Changing the BMC

UKBouldering.com

Help Support UKBouldering.com:

Hi Shark

Thanks for raising this. I have registered for the members forum and will submit a question about this. Personally I think he should clearly have stepped down and don’t understand why he hasn’t.

Dave
 
I look forward to Offwidth coming along and assuring us he's a great bloke and nothing was his fault and it's all basically fine...
 
abarro81 said:
I look forward to Offwidth coming along and assuring us he's a great bloke and nothing was his fault and it's all basically fine...
abarro81 said:
I look forward to Offwidth coming along and assuring us he's a great bloke and nothing was his fault and it's all basically fine...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=smoBjnTeSp4

Can someone with better tech skills than me stick Offwidth’s head over David Mitchell’s?
 
shark said:
He has played fast and loose with Board nominations at the last AGM trying to bypass the Articles to install new Directors he liked yet I was held rigidly to the Articles for the AGM resolutions.

What did he do here?
 
It may be fashionable to "Offwidth bash" on UKB but it does a massive disservice to someone who has contributed and continues to contribute so much to the running of the BMC on a voluntary basis. I just makes you look a bit of a d**k

Just because he's not as keen on hyperbole and rumours as Shark doesn't mean he's not doing his best via National Council to hold those in power to account.

A passion for the BMC isn't something to be ridiculed for.
 
Agreed. People bring different things to the table and Steve has a lot of experience at pulling the levers from within a large organisation. We are as lucky to have him on the inside as we are that Shark is prepared to take the flack from shooting from the sidelines.
 
I further second galpinos comments and would add, unless one has formally submitted one’s candidacy to volunteer one’s time to act in these roles (acting in good faith, to propose solutions, do the work, and not simply to moan or disrupt) then maybe one might wish to consider the depth of one’s convictions.

It’s easy to criticise from an armchair.
 
Tony said:
I further second galpinos comments and would add, unless one has formally submitted one’s candidacy to volunteer one’s time to act in these roles (acting in good faith, to propose solutions, do the work, and not simply to moan or disrupt) then maybe one might wish to consider the depth of one’s convictions.

It’s easy to criticise from an armchair.

So…
Members of a membership organisation, who have not actually sat on or volunteered/applied for board or national committee roles should not criticise those who have?
Gotcha, understood.
Seems legit.

As an aside, Offwidth takes too much flack for someone who seems to be honest and dedicated. We all benefit from his like and their passion for the organisation. I apologise for my part in that.
 
Oldmanmatt said:
Tony said:
I further second galpinos comments and would add, unless one has formally submitted one’s candidacy to volunteer one’s time to act in these roles (acting in good faith, to propose solutions, do the work, and not simply to moan or disrupt) then maybe one might wish to consider the depth of one’s convictions.

It’s easy to criticise from an armchair.

So…
Members of a membership organisation, who have not actually sat on or volunteered/applied for board or national committee roles should not criticise those who have?
Gotcha, understood.
Seems legit.

As an aside, Offwidth takes too much flack for someone who seems to be honest and dedicated. We all benefit from his like and their passion for the organisation. I apologise for my part in that.

Good post
 
Oldmanmatt said:
So…
Members of a membership organisation, who have not actually sat on or volunteered/applied for board or national committee roles should not criticise those who have?
Gotcha, understood.
Seems legit

That is very clearly not what Tony wrote.

The issue he raised was that repeated carping at an individual who has spent a huge amount of volunteered time on this, is perhaps not fuelled by a particularly sincerely held set of beliefs.
 
Sam R said:
Oldmanmatt said:
So…
Members of a membership organisation, who have not actually sat on or volunteered/applied for board or national committee roles should not criticise those who have?
Gotcha, understood.
Seems legit

That is very clearly not what Tony wrote.

The issue he raised was that repeated carping at an individual who has spent a huge amount of volunteered time on this, is perhaps not fuelled by a particularly sincerely held set of beliefs.

