 Poster: A snowHead
|
The ski club from the outside looking in seems like a snobby upper class club in the opinion of many of my friends and thats why they haven't joined it doesn't seem a cool place for young people to be since i have been a member i've found it not to be the case in general after chattign to the members but not many people will gamble the 50 quid to find that out.
So how can we change this image to get more members back and make it a more exiting club to be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
It's a very difficult subject, none of my 20 something friends are interested, they would prefer to spend the money on beer rather than join what they see as a club for stuck up british skiers, I think it's how they are currently brought up, many seem to prefer the have it now than possible advantages later, especially if like me they travel independantly they want to see definate benefits rather than say ski club holidays
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
It's difficult to know what the image of the Ski Club is and therein lies the problem. It's not (to my mind) a club anymore, it used to be with it's own clubhouse with regular events, that doesn't happen now now other than the Ski Club ball. It's not involved with directing UK skiing. It is, most definitely, a commercial organisation, it sells holidays, sells advertising space in its magazines etc. But it's not a commercial organisation in a form that most people would recognise. It does not appear to be run for the benefit of members, other than arranging discounts on holidys and equipment. It appears to me, to be run for the benefit of the Reps. However, for me, the abiding image of the Ski Club is David Goldsmith, who has been a member since 1962, desperately trying to generate some sort of positive response and being soundly denigrated for his troubles. Bit of a long winded response but I care about the Ski Club, I believe it could be a very positive influence in UK skiing. I am not uninvolved, although I gave up my membership a number of years ago, my company has 'affilate membership', we are listed on the Ski Clubs database, we give discounts to SCGB members and we advertise in the Ski Club magazine. So although my interest is commercial rather than altruistic, I fully support David Goldsmith's efforts and wish him well. I rather suspect that the vested interests, as represented by Gerry et al, will prevail and the Ski Club will continue to diminish until its finances become unviable.
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Sun 19-09-04 16:26; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
bootneck, where are you chatting to the members ? On the now closed forum ? Kevin (amongst others) was more than a bit miffed to pay for that - only to find all the action was over here, members and non-members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I joined the ski club to get into the chat room stupidly thinking it would be the same as last year and like Kevin then found all the action over here but i would like the club to get back to the vibrant place it was and change its outlook to appeal to skiers/boarders from all walks of life seems a shame for what was once one of the biggest influence in british snow sports to die because it's stuck in the past by keeping this upper class image.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David@traxvax, says it well. Seems to me it doesn't entirely know itself what it wants to be. They've attempted (unsuccessfully) to become The Ski Club. On the website home page the full 'Ski Club of Great Britain' still appears no less than 3 times. They've alienated a significant number of people by the sudden closure of the open forum. Some, at least, of their reps aren't generating favourable comments. They had another forum (I believe) for Boarders which was not well thought of. They've made some highly dubious claims about the 'unique' numbers using their website. My only real contact with members (other than on these forums) has been chats with 2 reps in a resort just after MO day. One was pleasant, helpful and welcoming - and the least said about the other the better. Yes it does take all sorts but a representative should be a promoter of the club. That one definitely wasn't.
What does it portray to me - an amorphous mess with little direction and less attraction to me. The web site is still a useful source of info, however, and for those who are making use of the discounts, it's not a bad thing. The 'class war' aspect has not been apparent as far as I'm concerned.
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Mon 20-09-04 9:16; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it's not really fair to blame the entire scgb membership for the behaviour of a few people on the ruling Council. I have been on some Club holidays and have not experienced any of this 'snobbish' attitude that some fear.
As with most 'national' organisations in the UK, it's mostly run by a few involved people, very often in London, who can be bothered to do the work. Which is all absolutely fine except that occasionally one of these organisations may find itself being run by people with, shall we say, atypical views. The normal remedy for that is for a wider membership to vote for different people to do the work. It seems that is not the case this year with the Club. I expect that after a while the people concerned will fade away and others, with what I would call a more sensible attitude, will take over.
