This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Use those like/dislike buttons for something constructive! Do you dis/ like the BMC rebrand?
39
493
In reply to toad:
I know, we're hoary old stickinthemuds and the rebrand isn't aimed at us, but even so, this highly scientific study doesn't look promising
I know, we're hoary old stickinthemuds and the rebrand isn't aimed at us, but even so, this highly scientific study doesn't look promising
11
In reply to toad:
The BMC/Climb Britain are becoming increasingly un-relevant to anything besides maintaining its self.
The BMC/Climb Britain are becoming increasingly un-relevant to anything besides maintaining its self.
26
6
7
In reply to toad:
"After a nine-month independent study, sports marketing specialists b-focused and design agency Thinkfarm found the answer."
“BMC members all climb stuff,” they reported back.
Cannot wait for the Dailymash take on that.
"After a nine-month independent study, sports marketing specialists b-focused and design agency Thinkfarm found the answer."
“BMC members all climb stuff,” they reported back.
Cannot wait for the Dailymash take on that.
32
In reply to toad:
Unfortunately the result of this thread is irrelevant - after a referendum of its members, Climb Britain have declared massively in favour of banning all polls from the organisation.
Unfortunately the result of this thread is irrelevant - after a referendum of its members, Climb Britain have declared massively in favour of banning all polls from the organisation.
8
7
In reply to Steve nevers:
What gives you that impression? Their access work alone is spectacular. The regional access database, cheddar gorge, horseshoe quarry etc.
> The BMC/Climb Britain are becoming increasingly un-relevant to anything besides maintaining its self.
What gives you that impression? Their access work alone is spectacular. The regional access database, cheddar gorge, horseshoe quarry etc.
13
3
In reply to Steve nevers:
Un-relevant is an un-word.
> The BMC/Climb Britain are becoming increasingly un-relevant...
Un-relevant is an un-word.
11
In reply to starbug:
Who the f*ck did they actually ask? Nobody on here or anyone I know seems to have been asked. DId they just do some random focus groups?
Who the f*ck did they actually ask? Nobody on here or anyone I know seems to have been asked. DId they just do some random focus groups?
13
In reply to JayPee630:
I suspect they "asked" sport England for some money, and sport England "told" them to rebrand, but it would be nice for a BMC bod to stick their head over the parapet and tell us the real story?
Sorry,sorry,sorry. A Climb Britain bod
I suspect they "asked" sport England for some money, and sport England "told" them to rebrand, but it would be nice for a BMC bod to stick their head over the parapet and tell us the real story?
Sorry,sorry,sorry. A Climb Britain bod
Post edited at 18:22
15
1
23
In reply to Christheclimber:
Re logo: the little mountain but is ok but that 'climb' font....wtf?? That has to be the ugliest font ever
Re logo: the little mountain but is ok but that 'climb' font....wtf?? That has to be the ugliest font ever
7
In reply to toad:
teensie little bump, but it looks rather one sided
Edit: tea sue? predictive nonsense!
teensie little bump, but it looks rather one sided
Edit: tea sue? predictive nonsense!
Post edited at 21:30
In reply to starbug:
I thought that WAS from the Daily Mash...
> "After a nine-month independent study, sports marketing specialists b-focused and design agency Thinkfarm found the answer."
> “BMC members all climb stuff,” they reported back.
> Cannot wait for the Dailymash take on that.
I thought that WAS from the Daily Mash...
19
6
In reply to Misha:
Ditto, I thought this was a joke post but then read the text of the actual article.
Ditto, I thought this was a joke post but then read the text of the actual article.
4
In reply to toad:
What's going to happen to all my Harveys/BMC maps???? I can't possibly use a Harveys/Climb Britain map. That'd be ridiculous.
What's going to happen to all my Harveys/BMC maps???? I can't possibly use a Harveys/Climb Britain map. That'd be ridiculous.
4
In reply to muppetfilter:
Um no, may be an incomplete back to front one but certainly not a proper one. Had me worried there for a second!
