Author Topic: CTC or BC? (Read 4818 times)

Aidan · « **on:** 26 September, 2011, 01:07:08 pm »

My CTC membership is up in a few weeks, and I'm undecided what to do.

I was less than impressed with the way the CTC conducted their campaigns for charity status, and vowed more than once to let my membership lapse at the end of its five years. That's now here.

I note with interest that BC have doubled their membership in the last 4 years from 20000 to 40000, and have added 10000 of that in the last year, and wonder how many of them are CTC abandonists.

Anyway, now it has come to change I am hesitating because of two reasons, firstly I like Cycle magazine , yes I can live without it, but I do like reading it. Secondly, I like the idea of supporting the Cyclist defence fund, which does excellent work.

Against this, BC offer the insurance cover I originally joined CTC for, and that is useful for audaxing, and at a significantly cheaper price .

What has anyone else done, and why?

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1 on:** 26 September, 2011, 01:09:56 pm »

I'm pretty sure you can support the CDF through donation if you so wish.

MikeFromLFE · « **Reply #2 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:15:38 pm »

My main reason for not joining BC is their stance on the magic plastic hat issue, as much as I would jump ship from CTC for almost the same reasons as Aiden, I don't want to be seen to be promoting that particular agenda.

jogler · « **Reply #3 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:18:57 pm »

Do I assume that BC support compulsory magichat wearing?

Manotea · « **Reply #4 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:23:30 pm »

Yeah but BC is a focused on racing rather than touring so the plastic argument has a completely different vibe.

Regardless, if all you want is the insurance why not get CTC associate membership via The Fridays/FNRTTC. Best move soon though as it goes up from 12 to 15 squid real soon. clicky

Greenbank · « **Reply #5 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:25:35 pm »

Quote from: jogler on 26 September, 2011, 05:18:57 pm

Do I assume that BC support compulsory magichat wearing?

Only in their competitive events:-

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/recreation/article/trav-20090730-Wise-Words--How-to-stay-safe-0

Quote

#3 Wear a Helmet

There is no legal requirement in the UK to wear a helmet and there are arguments for and against wearing helmets and making them compulsory. However, British Cycling strongly recommends wearing a helmet for all of your riding, and insists that you wear a helmet if you're taking part in any of its competitive events.

L CC · « **Reply #6 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:33:02 pm »

What do you need it for?

I'm not a member of either organisation. I have insurance cover when audaxing from being an AUK member, and some from being a member of my local club which is BC affiliated.

Should I have additional insurance? What for?

I could also join the Tandem Club. I'm just dubious how many clubs I ~~can afford~~ ~~be bothered~~ ~~have time for~~ ~~get any benefit from~~ can be a useful member of.

teethgrinder · « **Reply #7 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:35:29 pm »

So BC seem to be pro helmet if they advise wearing one all the time instead of saying that it's entirely up to you.
I stay with the CTC because they campaign for cycling as well as their insurance. They fought a good battle regarding the latest edition of the Highway Code.
Plus CTC have a good knowledge of touring and travelling etc. BC is more about racing, which I don't really do.
If all I wanted was insurance, then I'd probably go BC.

Aidan · « **Reply #8 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:41:17 pm »

Its not just the insurance, I like what the CTC do, and suppose I am only thinking of changing as a protest over the charity change. The impact of the change to full charity isnt yet apparent so I may renew for a year and see what happens.

hubner · « **Reply #9 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:42:36 pm »

The BC is for racing, and I don't think they really have anything to do with cycling as transport or leisure cycling.

They also have a stoopid name, what idiot came up with "British Cycling"; British Cycling what? Can you imagine "French Tennis" or "German Football"? "Cycling Time Trials" is just as bad

border-rider · « **Reply #10 on:** 26 September, 2011, 05:44:49 pm »

Quote from: teethgrinder on 26 September, 2011, 05:35:29 pm

So BC seem to be pro helmet if they advise wearing one all the time instead of saying that it's entirely up to you.
I stay with the CTC because they campaign for cycling as well as their insurance. They fought a good battle regarding the latest edition of the Highway Code.
Plus CTC have a good knowledge of touring and travelling etc. BC is more about racing, which I don't really do.
If all I wanted was insurance, then I'd probably go BC.

This is my view also. I'm not convinced that the charity conversion is the End of Times, or at least not the extent claimed even if the way they went about it was pretty poor. I'm happy enough with the CTC, been a member for 30 years, and I'll stay with them.

CrinklyLion · « **Reply #11 on:** 26 September, 2011, 06:07:03 pm »

i decided to stick with ctc for a year to see.

i didn't find the idea of conversion to charitable status of necessity a bad one, but disliked some of the behaviours around it - as a member with very very minimal involvement i saw enough that i wasn't keen, enough to vote against it 'for now' iykwim.

i did stop the family membership, and managed to get junior membership for eldestcub with associated household membership for me which worked out rather cheaper. this means that he gets the magazine and i don't

had i had a bit more time i'd have done associated membership through the fridays for me, but i only realised that it was actually going to expire a bit too late to get it sorted out in time for the fnrttc to hull. which i ended up bailing out on anyway

but that's water under the (humber) bridge....

