More discussions...
What about all the BOFREG members that exist, i.e. those who have joined BOF but do not belong to a club or region. I see them on results lists (not that many but they do exist). Is BOF going to do away with this membership and tell the BOFREGers to join a club and region in the area they live in ??
New BOF Membership proposals
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
freaky_phil wrote:although the levy they pay will go to BOF it does not cover their insurance,
So what dare i ask, does the levy cover, given that we are talking about a lot of people (and a lot of money) here.
BOFregers are a pain (although of course BOF wont care about that because they get the money and the number input) but they just parasite off others' hard work like the people who are members of those amorphous "Old Boys" clubs without being members of a proper club - they rarely do any actual work for the sport like put on a proper event or do any mapping and piggy back onto other club's efforts - but as long as they're BOF members BOF won't do anything about that iniquity because it doesn't affect them.
-
Mrs H. - nope godmother
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Middle England
Mrs H. wrote:...they just parasite off others' hard work like the people who are members of those amorphous "Old Boys" clubs without being members of a proper club
Imagine that. You orienteer a bit at university and have stayed in the sport only because of your 'Old Boys' club and mainly for social reasons, even though you hardly ever orienteer.
Your 'Old Boys' club is kept going largely by people who are also highly active members of a local club and give a great deal to the sport. Those people are involved with the 'Old Boys' club too because they think it is worthwhile to keep in touch and to encourage people not to drift out of the sport completely.
And all that time you never realised that by staying in touch with your old friends and occasionally taking part in that sport, all you are is a worthless parasite. And apparently that 'Old Boys' club you joined is not even a proper club.....
- Jon X
- green
- Posts: 314
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 9:20 pm
- Location: should be out training
exactly. some people don't have the time to put heaps back into the sport, but want to keep in touch with their friends, the sport, and perhaps occasionally compete.
whats wrong with that?
i like to play football every so often. no ones told me i have to join the FA and be a member of a club.
whats wrong with that?
i like to play football every so often. no ones told me i have to join the FA and be a member of a club.
-
bendover - addict
- Posts: 1459
- Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2003 5:00 am
- Location: London
Jon X wrote:And all that time you never realised that by staying in touch with your old friends and occasionally taking part in that sport, all you are is a worthless parasite. And apparently that 'Old Boys' club you joined is not even a proper club.....
Excellent heart rending stuff - he he he
and Ben, how does the above equate with
if you choose to opt out of BOF, then why should you have a say in how
Arn't you advocating both sides of the system?
-
Mrs H. - nope godmother
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Middle England
like the people who are members of those amorphous "Old Boys" clubs without being members of a proper club - they rarely do any actual work for the sport like put on a proper event or do any mapping and piggy back onto other club's efforts
' Substantial numbers of those Old Boy club members do loads for the sport (and even some Old Girls!), usually through their open club, but also helping keep younger orienteers in the sport through their ex-Uni clubs.. And these clubs have even been known to put on the occasional event - after all we wouldn't have the Harvester Trophy or the JOK Chasing Sprint if it hadn't been for these clubs.
And if you're focusing solely on those who don't join an open club - well there are loads of open club members who don't do anything for the sport either, other than compete and pay levy and membership fees of course. Could even be a higher proportion than for OB/G clubs.
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
We definitely need one membership level; everyone a British Orienteer, but club based because that is where 90% of the events are planned etc.
Many clubs, like mine, WCOC, have very large local only sections. The changes to a BOF subscription must be phased if we are going to retain those people. You can't just triple the fees! A ramp over three years is needed.
Although the membership structure is the first plank to get into position, our overriding concern is for increase in participation. With maybe 20,000 orienteers in GB (in total) we need to focus on doubling that. If your club is active, puts on lots of small local events, you will attract people. Let's focus on that. Simplify your small events, and look after everyone who turns up. No more talk about exclusion or penalising competitors; we can not afford to lose any more orienteers.
BOFREGers are probably making a point. Perhaps they don't feel at home in their local club!??! Perhaps address that thought. It doesn't really cost them any less in membership fees each year.