Um no, may be an incomplete back to front one but certainly not a proper one. Had me worried there for a second!
2
8
3
In reply to toad:
Please sign the petition to stop the BMC changing it's name to Climb Britian.
https://www.change.org/p/british-mountaineering-council-stop-the-bmc-from-c...
Please sign the petition to stop the BMC changing it's name to Climb Britian.
https://www.change.org/p/british-mountaineering-council-stop-the-bmc-from-c...
8
4
4
In reply to Jonathan Spooner: I saw your petition, but was unimpressed by your suggestion that the staff at the BMC are "unworthy" of speaking for the organisation. I think you'll find it was probably the BMC Executive that made the decision and who should be questioned over it by disgruntled members. From what I remember of my 6 years there, the staff do a pretty fine job and are eminently qualified to speak for the organization!
19
In reply to toad:
That must be a UKC record for the most 'dislikes' for a post. And all within less than a day.
That must be a UKC record for the most 'dislikes' for a post. And all within less than a day.
2
15
1
In reply to Frank the Husky:
That was always my impression. In my (admittedly relatively few) dealings with people at the BMC, I was always struck by their dedication, their desire to do the best they could. With your confirmation, that's something to cling to!
When the news broke here yesterday, I was horrified. But then I thought, 'Well, you're a silly old fart, probably hopelessly out of touch with the times.' So it's somewhat of a relief to find that I'm far from the only one to feel thus.
We all make mistakes. Perhaps the BMC might like to have a re-think.
Mick
> From what I remember of my 6 years there, the staff do a pretty fine job...
That was always my impression. In my (admittedly relatively few) dealings with people at the BMC, I was always struck by their dedication, their desire to do the best they could. With your confirmation, that's something to cling to!
When the news broke here yesterday, I was horrified. But then I thought, 'Well, you're a silly old fart, probably hopelessly out of touch with the times.' So it's somewhat of a relief to find that I'm far from the only one to feel thus.
We all make mistakes. Perhaps the BMC might like to have a re-think.
Mick
13
In reply to Frank the Husky:
That suggestion was made in a comment by someone who signed it, not by the poll originator.
> I saw your petition, but was unimpressed by your suggestion that the staff at the BMC are "unworthy" of speaking for the organisation.
That suggestion was made in a comment by someone who signed it, not by the poll originator.
1
1
1
In reply to toad:
So it would appear that this rebrand is even less popular then Brexit. That's saying something!
So it would appear that this rebrand is even less popular then Brexit. That's saying something!
2
3
1
3
In reply to starbug:
*Climber thinks other people interested in the renaming of British climbing's administrative body.*
While over 300 largely internet based climbers expressed their horror at the BMC changing it's name to Climb Britain, keen climber and satire fan Star Bug took comfort in the idea that the buffoons responsible would soon be publicly cut down to size by on Britain's Premier satirical website. "Cannot wait for the Dailymash take on that.", he said.
Non-climber Nikki Hollis asked, "What's climbing got to do with the doctors' union? Is this this Jeremy Hunt's fault?"
The Daily Mash was unavailable for comment.
*Climber thinks other people interested in the renaming of British climbing's administrative body.*
While over 300 largely internet based climbers expressed their horror at the BMC changing it's name to Climb Britain, keen climber and satire fan Star Bug took comfort in the idea that the buffoons responsible would soon be publicly cut down to size by on Britain's Premier satirical website. "Cannot wait for the Dailymash take on that.", he said.
Non-climber Nikki Hollis asked, "What's climbing got to do with the doctors' union? Is this this Jeremy Hunt's fault?"
The Daily Mash was unavailable for comment.
Post edited at 17:21
9
1
3
2
5
5
In reply to Chris_Mellor:
Agreed. It looks like it was designed by Blind Pew with a bread knife.
A complete and utter lack of any aesthetic sensitivity whatsoever. Whoever was responsible for this should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
It makes me ashamed to be a designer.
