UKC

It seems almost every time Rockfax publish a guide there is some negative sniping on this site, I know there have been some specific issues (e.g. North Wales Limestone), but the stick given out to Rockfax (no need for a guide here, riddled with mistakes there etc.) seems to me largely unjustified.
Some seem to hold a perception of Rockfax as some evil multi-national conglomerate that is determined to squeeze all other guidebook producers out of the market. This seems pretty harsh to me, Rockfax started small and has grown (largely due to the quality of the guides they offer) and by general publishing standards they remain a relatively small outfit.
As well as now offering a wide range of impressive guidebooks themselves (mistakes in them are rare these days), I feel we also largely have Rockfax to thank for the general revolution in guidebook standards, the quality of the colour photo topos has forced others to up their game and in the UK we now enjoy some of the best guidebooks available anywhere.
Rockfax do also contribute some profits into bolting schemes and appear to have made some reconciliation efforts where they may have ruffled a few feathers. Or am I missing something? Are there more sinister things afoot that I am unaware of?
Would be interested in others thoughts.

P.S. I am just a regular climber and have no connection with Rockfax or any other guidebook publisher.

In reply to The Ivanator:
Rockfax make great, convenient guides, particularly for visitors to an area. But they feel soulless compared to the local guides by the BMC, CC etc.

I have a bit of a problem with the steady flow of guides to Peak grit, particularly the bouldering, which is the most used and abused rock in the country. The trouble with the Rockfax guides is that while they're not a big faceless company generating huge profits (which as you say they are sometimes laughably portrayed as), they don't really fit the mould of guidebook producers because they're so clearly motivated by profit (no matter how modest that profit is).

Areas like the Lakes have suffered from lack of guidebook coverage and traffic, while the Peak boulders get more and more scarred by overuse. Yet Rockfax bring out guide after guide after guide to Easter grit. It is a little bit annoying, and in my mind, not really in the spirit of guidebook production which - in my mind anyway - has always been much more a labour of love rather than a business.

In reply to The Ivanator:

I think they can certainly be thanked driving up the quality of guide books generally, particularly in the use of colour photos / printing, and not just in the UK (I noticed the "local" guide covering the Haute Provence area is rather Rockfax-like).

That's not to say none of the criticism is valid though.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


It probably doesn't help their image that they've made (afaict) a deliberate decision to trim out most of the local history, miscellaneous anecdotes, essays on plants and place names and all that sort of stuff and to use the extra space for more routes at more crags. It's a matter of taste whether or not that makes for a better guidebook or not, but it probably adds to the (false) impression that they're written by a committee of accountants rather than by enthusiastic climbers.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I would hardly call a guide out in 1998 and another out in 2014 and steady flow for Peak Bouldering?

In reply to The Ivanator:

My only gripe with Rockfax is that for the foreign guides at least, there are often more errors than I'd like suggesting less than rigorous route checking at times. But this is probably the price of speed to market and overall they are pretty good at doing their job.

In reply to Paul Phillips - UKC and UKH:

It's a steady flow of guides to Eastern grit, with the bouldering guides being especially redundant given the existing coverage.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Thanks for your comments John.

Our printing schedule is largely dictated by what is selling out, plus we add new areas from time to time. Yes, we do produce guidebooks to popular areas, but we mix this with books to minor areas like Clwyd Limestone, Dorset Bouldering, Ariege, Rjukan and Lofoten, plus neglected areas like Peak Limestone.

Occasionally our books sell out when we aren't in a position to replace them. This happened with Yorkshire Limestone in 2011, Lofoten 2015, Rjukan 2015 and Peak Bouldering back in 2004. When this happens we get loads of requests for new editions of these books (often accompanied by stories of 2nd hand copies being sold on eBay for a fortune!) We could ignore those requests, or we could do something about it and fully commit to an area once we have started covering it. One of the most important things we do now is think about the next book when we are producing the current one. We didn't do that with Peak Bouldering in 1998 which led to a 9 year information gap from us for this area.

In this sense producing "guide after guide to Eastern Grit" is actually an example of us doing a decent job of covering an area we have committed to. The Lakes is on our radar though and hopefully that will appear in the next year or two. I would hardly regard it as a minor area though and expect to do pretty well out of our book when it comes out.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Thanks for the reply. What I'm left wondering is: what's the point in all the effort of a new edition when nothing in the area has changed? Why not just reprint and get on with other projects that make more if a contribution to the community?

In reply to The Ivanator:

Thanks for starting this thread.

One thing that many might not be aware of is that UKC wouldn't exist without the support it has had from Rockfax. During its first 10 years UKC was entirely funded by Rockfax (and Rock + Run) and Rockfax bought UKC in 2008 which added significant financial stability to the business and allowed us to expand in the way we have over the last few years.

Alan

In reply to The Ivanator:

I like 'em. If you don't (obviously not you personally, The Ivanator!), don't buy 'em.
Pretty simple really.
Bit like complaining about what is on the telly.

Respect to anyone that cracks on and gets the job done.
Would still do away with stars though...

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Well there are several reasons we try and avoid reprints but I am puzzled if you are referring to Peak Bouldering here since I would have thought virtually everything had changed from our 1998 guidebook to the 2014 one.

One of the main reasons for avoiding reprints is because our production methods move on so much from book to book as does the camera technology we use. This is now moving faster than ever. For example, in order to produce the App we have had to do a huge amount for work on standardising the way we produce our data. The pre-2009 books are a right struggle to work with and anything pre 2007 is impossible. The work is now paying dividend though since we already have 25,000 routes on the App which would have been impossible if we hadn't continually moved our production techniques on.

Another reason for avoiding reprints is that they are often only a bit less work than a new edition. It isn't just a question of ringing the printers and saying give us another 2,000 copies. We need to produce a PDF as with a new book, there will be changes for the advertisers, there may be changes for the crags and there is likely to be at least some new information.

We were going to reprint the Mallorca book since it was only 5 years old but when we looked at it, we realised how easy it was to add a load of new crags which is what we did. I personally think this is a better service to climbers than reprinting books that may well be more than 8 years old.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

OK ta. I wasn't really asking why not reprint the old bouldering guide, the point about Peak bouldering is that it's an area that's already covered by numerous other guides so there is no information gap to fill. Other areas in contrast are screaming out for modern guides.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I can assure you that producing RockFax guidebooks really is a labour of love for Alan AKA the EVIL overlord of UKClimbing - I guess due to their homogenous nature they seem to have less soul than other guidebooks but they take a lot less time to produce (how many milliennia did we wait for Big G South?) and are about a million miles better than the american equivalent - Supertopo.

Plus I'd argue that Peak grit would get a hammering with or without RockFax - POD has just bought out a guide to the area despite their being at least two books for each crag, maybe more?

Be thankful better areas aren't being overcrowded

In reply to Jon Stewart:


As I said, we had more requests for a new edition of Peak Bouldering than any previous guidebook. Whilst there were other books available, they didn't serve the dedicated low grade boulderer who only wanted to buy a single book that well.


Not sure there are too many of these but feel free to suggest a few. The Lakes isn't really one of them though - the latest Wired guide and the previous FRCC series were excellent, colourful and thoroughly modern productions. I can also guarantee that when we announce our Lakes guide someone will suggest that it is "not really needed".

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


That's reminded me to buy the FRCC guide, thanks!

I haven't been on a trip to Scotland with a decent guidebook yet...

In reply to Duncan Campbell:


I find the obsession with Peak bouldering amusing when it could be argued it's an area that requires zero guidebooks*!



*Not an opinion I subscribe to

In reply to Duncan Campbell:


I certainly wouldn't argue with that! But then rockfax had to compete with already excellent British guidebooks whereas, until recently, US guidebooks were almost uniformly dire........

In reply to Jon Stewart:


By which you mean you didn't have one or that they don't exist?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Dunno actually. I've used the SMC Scotland one which is good for some crags, crap for others. Can't recall getting much more out of the SMC NW when that was present on a trip. Can't comment on GL's book, it was out of print when I tried to get a copy but I have heard it referenced as "Gary Latter's Book of Lies" - an anonymous, unsubstantiated accusation that I take no responsibility for...

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I get the impression that Jon is concerned about the Peak being something of a 'honey pot' when it comes to bouldering, with the associated consequence of holds being eroded.

I don't suppose there's very much guide book writers can do about something like that, other than drawing attention to less known parts of already popular areas, in an attempt to spread the impact.

I can see it would be asking a lot of guidebook writers for them to not publish books people are asking for to lessen the load on an area, when it's their way of making a living.

In reply to Timmd:

What's annoying is seeing new guides come out over and over again when you haven't got one for the areas you like climbing in. This was the case for G south and the Lakes until very recently.

In reply to Timmd:


Agreed. I think the erosion at Stanage Plantation would be significantly worse if it wasn't for the books telling people about other areas. Guidebooks play an important role in this respect, although I do acknowledge that they encourage people to visit an area in the first place.

Alan

In reply to Jon Stewart:

As with all selective guides, it will be too selective for some users and perhaps not selective enough for others. The definitive SMC guides are as good as any - brilliant for people climbing regularly in Scotland but now too many and too expensive for occasional visitors.

> Gary Latter's Book of Lies - an anonymous, unsubstantiated accusation that I take no responsibility for...

I've always thought this very harsh. It was clearly a real labour of love and arguably too big a project for one person, but he did make a real effort to correct any errors in the second edition of the northern volume.

I wish the covers didn't fall of as soon as you show the book a rucksac!

The quality of the route selection can sometime be dubious and it feels like there is pressure to give climbs stars just to add stars to a guide or crag - promoting climbs in Square Cut Bay from dangerous choss death routes to quality climbs was an obvious example (luckily the routes have all fallen down now)!

In reply to Ramblin dave:

I'm not sure what aspect of this post people are disliking it for? I'd be interested to actually read a counterpoint rather than just get generic disapproval...

In reply to Jon Stewart:
I don't see guidebooks as being to blame as such for Peak bouldering erosion: the real blame lies with too many lazy climbers who should know better. The concerns have been around a long time, as has the advice on how to help deal with it. Most guidebooks could improve advice: I would have liked to have seen more emphasis on avoiding damaged problems when damp and on clean shoes in the Rockfax Peak Bouldering intro pages but many if not most who are to blame for accelerating erosion must know the score. As a community we can deal with this by challenging poor practice and stop pretending it's sheer traffic numbers: one encamped boulderer flailing with dirty shoes and with intermediate overbrushing will have a much bigger impact than a thousand of Grimer's good ninjas. On damp, damaged rock multiply by 10 or more.

As for climbing areas with no guidebooks that's partly climbers' fault as well: too many will splash the money on petrol beer and the latest shiny gear but the sales numbers show that they are as stingy as anything on guidebooks, that are after all largely based on volunteer efforts (even the commercial ones). Maybe we need a campaign on UKC: something like a badge on our profile saying "I always buy guides to the areas I climb in". We could do similar to bouldering "I always obey the BMC 10 bouldering commandments"

In reply to Offwidth:

My preferred approach would be to sacrifice the honeypot areas for the greater good; Rockfax etc could have penned in all the idiots to the Plantation, Curbar boulders, Burbage etc, rather than letting them loose on Count's area, Curbar crag, etc.

