CTC rebranding

[Regulator]

I haven't noticed BC or Sustrans organising local rides every weekend. It's that local social side which I value.

British Cycling has local groups, many of which organise regular rides of all types.  Not all CTC groups have regular rides.

I'm not sure why you keep raising the issue of Sustrans.  Sustrans is not a membership organisation for cyclists - it's not a membership orgnanisation full stop.  It's a group interested in sustainable transport (hence the name) of all sorts.

[TimC]

I haven't noticed BC or Sustrans organising local rides every weekend. It's that local social side which I value. personally. Road clubs do it too, but too fast (for me! and way too fast for the people who go on the 'easy rides' to ever contemplate it) and without the cafe and/or pub aspect. Audax rides don't happen with the same regularity and, again, have more of a performance (though not speed) emphasis (though they can be easier and funner rides than a CTC ride of same distance).

Insurance is often mentioned as an attraction by people eg on here, but I don't know how big a pull it is for new members.

Trouble with the morph of CTC and BC is that they will both end up sort of Sustrans Plus. There's room for all three organisations without entering each other's areas.

I've never been on a CTC, BC or Sustrans ride, so I can't really comment about what they offer. There isn't a group close enough to me to be practical, and in any case I'm sure CTC groups are as variable as any other kind of club. My road club (Boxford) organises easy rides that I'm sure would be within your capabilities, and the other local club (CC Sudbury) is very active in Audax, and offers many appropriately-focussed training rides. But that's not really the point; whatever CTC as a national organisation does, local groups will no doubt carry on as before and will suit some people and not others.

The question is what is the national CTC for, and does its brand need changing? And will it make any difference to its apparent slide from national visibility?

[Cudzoziemiec]

I haven't noticed BC or Sustrans organising local rides every weekend. It's that local social side which I value.

British Cycling has local groups, many of which organise regular rides of all types.  Not all CTC groups have regular rides.

I'm not sure why you keep raising the issue of Sustrans.  Sustrans is not a membership organisation for cyclists - it's not a membership orgnanisation full stop.  It's a group interested in sustainable transport (hence the name) of all sorts.

Call it Cyclebag if you want to be pedantic.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I haven't noticed BC or Sustrans organising local rides every weekend. It's that local social side which I value. personally. Road clubs do it too, but too fast (for me! and way too fast for the people who go on the 'easy rides' to ever contemplate it) and without the cafe and/or pub aspect. Audax rides don't happen with the same regularity and, again, have more of a performance (though not speed) emphasis (though they can be easier and funner rides than a CTC ride of same distance).

Insurance is often mentioned as an attraction by people eg on here, but I don't know how big a pull it is for new members.

Trouble with the morph of CTC and BC is that they will both end up sort of Sustrans Plus. There's room for all three organisations without entering each other's areas.

I've never been on a CTC, BC or Sustrans ride, so I can't really comment about what they offer. There isn't a group close enough to me to be practical, and in any case I'm sure CTC groups are as variable as any other kind of club. My road club (Boxford) organises easy rides that I'm sure would be within your capabilities, and the other local club (CC Sudbury) is very active in Audax, and offers many appropriately-focussed training rides. But that's not really the point; whatever CTC as a national organisation does, local groups will no doubt carry on as before and will suit some people and not others.

Hopefully.

The question is what is the national CTC for, and does its brand need changing? And will it make any difference to its apparent slide from national visibility?

Apart from providing those local groups and clubs and individuals with some sort of legal framework, including insurance, which they probably could get from BC or elsewhere, it does... Touring advice? Probably not so much now (though maybe a handy first port of call for foreign cyclists planning a tour in UK? Hasn't googlemaps etc made this all a bit irrelevant now?) Campaigning? This, but they're "in competition" with other organisations (including the one Regulator won't let me mention) giving out conflicting messages (well that's good - if they were all saying the same there wouldn't be any point in having more than one!) Training (I think - as far as I see this actually gets done on the ground by a mishmash of local organisations). I think they must be for something but we won't quite know until they stop! Perhaps it would be better if they did fewer things in greater intensity.