> And the font is ultra-shite .....
Agreed. It looks like it was designed by Blind Pew with a bread knife.
A complete and utter lack of any aesthetic sensitivity whatsoever. Whoever was responsible for this should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
It makes me ashamed to be a designer.
Post edited at 20:40
6
5
In reply to toad:
Marketing agencies and atrocious fonts aside, I think Climb Britain is actually a far better name than The British Mountaineering Council. It's far less fuddy-duddy and it gets across that it's about climbing, which we pretty much all feel that we do to various degrees, whether it's 'climbing' Snowdon, top-roping indoors or rising to a multi-pitch adventure challenge in winter. I very rarely consider what I do to be Mountaineering and I suspect many of the nay-sayers are acting out of misplaced or barely considered conservatism.
However, that font is still tragic.
Marketing agencies and atrocious fonts aside, I think Climb Britain is actually a far better name than The British Mountaineering Council. It's far less fuddy-duddy and it gets across that it's about climbing, which we pretty much all feel that we do to various degrees, whether it's 'climbing' Snowdon, top-roping indoors or rising to a multi-pitch adventure challenge in winter. I very rarely consider what I do to be Mountaineering and I suspect many of the nay-sayers are acting out of misplaced or barely considered conservatism.
However, that font is still tragic.
5
10
In reply to john arran:
I think for a lot of people the initial shock of this large unexpected move is shadowed by an aprehension of what other moves are going on behind the scenes and where is the money going ?
I think for a lot of people the initial shock of this large unexpected move is shadowed by an aprehension of what other moves are going on behind the scenes and where is the money going ?
Post edited at 22:17
4
In reply to john arran:
We also haven't heard why it was never an option to simply have two "brands", as Mountaineering Scotland and ClimbScotland have done - thus it's probably a false dilemma to have to choose between "fuddy-duddy" and trendy. We probably could've had both - and then everyone's happy. Why isn't this an option, if it is for Scotland?
> It's far less fuddy-duddy
But is that always a good thing? Maybe it's useful to have the air of sophistication for certain things (negotiating access with landowners, environmental submissions, government correspondence etc). We also haven't heard why it was never an option to simply have two "brands", as Mountaineering Scotland and ClimbScotland have done - thus it's probably a false dilemma to have to choose between "fuddy-duddy" and trendy. We probably could've had both - and then everyone's happy. Why isn't this an option, if it is for Scotland?
> and it gets across that it's about climbing, which we pretty much all feel that we do to various degrees, whether it's 'climbing' Snowdon,
If you had to put 'climbing' in quotes in your own point... (and use Snowdon as the mountain), it shows even you have doubts that real hillwalkers would call what they do climbing. Even UKClimbing has the subsidary UKHillwalking because they almost certainly found that trying to shoehorn hillwalkers under the banner of 'climbing' was not working. Personally I could not call anything where my hands have been in my pockets the whole time - a climb.> I very rarely consider what I do to be Mountaineering
That may be true for you, and for me. However the core of the BMC membership is still hillwalkers, and they're even less represented by this new name than before. The only logical conclusion I can draw is that the existing members are less important than prospective indoor climbers (presumably if there's a huge increase in climbers from the inclusion in the Olympics)? > However, that font is still tragic.
At least there's something for all to agree on
6
In reply to john arran:
I think for many people the issue has gone beyond branding and font to the issue of governance. The BMC is supposed to represent its members and these events have suggested that the executive have forgotten that inconvenient fact.
I think for many people the issue has gone beyond branding and font to the issue of governance. The BMC is supposed to represent its members and these events have suggested that the executive have forgotten that inconvenient fact.
12
In reply to muppetfilter:
Want to know where the money is going Check BMC accounts In particular wages and expenses
Want to know where the money is going Check BMC accounts In particular wages and expenses
2
1
In reply to Marek:
No it doesn't. "Representing its members" doesn't mean direct democratic implementation of every whim of it's members. It means using their knowledge and understanding of the issues to best meet and represent the needs and interests of the "climbing" community.