In reply to Ramblin dave:


To include the local history ect, would require some plagiarism, and that content is one of the unique selling points of the local guides. Rockfax really would be stepping on toes if they include that.

(I didn't dislike you)

In reply to Ramblin dave:


The fairly recent Rockfax Dolomites guide does include some of this and was all the better for it IMO. Stunning photography by James Rushforth in that volume too (though one partner who has used it over there did find some route description inaccuracies).
Of course they won't match the magic of something like the Ground Up Slate, but I appreciate that Rockfax get a regular flow of guides out there. Loving the new Clywd guide (must get there this year), fired up for Ariege at Easter and eagerly looking forward to the South Wales Sport guide (any clues on a date for that one?).

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I've challenged idiots using BMC and VG guides... how does that work then? The key issue is the idiots. Even with the Rockfax inclusion of the Woolpacks (that I opposed) it's still idiots doing the damage.

In reply to Offwidth:

"Rockfax etc" was intended to mean bouldering-only guides. There would be a lot less idiots - indeed a lot less people - on the problems outside the honeypots if the "beanie pen" policy was introduced.

In reply to Mike Stretford:


Yes, we guidebook producers define ourselves by our style of producing guides and it is an excellent feature of British guidebooks that they are all different yet still quality publications.

Another reason we avoid too many special 'added-extras' - historical pieces, anecdotes, etc. - is because we regard each edition as one of a series. Including too much of this one-off stuff makes the next edition harder - either you repeat it, which is boring; or you find another 'added extra', which is difficult; or you have a book which is likely to be perceived as a lesser publication to its predecessor. The 1990s Devon and Dartmoor guide was a wonderful quirky book, but it was such difficult act to follow that no-one did, hence a big information gap.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Seems a bit defeatist to hold back from a masterpiece for fear of never being able to match it!

That Devon guide is one of my all-time favourites and I'm glad that they didn't overthink their long-term publication strategy.

In reply to The Ivanator:

I love rockfax guide books, I always choose them over the others as I like the layout. Maybe it's just because that's what I'm used to though.

In reply to Wsdconst:


Seconded! If you had to use the factually-incorrect, badly designed, ridiculously expensive, shockingly (if at all) illustrated efforts which cover northern Germany, you'd fall to your knees and pray for a Rockfax guide!

JW

In reply to The Ivanator:

I like the rock fax guides, easy to read, good maps for how to find climbs. Great coverage I found for the costa blanco book. My only gripe is in the new eastern grit the image quality seems to be lacking in places, blurry or low res photos. Hopefully it was a one off

In reply to The Ivanator:

As I understand it Rockfax has produced a number of guides to various sport climbing areas abroad thus competing with local guidebooks. These local guides then suffer lost sales from the competition yet these provide the information on which Rockfax uses/copies to create their guides.

Secondly the local guides, usually produced by by local climbers, use their profits to fund bolting in these areas. So the Rockfax guides are directly reducing the money available for the local bolt funds. Apparently from what friends have told me, Rockfax is despised in some of these areas because of this. There are even routes (more than one) called 'F*ck Rockfax'.

In reply to stp:
Hi there,
It's not either/or for local guides. I usually pick up a guide from the climbers bar (usually near the crag) when I'm climbing abroad to support the local bolt fund. However, the Rockfax guide is usually the 'go to' publication for a wide area rather than a specific crag, so perfect for the visitor.
I'm sure Alan or Chris will come back on the charge of plagiarism.
I think I'm also aware that Rockfax have contributed to bolt funds from sales, and I'm sure someone will be along to confirm/deny.
How about (like other areas of endeavour) the local guide producers 'up their game' in the face of well produced competition? It certainly benefited the BMC, CC etc. who now produce really excellent guides.

In reply to stp:


That's life I'm afraid. Every business faces competion. Why should climbing books be any different? The onus is on other guides to produce a more attractive product.


Maybe the way funds are sought for bolts needs to change then. People are not going to order a foreign guide in a foreign language from abroad, requiring extra cost and time, if an excellent guidebook is available from their home country. It's just not realistic.

In reply to stp:


And apparently your mum. Come on, what is this, high school?

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:
From their website:


"Rockfax Donations

Rockfax are committed to supporting local access and bolting initiatives. From all direct sales made on this web site, of our main books covering sport climbing areas in the UK, we will donate £1 to the appropriate local bolt fund (if such a thing exists). For direct sales from this web site, of UK books which don't cover sport climbing areas, we will donate £1 to the BMC's ACT."

I find it unclear if any money is donated from guides of non - UK destinations or guides sold through their website (which I'm guessing is the majority of their sales). Either way its a commercial organisation and they don't have to do this, but agree there is a compete difference between this and a guide for which all profits go towards the local bolt fund, which may or may not be subsidising someone hobby even if plenty of other people get to enjoy the routes afterwards. As i understand it some/many? areas receive local government funding for bolting due to the tourism benefits anyway.

I was going to write a reply solely centred on RockFax but I will say just this. The reason that they centre most of their guidebook releases around honeypot (money pot) areas is interesting, the reason some of their guides come out at certain times in relation to other guides is also interesting, and the work (not just money) they have put back into the areas they cover is well… Have a search.

Instead I want to talk about what it’s like when you read a local guide. You can feel the passion that has gone into it; the hours spent in BMC area meetings, the discussions with local land owners to secure access, the hours replacing abseil stations, the days replacing bolts and the weeks cleaning whole crags. All so we, the climbers have that amazing joy when a new ‘crag-X’ is revealed, when we climb a long lost route or when we reach the top of an amazing lesser known climb and find a well-equipped belay (for which the ethics have been discussed in length).

Look at the upcoming Avon and Cheddar guide (when it arrives), it has taken years of love from the locals involved; the effort they have put in cleaning up whole buttresses, trying to secure access to the Avon ‘Dark Side’, the years (Pylon King has) spent wandering the Mendips in search of new climbs, the work people like Ian has put in to turning Fairy Cave Quarry into a local slab mecca and all the other hundreds of hours of peoples unpaid time.

Then look at the new North Wales Limestone guide from Pete and Andy; routes were cleaned up, bolts replaced, many routes were re-climbed for accuracy and hours were spent dangling off ab ropes so they could produce an amazing guide book for us. A guide book where ALL the profits are being put back in to the bolt fund!

Then look at the Southern sandstone guide, then the wye valley guides, then the definitive Portland guide and then the FIVE volumes for Pembroke…. These are modern guides with a wealth of information. To some these seem old-fashioned or not appropriate for them, which is fully understandable if you’re a visiting or occasional climber. As such I dearly hope the new, very modern selective Wired-guides made from the combined efforts of the BMC, FRCC, CC and SMC will become the new standard for British guides. From their website;


These are books of history, love, sweat and pride so please give something back to the climbing community we love.

In reply to planetmarshall:

What would you have preferred;

"Dear RockFax please stop making profit from the area we created for others to enjoy" - 7a

I think it's the sentiment that counts.

In reply to Mr. Lee:


A tale from the crypt... I'm told that, some years ago, a certain local honcho in a certain Euro country, threatened ire on a certain Rockfax editor. "I'm gonna f*cking kill him!" (Yeah, right, in my experience, the ones to really watch are ever so quiet and don't issue threats.) From what I remember, the Rockfax was fine. But the local guide (from said honcho, until, it's alleged, he got bored and left his partner to finish it): A shit cover photo (with nobody climbing), a third of the guide devoted to FA details (FA Harry Honcho, ad infinitum), dodgy crag directions (we got lost every day, despite my mate having been there several times before) and wanky gradings (F6bs with harder cruxes than F7bs across the valley). Need I go on?

I suspect that guidebook writing is a bit like route equipping and you need to do a fair amount of it to get good at it. So your first efforts may not be stellar. But the Rockfax editors must have so much experience now... shared experience - more than any body of people in history??

Which is not to say it's a closed shop. I thought it would have taken Dave Flanagan years to do his selected Irish guidebook. But it came out ever so fast. And it looks brilliant.

Whatever anyone may think of Rockfax, surely they've moved guidebook writing on significantly. Because of them, everyone's raised their game. Well, apart from Harry Honcho and I'm never using his sodding guidebook again.

mick

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I would prefer you say what you mean, rather than this vague, passive aggressive nonsense:

In reply to The Ivanator:

Just spent a bit of time reading this old thread!

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=43721&v=1

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Perhaps that should be "I want to talk about what it's like when you read SOME local guides..."

Some guidebooks can be uninspiring and frustrating by being not very good or not user friendly. Or most frustratingly of all, when you just can't get a guide because it hasn't been published.

In reply to The New NickB:

Hah! I now see my annoyance for non existing guides is at least 13 years old http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=43721&v=1#x580750

In reply to Tom F Harding:

Great post.

When one holds a locally produced guidebook, they are holding literally hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of combined man hours in their hand. When they open the pages, the passion bursts forth. That's a delicate thing. Don't take it for granted, it might go away (note the lack of a definitive guide to the North Yorkshire Moors, an area which has been revolutionised in recent years and is crying out for new coverage).

I was musing about going to the Dolomites this summer, but upon flicking through the new Wired guide to Pembroke, I dropped those plans and started planning a week's trip there instead in the spring. I have owned the Rockfax guide for a number of years but when I open it it just doesn't excite me.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


can anyone plot a time line of the bouldering guides and coverage because this point does seem a bit unfair Jon?

where there any guides before "Bouldering in the Peak District Vol 1 & 2" in 1994 by Allen Williams?

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=46
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=45

because as far as i can tell this was the first proper guide to Peak bouldering followed by in 1998 Peak Bouldering - Fax09 (rockfax) by Allen Williams again, teaming up with & Alan James (rockfax)

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=79

In 2004 Vertebrate Publishing (also a profit making guide book publisher) produced Peak District: Bouldering (i believe the rockfax guide by this stage had been well out of print for some time.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=340

Around the same time The BMC published for the first time proper bouldering coverage in their guide books, 2005,
Burbage, Millstone and Beyond:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=175

and stanage 2007

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=372

Froggatt to Black Rocks 2010

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=788

2011 saw Vertebrate Publishing update (their out of print?) with a new version

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=960

and finally in 2014 Rockfax revamped their 1998 guide Peak Bouldering, and why shouldn't they there isn't a monopoly on guide books!

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/book.php?id=1401


While it may appear that there have been a glut of guides there has been no overlap until recently of coverage as guides have gone out of print and another produced. Ideally as Alan has pointed out they are doing their job right when there isn't a gap in coverage. I guess it does seem like a lot of guides compared to somewhere like Leicestershire where the last guide was produced in 1993

In reply to planetmarshall:


Andrew, I actually originally did but really that's not the point so I deleted most of it. Instead I wrote about the reasons I love local guides. Just laying into Rockfax is not really productive when what I and many others want is to see is all climbers buying local guides and appreciating the work that goes into them. Its all for us in the end. They are getting better and better with some amazing recent publications and with efforts such as wired-guides from the BMC, FRCC, CC and SMC things are looking bright for community driven guide books.

In reply to Mick Ward:

>Whatever anyone may think of Rockfax, surely they've moved guidebook writing on significantly. Because of them, everyone's raised their game. Well, apart from Harry Honcho and I'm never using his sodding guidebook again.