Really?
That’s not how it reads.
Galpinos made the point to which you refer, with which I concurred.
Tony discredited any dissent or criticism by anybody not within the categories he stipulated. He did not limit his statement to “Offwidth bashing” and based on prior Tony posting, I certainly read it very differently from you. I rather took it as a swipe at Shark (and anyone who supported his, rather passionate and not particularly armchair, efforts).
♂️
It seemed rather ad hominem and in the same vein as the carping he was supposedly challenging. Perhaps that was not his intention.
Still, not really relevant to the discussion overall.
I haven’t seen any justification or evidence based support for Mr Murray’s re-election, whilst Shark makes a compelling argument for me to place my vote elsewhere. Anyone?
 
Oldmanmatt said:
Really?
That’s not how it reads.
I think you forgot, “… to me.” Perhaps your stated reading of my comments say more about your own beliefs?

Oldmanmatt said:
Tony discredited any dissent or criticism by anybody not within the categories he stipulated.
Except that’s not actually what I wrote at all.

Oldmanmatt said:
based on prior Tony posting
That seems rather ad hominem…

I really don’t know why you, OldMan, chose to insinuate that I have an agenda against any individual. I really don’t. Life’s too short.
 
Tony said:
Oldmanmatt said:
Really?
That’s not how it reads.
I think you forgot, “… to me.” Perhaps your stated reading of my comments say more about your own beliefs?

Oldmanmatt said:
Tony discredited any dissent or criticism by anybody not within the categories he stipulated.
Except that’s not actually what I wrote at all.

Oldmanmatt said:
based on prior Tony posting
That seems rather ad hominem…

I really don’t know why you, OldMan, chose to insinuate that I have an agenda against any individual. I really don’t. Life’s too short.

Great to know. Please retrospectively insert “…to me” as proposed.
Life is indeed distressingly short.
It was a little ad hominem, possibly I should add “needlessly rude” to my mini-bio too…

Anyway, Roger; what’s your take on the question at hand?
 
Other things that might be brought up on Wednesday are:

The recommendation by Roger Murray that ex UK Athletics CEO Jo Coates is appointed as a Director which is very concerning given her 19-month reign was characterised by turmoil, infighting and athlete dissatisfaction”.

The mooted (or is it signed) arrangement that the New Depot at Sharston is designated a National Performance Centre and will also provide office space for GBClimbing employees. This might be a good decision but it comes on the back of a recently concluded investigation into the Unit E contract and I’m told the National Performance Centre designation wasn’t put out to tender.

Im also told the CCPG (the sub board that is meant to oversee GBClimbing) hasn’t met for months.

And of course the potential sale of Burton Road which is on the agenda.

Finally I gather that Steve Clark (Offwidth) is next in line as a Council nominated Board Director so everything’s fine
 
Looks like Roger Murray will no longer be seeking re-election.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2024/09/roger_murray_steps_down_as_bmc_chair-73790
 
Where do we stand on selling the office? In the modern world I'm unconvinced an organisation such as the BMC needs a physical premises. Given the fairly dire financial situation (we are where we are, not trying to open the whys and wherefores of how it happened), selling the office would seem a reasonable course of action to me. Must be the best time to be selling in that area of Manchester in living memory as well in terms of prices, the place is booming.
 
Assuming they don't go all remote, it would depend on the annual cost of owning the property and the comparative cost of renting an appropriate workspace.

What is the benefit of selling the office? Guessing at some numbers for a an office of 30 people you'd want approx 7500 sqft which costs about £25sqft to rent in Manchester which is about £187,500 a year.

The Didsbury office is valued at what? if it was a million it would cover just over 5 yrs rent, after which the membership are stumping up the best part of £200k a year.
 
shark said:
You’re missing the point Galpinos. They need the cash in the bank because there isn’t a sufficient reserve.

I guess we will find out in the CEO update this evening but are we expecting them to run through the rest of the reserve this financial year? The last update we had we were told they were running a small surplus.

I would be disappointed if we sold the building to cover the reserve if the BMC continued to be office based and added £200k a year to OPEX. I could understand if the BMC was moving to remote model but I am not sure that is the case?
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top