent and it would all be focussed on a particular changeover date. In other words, done competently, there should be absolutely no gap. So my considered opinion is that this has been cocked up!

By the way, the gap might not be just a month. Note that it says 'October' - not 1st October or early in October, just October. Whatever it is it isn’t good because any of SCGB’s competitors aware of the gap will surely be briefing their digital marketing teams to go after that business. By now they should be able to say what date in October. Or do they mean November?

Gerry wrote:
Are you going away in September? The gap in sales is not ideal but we are operating in difficult times.


People don't have to be going away. If they have booked trips they want cover in place in case of cancellation. Did council not understand or discuss that?

If someone has an expiring annual policy in September, all the gap has done is encourage them to shop around and leave people with the impression they are out of business. Bad.

If you are wondering why this could be commercial suicide take a look at page 14 of the report and accounts: https://issuu.com/skiclub/docs/scgb_report___accounts_19 - Why risk that business? Without maximising insurance revenue the losses will be even worse.

Directors run the show so who are they going to blame this time?
ski holidays
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
@Pruman, you stand for election.
snow conditions
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
One might have thought that in this year of all years having a compelling, reliable, well thought out insurance offer in a time of uncertainty was a way of drawing skiers back to the SCGB. But no biggie if they can't be arsed with that and want members to get themselves elected before they can ask questions.

...swirls closer to the plughole...
snow report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Oh, I'm not sure I would bother Smile
A lot of work, and then you get spat on if you dare not to tug your forelock to the Chairman.
For me insurance is a distraction, useful way of raising money for the Club, but not a core offering. I'm one of many who finds cheaper, better insurance elsewhere - but why is that important to the club? Our objects are all about social skiing. For insurance to be core it needs to become an offer very much focused on members needs and integral to the membership fee, but that would move in the wrong direction on cost ... For me Club membership fee is much too expensive for the level of service currently offered. Can you imagine trying to start a club offering what we do at this price. We're lucky we have critical mass, but sadly years of incompetence in Council are eroding membership, and I can't see that turning round unless someone is willing to take on the challenges. Much more digital, much less head office overhead, much more focus on the on-snow experience.
ski holidays
 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.
pisteoff wrote:
discuss priorities and see what we can do to help re-instate volunteer led group skiing, particularly in France.


Spin off a new club, perhaps affiliated with snowsports England so you have a recognized leader training pathway of some sort and start again without the excess baggage. Don't bother with a forum; keep it on Facebook / Instagram / Youtube and the social platform du jour. Don't piss off the French in resort by excessive braying on the slopes.

Ok inside-out have a similar offering as do snowheads but there's always room at the top especially for something less commercial.
latest report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I received an email yesterday from TIF - "We are writing to you as your Multi Trip travel insurance policy from the Ski Club of Great Britain, is due to expire on 30/09/2020.
To explain who we are and why we are writing to you, Travel Insurance Facilities plc. were contracted by the Ski Club of Great Britain Limited, to provide you with your travel insurance. Travel Insurance Facilities plc are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
The arrangement between the Ski Club of Great Britain and Travel Insurance Facilities to manage your insurance needs, unfortunately came to an end on the 31st August 2020. As the firm which is ultimately responsible for the administration of your insurance, we are duty bound to remind you that the cover provided under your current policy will end on the date shown above.
We apologise in advance for any multiple notices you may receive, as you will likely receive separate confirmation from the Ski Club of Great Britain’s new provider of travel insurance, advising you of new terms or to contact their new provider for a quote."

Looks like I may be hunting around - anyone know off-hand of other cover which provides for over-70's skiing off-piste without a guide? Confused

Another pita from 2020 - what a year!
snow conditions
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Pruman wrote:
... If you are wondering why this could be commercial suicide take a look at page 14 of the report and accounts: https://issuu.com/skiclub/docs/scgb_report___accounts_19 - Why risk that business? Without maximising insurance revenue the losses will be even worse. Directors run the show so who are they going to blame this time?
I assume the insurance revenue is simply commission gained from farming the existing membership. Hence it would have very little marginal cost. Selling insurance isn't why the organisation exists, but this is probably their most profitable line-item, and without revenue they will not be able to engage in what they do regard as "core". Failing to support what is likely a very conservative membership in this area seems stupid, and is presumably why they tried to spin it as "Great News".

Page 24 - the statistics visualisation - is misleading. The size of the membership diagrams for 2017, 2018 and 2019, suggest growth, the opposite of the truth. "Great News" abounds.