We have a great product. A unique overprinted course and electronic timing to take you on an exciting navigational and physical challenge. How can we fail to impress the uninitiated? If the 20,000 current membership each brought along a friend during 2005........ Do it!
Many clubs, like mine, WCOC, have very large local only sections. The changes to a BOF subscription must be phased if we are going to retain those people. You can't just triple the fees! A ramp over three years is needed.
Although the membership structure is the first plank to get into position, our overriding concern is for increase in participation. With maybe 20,000 orienteers in GB (in total) we need to focus on doubling that. If your club is active, puts on lots of small local events, you will attract people. Let's focus on that. Simplify your small events, and look after everyone who turns up. No more talk about exclusion or penalising competitors; we can not afford to lose any more orienteers.
BOFREGers are probably making a point. Perhaps they don't feel at home in their local club!??! Perhaps address that thought. It doesn't really cost them any less in membership fees each year.
We have a great product. A unique overprinted course and electronic timing to take you on an exciting navigational and physical challenge. How can we fail to impress the uninitiated? If the 20,000 current membership each brought along a friend during 2005........ Do it!
- RJ
Not at the expense of the sport itself. ( I should have said membership numbers). i think they are in grave danger of killing the goose that's laying the golden egg. Sitting in on these JK meetings has been a real eye opener for me. BOF collect 2/3rds of the profit of the event and leave the rest to be divided between the clubs of the organising association. HOC will be lucky to make as much as a moderately successful badge event having put in ten times the effort. What is that BOF money spent on? Who will agree to host these events in the future for such a meagre return? A club needs to be set up for 2-3 years following this amount of effort to make it worth while. i can't yet see what the BOF input has been. Although a BOF bod did come to the last meeting although i suspect he wished he hadn't as it was very obvious that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing at HQ judging by his confusion. I have a sneaky feeling that a lot more Matlock energy is going on the world cup round than the JK and yet I really can't believe it's going to have that much relavance to the majority of the membership or impact on the future of the sport .
RJ is right - we should be thinking from the ground up and BOF should be actively rewarding the clubs who are doing this kind of work.
RJ is right - we should be thinking from the ground up and BOF should be actively rewarding the clubs who are doing this kind of work.
-
Mrs H. - nope godmother
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Middle England
RJ wrote:We definitely need one membership level; everyone a British Orienteer
This is easy to say in England, where your sportscouncil looks at BOF membership levels to determine English funding. But in Scotland, the sportscouncil looks at SOA membership.
If 90% of club-onlies sign up to compulsory BOF membership and 10% quit, it will increase sportscouncil funding to English orienteering and reduce it to Scottish orienteering.
Does BOF have the whit to address this externally imposed source of friction? Or will it be ignored and the Anglo-Scots bickering reignited?
Graeme
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
To bring this one up again.
A couple of days ago I (as well as - presumably - the others who wrote to him to express their views on the BOF proposal) received an email from Dick Towler (one of the BOF Councillors) to update us on what's been discussed at the BOF Management Committee meeting earlier this month:
My first reaction was that £100/annum, although it won't much affect the larger clubs (as it'll work out as some 50p per person, it can easily be absorbed in an almost unperceptibly higher club membership fee), is going to affect hugely clubs like CUOC (and other Uni clubs). With an average of 20 members in the club each year, that would be an extra £5 per person, and given that students are not earning money, it'll be awfully hard to get new members to join (the current membership fee is around £8 and it's hard enough to get that out of people).
I wonder if there has been some discussion of waiving this fee (or at least reducing it) for University clubs? I suspect that at the Unis where a couple of people just keep a club ticking over so that it's there, even if not very active, the Uni O clubs would be more likely to fold (and less likely to be re-formed?).
What are other people's views on this?