[jane]

The Skyride and Breeze initiative are part of British Cycling.  They have indeed begun to organise lots of local rides, although some of us who have been doing just that for years already under the auspices of other organisations feel they might have been better to do a little bit of consulting with those groups, first.  In our area, they managed to get several thousand pounds out of the local council to run 12 rides (led by unpaid volunteers) throughout the summer month (works out at about 1000 per ride, we thought).  I have no quibble with anyone organising rides anywhere, but I do think British Cycling could work alongside existing providers of rides, to ensure we don't  duplicate our provision.  And to make sure we are delivering the greatest range of rides to get as many people involved in cycling as we can.

[Regulator]

The Skyride and Breeze initiative are part of British Cycling.  They have indeed begun to organise lots of local rides, although some of us who have been doing just that for years already under the auspices of other organisations feel they might have been better to do a little bit of consulting with those groups, first.  In our area, they managed to get several thousand pounds out of the local council to run 12 rides (led by unpaid volunteers) throughout the summer month (works out at about 1000 per ride, we thought).  I have no quibble with anyone organising rides anywhere, but I do think British Cycling could work alongside existing providers of rides, to ensure we don't  duplicate our provision.  And to make sure we are delivering the greatest range of rides to get as many people involved in cycling as we can.

I agree.  That said, I know people who have contacted BC about these sorts of matters and found BC to be very open. 

[mattc]

The winner of all this will be British Cycling.

BC has got a good PR team, who are working with a skilled membership department, and they are targetting family, commuter and utility cyclists.  They're also becoming far smarter at representing all cyclists - not just the racing snakes - and they are listened to in Whitehall, Cardiff and Edinburgh.

BC's long term membership is growing at a rate of knots in contrast to CTC's decline in numbers.  BC has stolen a march on CTC.

I'm not so sure. I suspect they have a team who realised how valuable Wiggins Hoy and Pendleton are. It's quite possible that the CTC would have 'leveraged' that trio too given the chance.

Most recent cycling growth has been driven by the massive media coverage of our competitive riders. The media love it - they don't love utility cycling (as much).
(Before that the growth was in off-roading. A bit of a dead-end as it was more about driving to a muddy hilly area, but a few of the "mountain" bikes sold are now used for commuting/shopping, so not a total disaster. )

No, I'm afraid I don't know how CTC can regain the ground lost. I don't think they should abandon the work done over the last 20 years.

Ideally BC would have worked with CTC. Clubs can quite naturally cover 'BC' type activities and 'CTC' ones - but now bureaucracy/insurance encourages them to pick one. Shame.

The sad thing is that 90% of BC members don't race. (Or race only in TTs and Sportives!)

[TimC]

I think BC's publicity team may well be a bit better than CTC's, but to be fair the British racing scene has had an awful lot to shout about over the last couple of years, so one can forgive them that! But there's been a fair bit of British long-distance cycling achievement in that timescale too and - given that AUK isn't a campaigning organisation - it might be expected that CTC would 'leverage' that in the same way, and I think perhaps they haven't as much as they might. But perhaps that's a side issue. For my money (which is with CTC so far), BC have done a better job of promoting and representing real-people cycling in the last year than CTC has. It's not a competition, I know, and we should perhaps measure the cumulative effect of all of our cycling organisations' work rather than the relative merits of any particular one, but I feel a little disappointed that CTC is ceding ground to BC. But maybe that's as it should be; it's not who's talking on our behalf, but that several are, and collectively they're doing a pretty good job.

[mattc]

I'd like to see the PR budget of the two organisations.

Obviously if you include the race budgets, there could be a few zeroes difference!

[Cudzoziemiec]

I think BC's publicity team may well be a bit better than CTC's, but to be fair the British racing scene has had an awful lot to shout about over the last couple of years, so one can forgive them that! But there's been a fair bit of British long-distance cycling achievement in that timescale too and - given that AUK isn't a campaigning organisation - it might be expected that CTC would 'leverage' that in the same way, and I think perhaps they haven't as much as they might. But perhaps that's a side issue. For my money (which is with CTC so far), BC have done a better job of promoting and representing real-people cycling in the last year than CTC has. It's not a competition, I know, and we should perhaps measure the cumulative effect of all of our cycling organisations' work rather than the relative merits of any particular one, but I feel a little disappointed that CTC is ceding ground to BC. But maybe that's as it should be; it's not who's talking on our behalf, but that several are, and collectively they're doing a pretty good job.

