AGM 2023
Comments
-
That’s as maybe but the question was asked at the AGM so that gave rise to the answer. Perhaps the questioner should have asked it elsewhere, like the identical question posted on CT, but it is what it is. 🤷🏻♂️
0 -
Only three of the questions in the list were answered at the AGM and the question you refer too was not one of them. If you re-read the questions, those answered at the meeting have that noted by the submitters name.
Also there were no questions raised from the floor.
0 -
In my ‘working days’ at our ‘AGM’ and quarterly meetings I often had to answer demanding, frequently challenging and on the very odd occasion hostile but valid questioning. Never knew what could crop up under AOB. Pleased I’m away from this now but it always help galvanise thought and future action mind and certainly kept me on my toes and hopefully on the front foot.
So, out of a membership of thousands these 23 questions represented the most pressing and significant issues considered to be in need of addressing?0 -
I would think these questions were selected by the club for a purpose, for an intended audience and/orto clear up any misunderstandings and present the club's view clearly.
But having said that, as I have posted before, I don't think many that use club sites, or even of the 385,000 member households know and/or care about the AGM, they just use the club to gain access to the services it provides.
0 -
I found this part interesting:
we believe that choice is a very important part of the Club today and in the future. 'Non-facility' campsites have always been part of the UK campsite portfolio and will continue to be so in the future. We do however have to ensure we support the wider membership through sensible and reasonable financial management and as such, all of our campsites need a sufficient level of member visits in relation to the costs to operate in order to ensure they continue to be viable.
Just my reading but that appears to say yes we'll have no facility sites for the moment but to be fair to the wider membership (who aren't using them and prefer more facilities?) these sites had better pull their weight or they will go.
Just my view.
2 -
Just my reading but that appears to say yes we'll have no facility sites for the moment but to be fair to the wider membership (who aren't using them and prefer more facilities?) these sites had better pull their weight or they will go.
Perhaps, if they are leased but, I would hope the Club would first consider alternatives and the use of ANPR. I used the ANPR system at Bourton on the Water non facility site this year and thought it efficient and very good. No need for full time site managers at such sites.
peedee
0 -
Not convinced by ANPR, they certainly don’t eliminate access and egress of determined non desirables. I’d be saddened to see those staff members who incidentally are fellow members (I think that’s still the case) not being available for arrivals and for much of the day. I recall decades ago being told that the likes of Dockray Meadow, an unprofitable site then, was viewed as a gem by members and a ‘loss leader’ to the club and was thus supported by the income from the bigger sites. Think Englethwaite was similar. However, I recognise that this was a very different era with a different club ethos. Maybe some possible questions for next year are emerging!
0 -
I know I should have been paying attention but in the past the submitted questions were published before the actual meeting. Did that happen this year?
David
0 -
Not convinced by ANPR, they certainly don’t eliminate access and egress of determined non desirables.
I would sooner see sites fitted with ANPR and unmaned than lose them. Losses have to be covered somehow. It is all well and good saying other more profitable sites should support them but all that does is push up prices. This concern of undesirables causing problems is unfounded, there are tougher laws now in place to deal with such problems and in any case whether it is unmaned or fully staffed makes no difference. Problems can still happen on fully staffed sites.
peedee
2 -
While I fully welcome ANPR on club sites to enable a swift entry, especially if pre-paid, sites will still need club staff to maintain the site, grass cut, hardstanding maintained and general tidiness even on non facilities sites. I think the trial at one site (near Killin?) was where there was a staffed site nearby. What happens if the ANPR fails in a remote site?
The club model is to have staffed sites, and more importantly to have those staff live on site, or as in the case above a few minutes away. It is, in my opinion a good model, help is on hand from 11 hours a day and 24/7 in case of real emergencies. Personally it's a very big plus point and I know some see it as being too 'looked after' but it's what club members appear to like. I would think removing them would make these sites even less attractive
Also this won't cut costs fully, even those owned by the club with no 'rent' will need maintenance, will have water and waste services costs, rubbish collection costs, some electricity costs and there must be a break even point even when even losses will be too much if they are not used. There are always pitches at most if not all non facities sites, even fantastically located and popular Borrowdale for next year - so far.
0 -
Just like most politicians
0 -
Kj
Tend to agree. The answers didn't seem as candid as in previous years and I don't think we learnt a lot where as in previous years some of the answers had been quite enlightening?
David
0 -
Maybe the "management" have learnt from previous online AGMs just how to avoid answering pointed question while at the same time saying just what they want to say!
0 -
Nellie
I am not sure many "pointed questions" were actually asked which does make the job, as you say, of management much easier. If you ask closed questions you will get closed answers. On the other hand if people asked more challenging open questions it would be more difficult to side step them. An example is the question about allowing motorhomes to use club site to dump and refill water for a small (ish) charge whilst not staying on site. Two years running the Club have said that wild camping is illegal and they don't want to encourage that. Fair enough one could say. However if the questioner had pointed out that with the increasing number of perfectly legitimate places for motorhomes to stay over night like car parks where an overnight fee is paid or the increasing number of pubs that allow overnight parking, sometimes free if you eat a meal. (I think TDA may have used such stops?) Clearly these places don't usually have facilities but are not illegal so the Club would have had to answer the question in a different way. I don't suppose it would have been a substantially different answer but it would be more difficult to dismiss the question. I am not trying to start a debate on whether the Club should allow such access just trying to illustrate how asking a question a different way, might just get a different answer.
David
1 -
I don’t think we will ever know how many or how pointed many of the submitted questions actually were, David. Maybe the selection of those representing the different ‘subjects’ were selected because of their ‘ease’ of answering for the memberships. I cannot for one minute believe that only 23 questions were submitted.
0 -
Two years ago (I think) I submitted a question. As far as I remember the instructions/guidance said that if the same question had already been submitted, then I couldn't ask it again. And also, I think, already submitted questions were grouped and I could see them online. After the AGM I got an emailed answer, as well as a link to all the answered questions.
0 -
As I've often said people just using club sites just use them as simply that a campsite and are not at all interested about AGMs, yearly reviews, financial statements...
Another thing that occured to me was that the questions were nearly all about club site usage.
People often post about people join the club for other reasons rather than using club sites yet no questions about CLs for example and other club products and services, unless of course there's no concerns on these?
0