Still, I've no dog in this fight: I can't see a single snowboarder amongst the dozens of images there.

pisteoff wrote:
My own view is that SCGB Council is struggling to embrace the change and openness needed, and ends up defending the indefensible...
... Can you imagine trying to start a club offering what we do at this price. We're lucky we have critical mass...
That sounds correct.
Notwithstanding the pretty graphics, the cash cow is shrinking by the month. That's where your turn around space is, and it's being wasted.
snow conditions
 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.
philwig wrote:
Pruman wrote:
... If you are wondering why this could be commercial suicide take a look at page 14 of the report and accounts: https://issuu.com/skiclub/docs/scgb_report___accounts_19 - Why risk that business? Without maximising insurance revenue the losses will be even worse. Directors run the show so who are they going to blame this time?
I assume the insurance revenue is simply commission gained from farming the existing membership. Hence it would have very little marginal cost. Selling insurance isn't why the organisation exists, but this is probably their most profitable line-item, and without revenue they will not be able to engage in what they do regard as "core". Failing to support what is likely a very conservative membership in this area seems stupid, and is presumably why they tried to spin it as "Great News".

Page 24 - the statistics visualisation - is misleading. The size of the membership diagrams for 2017, 2018 and 2019, suggest growth, the opposite of the truth. "Great News" abounds.

Still, I've no dog in this fight: I can't see a single snowboarder amongst the dozens of images there.

pisteoff wrote:
My own view is that SCGB Council is struggling to embrace the change and openness needed, and ends up defending the indefensible...
... Can you imagine trying to start a club offering what we do at this price. We're lucky we have critical mass...
That sounds correct.
Notwithstanding the pretty graphics, the cash cow is shrinking by the month. That's where your turn around space is, and it's being wasted.


It's interesting that outsiders can see the picture clearly but the Council attack dog/ antagonist in residence can't offer anything more than platitudes and/or insults - has the clubhouse moved to the Alexandria delta?
latest report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
True, how wise. Incredible that they made me an outsider. I'm not of course, stupidly loyal to a flawed organisation.
snow report
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Yoda wrote:
I received an email yesterday from TIF - "We are writing to you as your Multi Trip travel insurance policy from the Ski Club of Great Britain, is due to expire on 30/09/2020.
To explain who we are and why we are writing to you, Travel Insurance Facilities plc. were contracted by the Ski Club of Great Britain Limited, to provide you with your travel insurance. Travel Insurance Facilities plc are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
The arrangement between the Ski Club of Great Britain and Travel Insurance Facilities to manage your insurance needs, unfortunately came to an end on the 31st August 2020. As the firm which is ultimately responsible for the administration of your insurance, we are duty bound to remind you that the cover provided under your current policy will end on the date shown above.
We apologise in advance for any multiple notices you may receive, as you will likely receive separate confirmation from the Ski Club of Great Britain’s new provider of travel insurance, advising you of new terms or to contact their new provider for a quote."

Looks like I may be hunting around - anyone know off-hand of other cover which provides for over-70's skiing off-piste without a guide? Confused

Another pita from 2020 - what a year!


You could try MPI.
ski holidays
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@Jehu, thanks, will do.
ski holidays
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Or you could stick with TIF https://www.holidaysafe.co.uk/ just not via SCGB
snow conditions
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
pisteoff wrote:
True, how wise. Incredible that they made me an outsider. I'm not of course, stupidly loyal to a flawed organisation.


You put yourself on the outside by your aggressive actions. All you ever wanted to do was spent more money on repping so don’t try and invent a new narrative to suit this particular audience.
snow report
 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?
@DJL, interesting, as their email went on to suggest dogtag .....
ski holidays
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
@Yoda, I guess they have multiple brands/trading names.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Yoda, I used Skicover.com last year for off-piste/heliskiing in Canada and they were excellent.
snow report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
If I ran the SCGB (tran: "If I ruled the world") ...

- The Club wouldn't be flogging insurance
- The Club wouldn't be flogging ski holidays
- The Club wouldn't be a promotional donkey for every tom, dick and harriet ski business that crossed its palm with silver, or entered 'mutual back-scratching' arrangements
- The Club would have a staff of, probably, about three (not including someone to make the tea, since this would be the personal responsibility of employees). The Club has no future except as run with skeletal staffing, given the ongoing economic crisis and threat to its existence.
- The Club would be ruthlessly independent of third-party commercial interests
- The Club would be absolutely true to the roots of the visionary Edwardians who formed it in the Cafe Royal, Regent Street, on 6 May 1903 ... in that ... it would be (a) demonstrably independent and only answerable to subscription payers (b) based on fraternity, goodwill, mutual help and anything else that contributes to great skiing experiences. But those Edwardians were mighty sexist and prejudiced - it has to be a Club that's open to all.
- The Club would be focussed on exchange of information, knowledge about skiing, advice exchanged by members etc.
- The Club would certainly have reps in the Alps, Rockies, Pyrenees, Himalayas, Scandinavian mountains and anywhere else ... with the basic principle that the reps were there to enthusiastically recruit new members, have a chat, explain what the Club was about ... with a helpful flyer
- The Club's expenses paid to any volunteers would be transparent and minimal. All and any freeloading would be nipped in its 50-year-old bud.
- The Club's membership rate would be great value, easily agreed to by newbies.
- The Club would be extremely active in any form of media (electronic, social or (less likely now) printed) deemed relevant and great value to members.