I'm not sure that's just a side issue, it might reflect the change in ideas at CTC's national leadership. Perhaps ten years ago they would have seen this as highly relevant, but increasingly in recent years they've been targeting the commuter and utility cyclist as well as families on pootles of various lengths and ambitions. There's nothing wrong in that, it's always been an important demographic, you might actually say the very core cyclist, but unfortunately it can lead to neglect of the more traditional areas - and bring them into conflict for members with other organisations. As TimC says though, it's good to have people speaking on our behalf and it shouldn't be a competition. How many people are members of BC, CTC and Sustrans (despite what Regulator says, they certainly do canvas for support and use the slogan "join the movement")? I imagine it might be quite a few.

[mattc]

Let's look at this from a slightly different angle ...
New cyclists will inherently be lacking in confidence, both in their mechanical and nav'ing abilities. If they are 'recruited' by watching Chris Froome sending his teammate back to a team-car, that's the type of riding they may well seek out.

CTC (and AUK), whilst providing lots of support to riders, is more about the self-sufficient style of riding - touring without a support wagon, commuting etc.

So the newer cyclist - reading the glossy press or browsing the web - will be drawn towards fully-supported events, which tend to be the BC side of things.

The only answer is to get newer riders along to their local club rides (CTC or 'proper' clubs) where they can  learn stuff. However, current trends seem to be away from clubs - they're seen as old-fashioned. Far more appealing to find 3 (equally clueless) mates and sign up for the local charidee ride and/or sportive (according to 'sporting' ambition).

[Cudzoziemiec]

I think that encapsulates the CTC's dilemma, Matt. They want those new riders but the newbies aren't attracted to the style of riding CTC does. So do they alter to attract the glossy, speedy, thrill-seeking riders who expect a sag wagon and arrows on the road, or do they try to make the slower, more self-sufficient and less glamorous riding appeal to the shiny newbs? There's an old CTC bod in Bristol - he's risen to the dizzy heights of President of CTC West, or somesuch title - who say it's all a mistake to go after anyone; that CTC's natural audience is people in their 40s, 50s, and up, maybe 30s sometimes, and leave the rest to BC or local road clubs (or sportives and charidees). I think he's got a point but as CTC has long claimed to speak for all (non-racing) cyclists, in campaigning terms - since way before the charity switch - they can't really make do with a membership that's ageing and gradually dying out.

[Glover Fan]

Fundamentally, CTC will never match BC in terms of membership, so contrary to a lot of opinion they should focus on the TOURING aspect to create their own USP.

For the record I am a member of BC. My renewal came through today at £28 for the year on their ride package. It offers everything I could want really. I don't need organised rides, I have third party liability covered, I have legal advice and accident support a phone call away and they do have a voice in the political arena. Like the venerable Audax UK you also get a car sticker.

[mattc]

... they can't really make do with a membership that's ageing and gradually dying out.

Think about this - is an older membership inherently "dying out"?

Are retirement homes less busy than 40 years ago?!?

[Cudzoziemiec]

If they can attract 40 year olds at the same rate as the 80 year olds hang up their wheels, no. But even if they manage to do that, it gives very limited scope for growth, which seems to be what they want now.

[mattc]

So if you were in the Retirement Home business (or stairlifts say!), would you abandon all hope of growth?

[Cudzoziemiec]

Is that the image you project for the CTC - the Stannah stairlifts of cycling?

I guess the blue and yellow "drunken bike" logo isn't far off a wheelchair anyway. 

[mattc]

If you prefer something sexier ... how about cars? Not many under 17s are buying them. Dying market, innit ..

[Cudzoziemiec]

They do say car sales are falling throughout the West... Point is though, people find cars attractive and sexy when they're young and by the time they're 40 or 80 they're in the habit of them (and till find them sexy), whereas the CTC is offering something which people won't necessarily get into the habit of. Whether this is necessarily a problem, I'm not sure - it is if the organisation wants to expand and if it wants to represent all cyclists, but if it's happy with it's current make up, that's fine. The growth of BC could mean it declines as cycling expands, cos the cyclists who would have joined CTC are already in BC, but to attract them it has to alter in ways which might not be acceptable to existing members. Parallels with AUK, and no doubt with BC in the future. All roads are good but in different ways.