Possibly the new name will not enhance the ability of the organisation to do that. Possibly it will. But I doubt a straw poll of members largely ignorant of the either what the BMC does or the challenges it faces will enhance the ability of the organisation to do that.
> I think for many people the issue has gone beyond branding and font to the issue of governance. The BMC is supposed to represent its members and these events have suggested that the executive have forgotten that inconvenient fact.
No it doesn't. "Representing its members" doesn't mean direct democratic implementation of every whim of it's members. It means using their knowledge and understanding of the issues to best meet and represent the needs and interests of the "climbing" community.
Possibly the new name will not enhance the ability of the organisation to do that. Possibly it will. But I doubt a straw poll of members largely ignorant of the either what the BMC does or the challenges it faces will enhance the ability of the organisation to do that.
Post edited at 17:33
3
3
In reply to Postmanpat:
Not raising an issue like this at area meetings when it is already underway is showing contempt for the subscription paying, volunteering, activists. How did the representatives know what the general membership wanted without asking them?
Not raising an issue like this at area meetings when it is already underway is showing contempt for the subscription paying, volunteering, activists. How did the representatives know what the general membership wanted without asking them?
5
In reply to Frank the Husky:
This may well be true but unfortunately has little to do with this issue. I'm sure they have human beings who are capable of describing the BMC (CB) position. Unfortunately they seem reluctant to prove you right. Mr Turnbull's offering yesterday certainly didn't. Maybe they are taking a run up this time.
This may well be true but unfortunately has little to do with this issue. I'm sure they have human beings who are capable of describing the BMC (CB) position. Unfortunately they seem reluctant to prove you right. Mr Turnbull's offering yesterday certainly didn't. Maybe they are taking a run up this time.
2
In reply to johncook:
It's not supposed to be a democracy. There is supposed to be democratic involvement and not necessarily about every issue.
Anyway, can you imagine the uproar if they chose a domain name only to find the domain name had been bought two weeks previously?
> Not raising an issue like this at area meetings when it is already underway is showing contempt for the subscription paying, volunteering, activists. How did the representatives know what the general membership wanted without asking them?
It's not supposed to be a democracy. There is supposed to be democratic involvement and not necessarily about every issue.
Anyway, can you imagine the uproar if they chose a domain name only to find the domain name had been bought two weeks previously?
2
In reply to johncook:
Ah, that's where you've gone wrong. In a mature democracy the executive decide what they want and then tell the members what the members would have wanted if only they had understood the situation.
I jest. I think.
> ... How did the representatives know what the general membership wanted without asking them?
Ah, that's where you've gone wrong. In a mature democracy the executive decide what they want and then tell the members what the members would have wanted if only they had understood the situation.
I jest. I think.
4
In reply to Postmanpat:
That's a non-issue - domain names are dirt cheap (£`100 or so including hosting, a few quid to squat on it otherwise.), and considering the quality of the design consultancy, there would've been plenty to buy every single name under consideration.
> Anyway, can you imagine the uproar if they chose a domain name only to find the domain name had been bought two weeks previously?
That's a non-issue - domain names are dirt cheap (£`100 or so including hosting, a few quid to squat on it otherwise.), and considering the quality of the design consultancy, there would've been plenty to buy every single name under consideration.
Post edited at 22:37
6
In reply to Postmanpat:
They started buying climbbritain domain names on 3rd March and climb-britain on 19th April. The final domains were added on 6th July. It would be a doddle to register all the ones that they were potentially interested in prior to any consultation.
Worth noting that the MCofS aren't too bothered about this - they've had mountaineering-scotland.org.uk since 1999 (it redirects to mcofs.org.uk) but still haven't bothered registering the other variants. perhaps they realise that there's nothing for anyone else to gain by buying the domains?
> can you imagine the uproar if they chose a domain name only to find the domain name had been bought two weeks previously?
They started buying climbbritain domain names on 3rd March and climb-britain on 19th April. The final domains were added on 6th July. It would be a doddle to register all the ones that they were potentially interested in prior to any consultation.
Worth noting that the MCofS aren't too bothered about this - they've had mountaineering-scotland.org.uk since 1999 (it redirects to mcofs.org.uk) but still haven't bothered registering the other variants. perhaps they realise that there's nothing for anyone else to gain by buying the domains?
In reply to Simon Caldwell:
> They started buying climbbritain domain names on 3rd March and climb-britain on 19th April. >
Yup seems to be a bit of a red herring. In reply to Postmanpat:
As others have said domain names unless you are talking about the really tw*ttish new extensions aint that expensive.
Choosing the ever popular postmanpatclimbing and a bog standard registry.
Getting
co.uk, .uk, org, org.uk. .com would come in under at under 100 quid with some of them being for two years.
> Anyway, can you imagine the uproar if they chose a domain name only to find the domain name had been bought two weeks previously?
As others have said domain names unless you are talking about the really tw*ttish new extensions aint that expensive.
Choosing the ever popular postmanpatclimbing and a bog standard registry.
Getting
co.uk, .uk, org, org.uk. .com would come in under at under 100 quid with some of them being for two years.
In reply to toad:
I just can't imagine trying to claim reciprocal rights under such a silly name. You can just picture the guardian saying "Yes, you should stick to climbing in Britain with this silly card!"
I just can't imagine trying to claim reciprocal rights under such a silly name. You can just picture the guardian saying "Yes, you should stick to climbing in Britain with this silly card!"
1
In reply to johncook:
I sat next to you at the area meeting... the implications of the marketing were obvious to me even if I didn't expect a name change (ie in my experience most marketing efforts involve burning money for often dreadful results) so maybe I need to be more directly satirical in my conversations or perhaps make sure I'm distracting you less. Yet it wasn't our money and compared to most of what we do names and logos are pretty unimportant.
Have a read of the locked thread... our national council reps were pretty close to unanimous in their support as were other trusted experienced volunteers on the exec and committees. I'm speaking as someone who cant stand marketing organisations and think the issue has been very badly handled (trad climbers unsurprisingly grumpy about change... blow me). As I said on the other thread : "I disagree with the way the rebrand has been handled but in the end it is nothing like as important as the main activities of the organisation. I don't want to become a member of the B ark in the hitchhikers guide who spent decades not inventing the wheel as they couldn't agree what colour it should be."
I sat next to you at the area meeting... the implications of the marketing were obvious to me even if I didn't expect a name change (ie in my experience most marketing efforts involve burning money for often dreadful results) so maybe I need to be more directly satirical in my conversations or perhaps make sure I'm distracting you less. Yet it wasn't our money and compared to most of what we do names and logos are pretty unimportant.
Have a read of the locked thread... our national council reps were pretty close to unanimous in their support as were other trusted experienced volunteers on the exec and committees. I'm speaking as someone who cant stand marketing organisations and think the issue has been very badly handled (trad climbers unsurprisingly grumpy about change... blow me). As I said on the other thread : "I disagree with the way the rebrand has been handled but in the end it is nothing like as important as the main activities of the organisation. I don't want to become a member of the B ark in the hitchhikers guide who spent decades not inventing the wheel as they couldn't agree what colour it should be."
3
2
In reply to Offwidth:
I agree with you. My problem is that I disagree with the way it has been handled. Marketing is something I was involved in many years ago and it really needed careful thought. This doesn't come across that way.
I agree with you. My problem is that I disagree with the way it has been handled. Marketing is something I was involved in many years ago and it really needed careful thought. This doesn't come across that way.
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Le Toit de Ben - Quebec 1958
This week's Friday Night Video whisks us back to Val-David, Quebec, in the Autumn of 1958. Two daring young climbers embark on the ascent of a route that seemed unattainable, resembling a roof suspended in the air, defying all the conventions of the time....
3 May
Loading Notifications...