In the meantime, although there may be other reasons not to join the Club, I don't believe these snobbish attitudes are a reality and so they should not deter people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
What is this thread really about, I wonder. The Ski Club is about getting out there skiing. Who cares about this image thing, whatever that word implies. I have skied with various members and reps and it's been fun. Nothing snobby - not sure what that means in this context either. Or is there some other agenda here eg carping here about the folk who run the club in London? : 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
daski, in fact the Ski Club is very self-conscious about its image but I totally agree with you. What a Club does defines its image. As it evolves and changes its activities and services it attracts people who feel an affinity with those ideas. The more those services appeal to all skiers, the less any feeling of snobbishness or elitism.
What should a national ski club charge for a year's basic subscription? £25? £40? £60 £100?
More to the point, what are the essential basic functions of a national ski club to be financed by those subscriptions? Publishing? Publishing what? How? Running ski holidays? What type, price? Training and assessing skiers? Training ski instructors? Organising ski shows, film shows? Talks on skiing? Making videos? Offering discounts to skiers? Organising independent databases of information, archives, a library? What should the Club do on snow? What should it spend on all these things?
Then there are all kinds of issues to do with administration, finance and promotion. I believe that snowHeads, as a community, are in an ideal position to define what a national ski club should be, and what it should cost to join. The image of the club is bound to be positive if people decide to cough up, and word of mouth will naturally achieve new recruitment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
David, we have very mixed feelings towards the SCGB, and have infact just cancelled our membership. We are no longer interested in discounts, have never been interested in the holidays[to independant] but on the whole have enjoyed the company of the reps, again they have been let down by other reps attitudes.
How many people first venture out on to the snow as a result of having parents who can afford to take them, and not as a result of organised school trips. Yes I know the question of teacher liability will raise its head, but surely encouraging skiing amongst the masses has to start in schools, as part of a full sports package.
I would be glad to pay my membership if I saw the SCGB involved at this level, giving freely of its self and vast experience. I would gladly help too! Forgive me if I have missed something, but if they are involved I have not seen any evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, I noticed the other day that the SCGB is a 'member group' of SnowSport GB, the governing British authority for competitive snowsports.
I'm not sure what this actually involves... Can you enlighten me DG? I can understand the logic behind the membership of all the others (Snowsport England, Snowsport Scotland, Snowsport Wales, Nothern Ireland Ski Council), British Alpine Racing Ski Clubs (BARSC), British Association of Snowsports Instructors (BASI), British Snowboard Association, Combined Services Winter Sports Association, but the SCGB does seem to be the odd one out.
The Snowsport GB articles state the following:
| Quote: |
| The British Ski & Snowboard Federation, trading as Snowsport GB, is made up of 9 constituent member groups, including the Home Nation Governing Bodies plus a number of other organisations who collectively manage British snowsports from grass roots to elite competitive level. The role of the Snowsport GB is primarily the management and promotion of Britain’s top international snowsports competitors and the co-ordination of UK activities. |
So the SCGB officially have a "management role" in British snowsports???
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
This can be dated back to the early 1960s when the Ski Club - originally the governing body of British ski racing - took the view that it couldn't justify the cost and organisation of competitive skiing.
The National Ski Federation was born (I'm relating this from memory, but I recall that being the name) and this operated from the same building in Eaton Square for around 20 years, independently of the Club but with considerable involvement.
Since that time the British Ski Federation, and its subsequent replacements, has been reorganised several times with a progressive scaling back of the SCGB's involvement. I don't know the full details on this.
I know little about other sports and their organisation, but I believe the Royal Yachting Association (as an example) is a governing body of both the competitive and instructional sides of its sport.
The Ski Club is now essentially devoted only to recreational skiing, which is fine by me. The question I'm putting is: what should it most relevantly do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
I think HG hit the nail on the head take skiing to the masses school and the forces is where i developed a love for the snow not everyone goes into the forces but we all at some point went to school what better way for the club to attract younger members which after all is what it needs most.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
snowHeads 
