FNRttCers - please take a look at this

[dellzeqq]

I'm going to erase this post tomorrow evening, but, in the mean time, I'd appreciate your thoughts...........the formatting is went a bit suss when I pasted it in here, but you get the drift........

 

[Tim Hall]

Ok, so FGSS got denied access. Is there any suggestion that FNRTTC will be treated similarly? The tone in the following paragraph suggests this is the case.

I cannot see why the Friday Night Ride to the Coast should be denied access to Gatwick. If we have to, we’ll find an alternative stopping off point, but, to be honest, the only loss would be to the franchisees at the airport, and the reputation of BAA, which, as you know, undertook to encourage sustainable transport when gaining consent for a greater number of passengers. The FNRttCers behave considerately, and don’t represent a security risk. If security is the concern then I’d have thought it does no harm to have a bunch of people who are fairly alert (Mr. AsleepontheCashMachine aside) in the airport at a time when most of the occupants are pretty dozy. If you harbour anxieties about our visiting the airport, might I suggest that you let me know what those anxieties are as soon as you can – and if you can find out why the London Fixed Gear and Single Speed Club was denied access, that will enable us to avoid a repetition.

It might be worth altering the section above to reflect the "we hope we won't be, but if we were to be denied access" flavour.

This bit:

We used to stop at a friends house

Needs an apostrophe.


This bit rambles slightly:

My point is that we want to get in to Gatwick at about 2.45 and leave at about 3.45 and if the number of riders registered for the ride is so great that it makes a mess of our schedule we’ll go elsewhere.

Surely your point is we want to get access to Gatwick and know beforehand if it's going to be denied to us.



Hope this has been constructive, but it's a slightly rushed response.

 

[Davywalnuts]

Seems good to me.

We dont want to be refused entry on a cold morning in need of refreshments so I see the point.

 

[cheadle hulme]

I don't ride the ride, but he may be a busy man?

Couple of paragraphs of editing wouldn't go amiss.

 

[CopperBrompton]

I'd say it's a VERY long way in before you get to the point, and if I were him I'd probably have stopped reading before then.

I'd open much more along the lines of:

Dear Mr Turner,

I organise an overnight club bicycle ride, and we stop for refreshments at the Costa Coffee at Gatwick.

I was concerned to hear that another cycling club was recently refused access to the airport, and just wanted to ensure that there will be no such issue when we arrive in the early hours of 28th November?

(Then go into the background and reassurances)

 

[Flying Dodo]

I'd agree with Ben's comments. Have the opening comments as he put them, then a couple of further paragraphs of background (but no more), to show they're an official, long running ride which hasn't had any problems in the past.


(I go into M&S rather than Costa Coffee!)

 

[Aperitif]

I'd agree with Ben's comments. Have the opening comments as he put them, then a couple of further paragraphs of background (but no more), to show they're an official, long running ride which hasn't had any problems in the past.


(I go into M&S rather than Costa Coffee!)

Why is that Adam - so you can take it back if it isn't the right size?

Agree - but I fail to see how a cultured BAA executive could possibly miss the chance of a Gatwick photocall with the airport duty photographer + Simon + assorted hoi-polloi - all under the umbrella of 'BAA supports sustainability' etc...

Anyway, I want my coffee, so "Turner. Blind eye" yeh?

 

[Flying Dodo]

I'm an XL man myself.

Anyway, regardless of what the man from BAA might or might not say, just make sure we have the mysterious Pavel with us, photographing our every move, so that if we're met with a roadblock and machine-gun barricades, that will give us the best sort of photo opportunity.

 

[dellzeqq]

this chap, Turner, is, apparently, the man to get us out of our problem - so he needs as much as possible at his disposal. A couple of paragraphs won't do it. We have to hit the bell marked 'sustainable' because they, BAA, have ****ed up. (Interestingly the carbon emissions generated by passengers travelling to the airport are greater than those generated by the flights they catch...). And he won't stop reading it - he knows this is coming.

Point taken about apostrophe in friend's. And that para does ramble a bit.

I know what happened between the LFGSS and the police, indeed I know more than Oliver S, and I'm not telling you....you'll have to ask me on the next FNRttC. Suffice to say, there's a lot of ambition in the fuzz, and pushing it to BAA gets by the ego thing.

The Guardian thing is a kind of threat - is it coming across as that?

Actually, I'm with Aperitif on this - my intention is to give them an opportunity for points.

 

[Aperitif]

Ask Claudine to 'engage' him perhaps..? Invite him to view the anticipation that has been building for the past week since we last joined together...previous rides? Invite Borissimo to ride with us this time?

 

[dellzeqq]

they undertook to sell Gatwick as a destination. Hence the bit about the franchisees.......

just received message from my DA sec. Dating it 9/11 may not be good.

 

[Tim Hall]

The lovely Mrs. Hall can't manage a full ride - she needs her sleep. However she could manage half a ride, and then toddle the few miles home from Gatwick.

I'd then have an empty chair on the tandem.

Do you think Mark Turner would like a go?

 

[clivedb]

Gatwick

Simon

I'm sorry that you're having to undertake this tedious task which seems to be a mixture of feather-smoothing and veiled threats. I do agree with those who have suggested that it might be better to get more quickly to the point - especially the threats perhaps?

So I have taken the liberty of trying to do that on the attached - it may not work for you, but it might help. Please discard or use as you see fit. The transition from the main points in the opening paras into the detail is a little bumpy but in effect the letter is now in two sections.

 

[Tim Hall]

Do we want to keep the "we'll go elsewhere" bit, present in both the original and clivedb's version. Surely this gives BAA an easy get out clause.

 

[dellzeqq]

Do we want to keep the "we'll go elsewhere" bit, present in both the original and clivedb's version. Surely this gives BAA an easy get out clause.

I debated that, and, on reflection, think you're right.