Karla · « **Reply #12 on:** 26 September, 2011, 09:30:40 pm »

Quote from: hubner on 26 September, 2011, 05:42:36 pm

The BC is for racing, and I don't think they really have anything to do with cycling as transport or leisure cycling.

They also have a stoopid name, what idiot came up with "British Cycling"; British Cycling what? Can you imagine "French Tennis" or "German Football"? "Cycling Time Trials" is just as bad

It is the "British Cycling Federation", it's a federation because it was formed by the merger of the National Cycling Union and the British League of Racing Cyclists. If you want a stupid name, The League International surely takes the biscuit.

For most people, BC ride membership will be cheaper than CTC membership.

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #13 on:** 26 September, 2011, 10:30:42 pm »

Meanwhile, I'm considering joining the CTC after 20-odd years of not being a member. I don't think I'd join BC because I'm not going to be racing and I'm not that focussed on the insurance, whereas CTC membership offers all those rides. Which, of course, I never went on back when I was a member...

bobb · « **Reply #14 on:** 27 September, 2011, 08:42:03 am »

I might rejoin CTC for the mag. I miss the ranting dinosaurs in the letters page. Hilarious

phil d · « **Reply #15 on:** 27 September, 2011, 09:04:56 am »

People need to check that their CTC membership gives them the insurance cover they need if on any form of reduced price / associate deal. It used to be the case that some versions did not carry the insurance. Might have changed.

And AUK cover is only for the duration of the event (so not getting to or from the event, and not if you have packed for any reason). It has a (IIRC) £500 excess. So nothing like comparable to CTC.

YahudaMoon · « **Reply #16 on:** 27 September, 2011, 09:14:18 am »

Ive just renewed my CTC membership with 'The Fridays' at a cost of £12 instead of £39 with CTC. I cant see any difference in the cover and also have kept my old membership number in the process except they have put a 'FM' on my old number and Ive only been a member since 2011 instead of 2005

Well chuffed

Polar Bear · « **Reply #17 on:** 27 September, 2011, 09:42:53 am »

What's 'The Fridays' and can anybody join via that method?

mattc · « **Reply #18 on:** 27 September, 2011, 10:12:09 am »

Quote from: Polar Bear on 27 September, 2011, 09:42:53 am

What's 'The Fridays' and can anybody join via that method?

I think it's the 'club' that was formed to formalise the FNRttC rides [London Branch].

Many clubs do associate CTC membership - you may find a 'local' club near you that is more appropriate than joining a London club.

(BC won't me getting my money while CTC are the only national body promoting cycling for transport and leisure.)

Regulator · « **Reply #19 on:** 27 September, 2011, 01:51:13 pm »

I would be careful about affiliate membership with the CTC for the moment - as there is a discussion going on at National Office and within members groups about limiting the ability of affiliates to ride with or lead rides for CTC MGs.

Quote from: mattc on 27 September, 2011, 10:12:09 am

(BC won't me getting my money while CTC are the only national body promoting cycling for transport and leisure.)

BC is also promoting cycling for transport and leisure.

Part of the current focus on the sport side of cycling is because BC received significant amounts of money from the government and the National Lottery to develop competitive cycling post-2008 and pre-2012 Olympics.

That money won't last forever, and BC is mart enough to realise it needs to move into the wider cycling world.

mattc · « **Reply #20 on:** 27 September, 2011, 02:48:50 pm »

When exactly did you become a fan of BC, Greg?

Regulator · « **Reply #21 on:** 27 September, 2011, 02:54:03 pm »

Quote from: mattc on 27 September, 2011, 02:48:50 pm

When exactly did you become a fan of BC, Greg?

I've never been 'anti' BC...

Unlike some in CTC, I believe there should be co-operation, rather than competition, between the various cycling organisations. I found the antipathy toward BC expressed be some CTC staff and councillors extremely offputting.

mattc · « **Reply #22 on:** 27 September, 2011, 03:02:10 pm »

Quote from: Regulator on 27 September, 2011, 02:54:03 pm

...

I believe there should be co-operation, rather than competition, between the various cycling organisations

well amen to that.

Sadly I guess they ARE in competition for our 30quids. $:-\$ Personally I'd rather not see my money go on racing - I'm happy to pay my own race fees.

Canardly · « **Reply #23 on:** 27 September, 2011, 08:21:32 pm »

Must admit I do enjoy some aspects of the CTC and would be keen to form a local group.

jogler · « **Reply #24 on:** 27 September, 2011, 08:24:41 pm »

where is "local" for you?

Author Topic: CTC or BC? (Read 4818 times)

border-rider