This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
The BMC have announced that their recently signed discount scheme deal with outdoor clothing brand Montane will be withdrawn. A statement posted on the BMC website today from Terry Stephenson, Head of Marketing at Montane, explains that the brand has reconsidered the arrangement in order to support independent retailers. Montane's relationship to the BMC will now be 'recommended clothing and pack partner.'
Read more
Read more
8
8
2
In reply to UKC News:
That's disappointing. I can't be the only one read the title and came looking for some cheap quickdraws.
That's disappointing. I can't be the only one read the title and came looking for some cheap quickdraws.
4
In reply to Greasy Prusiks:
Montane make clothes, not hardware, so your disappointment is misplaced....
Montane make clothes, not hardware, so your disappointment is misplaced....
10
13
In reply to Neil Williams:
That's what they are planning to do: "The current 20% off introductory offer at www.montane.co.uk will be available until midnight on Sunday 12 November 2017. After that date, Montane’s website will carry a full list of Montane UK stockists offering BMC members direct discounts online and instore."
That's what they are planning to do: "The current 20% off introductory offer at www.montane.co.uk will be available until midnight on Sunday 12 November 2017. After that date, Montane’s website will carry a full list of Montane UK stockists offering BMC members direct discounts online and instore."
6
3
In reply to CasWebb:
From my point of view they are suggesting the exact opposite. Basically withdrawing their company funded discount and expecting retailers to offer the discount out of their own pocket. Seems more of a hinderance to small businesses and it may inadvertently put people off buying Montane products.
I imagine most people will buy their montane products from Cotswold Outdoor who can afford to offer the discount where as smaller businesses will loose out.
From my point of view they are suggesting the exact opposite. Basically withdrawing their company funded discount and expecting retailers to offer the discount out of their own pocket. Seems more of a hinderance to small businesses and it may inadvertently put people off buying Montane products.
I imagine most people will buy their montane products from Cotswold Outdoor who can afford to offer the discount where as smaller businesses will loose out.
4
5
I have absolutely no idea why climbers think they should get a discount at all.
41
3
In reply to JJ Spooner:
I think that many retailers both big and small having been offering a discount (usually 10%) to various groups: BMC, ramblers etc. for a very long time (they certainly were when I worked in retail twenty years ago) and it is the perogative of the store to do so or not. Having a manufacturer undercut the retail outlets that stock their stuff is unhelpful and especially punitive to smaller shops. It was a reason why many stores didn't stock another brand who did similar for a lot of years: the brand sold the stuff cheaper online than their own retailers could compete with.
Montane recognising this and withdrawing the offer is only good news if we want decent outdoor retailers in the future!
I think that many retailers both big and small having been offering a discount (usually 10%) to various groups: BMC, ramblers etc. for a very long time (they certainly were when I worked in retail twenty years ago) and it is the perogative of the store to do so or not. Having a manufacturer undercut the retail outlets that stock their stuff is unhelpful and especially punitive to smaller shops. It was a reason why many stores didn't stock another brand who did similar for a lot of years: the brand sold the stuff cheaper online than their own retailers could compete with.
Montane recognising this and withdrawing the offer is only good news if we want decent outdoor retailers in the future!
37
14
In reply to Aonach:
Has anyone actually suggested that climbers are entitled to a discount? We don't get offered discounts because we should, they're offered because they're a good marketing tool.
> I have absolutely no idea why climbers think they should get a discount at all.
Has anyone actually suggested that climbers are entitled to a discount? We don't get offered discounts because we should, they're offered because they're a good marketing tool.
16
1
In reply to Luke90:
Not sure I agree with that.
Its a no win situation for retailers and brands. Climbers do want discount, unfortunately they also want great service and independent outdoor shops.
Not sure I agree with that.
Its a no win situation for retailers and brands. Climbers do want discount, unfortunately they also want great service and independent outdoor shops.
4
In reply to CasWebb:
Sounds good.
> That's what they are planning to do: "The current 20% off introductory offer at www.montane.co.uk will be available until midnight on Sunday 12 November 2017. After that date, Montane’s website will carry a full list of Montane UK stockists offering BMC members direct discounts online and instore."
Sounds good.
1
In reply to Luke90:
It's not a good marketing tool. Shops have to offer it as most other shops do as they would lose sales otherwise. It creates no customer loyalty as it expected everywhere. The large chains can cope as they get big volume discounts from suppliers however the independent specialists are seriously affected by it. A 10% discount from RRP is generally about 30% of the profit on an item in an outdoor shop. It's no wonder theres so few proper specialist independents really.
It's not a good marketing tool. Shops have to offer it as most other shops do as they would lose sales otherwise. It creates no customer loyalty as it expected everywhere. The large chains can cope as they get big volume discounts from suppliers however the independent specialists are seriously affected by it. A 10% discount from RRP is generally about 30% of the profit on an item in an outdoor shop. It's no wonder theres so few proper specialist independents really.
3
In reply to Aonach:
Brands are highly profitable - as long as Montane fund the discount rather than the retailers by offering some kind of wholesale discount I see no issues.
