 Poster: A snowHead
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| I know of no other membership organisation which regards 19-year olds, 20-year-olds, 21-year-olds, 22-year-olds and 23-year-olds as (effectively) children. Since these are the offspring of A B C1 households, because of the SCGB's demographic, they will generally have fled the nest at these ages to enter higher education etc. |
I belong to a ski club in Canada where the offspring can remain part of the "family"membership until they reach the ripe old age of 27. 
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ...particularly when determining membership growth percentages - I think it's best to work with paying subscription units only. |
I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| riverman wrote: |
| bertie bassett, The DHO membership is not so quite "Hooray Henry" these days as the On the Piste programme . |
that's good then - as they definitely came across in On the Piste like that
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Journalist, paying units still went up over the last 2 years though - didn't they! And if the number of family members goes up it is likely there will cease being some individual under 24s. And counting families once ignores spouses you old Patriarch!
But we have done that one to death...
Going to answer the questions? 1) why are you still a club member? 2) why have you decided to rescind your self-banishment here? 3) Are you planning to ski this year? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ..........I know of no other membership organisation which regards 19-year olds, 20-year-olds, 21-year-olds, 22-year-olds and 23-year-olds as (effectively) children. Since these are the offspring of A B C1 households, because of the SCGB's demographic, they will generally have fled the nest at these ages to enter higher education etc......... |
Doesn't the state itself consider that age group to be - effectively- children by taking parents' income into account when considering student funding?
| The NUS wrote: |
| Your household income, including, if appropriate, your parents' income, will affect your funding. |
Just musing , really, as you probably know, I am no longer a SCGB member. Society seems to consider the Bank of Mum and Dad should be supporting children at least into early middle age. Rather nice of the Club to recognise that, and cut a little slack, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| stoatsbrother wrote: |
Going to answer the questions? 1) why are you still a club member? 2) why have you decided to rescind your self-banishment here? 3) Are you planning to ski this year? |
1) I'm still a member because I enjoy being a member. [Many people think that I am a member.] Presumably a sense of enjoyment is why anyone belongs to it. I don't necessarily seek to write-off my membership in material or monetary terms, though everyone's welcome to seek whatever they wish from membership.
2) Pardon me, but what the Ross does this have to do with anything in this thread? If I skied for 6 months this winter, or 6 days (or not at all) would it have any bearing on this thread? I'm not aware that SCGB Terms and Conditions include the phrase "You are required to ski to validate your membership". It's quite possible that I'll head for Davos this winter, but don't put money on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| .......2) Pardon me, but what the Ross does this have to do with anything in this thread? If I skied for 6 months this winter, or 6 days (or not at all) would it have any bearing on this thread? I'm not aware that SCGB Terms and Conditions include the phrase "You are required to ski to validate your membership". It's quite possible that I'll head for Davos this winter, but don't put money on it. |
So that's a 'no' then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Lizzard wrote: |
| David Goldsmith, perfectly serious point. You remark on the dearth of young club members while at the same time banging on incessantly about a load of incredibly tedious rubbish. Assuming that you are typical of the membership, it's hardly surprising that the place is dominated by boring old farts, is it? |
As previously suggested, personal insults are best delivered with Groucho-type penetration, viz:
"You're the reason our kids are so ugly"
"I've got a good mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it"
"I could dance with you until the cows come home... on second thoughts, I'll dance with the cows and you go home."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, any decision to include children up to 24 in family memberships has to be based on cold logic:
1. Is the consequent loss of 19s to 24s as independent members exceeded by the gain of more people joining as ex-family members at the age of 25? The new policy was presented as an opportunity to collect email addresses of the 'children' and promote independent membership to them when they 'came of age' at 25.
2. Or is it merely a good wheeze for boosting gross membership numbers?
In a couple of years we'll know if the policy decision was any good, by looking at the independent 'age 19' membership numbers and the 'age 25' membership numbers. Because ultimately it must always be about genuine membership growth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| achilles, any decision to include children up to 24 in family memberships has to be based on cold logic....... |
I don't think that is true. A club is not in business for paying dividends to shareholders, it is there to benefit its members and their common interests. Assisting youngsters seems to have the members' approval. Certainly, whilst I was a member, I did not begrudge the subsidy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's one point of view. Another view, expressed at the AGM (not by me, but by several other members), was that the Club was not gaining enough new members in their twenties. In other words, it's not about vague sentimentality and goodwill, but about hard membership numbers.
Time for a lot of (genuine) research, communication and creative thinking, perhaps. I suppose one extreme would be to replace the Wimbledon clubhouse with a youth hostel in the Alps (not necessarily in La Rosiere).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
David Goldsmith, could be. I wish you and the Club well. Have a good season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Thank you. There were several seats at the AGM marked 'Reserved' (which seemed quite an interesting concept).
Maybe they were reserved for snowHeads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, I hope you do get to Davos and have a good time. We all need some snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Yawn 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Lizzard wrote: |
| David GoldsmithAssuming that you are typical of the membership, it's hardly surprising that the place is dominated by boring old farts, is it? |
Like this chap ? Boring,old..