I think this was a valid point some 10 to 20 years ago but my personal opinion is that in the great guidebook arms race the local clubs and the BMC are now leading the guidebook writing gap. They've taken everything that Rockfax brought when they broke the mould and added more (in the latest YMC guides, the editor flew past each crag in a bloody light aircraft to get the aerial shots!). Most importantly of all, the locally produced guides include the history, the stories, and the general craic from the local climbing scene - which surprisingly Alan has said he wouldn't wish to try and emulate.

In reply to The Ivanator:


God help you in the UK if you ever make a success of something. It's just not the done thing.

In reply to Will Hunt:


Not everyone who wants a guide book wants that though, especially if it means the book costs more, weighs more, and takes another couple of years to come out. I like the way things have been going with more books specifically covering the history and culture of an area (the Ben Nevis book, Peak Rock etc.) which can revel in all that, whilst the guide books mainly guide.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive. Regarding the Chamonix guide - I'm looking forward to seeing it, the local guides are all great in their way, but the Rockfax guide offers something familiar to British climbers, there's definitely a market for it. Why should they not produce such a guide? And why should its existence preclude the development of more comprehensive guides by locals?

In reply to Graeme Hammond:


It does. And 3 editions of EG while I've used the same shitty guide to the Lakes all the while - but that's fixed now so I'll stop moaning. And I shouldn't moan anyway 'cause they published a big picture of me on my favourite route in that bouldering book!

In reply to planetmarshall:

I couldn't find any details about the RockFax Cham guide so not sure at this point what its aim/angle is. As such I can't really give comment. I was out in the Dolomites this year and did buy the RockFax guide, there really is not any other option and as such seemed a great place to release a reasonably good English language selective. Cham seems a strange one.

In reply to Will Hunt:


Your definitely right, if we are taking about pure aesthetics RockFax are not keeping up with other guides. The graphics, symbols, fonts and colors seem dated and slightly childish when compared to many others in my eyes. I'm guessing a complete overhaul of this has to be in the pipe line. Have you seen the Vertical-life guides? (https://guide.vertical-life.info/en/publications/). Beautiful and all of them come with a FREE app version when you buy the guide - some would say they are ahead of their time.

What are your top most aesthetically pleasing guides? A few of mine..
- Font 7 + 8 - old version with the white and orange plastic cover
- Anything by Vertical-life
- Patagonia Vertical: Chalten Massif
- Ground-up Slate
- Baffin Island Guide - Climbing, Trekking, Skiing, a Baffin Island Guide Book by Mark Synnott

In reply to Will Hunt:



Will,

I 100% agree with the first part. Look at the Lancashire brick, a mighty tome to rival Lord of the Rings or A Song of Fire and Ice.

However, for the NYMoors, that could prove controversial...

Andy F

In reply to Jon Stewart:
Three east grit after each one sold out isn't that what we want, continual guide book coverage? In the same time the bmc have nearly finished a full set of definitive guide (southern limestone still to be published) to finally replace the 1987!!!! Peak Limestone south guide which with out rockfax's Nothern Limestone 2004 recently replaced after selling out with Peak Limestone 2012 (a book that at least lists the first accentionist after each route. Unlike the new bmc guide, though the rest of the bmc guide is almost faultless and much more interesting and insperational read) Without this input from rockfax peak limestone that we both love would probably be even more neglected. Personally I think the new eastern grit has become too definative particularly at stanage and whilst the topos are clear and great it doesn't have the wow factor that current cc/frcc etc guides have. BUT there hasn't been a modern alternative for the occasional visitor to it with the BMCs On Peak Rock falling short in many respects given its current version is basically a reprint of its original 1993 form pre photo topo style. So whilst people complain that eastern grit effects the bmc definative guides the bmc haven't produced a guide to subsidise the definitives that people actually want to buy. Perhaps thos will change with the Wired series?

In reply to Tom F Harding:

As much information about the Rockfax Chamonix guide that I've seen is here, on the authors blog :

http://chamconditions.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/chamonix-rockfax.html?utm_sour...

Personally I really like the Snow, Ice and Mixed guides for the Alps published by JM Editions and recently translated into English. I'll be interested to see how the Rockfax version compares as they are very comprehensive and also give some explanation of the history of the area.

In reply to The Ivanator:

Rockfax are amazing.. the sooner the days of 'artistic' (read shit and inaccurate) drawings in guidebooks... and the piecemeal route descriptions that go with the.. are gone the better!

A shit guidebook to a place you have not been before can mean you lose days of climbing time - or end up on the wrong route half the time. I want to climb not decipher terrible communication!

In reply to Mick Ward:





I do find this aspect of the debate a little overstated. I like Rockfax guides and they have done a good job. But much of the improvement has coincided with the emergence of digital technology, not available to earlier generations of guidebook authors. At the same time it is important to recognise, as Tom Harding suggests, that guidebooks of all descriptions are wholly dependent on the accumilated knowledge of dedicated local activists and volunteers.

In reply to Mr. Lee:



In other words, you stupid French should change your ways and adopt our neoliberal, anglo-saxon ones. And we call them arrogant!

In reply to flaneur:


Hmmm maybe there's an arrogance about not upping your game as a response to change, but still expecting to sell your product?

In reply to Will Hunt:



I think the Harry Honcho comment was about guidebooks outside of the UK, and I'd agree that in many places local guidebooks are still really badly produced, black-and-white photocopies stapled together in some cases. And that's when you're lucky enough to find the local shop/bar that sells it AND be there during opening times! I do try and buy the local guidebooks but quite often they don't exist - certainly in France a lot of bolting is funded by clubs or local authorities rather than guidebook sales.

In reply to Graeme Hammond:


Our practice towards funding local access and bolting efforts has changed dramatically in recent years. We certainly didn't get it right in some of the areas in France but hopefully we have now set up a system that will work for everyone.

The system we use now is to link up with a local fund or initiative and make a donation from all the early sales of a new guidebook up to around 1000 or 1500 depending on the size of the area. After that we just donate from sales made direct from the Rockfax web site (this is actually only a relatively small percentage of our sales). I report these quarterly on the Rockfax web site. here is the latest report - http://www.rockfax.com/news/2016/01/14/rockfax-donations-to-bolt-funds-and-...

This has resulted in significant donations towards the North Wales BF, Yorkshire BF and the Cumbria BF. The Clwyd guide is being channeled towards Gary Gibson and his efforts. We have also had some really good link-ups with the BMC ACT and established a fund dedicated towards improving path access to the Portland cliffs affected by the recent landslips.

For the non-UK areas we have good contacts with the Mallorca climbers and are in the process of deciding what we can do there. Our Kalymnos App is likely to raise funds for the island rescue team. We have also got a relationship with the El Chorro BF and made some donations there although these are limited due to the age of that guidebook.

We also operate a Point of Sale donation system where people buying direct from the web site can add money to their purchases. This tends to do quite well for the BMC ACT - thanks to people who contribute there - but we have so far failed to generate much support this way towards bolt funds.

Alan

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


I actually disagree slightly with this. Your use of the word 'wholly' is incorrect I think.

All guidebooks should take the existing information and enhance, update and improve it. In this way the legacy of coverage of our climbing information is added to with each new book and the credit for that goes to everyone producing a book, not just the volunteers.

For Rockfax's point of view, we have documented areas like Clwyd Limestone which have developed massively since the last Cicerone (also commercial) guidebook, and held the torch for much of Peak Limestone over the last 25 years, as has been commented elsewhere. There are other areas like the bouldering books which contain information that has only ever been documented in commercial publications.

The usefulness of the UKC Logbook system should also not be underestimated in this respect, something that would never have been possible without Rockfax.

This is not to underestimate the efforts of volunteers over the years, but it all as part of one big effort.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

That's the point Alan, it's all part of one big effort.

The inference of : 'Yes but, you could not have got here without us' is what I find is slightly misleading and unnecessary.

In reply to The Ivanator:

I normally steer well clear of threads like these but there is a worrying amount of misinformation here. A few thoughts from my perspective (my opinions aren't necessarily reflected by the other authors).

Whilst Rockfax are a profit making company it is first and foremost motivated and driven by a passion for climbing and a genuine drive to promote the sport and areas covered.

I spent just over 3 years working 10 hours a day to put the Dolomites book together. I was told it was an impossible project by many local guides and previous authors in the area due to the sheer scale of the climbing here. The book cost roughly (I've never sat and worked it out exactly) £18k to create (granted some of that is camera equipment which has continued to serve me well long after the book was published) and I didn't have any other income at the same time. I lived pretty much full time out of a converted van and lived as cheaply as possible. Without the income generated by the profits the book has made it would have been a non starter. A real shame for a book that has been so well received - you only have to wander around the crags here to see how many locals are using it.

Without going into specifics Alan is exceptionally generous with his staff (the owner of the Idea Montagna Italian guidebooks is a good friend and thought it was scandalous how much Alan pays his authors) and isn't driven solely by profit. Even so with the above expenses I'm sure you can appreciate I didn't create the guide with the idea of retiring in the south of France.

For me the pleasure comes from attracting new people to experience the area - there's nothing more satisfying than seeing climbers enjoying themselves with your guidebook in hand. I get tired of this 'soulless' argument that keeps getting banded around regarding Rockfax authors. If you know an English person that's more passionate about the Dolomites than myself I'd love to meet them and share a beer (still keen to meet Ron James face to face). The same applies for all the other dedicated Rockfax authors - the money helps us support ourselves doing what we (and hopefully you) love doing. Nobody is getting super rich from this endeavour...

Finally have some consideration for the authors and editors that do put so much time and effort into a guidebook - no matter what publisher they happen to work for. Unless you've done it you can't possibly comprehend how much work goes into creating a guide. I used to curse Ron James when I couldn't find the 'obvious crack' 15 pitches up a route here. Then I started the Rockfax guide and developed a huge respect for the man - navigating people up 22 pitches of difficult route finding is a nearly impossible task. It's not like Stanage, you can't go and quickly check pitch 17 for accuracy. I still get annoyed at any negative reviews for his East and West guides - it was a monumental undertaking back when they were first published.

Go and enjoy climbing...

In reply to James Rushforth:

That's brilliant James. An effort which is no doubt replicated one way or another with every guidebook written.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


Well hind-site is a wonderful thing; it is worth a few minutes to re-read Ed Douglas's review of Peak Grit East to see the
reaction at the time.

