No longer welcomed
44 replies
Junezhubby replied on 28/03/2017 17:57
Tinwheeler replied on 28/03/2017 19:13
grin factor replied on 28/03/2017 19:36
Posted on 28/03/2017 19:36
I don't contribute much on here but if this is all the OP has to worry about, he has no worries that I can see.
I agree a million quid is a lot of dosh, and we are paying for it with increased site fees. Yes it could have been spent better elsewhere, but as in politics, those "In Charge" always think they know better, and sadly, as in politics, they are out of touch with the people.
4 people like this
mickysf replied on 28/03/2017 20:41
ABM replied on 28/03/2017 21:51
Posted on 28/03/2017 20:41 by mickysfHey, we're all caravaners, motorised or otherwise! Don't forget that the original and ancient caravaners lived in tents!
Alienation is futile, as I'm sure the Borg would say!
mickysf replied on 29/03/2017 05:43
TwoBeards replied on 30/03/2017 20:52
Posted on 26/03/2017 17:19 by InaDMotorhome is just a different word for campervan, IMHO. On CT one is either a caravanner or motorhomer on one's profile. Perhaps that's where the new name came from?
I couldn't care less what the club is called, but do consider the expenditure the name change necessitated a waste of money, which could have been put to better use. Again, IMHO.
JVB66 replied on 30/03/2017 20:55
Wildwood replied on 01/04/2017 15:32
Posted on 30/03/2017 20:52 by TwoBeardsLike keeping Much Wenlock site for example (which has now reopened under private ownership BTW
Quakerboy replied on 20/06/2017 23:00
Posted on 20/06/2017 23:00
I have spoken with a number of members about the rebrand, not one of them is happy with it. Before taking such a huge step and spending an equally huge amount of members' money we should, at least, have had an opportunity to vote on whether we approved of it. How many times have we seen comments in the Club magazine telling us that it is OUR club, that we should all take a greater interest in what is going on, in and with it? As far as the rebrand is concerned we were told nothing about it before the deed was done. Not only were we, the members, kept in the dark but a warden told me that they were only told about it the same day that it was revealed to the membership. Why all the secrecy? Didn't anyone think that such secrecy may have prompted thoughts of misdeeds within the hierarchy? After all, in recent years, some of the Club sites have had their names changed, requiring new signage? Then the colour of the livery was changed, requiring more new signage. Now the name of the Club has been changed, requiring even more new signage. What has been the cost of all of these changes? How many other changes are planned in the near future? Has the same printing company been employed on all three changes? Does anyone within the hierarchy have any links with that/those companies? I am not the only member who has thought about this. Why didn't someone within the hierarchy think the same way before these changes were made? The membership should have been consulted before the decision to spend such a large amount of money was made. I respectfully suggest that we should revert to the former name with the cost of such a move being borne by all of those who were complicit in the rebrand.
Fisherman