[mattc]

I think I agree with this post on the CTC forum. The BBC is a good analogy:

"
So my vote would be to stay with CTC even if touring is no longer its main theme because if you change the name you risk losing the history and established reputation which an organisation which has been around a 100+ years should be able to lay claim to. For example, the BBC might think that here in the digital age they should change their name to something like Digital Media Services but that would be a mistake*. The BBC is a very well established brand and unless it was irretrievably damaged (e.g. like the News of the World newspaper) they should stick with it and so should the CTC.
"

p.s. Cudzo, please stop waffling and admit that an organisation with few under 30s is not necessarliy "dying out" 

[Cudzoziemiec]

Waffles are eaten in Sweden on 25th March because the word våffla is similar to Vår Fru (The Virgin Mary). Or so Wikipedia told me (I was looking up Michaelmas yesterday and that led to other quarter days).

As I said several posts above, it all depends on attracting people at the same rate or faster than the older ones leave. That, plus the question of whether you can legitimately claim to represent all cyclists when your members are predominantly rather older than the average.

I'd like cinnamon on mine.

[robgul]

Let's look at this from a slightly different angle ...
New cyclists will inherently be lacking in confidence, both in their mechanical and nav'ing abilities. If they are 'recruited' by watching Chris Froome sending his teammate back to a team-car, that's the type of riding they may well seek out.

CTC (and AUK), whilst providing lots of support to riders, is more about the self-sufficient style of riding - touring without a support wagon, commuting etc.

So the newer cyclist - reading the glossy press or browsing the web - will be drawn towards fully-supported events, which tend to be the BC side of things.

The only answer is to get newer riders along to their local club rides (CTC or 'proper' clubs) where they can  learn stuff. However, current trends seem to be away from clubs - they're seen as old-fashioned. Far more appealing to find 3 (equally clueless) mates and sign up for the local charidee ride and/or sportive (according to 'sporting' ambition).

I think you're probably identifying the "problem" we've had with two local groups/clubs (one is a CTC Member Group) ... an awful lot of the "new cyclists" are  :  Time Poor - Cash Rich .. in other words they can buy smart bikes and all the gear (even with no idea!) - BUT have limited time to spend riding - for a host of reasons - and want to blast along for a couple of hours ... thus tilting the whole cycling thing in yet another direction.

Rob

[Canardly]

There has to be a Yurt in here somewhere. National Trust are kicking their farmers out atm  'cos rent potential is rising (allegedly). Sod all to do with Bankers cocking it up. YHA Scotland are going the same way as YHA England and selling off the family silver. Seems that there is an overall general 'modernisation' agenda via the pinstripes atm. We should all be maximising our bling potential apparently. Strewth. Now why was the CTC founded remind me? Did it actually have something to do with its members?

[shyumu]

Let's look at this from a slightly different angle ...
New cyclists will inherently be lacking in confidence, both in their mechanical and nav'ing abilities. If they are 'recruited' by watching Chris Froome sending his teammate back to a team-car, that's the type of riding they may well seek out.

CTC (and AUK), whilst providing lots of support to riders, is more about the self-sufficient style of riding - touring without a support wagon, commuting etc.

So the newer cyclist - reading the glossy press or browsing the web - will be drawn towards fully-supported events, which tend to be the BC side of things.

The only answer is to get newer riders along to their local club rides (CTC or 'proper' clubs) where they can  learn stuff. However, current trends seem to be away from clubs - they're seen as old-fashioned. Far more appealing to find 3 (equally clueless) mates and sign up for the local charidee ride and/or sportive (according to 'sporting' ambition).

I think you're probably identifying the "problem" we've had with two local groups/clubs (one is a CTC Member Group) ... an awful lot of the "new cyclists" are  :  Time Poor - Cash Rich .. in other words they can buy smart bikes and all the gear (even with no idea!) - BUT have limited time to spend riding - for a host of reasons - and want to blast along for a couple of hours ... thus tilting the whole cycling thing in yet another direction.

Rob

Is this type of cyclist a problem?

[shyumu]

Rob, just to be clear, I'm not criticising you. I just hear a lot of criticism of riders not fitting in with older models of clubs.