Surely these are matters for members to raise within the Club and no one else?
You don't understand about fearless journalism do you. Hang around. You will.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
[quote]
Comedy Goldsmith, ah I see. You are on the good end of the shitty stick. So what do all the members on the bad end of the shitty stick get for £65 per year, other than tickets to the debating contest?
dirty smelling hands smelling of p--
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?
Quite probably, but often then best way to deal with an itch is not to scratch it as that often provokes a further itching,scratching cycle.
Herein lies my ointment, try not to scratch and the itch is likely to go away, mostly if not completely.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Yes, we know all about Gerry Aitken's predictions, promises and commitments over the past decade. As his second term as a SCGB director expires next month ... what is there to show for the 7 years?
'Ten unanswered questions' ... to be strictly accurate
After all it is free
After all it is free
I thought @Karl Marx and @Gerry were supposed to meet in some pub to 'get it on' and out of their system once and for all
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.
And we're off.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
So, it does seem that the date of the SCGB AGM was switched ... but when it happened, who knew, and how (or if) it affected nominations for the Club's council ... is not clear.
This is the original announcement (17 June 2015), now amended ...
Please note that any previous articles stating that the AGM was to take place on 29 October 2015 were incorrect. The AGM will take place on 19 November 2015.
But ... as originally and correctly specified (deadline 3 months ahead of AGM) ...
Quote:
The deadline for applications is 5pm on 29 July 2015.
But the correct legal deadline for a 19 November AGM was 19 August. Were nominations accepted discreetly between 29 July and 19 August, if the AGM date was changed between those two dates? When was the SCGB membership universally made aware of the change in date and was a revised deadline ever given?
FFIRMIN won't agree ... but perhaps we should be told.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
The SCGB's 2015 annual report has been published ...
... admittedly from the viewpoint of someone who was expelled from the Club in 2013, but was then offered a half-price subscription to enrol again 18 months later (accepted) ... and a further invitation to join the SCGB by email this very day today 14 Oct 2015 ...
Quote:
Ski Club of Great Britain <theedge> Today at 8:02pm
To dgoldsmith@xxxxxxxxxx.com
Hi David,
We're now just three weeks away from kicking off our winter snow reports, and the white stuff has already been falling in glaciers across the Alps - the image above was taken in Zermatt just this week! Now's the perfect time to plan your trips and buy your new kit – join the Ski Club to take advantage of the great member discounts listed below.
The Ski Club team
I'll have another go at re-joining and will report back. No one can deny the Skeeb's enthusiasm to have me back as a member!
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.
One revelation of the 2015 report (see chairman's statement, p.3, third column) ...
... is that the Club is looking to move again. It has been in Church Rd, Wimbledon, since 1997
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
I see the appeal over the ski leader conviction is being heard at Chambery on 21 October.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
David Goldsmith wrote:
I'll have another go at re-joining and will report back. No one can deny the Skeeb's enthusiasm to have me back as a member!
Classic!
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Fresh tracks income is more than twice the take from subscriptions.
'Ski and board' costs more than either Freshtracks or the Leader service.
That is if you exclude "support costs". Difficult to know how those costs would be allocated across the various services.
I would have said the leader services were more important than the magazine though.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Does anyone else think that £195,000 investment in the website seems high ?
The fact that Ski and Board is no longer available on newstands may well go some way to explaining the fall off in Advertising sales.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
The magazine is accounted for rather strangely these days. It's itemised as "Ski & Board production cost" - at £227,196. So presumably that's not the net cost of publishing it.
What about postage costs?
What about the offset revenue - advertising sales for the mag?
All I can say is that back in the mid-late 1980s and early 1990s - when Ski Survey (the former magazine title) was doing 12,000 (audited) newsstand sales in addition to the membership circulation, it was viewed as the key membership asset.
The problem with 'leader services' is always that the vast majority of SCGB members don't use them. See page 12: only 2048 members AND non-members skied with a leader last winter. That's somewhere between 5% and 10% of the members therefore using the service.
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?
D G Orf wrote:
Does anyone else think that £195,000 investment in the website seems high ?
Very much so, that's either Silicon roundabout levels of f***wittery or a lot of bearded hipsters having meetings about the pantone colours clashing with their javascript thingies
Does anyone else think that £195,000 investment in the website seems high ?......
Yes.
a. It is very expensive for what they will get.
b. I have not looked at their accounts - so could be well out on this one. But my usual rule of thumb is that an investment in a fixed asset or publicity needs to generate 10 times the investment in terms of turnover - assuming that they aim normally for a 10% net profit. So, getting back to the web site, I think they need to generate extra turnover of £1,950,000 to justify it as a business proposition. Unlikely. That said, the SCGB was in a bit of a strange world, when I was last aware of what it did. The Club itself was a not-for-profit company, IIRC, however, they owned Freshtracks which was a company run for profit. Can't quite get my head around that - but maybe my thoughts on ROI in terms of turnover don't apply. Any accountants show could advise?
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Thu 15-10-15 12:07; edited 2 times in total
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
D G Orf wrote:
Does anyone else think that £195,000 investment in the website seems high ?
Not really TBH - depending on what they did and who did it. I'm looking at proposals from agencies for some website work at the moment, and that level of spend is easily achieved if you want any kind of half decent people, but don't want them on your books year round.
yes it is, i worked in that area for a while and you can get as good as any stuff out there for less if you know where to look
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Quote:
Not really TBH - depending on what they did and who did it. I'm looking at proposals from agencies for some website work at the moment, and that level of spend is easily achieved if you want any kind of half decent people, but don't want them on your books year round.