Ed Douglas, Climber Feb 2002 said

I think we may just have set the guidebook world on fire, ‘Chris Craggs writes in his acknowledgements to the new Rockfax Peak Gritstone East which covers Stanage, the Burbages – Mr and Mrs – Millstone, Froggatt, Curbar and so forth. There may be more than a hint of irony here, since relations between Craggs, his publisher and co-author Alan James, and the British Mountaineering Council have at time resembled a Sydney suburb in January. The BMC believe that Rockfax are stripping customers away from their voluntarily produced comprehensive guidebooks and Rockfax believe they are giving climbers what they want. But you don’t want to know about politics, do you? You want to know whether to buy the thing. The short answer is yes. Oh yes. Buy two, one for the toilet and one for your rucksack. Why? Well, there’s a short answer to that too. Because this book is as close to perfect a guidebook as we are likely to get. Part of it is in the refinement of the Rockfax style present in their latest and perhaps boldest outing. They understood very quickly that climbers, like the rest of the British public, were becoming graphically sophisticated and they use the latest technology to deliver it. People are now more used to absorbing information in this way than wading through thick chunks of text. (I can hear the sound of traditionalist axes being sharpened. Well, tough banana.) The guide uses a combination of topos, photodiagrams and pithy descriptions in a visually sumptuous production that leaves previous attempts standing. Its format is a little like a computer program which you can use immediately but which has features that are helpful that you learn. Full colour helps in this, since route numbers are reversed out of a colour, each one referring to a band of grades, with green being the easiest. Cunning, eh? It’s a selective guide, of course, so true aficionados will be looking forward to the BMC’s new Stanage volume, but most climbers will be content just to own this version. Some readers will be shocked at the absence of a historical section. The barbarians are at the gates, they will cry. Nincompoops. In the days when there were few rock climbers and few books on the subject, Menlove Edwards’s guidebooks made perfect sense, rich in detail and atmosphere. But the world has changed since the 1930s. What we the chalk-dipping public want is an outstanding guidebook and an outstanding history of Peak District climbing. Now we have at least one of them. And it’s worth bearing in mind that the British didn’t invent the topo guidebook. But Rockfax have absorbed the new format and added a very British passion and depth that rewards close scrutiny. I pored over this volume, despite the propaganda that Rockfax guides are dull, noticing gaps on Stanage where I’d never climbed admittedly not very big gaps – drawing up new objectives and generally feeling a burbling enthusiasm for gritstone, despite being pretty darned enthusiastic in the first place. The visual impression is more like visiting the crag than thumbing a guidebook. Any criticisms? Well, a few black and white historical shots would have been nice, and some of the grades seem a bit wonky. Grade inflation is one of those things, like quantum mechanics and self-assessment tax returns, that are beyond me but I’m sure the experts know what they’re doing. But to criticise the choice of photographs seems too harsh, since the book is stuffed full of inspiring shots, some of them of routes that I haven’t done which it’s just possible I might. Oh God. And I was so looking forward to middle age.
Reply

In reply to John Postlethwaite:



Actually, there are some recently produced guides by other organisations which, although a major step better than their predecessors, and very good guides in their own right, still haven't 'got there'.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make Chris?

Douglas writes a good and witty piece; but at times perhaps even he falls into the trap of the attractive but slightly oversimplified narrative of 'modernisers v traditionialists'.

Rockfax have made a great contruibution to the development of guidebooks; but a contribution which built on a long and accumilated knowledge base.

In reply to natetan:


This is an interesting one, I don't feel photo topos are appropriate for every type of route. They work great on single pitch and shorter multipitch but as routes get longer they can become less useful. We have all had the problem that the route looks completely different from the guide when you stand at the bottom of are half way up. A photo topo taken of a 800m alpine face from a mile away can be pretty unless so you end up trying to rely on the text descriptions (as you did with older style guides) anyway. We get hopelessly lost on a couple of long routes in the Dolomites when trying to use the RockFax photo topos as they simply don't show the level of detail required. Also what about crags that are obscured by trees or a good angle for a photo is not possible?

There is something to be said for also having this type of topo as well:
http://www.cascadeimages.com/images/graphic_design/cobra_pillar_topo.jpg

In reply to The Ivanator:

The worry about trashed problems is pointless.If you want unmarked rock,find your own problems.There are loads in the Burbage valley.Even Stanage Plantation has plenty of good probs not in any guide.I've done plenty and not written them up.That way they stay fairly traffic free.Most boulderers won't do a problem unless they can get the tick in the guide.Feeble mentality and depriving themselves of a lot of new rock.
Another game you can play is to go to a crag and do routes without checking grades in the guide.Lots of fun,exercising your own judgement.

The problem with commercial guides is that they cherry pick ''classics'' which tend to get trashed.People climb those because their mates followed the guide and climbed them.Then other routes get covered in plants,climbed less,and then it's a vicious cycle.Classics get more and more trashed. If you want less trashed rock,duh,then seek out untrashed rock,and be prepared to clean it up occasionally.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Your passion for local guidebooks is commendable, and I don't disagree with you here. What I take issue with is the implication that Rockfax by contrast are not passionate about climbing, and their guidebooks produced by a committee of suits driven purely by profits, when it's obvious to anyone that that is not the case.

In reply to paul mitchell:


There is little evidence of this and Rockfax have only really ever selected buttresses rather than routes although that is less the case in the bigger mountain crags.

Most climbers use a variety of things in deciding what route to climb with guidebooks being one of them. Stars in guidebooks are another, friends recommendations, ease of access, visible chalk, web or magazine articles, or prevailing weather conditions. The absence of stars and/or guidebooks does not mean that climbers will then spread themselves thinly across all available routes, it just means they will use fewer criteria for selecting routes which may well lead to a smaller pool of routes which are actually climbed in the main. This is what happened with the laudable, but in the end counterproductive, starless Tremadog guidebook experiment.

Alan

In reply to planetmarshall:
>... and their guidebooks produced by a committee of suits driven purely by profits,

I do have a suit!

It may also be of interest that we don't actually have to make a profit since we don't have any external shareholders. The business basically invests what we make back into UKC and things like App development. As far as the accountants are concerned, our profit is non-existant.

Alan

In reply to planetmarshall:


Well said. I have always found the accusation that my books are 'soulless' a bit odd and a bit offensive if the truth be told. I have spent 25 years following my joint passions of climbing and producing books to guide people to bits of rock and loved every minute of it.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:
So following the work of BMC volunteers of which you were one of the leading activists, and so intimately involved with (including a good deal of development work for the next Stanage guide), and an internal dispute, you split of and joined Alan and re-wrote a new much more user friendly guide and rather unsurprisingly the remaining BMC volunteer team were pissed off with this (legal threats and all) ? Looking back it's still a pretty sad affair as I'd rather have seen climbers working together but I'm glad PGE happened (driven more by a desire to do things properly than to make a fortune). My BMC work certainly wouldn't have been possible without it as I always saw good attractive user information with balanced content (a change from the old style and especially from the bloated and barbed history of the Wye guide) as essential. Yet I think its important to remember that PGE and the following BMC guides were born out of dispute, and Rockfax disputes with other guidebook teams still happen. There is still no serious money to be had in UK guidebooks and too much overlapping coverage can be a major problem for small producers... the difference now is that Rockfax are the biggest player.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Sounds like you have quite a clever accountant, Alan

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Chris, you must have enabled more people to have fun days on crags (especially in sunny places) than anybody ever. That's a pretty good use of a big chunk of your life.

Mick

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan, thank-you for replying.

Looking at the website it seems RockFax donated £1900 in 2014 and £2267 in 2015. Is that split across all the areas you cover in both the UK and abroad? As James R mentions the new Dolomites guide cost £18k to produce, I'm guessing this has been one of your most expensive guides but is must also be expected to make a reasonable profit percentage. When you compare this to the funds made available there seems to be a large discrepancy - Do you feel RockFax is giving enough back to the areas it covers? I would also be interested to hear how many times has RockFax made efforts to secure access to crags or been involved in crag maintenance such as cleaning or the physical effort of re-equipping?

Thanks

Tom

In reply to The Ivanator:
I have a bit of a guidebook problem... I have at least 20 and quite a few of those I have either used on one occasion or (in one or two cases) never actually got a chance to use, so I am a big fan of definitive guidebooks. But the quality does vary... in one sense it may seem unfair to blame a guidebook made in say the late 90s for having crappy black and white phototopos that you can't see anything on, but if that is the latest guidebook then actually I would argue it is fair!

Relating to an earlier comment I would argue the current definitive (sport) guidebook to Portland is the Rockfax? I like the definitives and I am happy to buy and support the definitives, but a lot of the time I still find myself chucking the Rockfax in the bag just for a better photo...

The newest non-Rockfax guidebooks I have bought are much better. Although some of them still seem to insist on putting routes right to left which is just madness!

Finally having just started caving (a much smaller market than climbing) I have come to appreciate climbing guidebooks a lot more!

In reply to Tom F Harding:

Just to be clear it cost me about £18k over the three years in camera equipment, living expenses, occasional campsite fees, van, insurance etc. That figure had nothing to do with print costs etc. That's very much Alans department.

In reply to Chris Craggs:



I'm just enjoying building up to a Costa Blanca trip at the end of the month putting together a tick list with post-its in the latest Rockfax Costa Blanca. Excellent work, and not a bit 'soulless'. Trawling these guides is a big part of the build up to a winter sun getaway!

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Albeit one who can't spell!

In reply to Tom F Harding:

I'm finding it impossible to interpret your last post as anything other than mischief making.

FWIW as a cold hearted philistine with no sense of history I like Rockfax guidebooks. They work very well and I'm old enough to remember trying to interpret some pretty awful older guides (and pretty awful recent guides too ) . I rarely, if ever, read the history pages in guides - decent maps and reliable route informaton are my interest, and there Rockfax do a good job. I'm looking forward to seeing their alpine guide

In reply to The Ivanator:

Something not really mentioned yet is the cost of purchasing guidebooks. I got into climbing around 10 years ago when a lot less Rockfax coverage. I own seven definitive guides for North Wales but have probably climbed only a handfull of routes not in the North Wales Rockfax. I used to live in London and so naturally wanted to climb classics after a 5 hour drive. I've spent a lot more money on guides over the years but evidently not got much more out of them than had I hyperthetically been able to buy the Rockfax guide 10 years ago. Now that I live in Oslo I'm actually wanting to buy the NW Rockfax guide just to reduce my handluggage for any return visits.

I'm all for reading about the history of climbing but maybe this is better suited to coffee table type books rather than in the front/back of guidebooks? I would buy them for areas of interest. I already own a few such books on Scotland.

Only downside for me about the Rockfax guides is that they seem be getting thicker with each update. I'm thinking specifically about the Grit guides. No doubt partly to encourage people to update to the newer version. For my they are getting a bit too bulky for my personal taste.

In reply to James Rushforth:
Impressed that you managed to live on so little for three years - even if it was only for the summer months.

In reply to Tom F Harding:

It cost HIM £18K to produce, not me (although that is probably roughly what the printing bill was). That is the sort of dedication required by professional guidebook authors and it is the sort of commitment made by Mark Glaister, Chris Craggs and Adrian Berry and others. They invest in time and effort and reap the rewards when the guidebook sells which is the only time they receive money. Quite a commitment though I am sure you will agree.


Yes, with regard to more recent guides as detailed in my post above.


Well we cover a lot of areas but if you take a bit of time to check who authors our books in most cases you will find an individual who is closely linked with the area they are writing about and who will undoubtedly have carried out a lot of such work.

Pete Oxley in Dorset for example, Mark Reeves in North Wales, Lee Proctor in Clwyd, Thorbjorn Enevold in Lofoten, James in the Dolomites, Ben Stokes on Portland, the Arrans in the Ariege, Tom AB and Jon H in Rjukan. Mark and Chris and myself have also done plenty in the areas we have lived in and cover - 25 years of attending BMC Area meetings in my case and similar I think for Mark, plus years of guidebook work from Chris before he started with Rockfax, Adrian has bolted hundreds of routes in all sorts of places.

