Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
My copy of their ad rag went in the bin unread.
Touring Cyclist Club
- Thread starter robgul
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
hoppym27
Well-Known Member
I might have missed something but i stumbled on this thread and clicked on the link, it just took me to some online shop selling canadian hockey and american football replica kit???
Zactly. There were no spoiler tags or anything.
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
The website you visited was that of an organisation set up as an alternative to the CTC for those disappointed in some major changes in the CTC organisation. It would appear that the new organisation failed to gain sufficient support to continue. Why a disused website address would be taken over by a business unconnected with cycle touring, I don't know.
Edit What Milkfloat said in fewer words
.
OP
OP
robgul
Legendary Member
The website you visited was that of an organisation set up as an alternative to the CTC for those disappointed in some major changes in the CTC organisation. It would appear that the new organisation failed to gain sufficient support to continue. Why a disused website address would be taken over by a business unconnected with cycle touring, I don't know.
Edit What Milkfloat said in fewer words
Your surmise is correct - lots of interest and a group enlisted to develop the idea - but when it came to any work, commitment or contribution the enthusiasm waned.
As one of the joint founders we decided to close the project . . . we were also thwarted by CTC's insurer (a monopoly) creating insurmountable barriers for a member insurance offer which was key to the plan.
The website domain name has lapsed and through the mysteries of the internet companies harvest these names and display odd stuff - nothing do with us guv!
Rob
hoppym27
Well-Known Member
Ahhh..Ok..thanks for clearing that up...shame it never took off though although I do know how difficult these type of things are to get off the ground so I do understand the challenges
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
Insurers are never a monopoly. Someone, somewhere, would have been persuadable if you'd pitched up with the right proposition.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
"Someone, somewhere".
Yes, the insurer that covers CUK might not have been willing, but someone, somewhere would have been with the right proposition. Of course, the proposition on offer might not have been the right proposition for an insurer, but blaming insurers for the unwillingness of the challengers to put together an attractive package for members is a cop-out.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
A club looking to intermediate insurance for its members isn't the client, it's the distributor. It will be making money from the sale of insurance. The members are the (potential) clients.
Would you blame the entire food distribution industry if you waltzed into Tesco and they refused to offer you a discount so you could set up your own shop? No. You would look around until you found a wholesaler who was happy to work with you. Or you might accept that starting a shop is not the simple proposition you thought.
OP
OP
robgul
Legendary Member
I'm not proposing to make any further comment after this as, per usual, the "experts with no facts" are posting. The reasons that the plan was stopped were as detailed in my recent post :
- initial enthusiasm from a core group that failed to materialise as contribution and input when it came to the point to get moving.
- failure to secure an insurance offering which was a key requirement indicated by the initial research. We spent a lot of time pursuing possibilities although almost all avenues came back to the same broker (Butterworth Spengler) for whichever company (or cycling organisation) and they refused on the basis of QUOTE: "conflict with our other major clients" - the ONLY option we found was for cover linked to a very expensive (aren't they all?) bicycle theft cover product which would not have worked. IF there had been immediate volume in tens of thousands then the situation would have doubtless been different.
We gave it a good shot and it didn't work - our efforts were on an unpaid basis and after very minimal costs the balance of the modest funds contributed was donated to charity (NOT CTC!) that has relevance to cycling.
It's unfortunate that the lapsing of the domain name has led to the current content - on reflection to have paid the annual domain registration fee of about £5 a year for a few more years would have been a good idea. [I did look yesterday to see if there was any way that we could retrieve it but there isn't]
That's it - over and out!
Rob
- initial enthusiasm from a core group that failed to materialise as contribution and input when it came to the point to get moving.
- failure to secure an insurance offering which was a key requirement indicated by the initial research. We spent a lot of time pursuing possibilities although almost all avenues came back to the same broker (Butterworth Spengler) for whichever company (or cycling organisation) and they refused on the basis of QUOTE: "conflict with our other major clients" - the ONLY option we found was for cover linked to a very expensive (aren't they all?) bicycle theft cover product which would not have worked. IF there had been immediate volume in tens of thousands then the situation would have doubtless been different.
We gave it a good shot and it didn't work - our efforts were on an unpaid basis and after very minimal costs the balance of the modest funds contributed was donated to charity (NOT CTC!) that has relevance to cycling.
It's unfortunate that the lapsing of the domain name has led to the current content - on reflection to have paid the annual domain registration fee of about £5 a year for a few more years would have been a good idea. [I did look yesterday to see if there was any way that we could retrieve it but there isn't]
That's it - over and out!
Rob
hoppym27
Well-Known Member
Sorry but 'Over and Out' isn't a correct way to sign off :0
Over is an invitation to reply but Out is end of transmission....you can't invite someone to rpely but end the transmission....it annoys me on military based films etc when they do this....everyone who has served knows this is not correct
Over is an invitation to reply but Out is end of transmission....you can't invite someone to rpely but end the transmission....it annoys me on military based films etc when they do this....everyone who has served knows this is not correct
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
It'll also get the pish ripped put of you in the ham radio world.
PaulSB
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chorley, Lancashire
Domain acquisition is a strange thing. My club was slow to renew .co.uk and it was nicked off us. We now have .com and ring fenced various others.
The .co.uk addresss sells shoes. Bizarre.
The .co.uk addresss sells shoes. Bizarre.