Blanka
A couple of days ago I (as well as - presumably - the others who wrote to him to express their views on the BOF proposal) received an email from Dick Towler (one of the BOF Councillors) to update us on what's been discussed at the BOF Management Committee meeting earlier this month:
Hi, all
I am writing to let you know that BOF Management Committee has decided to
recommend to Council an alternative membership proposal, to replace the one
put out for consultation last September. Comments received on that earlier
proposal led Management Committee to conclude that that proposal was
divisive. It is hoped that the new proposal will be more widely accepted.
The gist of the new proposal is that:
All members of clubs will have the option, free of charge, of automatically
registering with BOF.
Clubs will pay to BOF an increased affiliation fee of £100/annum, plus a
participation fee calculated with reference to the number of entries to each
club's events in the previous year. How clubs raise the fees to pay to BOF
will be up to them.
I have just given up putting into words exactly how it is proposed the
participation fee will be calculated. It's actually very simple, but not so
easy to explain unambiguously. Worked examples will be included in a
presentation of the proposal currently being prepared by BOF. Once I receive
this paper, I'll forward it to you.
Many thanks for your comments on the previous proposal.
Best regards
Dick Towler
BOF Councillor.
My first reaction was that £100/annum, although it won't much affect the larger clubs (as it'll work out as some 50p per person, it can easily be absorbed in an almost unperceptibly higher club membership fee), is going to affect hugely clubs like CUOC (and other Uni clubs). With an average of 20 members in the club each year, that would be an extra £5 per person, and given that students are not earning money, it'll be awfully hard to get new members to join (the current membership fee is around £8 and it's hard enough to get that out of people).
I wonder if there has been some discussion of waiving this fee (or at least reducing it) for University clubs? I suspect that at the Unis where a couple of people just keep a club ticking over so that it's there, even if not very active, the Uni O clubs would be more likely to fold (and less likely to be re-formed?).
What are other people's views on this?
Blanka
- Blanka
- green
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:54 pm
- Location: Oxford
aye totally agree £100 per year is going to be a shot in the arm for small clubs. This could be the end of some of them.
have they not thought of introducing a sliding scale big clubs paying over the odds reflecting in their big memeberships and small clubs having to pay very little
have they not thought of introducing a sliding scale big clubs paying over the odds reflecting in their big memeberships and small clubs having to pay very little
nope it i still have the coolest hat in school
-
eddie - [nope] cartel
- Posts: 2260
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 4:54 pm
- Location: back at the begining
It would be better to have a sliding scale based on membership. For our small club, this would work out at about £2.50 each, whereas for a large neighbouring club it would only work out at about 60p.
Even if there was only a large/small club split (perhaps similar to CSC/CST) it would be more equitable.
Even if there was only a large/small club split (perhaps similar to CSC/CST) it would be more equitable.
-
PorkyFatBoy - diehard
- Posts: 654
- Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 9:13 am
- Location: A contour-free zone
What this looks like is a levy only system under another name. After all, it doesn't matter how the club raises the cash, it's going to have to be paid for by participants, unless clubs come up with other wheezes to raise money.
Given what the Chief Exec told me, that effectively means (less the £100 per club) a doubling of levy. Which, if it is the case, will seriously clobber you if you are a regular orienteer, even more so if a family. I await the figures and workings with some interest, but at first glance this, if anything, looks worse than the previous set of proposals.
As a family, we have already cut back on our orienteering at major events - the costs are increasingly prohibitive. For me, playing table-tennis is something like three times cheaper than regional/national events on entry fees alone, and infinitely less on travel.
And I'm still yet to be convinced of BOF's expenditure plans.
Given what the Chief Exec told me, that effectively means (less the £100 per club) a doubling of levy. Which, if it is the case, will seriously clobber you if you are a regular orienteer, even more so if a family. I await the figures and workings with some interest, but at first glance this, if anything, looks worse than the previous set of proposals.
As a family, we have already cut back on our orienteering at major events - the costs are increasingly prohibitive. For me, playing table-tennis is something like three times cheaper than regional/national events on entry fees alone, and infinitely less on travel.
And I'm still yet to be convinced of BOF's expenditure plans.
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 197 guests