We are also currently working with the BMC to try an ensure that accurate and up-to-date access information gets linked on a real-time basis to UKC Logbooks and the Rockfax App. In the end this will mean that we will be able communicate when crags are restricted and inform people as they check a route at the crag (if they are using the App).

Obviously communication is our strong point which is why we are focusing on this sort of thing.

Alan

In reply to Mr. Lee:

Those guidebooks were a bargain compared to the travel to and from Wales. Luggage weight is an issue at times but guidebooks are cheap.

In reply to planetmarshall:


I certainly don't think they are produced by a committee of suits and the authors are obviously passionate but, the reasons the RockFax guides are produced is certainly not alturistic. Whatever anyone says they are a for profit company - not a community not for profit like many local guides.

THIS NEXT PART IS VERY IMPORTANT - Lets look again at the money going to access and bolt funds:

RockFax donated £1900 in 2014 and £2267 in 2015 which as far as the website says is split across all areas covered by their books.

Now lets look at one local, small guidebook namely North Wales Limestone. A guide book where ALL profit is put back into the local climbing community (yours!). The authors claimed £250 each in expenses. After repaying their BMC loan and recouping the printing cost they donated £3000 in early 2015 to the local North Wales bolt and access fund. They also have a further £6000 in the bank that is available to local climbing good causes. So 1 small guidebook has raised around £9000 for our community when RockFax have given just a few thousand spread across all the areas they cover.

Trying to argue about the moral worth of commercial guidebooks in the face of these kind of statistics is just disgusting. Support local guides, they are supporting the climbing we love.

In reply to Will Hunt:


Hi Will, apologies for not replying earlier. I'm glad you've fallen in love with Yorkshire grit, though never forget your first love... Pex.

John Postlethwaite rightly made the point that Rockfax emerged alongside ditital technology (which I can barely spell!) I've been told that (pre Alan's involvement in Rockfax), he tried to work within the system, meanwhile alerting the then powers that be to digital technology. And was told to wash his mouth out. If so, you can understand his frustration and surely applaud him taking a big financial gamble initially. Sure Mick started Rockfax and Mick's a fantastic innovator. But Alan has made things happen in the long term.

Once there's an established track-record, of course even the most moribund will suddenly discover new life and think, "I'll have some of that." And I'm sure you're right and this is what's happening (I'm hopelessly out of touch). Like you, I love the history, the stories, the craic, oh God, I love it. But, if I were in Alan's position, I wouldn't get properly stuck into it either.

I'm told the latest Yorks grit guide is superlative and people such as Adi Gill have pulled out all the stops with the history, the stories, the craic. Things have certainly moved on from my tattered old guide with Austin on Beeline on the front cover. Part of that's due to Rockfax.

Mick

In reply to Michael Hood:

Not luxurious but great fun and no regrets

In reply to Tom F Harding:


The last Alpine Club guide to the Mont Blanc Massif was published in 1990 or so - ages ago. And, unfortunately, the Alpine Club gives the impression of now having given up on guidebook production. (I *hope* not, but that's the impression I get: anybody who knows differently might care to speak up.)

There is a huge void for a good current guidebook to the Mont Blanc Massif - and ditto for other alpine areas. I don't have any details about the planned RockFax guide, but I hope it's a good one, and I certainly don't think it's a 'strange' area to have chosen.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Alan, you do pay yourself and your staff a wage though. Also any money your invest back in your company is just that - money back into your company. Neither of these are totally alturistic.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

All good stuff but if you log onto the the other channel and look at North Wales Limestone threads communication seems to have suffered a breakdown. I'd go further and say two way communications with most UK definitive producers are far from a strong point. I'm not apportioning blame for this breakdown but it seems silly to deny it.

In reply to Mick Ward:


Slight information correction there. It wasn't the digital innovation that I approached the old BMC guidebook committee with (note - not the BMC in its current guise really), it was my drawn topos which were rejected in the early 90s,
... as well as me being turned down twice for jobs, but I am not bitter, ha!

You are also right to acknowledge Mick's input in this. It was a running joke between me and Mick that he was the creative midfielder and I was the striker who put the ball in the net.

Alan

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I apologise Tom for the heinous crime of daring to make a business out of climbing in Britain. How despicably capitalist of me!

Alan

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I believe it's the same for the local/BMC guide, there is a salaried person who puts the product together.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I bet Mick got more red cards.

In reply to Tom F Harding:

I take it you don't charge for your photographic services then?!?!

In reply to Tom F Harding:


North Wales Limestone was an exceptional effort and needs all the praise it gets. But it is also a one-off and, as a model for guidebook production in the UK, it simply wouldn't work. It needed a convergence of a dedicated local group plus a few individuals to put in a huge effort while able to fund themselves by other means in order to exist. That doesn't happen very often.

Also, you conveniently forget all the other things that Rockfax gives you like UKC. Noble local efforts (I am still struggling to think which other books you mean) are never going to result in big international web sites like UKC. That may not bother you (although you do seem to have a logbook and enjoy the forums) but obviously there are other people who do appreciate UKC. The fact that it is a commercial operation isn't evil, it is just a reality that it is the only way you could ever run something like UKC while supporting the 10 individual livelihoods required to run everything.


What makes a guide a 'local guide'? Can you give some examples of local guides?

Alan

In reply to Offwidth:


Beautiful! I'm sure he did, bless him.

Mick

In reply to Tom F Harding:

Just what is it that you are expecting Rockfax to do? Give up? Tell their staff to find careers in banking and seek charitable status?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


That really is fine Alan, we have UK clothing and climbing equipment manufactures that are making profit - it's a free market and we don't live in a communist country.

My point though is that I think it is important people know the repercussions they cause by choosing to buy a commercial guide over a local not-for-profit guide. People should know that by buying the commercial guide they are potentially taking away thousands of pounds that would otherwise be available from the local climbing community. Everyone can 'dislike' this as much as they want - but it is the truth.

In reply to Lusk:


My aerial images have appeared in a couple of climbing guidebooks of late - they are of course given for free.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Maybe guidebooks should have a Fair trade status. Bananas are sorted. Maybe UK climbing guides are next on the list.

In reply to The Ivanator:

1) Rockfax Guides are great,they have revolutionised UK climbing guides - just grab a CC/BMC/FRCC guide from 10 years ago with no photos and shonky descriptions e.g. -"climb the slabby rake!" and be reminded how lucky we are

2) Rockfax are not the only ones doing this - Ground up and Vertebrate to my knowledge are both commercial publishers following a great format publishing guides to areas where CC/BMC etc. already have guides

3) Not everyone cares about excessive history and random stories some people just want clear factual guides - this is what these commercial guides do so well - they understand their customer and offer a product that sells

4) Nothing wrong with making a profit particularly when it supports jobs in the climbing industry

To Alan and the crew at Rockfax you are doing a grand job - please keep producing quality guides in the same format, I will keep buying them and the new editions as well all my older ones are so well used they are falling apart!

In reply to sdavies141:

What a horrible, jarring, depressing expression.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Good for you.
Not quite the same as the 100s, if not 1000s, of hours that goes into producing a guidebook.

In reply to Robert Durran:


I can think of few things less depressing than being able to earn a living doing what you love.

In reply to Robert Durran:


You're such a romantic!

I'm more of a pragmatist and am quite happy to know my climbing gear has been professionally manufactured.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Is this really true? Which books are you referring to?

Alan

In reply to The Ivanator:

Question for the Rockfax chaps: when are you boys going to invade America? Their guides are generally terrible, even the Supertopo ones. World-class areas like the Needles depend on internet print-outs. Surely a Yosemite cragging and Indian Creek/desert spires guide would be good sellers?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:




It's the language Alan, the language. It's some of the messages that it conveys.

Rockfax is great and delivers good products; on the basis of hard work, of which, you and your colleagues are justifiably proud and naturally protective .

But Rockfax isn't a universal good, which has made everything else better; nor could it have existed without the accumilated knowedge of generations of dedicated individuals; nor is it the mainstay local activity now.

In reply to Lusk:


No this is true but also an expected comment. I try to do my very small bit; buying local guides, removing the odd bit of vegetation, picking up litter, removing & replacing tat, reporting damage to the local BMC rep, being a member of the BMC, offering photographs, respecting bird bans, respecting access agreement, arguing the virtues and morals of not-for-profit guides at every opportunity.

I hoped from my previous replies that people may have noticed my passion and support for the amazing work carried out by the local community, of which some give an unbelievable amount of time (and money) - I can only offer a small amount from myself but is that not the point. A small amount from a lot of people makes a huge difference.

Many of the comments on here make me pretty sad and come across as quite selfish really. Its important to remember who built the paths, placed the bolts, cleaned the crags, secured the access and gave their time for all of our enjoyment.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Hi Alan

I gave the example of the North Wales Limestone as it's a guide I have knowledge of the finances for - I understand that this was a very successful guide and will take this into account. Now if you look at the amount RockFax have given to different bolt funds, the website does not mention the north Wales fund directly but mentions donations from - £111-268 to other funds (totalling £2267). Then you look at the £9000 made for a single guide (North Wales Limestone) - If you extrapolate this across the country to areas where RockFax are published even the most conservative estimate would suggest that the local communities are potentially missing out on thousands in investment to funds from guidebook sales. As we both know Alan a couple of hundred quid from RockFax does not go very far where equipment replacement is necessary (3/4 routes?). £89 to the Dorset Path restoration fund I'm sure is appreciated but I feel slightly insulting when you look around on any sunny day and everyone there has a got a copy of the RockFax Dorset guide and it has obviously been a massive success.

You mentioned my use of UKC in a previous, I may be wrong on this but as I understand the website is now self supporting through advertising revenue. It is also quite a different proposition as it was not a commercialisation of an already present not-for-profit service. It is unique, and as far as I'm aware doesn't step on any toes in the same way RockFax guides did. It would be nice if the website also gave a bit of its revenue back to local funds as well, does it do this?

Regards

Tom

In reply to Tom F Harding:

Yes Tom, good points but locally-produced guides were, bluntly, crap and published infrequently until Rockfax came along. So get off your bloody high horse and hand out credit where it's due. RockFax is not a parasite and not everyone wants to cart around pages and pages of pointless verbiage about first ascents and geology and botany notes when they go cragging. As for 5 volumes of Pembroke guides you must be joking; selected climbs for me there.

The all-inclusive CC guides are getting too thick and thorough; witness Llanberis and Ogwen. These things are driving more of us to selective guides. Some sort of culling or separation into main and subsidiary crag volumes might be a good idea.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Yes, and said this was unique and explained why it was unique. You can extrapolate all you want but such guides have never previously existed, nor are they likely to in the future, therefore your hypothetical sums are nonsense. Have you got any actual examples other than NWL that you can produce to support your assertion?


Actually the current figure is £850, boosted by a generous £200 from the BMC ACT, and Rob Dyer told me at the Peak Area meeting the other night that the work was underway which is great to hear.


The point is that UKC only got to where it is because of significant long term support from Rockfax. It is the big thing we have given back to the climbing community.