You'd think that any of the above would be obvious, unless one is wedded to the idea that the SCGB has to be an office full of desk jockies.

[quote="David Goldsmith"]We've been waiting a decade or more for the SCGB to explain where all the 'Respect the Mountain' environmental levy money went [c.£66,000 out of c.£100,000]. Any update on that?

pisteoff wrote:
Last year at least reps could still get an extra £100 allowance for travel by train from this fund (some reps waved all travel expenses to support the club when asked last year)


Incredible that this £100 dish-out is still going on. At the outset (2005), the SCGB's Environmental Working Group defined that the money was to go to bona-fide environmental charities - The Woodland Trust was to receive about 50% for the SCGB's "long-term tree-planting project" - and other environmental projects. It was NOT for dishing out as yet another dish-out.
Good to hear that some volunteer reps are willing to honour the basic principle of volunteering and waive their expenses. Thanks for pointing that out - at least it's one speck of hope.

I must emphasise that the SCGB [b]must[/b[] explain where all the environmental levy money has gone. This money was being collected for a decade or more (is it still levied?).
latest report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Davina Goldballs wrote:

pisteoff wrote:
Last year at least reps could still get an extra £100 allowance for travel by train from this fund (some reps waved all travel expenses to support the club when asked last year)


Incredible that this £100 dish-out is still going on. At the outset (2005), the SCGB's Environmental Working Group defined that the money was to go to bona-fide environmental charities - The Woodland Trust was to receive about 50% for the SCGB's "long-term tree-planting project" - and other environmental projects. It was NOT for dishing out as yet another dish-out.
Good to hear that some volunteer reps are willing to honour the basic principle of volunteering and waive their expenses. Thanks for pointing that out - at least it's one speck of hope.

I must emphasise that the SCGB must explain where all the environmental levy money has gone. This money was being collected for a decade or more (is it still levied?).


I must admit I was surprised to learn that reps could benefit from a £100 allowance if they travelled by train, paid for out of the environmental levy. I think many of the contributors to the levy would not have been expecting individuals to receive personal financial benefit from it, however if the SCGB concluded that subsidising people's greener travel to ski resorts was a valid use of members' payments into the environmental fund then why didn't they make the subsidy open to all SCGB members travelling to resort by train? Madeye-Smiley
snow report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Alastair Pink wrote:
Davina Goldballs wrote:

pisteoff wrote:
Last year at least reps could still get an extra £100 allowance for travel by train from this fund (some reps waved all travel expenses to support the club when asked last year)


Incredible that this £100 dish-out is still going on. At the outset (2005), the SCGB's Environmental Working Group defined that the money was to go to bona-fide environmental charities - The Woodland Trust was to receive about 50% for the SCGB's "long-term tree-planting project" - and other environmental projects. It was NOT for dishing out as yet another dish-out.
Good to hear that some volunteer reps are willing to honour the basic principle of volunteering and waive their expenses. Thanks for pointing that out - at least it's one speck of hope.

I must emphasise that the SCGB must explain where all the environmental levy money has gone. This money was being collected for a decade or more (is it still levied?).


I must admit I was surprised to learn that reps could benefit from a £100 allowance if they travelled by train, paid for out of the environmental levy. I think many of the contributors to the levy would not have been expecting individuals to receive personal financial benefit from it, however if the SCGB concluded that subsidising people's greener travel to ski resorts was a valid use of members' payments into the environmental fund then why didn't they make the subsidy open to all SCGB members travelling to resort by train? Madeye-Smiley


Traveling to the Alps by train costs more than flying, or it did last time I compared. The allowance was made available to offset that extra cost for reps going out to rep for the club. Goldsmith was on the committee that recommended spending the levy in this way.

Repping in Switzerland and want to go by train? No problem as the Swiss tourist board will give you a travel pass.
latest report
 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.
@Davina Goldballs,

“The Club wouldn't be flogging insurance
- The Club wouldn't be flogging ski holidays”

What’s wrong with a ski club organising holidays for its members? If you were running snowHeads would you cancel the Bashes?
snow report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Oh Lordy save us from the manifesto of what DG would do if he ran snowheads....


For what it's worth I don't see anything wrong with those activities as a member service and provided they are objectively a benefit to members that stand on their own two feet (i.e. without dipping into member subs but also priced at a competitive level to the lay market). The fairly obvious problem is if that they are such that the "club" effectively becomes a TO with a £70 surcharge to get the brochure, or an insurance intermediary layering on £70 premium on top of the actual cost of insurance.
snow report



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy