BRSCC call E.G.M.

[Rod Birley]

Letters have gone out to members advising of an extraordinary general meeting in London later this month. Most of you will know that all the entries for next year will be dealt with by H.Q. and some directors will be asked to step down. The news is that they will be running fewer meetings............peoples thoughts?

[greenamex2]

Sounds very interesting, and long overdue.

I just hope it doesn't turn into a witch hunt and a bit of common sense prevails. In particular people should consider the wider implications and not just their own personal gain.

Let us know how it goes, it could either be the beginning, or the beginning of the end.

[JR Ewing]

I'm not sure they will be running fewer meetings will they, just streamlining the entry process by centralising it?

[Suzy]

I got this letter too yesterday. It was written in jargon (and jargon is not my speciality). Am I right that I've interpreted it as meaning:

1) BRSCC are reducing the number of Directors from 12 to 6?
2) One person will be appointed to the board to represent all the regional BRSCC clubs?
3) They have had a massive reduction in the number of entries in 2003 and this is costing too much money?
4) They are looking at a way to increase revenue whilst keeping the entry costs low?

[Rod Birley]

Yes, that sounds about right.

[goforit500]

I wonder if the cost savings realised by fewer directors and centralised admin will be passed to the members in the form of reduced entry fees....??

[Stephen Green]

The letter does also say less meetings next year.

[Barny]

In the BRSCC News it says something like, they had less entries this year, so will hold less meetings next year with hopefully bigger grids.
But no mention of reduced entry fees to attract more competitors.

[Bob Pearson]

Suzy,
Did you say "keeping" the entry fees low. That implies they already are!!

[spearce]

.... they're having a laugh !!!

[Chris Y]

Well, at least it's a 'step forward'. This is actually the fist positive move i've seen since the whole MIA report thing.

And, let's face it - the BRSCC need to do the most to stay in line with the competition.

I really do hope they pass on the savings to the competitor, otherwise they will find their entries reducing even further.

[Suzy]

I don't have the letter in front of me but I'm sure there was a reference to "keeping" or even reducing the entry fees. Those of you with the letters to hand will be able to confirm it (unless it's on the BRSCC website).

I have to confess that, when I heard that they were planning on halving the number of Directors and only having one centre representative, I interpreted it was meaning that they were paying too many people far too much money to not do very much! Maybe I'm wrong.

Fewer meetings next year - but no change in the membership fee for racers and members etc? Wonder how they'll justify that...

[Tim Falce]

Fewer meetings next year will probably mean an increase in entry fees to keep the revenue on a par with this year.
Maybe if they followed the BARC's example and cut costs and were a bit more friendly, more people would race with them. But that would be too simple wouldnt it.

[stroller]

I have to confess that, when I heard that they were planning on halving the number of Directors and only having one centre representative, I interpreted it was meaning that they were paying too many people far too much money to not do very much!

I think you'll find most of the directors of the Club are not paid anyway (except for expenses)

[Suzy]

Thanks stroller - I assumed that all the Directors were in paid positions.

[spearce]

So what does happen to all our £165's then !!!

[JR Ewing]

Originally posted by stroller
I think you'll find most of the directors of the Club are not paid anyway (except for expenses)

Sorry Stroller, anyone who believes that is on a different planet. You'd be amazed what 'expenses' can cover...

[Ian-S]

You should also ask about the expenses in their accounts that they do not have to itemise in the audit or to companies house, last time I saw the published audited accounts, the amount for "Misc" was massive.

I probably havn't used the right words or descriptions here, but an accountant will understand what I'm talking about

[dogsbody]

Calling an EGM in mid-week, in London, at half term time, to reduce the number of Directors by getting rid of the Centres' representation (unpaid Directors) seems like someone is loading the dice here.

OK, I do have to declare an interest as a Centre Committee Member, but not a Director, but this seems a bit like the thin end of a wedge to me.

Chances are opposition to any part of this "streamlining" is likely to be minimal due to the location and timing of the EGM and the fact that most of the opposition would come from the Centres and they can't travel to such a meeting on such a date for whatever reason.