Alan

In reply to Tom F Harding:

And when you lool around on a sunny day all of those people could have dipped into their own pockets to ccontribute or parked in a proper car park rather tthan on the road side to avoid paying a few quid for example at stanage plantation. Perphaps you should ask the gear manufacturers of the gear these people are using to run thier business on a charity basis or contribute more. Whilst the north wales limestone example of comminity funding is great your ridiculous argument is undermining your original point

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I gather that by your willingness to extrapolate from a single data point that you are not a statistician.

In reply to Chris_Mellor:


Or, rather, what we need is for online versions to be comprehensive, with hardcopy versions being more selective.

I'd suggest that all the leading publishers (CC, BMC, FRCC, SMC, Rockfax, etc) could collaborate on a joint online database covering the whole country and trying to be comprehensive -- something like UKC logbooks but with topos and everything else also.

This would be best if it were an open wiki (with moderators) that locals and regulars could update.

Then the publishers could produce hardcopy guides as they saw fit, but not including minor crags or lower-quality routes,.

In reply to Chris_Mellor:


What a sad view and one I really can't understand, its only a few pages and often a simple celebration of the things that make British climbing so good. The amazing history of some routes, which is now represented by 3 little stars, personally adds to the cragging experience for me.


I mentioned this in a previous message. I agree some of the old guides were rubbish, RockFax came along at the right time, they are not the messiah though. Guides were evolving and would have gone the way of the photo topo with or without them. I also agree many of the definitive local guides are inappropriate for the travelling climber, its great if your a local but everyone has seen the need for selectives - it didn't need RockFax to show them this. We are now living in a great time with some amazing not-for-profit selectives such as the new wired-guides, the SMC guides etc. These are great, selective, photo topo guides and the money goes to good climbing causes rather then someones pocket - How can you argue that this isn't the better way?

In reply to Tom F Harding:



I completely agree with you on these points. Small amounts can add up. And some people will put in large amounts, just as others will simply take and not put back.

I hope you do make money from your aerial photography - it's superb.

Mick

In reply to Tom F Harding:


Why does it need to be in the guidebook though? What's wrong with putting it online? It just adds bulk to the guidebook without any functional benefit.


Why would 'local' guidebooks increase production costs voluntarily without competion? By your argument this would would be less money back into the 'community' and more to the publisher. Main reason guidebook standards have risen sharply is because of competion, with Rockfax playing a major part in that.

In reply to Tom F Harding:


I stand to be corrected but I think Wired guides are done on a more commercial basis by people with pockets which accept money. And good luck to them, the books are excellent and the effort deserves to be rewarded.

It is a good thing that authors are paid for their guidebook work and I personally would regard efforts like James Rushforth described above as a 'good climbing cause'!

Alan

In reply to andrewmcleod:



Aside from the fact it is bigger than the Bible, I would put the most recent Mendip Underground as equally professional as any of the climbing guidebooks.

Also the Swildons Hole book. A whole hardcover book on just one cave!

From the above, you can probably guess which area I mostly cave in.........

In reply to planetmarshall:


It is the term that I find depressing.

In reply to seankenny:


The indian Creek guide is superb and the Moab area one looked good too. American guides are catching up I think.

In reply to Mike Stretford:


Thanks! You've brightened my day.

In reply to matthew jones:


really ? lets put it to a test.

like for stars
dislike for no stars

In reply to The Ivanator:

What's wrong with the Rockfax North Wales? I've just bought one....!

In reply to Ban1:

One of the things that most irritates me about using guides to European sport areas I've never been before is the often complete lack of info about which routes, sectors and crags are genuinely good and which are fillers or tainted in some way. It's like they've been written by locals for locals rather than for people who actually will be using the guide. Yes you can often get some idea of quality by looking at the the routes from the floor, but why should you need to? Wouldn't it be far more useful as a 'guide' if it told you that info before you committed to driving there in the first place?

In reply to john arran:


True, but off course that is only relevant in the unlikely event that it actually tells you how to find the crag in the first place.

In reply to john arran:


Totally agree. My guess is that, when you write your first guidebook, it's to somewhere you know well - perhaps too well. You may be in a little bubble of knowledge and unwittingly write in this bubble. Which is great (if you're already in the bubble but, hang on a minute, then you wouldn't really need a guide) but worthless if you're not in the bubble. My benchmark for guidebook writers is that they can stand outside the bubble and approach the area (even if they know it intimately) through the eyes of the first-time visitor. My guess is that the more guidebooks you write, the easier this becomes.

My quick and dirty litmus test is directions to the crag. Yes, the guidebook writer may have been there dozens (hundreds?) of times. But can they get numpties like me there easily? If they can't, then I'm sorry, but I've lost confidence in them. If I can't find the crag, I'm off to the pub.

Mick

In reply to Mr. Lee:


I'd say they're different because they're community initiatives and not businesses. Their aims are something that benefits the whole climbing community and they are done in a spirit of cooperation and not competition.



It's not us that's the problem it's them then? I wonder what reaction you'd get if you told some of the locals in these areas that.



First, most guides are pure topo guides so the language is not that important and for the bits that are many bilingual too. Many of these guides are already available here, and possibly more would be if they didn't face competition. If the extra cost was seen as contributing to the bolting in these areas most people probably wouldn't mind paying a little more. If Rockfax contributed more to these local bolt funds perhaps there wouldn't be this resentment in the first place.

In reply to Robert Durran:


In certain areas! I currently live in Seattle and get by with a mixture of PDFs, dodgy apps, out-of-print guidebooks, MountainProject, one Supertopo guidebook and an excellent Squamish guidebook! Any chance of Rockfax paying a visit?!

In reply to Mike Stretford:


And someone else who also edits the guide?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:



Escalades autour du Ventoux.
This is the maine guide book for St Leger - world famous climbing. You can buy it at the gite next to the parking or in any tourist office.
I admit it is not a perfect topo but I am heartbroken when I see many Germans and English at the cliff using Rockfax without buying the local book. The local book helps pay for the equipment.
No wonder there are Rockfax and Rockpunkt Topo Vampire signs at the crag.

Steph

In reply to Coel Hellier:


Yeah! I was waiting for this; I suggested it on here about 10 years ago (that possibly the BMC should hold this definitive record). I was laughed out of town

In reply to sdavies141:

That first point is just plain lazy. Show me a guidebook of the time with no photos (you must mean photo topos). Where you say 10 years you must mean more... Burbage Infinity is 10 years old. Also of the many problems I saw in that generation of guides the route descriptions were rarely one of them and certainly not one of the many things that Rockfax helped change.

In reply to Degaine:



Hi Steph

The situation with regard to our France guidebooks I acknowledge was not one we dealt well with.

The St Leger guidebook didn't exist when we were producing ours. I made several approaches initially to the FFME and then after publication to the local climbers. I only ever got a reply from the FFME which was not particularly constructive. I don't know if my emails to the local climbers ever got through but the address was given to me by local climber who knows them personally. We have also had an open invitation on our web site for the last two years for people who are in areas covered by our international guidebooks to get in touch to look at ways we can help. This offer remains open.

I think there is a problem here though for travelling climbers. The Germans and Brits you refer to were using the Rockfax and Rotpunkt topos because they fill a demand - a large area single guidebook that is widely available. Many of them probably wouldn't have been there were it not for the Rockfax and Rotpunkt topos. So while the French climbers may not like the books I would suggest that the French people, running local businesses, are quite happy with them, and the French tax payers, who actually fund most of the bolts, would also be happy with them (if they were aware).

People say that the local guides are easy to find near the crags they cover. This isn't my experience and they are seldom easy to find in a single location at a price tag less than a few hundred Euros for the set. This is a high price to pay for a travelling climber who may only visit each crag once.

I think a more accessible funding system would be helpful - many bolt funds use PayPal to generate donations and our 8 year old El Chorro guide has managed to generate quite a lot of funds for bolting there using this method in only the last 2 years. I am not aware if this exists for the areas in the Haute Provence guide but would be willing to explore the options it gives if there was such a fund.

Alan

In reply to stp:


It's still down to them to produce a guide book that can compete with other guide books. Expecting to maintain a monopoly of the market as an area grows in popularity is not realistic.


I don't know how much of a problem it is to be honest. I don't think you do either given your original post used words such as 'apparently' and 'what friends have told me' to indicate someone else's opinion. Local guidebooks obviously lose a share of the marketplace when faced with competition. Maybe an area has gained in popularity though. A market share might have halved but the number of visitors might have doubled, so no actual loss of income. Maybe the increased popularity of the area was partly due to a Rockfax release? Therefore it can hardly be viewed as lost revenue to a local guidebook. How many more people are planning a trip to the Dolomites verses a few years ago for example? If you know of any specific examples of local initiatives abroad having a shortfall of funds to pay for bolting then please share.


Yes I think Rockfax should contribute to a bolt scheme if there is a shortfall, given there would be no guidebook without the bolts. I would personally rather take best guidebook available and then pay into some sort of crowdfunding scheme than take a lesser guidebook though.

In reply to Mr. Lee:

I buy Rockfax guides to an area I am visiting. If I like the area or a part of it and intend to return I will buy the local guides, which have much more info and routes than the selective Rockfax. I wouldn't risk a long drive to a crag on the off chance it was good and that a local produced guide was available. Rockfax produce good selective guides that give an overview of a largish area. When I am more intimate with that area I will buy more local stuff.
I have all the Peak Rockfax guides, but also the BMC definitive guides. When friends from out of the area visit they tend to look at Rockfax first, then when they have made a choice of crag I bring out the BMC guide which has all the routes. The two sets of guides have a different job and they both fill an essential niche.
Could you imagine coming to the Peak for a week from America, and then buying all the BMC Peak guides? They buy Rockfax and then use local knowledge and the BMC guides for specific crags.
Good luck to Rockfax, they fulfil an excellent role in getting people to an area, and the local/BMC guidebooks for then ensuring the full picture is also available.
P.S. I like the History, Environment and Geology sections in guide books, I read them in the pub, or when resting between routes etc.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Lots of small companies don't make a profit (or much of one). I know mine doesn't. Profits are calculated after costs - and salaries are a cost.

In reply to all:
I've been a contributor to some CC guides, so I may not be entirely impartial, but I do really like them, particularly the newer ones. However, I do also own several Rockfax guides, and find them very useful.

What does depress me a bit is the attitude that market forces always trump every other consideration - so much so that we're reduced to a kind of helpless shrug. I want things in my world like not-quite-so-profitable definitive guidebooks.

In reply to Chris_Mellor:


Don't agree with this at all. The guidebooks I bought when I started circa 1989 were excellent. Still use the NMC and Eastern Lakes guides from then on my increasingly infrequent visits. Seems like a kick in the teeth to the guidebook authors of the time.

In reply to Willi Crater:

Most small companies don't make much profit, however the concept of 'making a profit' is often used as a stick in (British) climbing to characterise evil practices since it is seen as bad for some reason. I think most people who make these statements are assuming that small business and big business are the same thing. There is a huge difference between the Googles, Amazons, Costa Coffees of this world and your average employee-owned small business.