It's a fair number if you go to AKQA or another of the big "NEW MEEEEJA" houses, however I believe it's all done in-house - in which case one has to ask, was it money well spent ...... (*)
* This is my opinion and certainly not the opinion of the benevolent dictator that is Snowheads GmbH
After all it is free
After all it is free
windymiller wrote:
Quote:
Not really TBH - depending on what they did and who did it. I'm looking at proposals from agencies for some website work at the moment, and that level of spend is easily achieved if you want any kind of half decent people, but don't want them on your books year round.
It's a fair number if you go to AKQA or another of the big "NEW MEEEEJA" houses, however I believe it's all done in-house - in which case one has to ask, was it money well spent ...... ? (*)
* This is my opinion and certainly not the opinion of the benevolent dictator that is Snowheads GmbH
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.
@windymiller, dammit, you made me go and actually look at the website now! If that was just investment over this year (and only investment, so not including annual running/normal staff costs), and in house, then yes, it's pretty expensive. It' snot as if there is loads of imagery to bump up the price, so not sure what it would have been spent on.
Would be interesting to see more of a breakdown (and no, I really can't be bothered to read the annual report for myself to see what's in there - I just don't care that much about the SCGB. In fact, why am I even reading this thread?! ).
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
D G Orf wrote:
Does anyone else think that £195,000 investment in the website seems high ?
It says it is for a content management system. If so that number is ridiculous. Maybe £190k to the north of what you might expect.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Quote:
It says it is for a content management system. If so that number is ridiculous. Maybe £190k to the north of what you might expect.
Also looking at expenses, who are they paying for the snow reports?
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.
I made the comment about the website as I'm currently involved with redoing the website for the downhill only club and we will be going to a content management system, we are lucky enough to have some good web design/publicity people who are doing a lot of the work for us at cost but even at full price we'd be talking no more than 1/10th the ski club budget so I'm at a total loss to explain the SCGB website expenses
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
David Goldsmith - rejoin the club and ask your questions directly and from a position of entitlement/strength!
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@D G Orf, £19,500 would still be a huge amount for an HTML5 / CSS3 responsive site with an open source CMS. Under £5k does it with all the bells and whistles. In the case of the Ski Club I think they are confusing CMS with CRM and that can run into 10s of thousands but certainly not £195k.
@FFIRMIN, from what I can tell from page 1, it was the Ski Club that started this thread therefore its their fault if people are openly discussing them isn't it?
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Pruman - but there are good questions which deserve answers and if David is re-accepted then I have no doubt he will continue to ask them from a position which entitles him to ask them ie as a member within a members organisation. It is always much harder to question such an organisation if you do not belong at the time of asking.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@Pruman, I said no more than 10% actually closer to about 6.5% but that's irrelevant as we are getting a custom built wordpress theme for considerably less than that, whatever way you look at it when you add the cost of the infrastructure to the £581,692 they are paying out for admin and IT that's a lot of cash !
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
The appeal hearing of a SCGB rep convicted and fined for leading skiers has been postponed. SCGB statement ...
20 October 2015
Ski Club Leader Appeal Hearing Deferred
The appeal hearing due to take place in Chambery on 21 October has been deferred.
We have not yet been given a new date for the hearing.
The Club is appealing the verdict of a French court, which found a Leader — one of the Club’s volunteers who show members around the mountain, but offer no instruction — guilty of illegal practice.
The volunteer was fined €10,000, of which €5,000 was suspended. The judge also awarded damages of one euro to the Ecole du Ski Français — France’s national ski school, which brought a civil case — for loss of earnings. He was charged in relation to a French law which stipulates that no one can “lead people around the mountains for remuneration unless they are suitably qualified ski instructors”.
As Ski Club Leaders are non-remunerated volunteers, the Club continues to maintain the action is misguided and inappropriate.
More details to follow as soon as they are available.
What a pair of scruffy bar stewards . Not at all how I expect the voice of the british skiing to represent me. What, what?
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
[MOD EDIT: This post was originally in response to other posts since deleted...]
How about asking the SCGB rather than rhetorical questions on here? We get it, the SCGB is dying on its back bottom and making all students who go on a BUSC trip defacto members says nothing about said students intent or desire to continue being paid members. There will always be a core of loyal SCGB members (at least until they die/retire from skiing) but chances of them staying relevant to young and youngish adults seem vanishingly small.
But really very few people here care. No one begrudges sHs who are also SCGB members if they enjoy SCGB activities but equally I suspect there are many who'd rather chop off a limb than partake in a freshtracks holiday (and that is what SCGB mainly seems to have become to me - a mandatory club if you want to go on particular trips).
After all it is free
After all it is free
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
How about asking the SCGB rather than rhetorical questions on here?
AFAIK, the Club refuses to enter into two-way communication with him and that is unlikely to change for all eternity.
Eternity/forever is a long time. Now, imagine a tungsten carbide sphere the size of our sun being brushed by a single butterfly wing every 10,000yrs. Well, when said sphere has been worn away to nothing this two-way communication ban will have only just begun.
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.
We are also reviewing our freehold office premises in Wimbledon, which represent by far the largest financial asset of the Club. We have received several independent professional appraisals of the property and believe it would be in the best interests of members to seek to realise the hidden reserves representedin the value of the property and to relocate to more suitable premises.
Anyone know if the SCGB clubhouse freehold is now for sale? And what is to become of the most important asset within that building - the Sir Arnold Lunn library, ski collection and other archival material?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@Davina Goldballs, Perhaps you could offer to curate the library and archive?
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
).