Centralising race entries: no problem; reducing entry fees / other expenses for members: our Centre has been calling for this for years, apparently on deaf ears; handing over race day organisation (timetables etc) to HQ: a recipe for disaster (our Centre has had major problems with HQ proposed timetables, they just have no idea); only 6 directors?: fine but let's have ALL of them out and a genuine postal vote to elect those people WE (the members) want on the Board. That brings me to my biggest gripe: no proxy or postal voting for either the EGM (or AGM) thus disenfranchising the majority of members who cannot attend a meeting in person for whatever reason. If this was a commercial company the shareholders would not stand for it.

Incidentally, if this is going to cut costs, who at HQ is going to be handling all these centralised entries or are we going to see advertisements for more staff? Also, as most of the competitors I know actually work for a living and would prefer to contact Competition Secretaries at evenings or weekends, are overtime costs going to go up to provide for such a service?

Then of course, the perfect HQ organised race meeting is going to be packaged up, sent off to the circuit, and all us unpaid volunteers are going to be left with the mess to sort out with no prior knowledge of what is going on.

Also Centres are having to submit to a lower level of independence if the plans come to fruition, giving them less opportunity to react to local circumstances as they will have to apply for an annual budget to run socials etc, and stick to it. Whereas it is probably safe to say that the Centres are the ones that have been frugal, and earned surplus from their activities such as running rescue units etc. in order to plow that money back into the Club. Start asking the questions as to where all the money "Owed to the Centre from HQ" as stated on Centre accounts really is.

Personally, if I could get to the EGM (and I can't because of work commitments, distance, cost etc.) I would vote no to these proposals simply because I believe there is a hidden agenda that needs to be uncovered and until the members are satisfied as to the direction of that we should not be handing control of the Club over to a smaller number of accountable representatives than we now have.

Sorry for the rant, I am now off to check out the membership costs of other clubs as I doubt I will be sticking with this one for much longer.

[Rod Birley]

Wow, what a reply. Obviuosly this is an issue which has many implications. The qoute about entry fees in BRN reads: "In the long term this move should also help us (the BRSCC) peg back entry fees." Hummm I thought transponders were going to do that.

[greenamex2]

The BARC have a centralised race entry system and it seems to a lot easier for the competitor than I remember the BRSCC system being.

If it saves someone some money then all the better.

It certainly doesn't seem to affect the various centres activities you are still allowed to run their individual series.

As for the cost of entries and race series registration people can't be THAT concerned or they would go elsewhere!!!

[redshoes]

Originally posted by Denis Bassom
As for the cost of entries and race series registration people can't be THAT concerned or they would go elsewhere!!!

Surely it's not that easy. If you want to race in a BRSCC run series you have to be a BRSCC member. You can't simply walk away and find another series as there may not be another that suits your type of racecar. That should be even more true now that the MSA are trying to stop duplication of series. It's often a case of either putting up with things or selling your car and buying something completely different.

[spearce]

.... and some people have been going elsewhere. BARC and 750MC seem to be getting bigger (in terms of race entries and series run) while BRSCC is shrinking.

[Barny]

Originally posted by Denis Bassom

As for the cost of entries and race series registration people can't be THAT concerned or they would go elsewhere!!!

I did precisley that, sold my FF1600 & bought a FF2000 and joined the BARC, not only race entries less, no registration fee and cheaper membership.

But three years on and I would like to return to FF1600, but my only option is to go back to to the BRSCC, which goes against my principals.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by Denis Bassom
The BARC have a centralised race entry system and it seems to a lot easier for the competitor than I remember the BRSCC system being.

Not totally true Denis.

The BARC runs a few centres so if you want to race at Lydden you send your entry to the BARC South Eastern Centre. For Oulton its that nice Mr Leck of the North Western Centre.

The entry forms are issued by Claire in the central office at the beginning of the season. But you do send them to various locations. Not having recent experience of the BRSCC I can't comment on their efficiency. I can however endorse the capabilities of the BARC.