The maxim 'a business is either growing or shrinking, there is no status quo' is sometimes trotted out. This is probably true for businesses with third party shareholder investors who will demand a dividend or move their money elsewhere. For the vast majority of small businesses it is perfectly possible to run for years without growing or making any significant profit, and most that do make a profit just plough it back into the business anyway. This means that a conventional small business and many claiming to be 'not-for-profit' are actually the same - they produce stuff, sell it, pay bills and reinvest the money in producing more stuff.

It is a shame that people who make negative statements about successful British outdoor businesses can't make the distinction between big and small business and recognise that small businesses are a good thing that actually makes the economy work.

Alan

In reply to Mick Ward:

Yes, without getting you to the crag, everything else is pointless. Early Rockfaxes did this brilliantly. I remember being really impressed following directions to a crag in Mallorca for which driving distances up dirt roads had been carefully measured and walking distances on faint paths paced out and key landmarks noted; everything seemed to have been meticulously checked and the whole project gave the impression of being a labour of love. In contrast, I more recently used the two Provence guides - these gave the impression of having been rushed out with too many poor directions, and apparently unchecked routes and grades - a real disappointment. I do sometimes wonder whether Rockfax would have been better sticking to a core business of providing really carefully produced guides to European sports climbing areas - the Rockfax format is ideally suited to sport but is, I think, less satisfactory for trad. Yes, I know this can upset the locals, but most British climbers probably wouldn't be there at all unless the Rockfax existed. Having said this, some of the guides have probably been too successful - on a recent visit to the Costa Blanca armed with the Rockfax, almost every route I did had been polished beyond any chance of enjoyment and the trip felt like a bit of a waste of time - If I went again, I'd certainly seek out local guidebooks.

I do feel that Rockfax may have lost their way a bit with UK guides. It is difficult to see who the N. Wales and South West guides are really aimed at - for quite bulky books they really have remarkably little in them and seem padded out with full or double page photos, some of which are not exactly stunning. Something more is really needed for anyone making more than a one off trip. The same criticism could probably me made of the Lofoten book (though it is visually more inspiring). This one possibly gets away with it because most users probably actually are only making a short one off short trip (and because there is much less climbing in Lofoten that first impressions might suggest!).

I admit I've not seen the Dolomites guide (or been to the Dolomites), but I find it hard to see how this or a Chamonix guide could do other than to overpopularise featured routes - I hope I'm proved wrong.

As for historical sections, I think it would be a great shame if these were omitted from future definitive guides. If they were online, then I doubt they'd get read; having them in the guidebook means that people will dip in on wet days or when browsing between trips. At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old man, I'll say that I am sometimes dismayed at how ignorant some of "the youth of today" are; young alpinists who salivate over the latest Ueli Steck footage but havn't heard of Bonatti or young Scottish climbers who can probably quote from "E11" but can't name a single Robin Smith route.

Undoubtedly Rockfax have done a huge amount of positive work and, arguably, revolutionised the standard of guidebooks generally, but I hope they don't lose their way by overreaching themselves (for example I would much prefer to see more high quality locally produced American guides emerging rather than cherry picking raids by Rockfax).

In reply to Willi Crater:


Absolutely. There have been brilliant, classic, highly functional guidebooks produced for a hundred years. Yes, even the 1980's ones may feel dated now, but then the same could be said of almost anything from earlier eras (cars, music, clothes etc. etc)

I've often wondered about this. The essence of the difference between Rockfax-type commercial guides and largely volunteer-written guides comes down mainly to whether the authors and contributors are paid for their efforts. In many ways the quality of many of the recent UK offerings across the genres seems to be broadly comparable, and it seems that few if any are making a profit (beyond that of drawing/paying salaries). You would expect, in that case, the costs of the volunteer-led guides to be very much lower and for that to be reflected in the price; I'm not up to date with prices of recent guides but that appears not to be the case, and if it was/is then that itself should be a significant factor in sales figures of competing guides.
So what it looks like we have now is a choice of guides, of broadly similar quality, of broadly similar price, some with more info than others but all serving largely the same purpose. The main difference I can see that remains is that in the 'commercial' guides the authors are recompensed for (some of) their work, rather than doing it for the love of it. Maybe I'm being stupid but I can't see anything really wrong with that, given that pretty much all other factors are comparable.

In reply to bpmclimb:


I couldn't agree more.

I find the "not commercially viable" phrase now being trotted out by the publishers of volunteer produced definitive British guides as the reason for not producing or updating guides to less-mainstream/ non-honeypot areas both frustrating and depressing. Rockfax and other commercial guidebook publishers are usually blamed for this sea change in attitude and approach, particularly with regard to the publishing of selective area guides. I'm not convinced that this is entirely true, but it may well be a contributory factor, but the overall decline in across the board sales of British guidebooks can't be helping either. Also the current fixation with Apps will do nothing but rapidly reduce the viability of producing traditional guides. Is this what the climbing public wants? Has anyone actually asked the question?

As an example, Welsh climbing areas now deemed to be commercially 'dead' from a guidebook point of view include the Carneddau and Meirionnydd/ Mid Wales, while the fate of a new guide to the Moelwynion and Cwm Lledr is still undecided. Presumably, once stocks are sold out, there will be no replacement of guides to Cwm Silyn, Llyn, Lliwedd etc. as these areas will also be consigned into the 'non-commercial/ non-profitable' abyss.

Instead of more choice and diversity, there will be less - and in an information rich age, there will be less information available. It remains to be seen if wikis, FB pages and the like can fill the information gap, or even whether this is a desirable - or indeed desired - alternative.

It'll be a sad day - and a huge disservice to British climbing - when all that's left is a few select and definitive guidebooks to just the 'popular' core areas, all trying to outdo each other, with (if we're lucky) token coverage of a few less mainstream areas appearing in selective guides such as Rockfax's North Wales Climbs.

Who knows, perhaps Rockfax is partially to blame for starting this trend, but it is clear that other publishers are now busily following suit. We now have Wired Guides covering the Lakes and Pembroke, both endorsed by the Fell & Rock and the CC yet in direct competition with their own definitives. Commercially viable or commercial madness? No doubt 'market forces' will decide ....

In reply to john arran:



John, what you have stated above is fair comment, but ignores some awkward facts.

The selling price of a guide is a commercial decision for all producers, a balance of production costs, print run and what the customer may pay. Usually a good guess to hopefully cover costs and maybe produce a profit.

The major factor you are ignoring is the source of the material information in the guide.
This has been hotly covered and discussed ( understatement ).
Original first ascent notes from new routes books and club journals,earlier guidebook descriptions, research on site by authors, and feedback from repeat ascentionists and other are possible sources, even UKC logbooks.

An excellent read is the open letter from Neil Foster to Chris Craggs about the Stanage guide at the time of the spiff mentioned previously. I'll have a dig for it later on.

In reply to Dave Williams:
Where do you get this stuff from.

British guidebooks are in a stronger health than they have been for years. The BMC, CC, YMC, FRCC and Wired are producing superb guidebooks, and there are more small players around than there have ever been. It is unquestionably true that there are more routes, on more crags in the UK, in print now than at any time in history.

Yes, there are guidebooks that struggle to get produced because they are minor sellers that take a huge effort but there have always been these, far more in fact. It was the state of affairs in the early 1990s that led to Rockfax appearing since it was felt sport climbing was being neglected by the traditional guide producers. The ease of self-publication has also helped in this respect.

The problem now is not that the information base is diminishing, it is that it has increased to such a level that actually covering it all in print is becoming too much work and has made the books too big. Far from being a problem, the "current fixation with Apps" is actually an excellent long term solution to this problem. It is precisely online and via Apps that this information can find a long term home, while being continually updateable without costing the earth.

Alan

In reply to Dave Williams:


Presumably it's the production and distribution costs that makes some guidebooks commercially unviable? Maybe online guides are the way forward in such circumstances. Half the ice climbing guides that I have used for Norway have been top quality online pdfs. None would sell many units I imigine if they were in the shops. All the UK drytooling areas are also covered by online guides.

In reply to Mr. Lee:

Assuming you mean 'more than covering production costs' then no guidebook is commercially unviable unless you do it wrong. Trust me on this one, I know the figures and I could produce a guidebook to anywhere that was commercially viable, including one with a paid author. It may not make much money, and the author would have to really want to do it, but it could be done. I am not saying I would, since I don't think print is the best option any more for many crags, but it is possible and I'd be happy to discuss how to do it with anyone who asked.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Some is based on actual fact and some is personal opinion, both expressed to perhaps stimulate and broaden debate? Is one not allowed to have an opinion these days?


This is an entirely different matter and I never questioned the current situation with regards to in print publications. As it happens, I don't disagree with what you say.


It's a fact that cross-subsidies were once used to produce 'minor selling' definitive guidebooks to peripheral areas . As this is no longer the case with one notable UK guidebook publisher, then I merely speculated as to a likely future scenario, one that's not impossible to envisage when a replacement Carneddau guide has been deemed to be commercially inviable.


I didn't state that Apps were a problem, nor do I disagree that they're not one of a number of possible 'solutions'. I was merely posing the question if this is actually what the climbing public really want - i.e Apps instead of traditional guidebooks? Has anyone - you included - actually asked the question or are you and other App developers/ publishers just working on an assumption?


Okay, I'll bite. I don't doubt that you're right with your assertion, so I'm genuinely interested in hearing what you have to say. How do you wish to do this?

In reply to Rick Graham:


It was ( I think )Neil Foster´s editorial in High Magazine criticising Chris Craggs about his plans to privately publish an alternative Stanage guidebook.

I am sure one of them, at least, will have kept a copy.

In reply to Dave Williams:

To describe Wired Guides as 'endorsed by the Fell & Rock and the CC' is a misunderstanding of what Wired is: it's a collaboration between clubs under a single umbrella name/'brand'.

In addition: the new Wired Lakes guide is no more 'in direct competition with (the FRCC's) own definitives' than was the previous FRCC selected guide 'Lake District Rock' published in 2003; rather, it's just an updated version of the same thing.

In reply to Rick Graham:


When Brian did his lovely little guide to Fairy Cave Quarry (a true labour of love), if I remember correctly, it retailed at £4. If I also remember correctly, he didn't have any input into the pricing. If so, this seems both ungracious and silly. He put his heart and soul into that guide - and it shows.

And sorry to be critical but... whoever came up with £4 was having a laff. If it had come out at £7, my guess is that they wouldn't have lost a single sale. For heaven's sake, we pay that kind of money for a single person to visit a climbing wall. Even splitting £7 in two for just one day's climbing, well, even the most impecunious among us can surely afford that. Two or more days climbing and it's less than £2 per person per day.

What would £7 have done to the profit (or contribution to profit) versus £4? Sent it ballistic, that's what! Unless I've made a glaring schoolboy error (and I freely admit my accountancy exams are lost forever in the mists of time), whoever priced this guide didn't know their stuff. At the very least, they should have consulted Brian. He's far too polite to say anything but, at the time, on his behalf, I felt bloody furious.

Mick

Maybe a rockfax guide for font?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:





As someone who has recently moved into the small business world, the tax rules have been a real eye opener, something which I guess the comment about creative accountancy may have been alluding to.

Before I was taken out of the PAYE system, I had no idea that things which I (and HMRC) had previously understood to be personal (taxable) expenditure could suddenly be classed as costs.