Cannot remember exactly who was there.
What with the free bar, I am afraid we were all very, very drunk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| It's quite possible that I'll head for Davos this winter, but don't put money on it. |
If you're there end of January, I'd be happy to share a day or two in the off-piste with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| johnboy wrote: |
| Yawn |
We're genuinely sorry about that. Your comment has been passed to snowheads Customer Services Department who will, of course, arrange a refund. If any future threads disappoint, please return them to Haberdashery, who will be pleased to provide a replacement reel or refer you to Knickers.
Levitt - thanks and greetings!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
...and if you're there at the beginning of January you may meet me (on my wooden cored skis) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| johnboy wrote: |
| Yawn |
You're only saying that because you're not a 'paying unit', I wonder when they ceased to be members?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| johnboy wrote: |
| Pawn |
I agree. Apparently chess sites account for 99% of internet revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Apparently chess sites account for 99% of internet revenue. |
If you had said chest sites, I might have been more inclined to believe you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Latchigo wrote: |
What with the free bar, I am afraid we were all very, very drunk. |
Ah, the free bar. Was encouraged to see that I was not alone in rejecting the hospitality/buttering-up this year.
I see from the annual accounts that the 'Club events' expenditure mushroomed from £9,157 (in 2006-7) to £23,413 (in 2007-2008). In 2005 these events made a profit of £457, which is presumably how it should be unless a subsidy is valid. What percentage of our Club's members attend these events? (not double-counting those who attend multiple events).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 final 'AGM question' for this year:
The minutes of the 2007 SCGB AGM (29 November 2007) were distributed to members on 7 August 2008. The Chairman of the 2007 AGM had promised them 'after Christmas', so he was therefore broadly correct.
I was wondering if anyone with more experience of AGMs of national organisations than me could throw some light on when members would normally expect to receive minutes [bearing in mind the important dual function of minutes: to inform non-attendees of what happened, and to act as a veracious record of what everyone said].
The 2008 AGM was held last Thursday 27 November, which provides scope for a fun competition:
FUN COMPETITION
Star Prize!!
Just guess the date on which you predict the minutes of the SCGB 2008 Annual General Meeting will be published on the SCGB website and/or emailed to members (earliest date applies):
December 2008: specify date
January 2009: specify date
February 2009: specify date
March 2009: specify date
April 2009: specify date
May 2009: specify date
June 2009: specify date
July 2009: specify date
August 2009: specify date
September 2009: specify date
October 2009: specify date
November 2009: specify date
The person who specifies the date closest to the actual date will win a copy of my favourite snow-related book, which will be posted with my compliments and thanks for taking part! Just enter your winning date below.
-------
Terms and conditions: (1) Entries must be posted on this thread by Saturday 20 December 2008. In the event of two identical dates being entered the first date received will be eligible for the prize. (2) The date you specify will be your copyright. (3) The prize is a quality hardback book, which may be supplied in good secondhand condition. In the event that you prefer an alternative book (e.g. you already have the prize book) of equal value, this will be supplied. (4) Can't think of any more terms and conditions.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Wed 3-12-08 17:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, surely the date I specify cannot be my copyright unless I invent a new date that doesn't already exist on the calendar. Your Ts & Cs are hopelessly flawed.
The best time to write the minutes is surely immediately after the meeting. ie in this case, first thing next morning. I would imagine they'll be scratching their heads as to how best explain why they haven't coughed up the money collected over the last 2 years for the Woodland Trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Just gimme a date, Swiller, and stop twittering in the trees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
And don't call me Shirley
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it true they havent sent my donation to the Woodland Trust for the wristband.................I am contacting my solicitor immediately 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
............oh and 15 March 09........ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
I predict you'll get them on a friday afternoon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
David Goldsmith,
As an enviromenally aware SCGB member are you aware of any way one can opt for not receiving the minutes or of receiving them electroncally, they go straight from envelope to recycling bin in my household without passing my eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
14th January 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Smokin Gun, if you paid for the wristband in or before 2006, this page may clarify income/donations from the 'Respect the Mountain' campaign. As I understand it, the financial information on this page is correct to 2006:
http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/respectthemountain/environment/skiclub.asp
[Correction 15.38: Having taken a fresh look at that page, it appears that the expenditure information has been recently updated. The income figures appear to be up to 2006]
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Wed 3-12-08 16:39; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Smokin Joe, Maybe there getting some "We sort of accidently / deliberately forgot to respect the mountain" wristbands made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
T Bar, that's slightly puzzling. The minutes are only posted on demand. I received them electronically last August.
Are you sure you're thinking of SCGB minutes, and not the minutes of the British Papermaking Corporation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
David Goldsmith,
Probably not the minutes then but some other piece of bumf, as I say I don't read anything other than the mag occasionally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Annual Report and Accounts are worth a read. Equally glossy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
The Annual Report and Accounts are worth a read
|
I suspect I will be able to resist their allure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
T Bar, you're obviously a keen reader. Would you like to win a book - just enter a date.
You can't winnit without being innit. Innit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st April 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