Now I am not saying for a minute that all companies behave as badly as the large corporates; but there is no denying the differences in the system. We should not conflate challenging double standards with anti-business 'profit bashing'.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


I have been self employed since 1978.
TBH the basic principles of taxation that HMRC operate have hardly changed.

In reply to Rick Graham:

Think you've missed my point

In reply to John Postlethwaite:

I did not realise you had made one

In reply to Robert Durran:

Ironically, the only time I remember in my life not finding the crag was trying to go to Chudleigh following the directions in an old Littlejohn selected SW guide. We of course didn't have GPS back then, but weren't stupid and had never had that much problem before. I imagine the Rockfax SW guide is aimed at exactly the same type of people as used the Littlejohn guide - like us, down for a week of bivvying in carparks and visiting lots of nice crags!

In reply to TobyA:


Well yes exactly. I went to Cornwall for the first time last year and bought the Rockfax. I went back again later in the year and wished I'd got something with more in it. As I said, it only really seems aimed at the one off short term visitor.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:



Really? Do share examples.

In reply to TobyA:


In Littlejohn's defence, his sketch map allowed me to get to Blackchurch when I was damned if I could find it from the description in the CC guide. The CC description makes perfect sense now I've been there, of course. And, without doubt, ticking Littlejohn is infinitely more important than Rockfax SW.

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Lets be honest, this is a bit of things being better in the good old days. We of course have an emotional attachment to the guides we used in our youthful exploration days

In reply to Mick Ward:

He's far too polite to say anything


Hi Mick, thanks for your comments about the guide - and my politeness! I should also mention Mark at this point, who took action photos, produced topos, and had much input besides.

I also think the price was a misjudgement, but to some extent an understandable one, and I think the CC do deserve some credit for being open-minded enough to agree to a printed volume at all. The original catalyst was a problem with having to use out-of-date grades for the upcoming Select guidebook; all that was required to fix that was an online update of the definitive record.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


What are you accusing Alan of now? Passing off his moat cleaning expenses as a tax deductible business expense, perhaps? Get to the point. If you have an accusation to make, then make it. Enough of the vague nonsense.

In reply to The Ivanator:

Dear readers.

I am also a fan of the Rockfax guides as they read extremely well and give a good overview of a particular area (some may refer to them as selective guides) whilst still remaining rather comprehensive, the more recent ones in particular.

However, I am also a fan of guides produced by lesser-known developers whenever excellent ones periodically hit the shelves. One of these is the beta guides book on the bouldering areas of the North Yorkshire Moors and the east coast of Yorkshire, published roughly 12-18 months ago. The developer is known as Lee Robinson and the link below contains a documentary-style video with Lee himself describing the whole process of getting a decent guidebook into shop shelves and how much fun one can have doing it.

I would recommend watching it whenever you have 10 minutes to yourself as it really does provide an insight into how much hard work developing such a book entails. It also identifies some of the most worthwhile Boulder problems in the area, of a variety of grades, should anyone be interested in climbing around that area in general.



Jamie

vimeo.com/111147021

In reply to Rocknast:

Why are you trying to change the subject.
This topic is clearly a mud slinging about tax avoidance

In reply to The Ivanator:

I have guidebooks on my shelf which go all the way back to the 1970s. Some are good, some are pretty awful. Rather too many fall into the 'local knowledge' trap and are not very good at telling you where the routes are - a significant failure in a guidebook. Rockfax changed the game, and now we have a wide range of high-quality guidebooks, including from the traditional publishers, which actually guide you. Probably this would have happened eventually anyway, but without the pressure of competition I wonder how long it might have taken for the traditional publishers to have changed their approach.

In reply to Mick Ward:



I agree with you on that.

In reply to bpmclimb:

Agree absolutely with both points: Mark's superb input to the guide and the CCs open-mindedness in facilitating a guide at all. All credit to them for that. I hope it's gone down well. A lot of people must have had fun days at Fairy Cave Quarry because of it. My impression of the clientele is that many had limited trad experience (fair enough, we've all got to start somewhere) and would go to FCQ with a guide but not otherwise. It seems to me that it's fulfilled its purpose admirably.

Mick

In reply to Howard J:

Hear hear!

In reply to Ban1:

Tell that to the other hundred+ responses individually! LOL

In reply to Rocknast:

Great video, thanks for posting.

In reply to Mick Ward:


One word.

Map

Thats all a guidebook needs in it to get you there.

In reply to Mick Ward:



To turn it around ...
It took us nearly two hours to get back to the car from Standing Stones once (in the mist), the pub did well that night!

In reply to Urgles:

Well, a half-decent map - 'cos ole' Harry's squiggles wandered all over the place... and so did we.

Mick

In reply to Lusk:

Standing Stones in the mist - cruel, certainly without a compass! Coming back from Ravenstones, I used to line up markers ever so carefully to work out where the road/car would be. Once, very knackered and in near-darkness, I was convinced I'd blown it. Can still remember the utter relief.

Didn't Chris Hardy suggest that finding your car again might just be the hardest thing in his guide? Consider your ale well earned.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:



Yes he did, Appointment with Fear is a stroll in the park in comparison.

In reply to Urgles:

I defy anyone to find half the crags, let alone the circuits, in Font first time from only the maps in the old purple guide.

In reply to Lemony:
Always worked for me. The main reason the maps looked wrong (aside from user incompetance) is some problems get moved from time to time. As a first time visitor I did struggle to find some routes in the 1980's guides, especially those seacliffs covered by CC guides... quite a few seemed to be written for climbers experienced with the area.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


I am not sure what you are getting at here but I can assure you I am not conflating the two. Just because we keep our profit to a minimum by reinvesting in the business doesn't mean we are cheating the tax system. In fact, as most business people and tax people would agree, allowing businesses to reinvest in themselves leads to growth, employment and bigger tax returns from regular monthly PAYE and VAT. UKC/Rockfax has grown substantially over the last 8 years and we haven't had to cook the books to do that.

Alan

In reply to Dave Williams:


I am not sure that this was ever really the case that books actually had to 'cross subsidise'. The sums have never added up to make this seem necessary for the last 25 years while I have been printing books.


Yes, it is an assumption but you can't ask people whether they want Apps until you have made them and shown what is possible. Also, the pace of change is so great now that you need to be in a position to take advantage of what might become possible. We are committed to that and have invested heavily in it. If people don't want it then we will adapt and produce what they do want.


Not sure what you want in response here. I would be happy to advise anyone but I'd need to know what they were doing first to see how it could be changed if it wasn't working.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


I think that makes you an unusual publisher. Every publisher I've worked with has had a small number of very successful titles which generate the vast majority of profit, and it's these very successful titles which allow smaller less successful (and sometimes unprofitable) titles to go ahead. My first publishing director back in the early 90s was very keen on invoking Pareto's Law, with 80% of the profit coming from 20% of the titles.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


A question of balance in the debate is what I am trying to encourage Alan.

This has been one of the more interesting and informed threads on the forums for a while; with, in the main, people sharing a range of thought provoking points about an important issue.

However at times it has slipped back towards some of the more typical 'tit for tat' which is often encountered on here. The point about tax and costs, I felt, risked sliding back into a 'black and white' case of pro or anti (small) business.

Admittedly the issue was raised through what appeared to be a tongue in cheek comment about creative accountants; but behind the joke there is an important point. The tax system is full of grey areas, especially in relation to the calculation of costs. Indeed, from a self assessment point of view there are clear incentives to maximise the calculation of costs and minimise the size of profits. Incentives it must be emphasised, that are not open to those of PAYE. As you rightly point out many of the large corporates have got this (and much else) off to a tee and I am certainly not suggesting that every company seeks to cheat. But I hope that you would agree that making this point isn't anti-profit or small business bashing?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Your sales won't be entirely on top of what the definitive sales would have been, so you and other commercial producers will be cutting into the profits of the more lucrative definitive volumes (like say Stanage); profits that they also would have reinvested.

I'm also not convinced that you can always make money other than on the publication of a book based on ready content... from what James said above, he had to make a big personal financial input to get the information together for Dolomites, in the same way I and most other editors did as definitive guidebook volunteers. From what I've seen many of those volunteers only did that work to bring the information to the climbing public because it was through a non-commercial route.

In reply to Mick Ward:

Yes it was very much a joint effort even if I didnt get my name on the front

In reply to Urgles:

Could be worse... you might not be on the front cover of Peak Rock!

Mick

In reply to tony:


The owner of the publisher I once worked for kept mentioning this too, though never gave it a name. But he also wanted all the remaining 80% to make a profit too - breaking even would do, but making a loss (so being subsidised by the profitable titles) was seen as a failure.

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


You still haven't given any examples of these.

In reply to Willi Crater:


Give him a break, Willi.

He has just set up in a business without doing any preparatory research into the tax implications

In reply to Rick Graham:

Like, err... most of us, if we're being honest.

'You know it ain't easy
you know how hard it can be...'

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:

Too well versed, too well read...........and too kind as always.

Back on track, let's slag or praise Rockfax.

In reply to Jon Stewart:
"What's annoying is seeing new guides come out over and over again when you haven't got one for the areas you like climbing in. This was the case for G south and the Lakes until very recently".

Well.. You could always write one yourself if you like the area so much.. I'm not attempting to be bolshy.. Honest But if you don't like the way things are. then do something about it..

In reply to John Postlethwaite:


Yes it has been an excellent thread. I think you and I are at cross purposes though. I was trying to make a point about the negative characterisation of business and profit amongst some in the British outdoor community, and you are making a point about the integrity of some small businesses.

Alan

In reply to tony:


Climbing guidebooks are actually not that minor, even the minor ones. I heard a figure that only the top 5% of books that are published ever have print runs of more than 4000 copies. That puts every Rockfax in the top 5% and most other guidebooks there or thereabouts.

From a business point of view there are lots of guidebooks that shouldn't really be considered 'commercially viable' (we have a number of them) since it is almost certainly the case that, financially, your time could be better spent elsewhere. All I am saying is that you can print a guidebook to anywhere in the UK, and cover your costs within a reasonable time span, and keep a bit aside for an author/editor.

Alan

In reply to Rick Graham:



Well - I was only hoping to get a few (legal) tips.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

... but like everyone else you rely on significant volunteer time and expenditure. The publishing costs are what can be covered with a bit left over. If the whole project was costed as a job of work.. salaried folk (re)checking everything ... a profit is impossible.

In reply to Willi Crater:


After the torrid time I've had of it recently, here's one: prepare your tax return early

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:



That might be your viewpoint and experience , Alan.

But only because Rockfax produce good guides!

In reply to Rick Graham:


I think plenty of people are capable of producing good books but, you are right, one of the main requirements to make publishing work financially is producing a really good product that people want to buy.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:




Obviously, when it comes to selling, quality helps. But that consideration is easily trumped, I think, by the choice of subject matter.

A definitive guide to a relatively obscure area could be of the highest quality but still not sell at all well. Conversely, a selected climbs guide to a popular area could be a bit of a rush job but still have sales pretty much assured.

In reply to bpmclimb:


The definitive would still sell enough though, as long as you didn't print too many.

Alan

In reply to bpmclimb:


You should try having to do a ct600.