More widely the discounts are interesting, it's a fairly clever method of price differentiation, allowing "proper" climbers, hillwalkers, Scouts etc to get stuff at a reasonable price while caning those who buy outdoor gear for fashion for a higher price.
> Its a no win situation for retailers and brands. Climbers do want discount, unfortunately they also want great service and independent outdoor shops.
Brands are highly profitable - as long as Montane fund the discount rather than the retailers by offering some kind of wholesale discount I see no issues.
More widely the discounts are interesting, it's a fairly clever method of price differentiation, allowing "proper" climbers, hillwalkers, Scouts etc to get stuff at a reasonable price while caning those who buy outdoor gear for fashion for a higher price.
Post edited at 09:59
1
7
In reply to Neil Williams:
That may work in a Cotswold or Snow and Rock but not in a specialist shop where nearly all of their customers are 'proper' and they don't have the general punters buying Rab and North Face jackets at full price to offset the discounted sales.
That may work in a Cotswold or Snow and Rock but not in a specialist shop where nearly all of their customers are 'proper' and they don't have the general punters buying Rab and North Face jackets at full price to offset the discounted sales.
1
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
True. TBH I'd rather the discounts went away and were replaced by a more reasonable RRP, they are a bit of a faff. But I do recognise why they are there.
True. TBH I'd rather the discounts went away and were replaced by a more reasonable RRP, they are a bit of a faff. But I do recognise why they are there.
2
In reply to Aonach:
Instead of the brand offering a discount, they could offer a small percentage levy on profits to go to the BMC. That way the shops don't get undercut (they can choose to discount if they want), the retailer gets to maintain the RRP (which is what they want), and the BMC gets some money as a result of the partnership. It would also have the benefit of not necessarily being exclusive - other brands could join if they wanted, and it could become a powerful marketing tool, "buy this and support the BMC".
It wouldn't directly drive up BMC membership though, which is half the point of the discount offerings, but could avoid the race to discount which does tend to be damaging for everyone in the end.
Alan
> Its a no win situation for retailers and brands. Climbers do want discount, unfortunately they also want great service and independent outdoor shops.
Instead of the brand offering a discount, they could offer a small percentage levy on profits to go to the BMC. That way the shops don't get undercut (they can choose to discount if they want), the retailer gets to maintain the RRP (which is what they want), and the BMC gets some money as a result of the partnership. It would also have the benefit of not necessarily being exclusive - other brands could join if they wanted, and it could become a powerful marketing tool, "buy this and support the BMC".
It wouldn't directly drive up BMC membership though, which is half the point of the discount offerings, but could avoid the race to discount which does tend to be damaging for everyone in the end.
Alan
11
In reply to Neil Williams:
I'd argue that the RRP of most climbing gear is reasonable. You can get a wire gate karabiner, fully tested engineered PPE for about a fiver, it cost me that to get a key cut recently. You can get a basic harness for the cost of a decent pair of jeans. Rope prices haven't gone up in about twenty years. Entry level rock shoes are the same £60 odd quid they where in the nineties. Clothing is a different matter but even there if you buy a £40 regatta shell or £20 fleece they're probably better than something you'd have paid double that for twenty years ago.
I'd argue that the RRP of most climbing gear is reasonable. You can get a wire gate karabiner, fully tested engineered PPE for about a fiver, it cost me that to get a key cut recently. You can get a basic harness for the cost of a decent pair of jeans. Rope prices haven't gone up in about twenty years. Entry level rock shoes are the same £60 odd quid they where in the nineties. Clothing is a different matter but even there if you buy a £40 regatta shell or £20 fleece they're probably better than something you'd have paid double that for twenty years ago.
9
In reply to Neil Williams:
Microsoft and Apple and Lego. THEY are profitable companies. They don't offer discounts on a regular basis unless they are trying to clear old stock. You don't expect a discount from them think that you could suggest a lower RRP because you're not happy with the price, so why would you expect one from outdoor retailers who make much much lower margins of profit? And when you say reasonable RRP, do you actually know what a reasonable RRP is? Basically you are saying that the vast majority of people who buy at RRP are paying an unreasonable price. But if it was unreasonable they wouldn't pay it. Maybe I'm confused and maybe my brain is going to burst out in a cloud of smoke and I'll go bezerk in a sort of post apocalyptic robot gone wrong, but the concept that a shop should make less money because a bloke on the internet reckons he's getting ripped off when they have people buying the stuff at the price that's being asked is an odd one... And besides, if they offered a lower RRP, I'm betting you'd question those prices aswell...
> Brands are highly profitable -
Microsoft and Apple and Lego. THEY are profitable companies. They don't offer discounts on a regular basis unless they are trying to clear old stock. You don't expect a discount from them think that you could suggest a lower RRP because you're not happy with the price, so why would you expect one from outdoor retailers who make much much lower margins of profit? And when you say reasonable RRP, do you actually know what a reasonable RRP is? Basically you are saying that the vast majority of people who buy at RRP are paying an unreasonable price. But if it was unreasonable they wouldn't pay it. Maybe I'm confused and maybe my brain is going to burst out in a cloud of smoke and I'll go bezerk in a sort of post apocalyptic robot gone wrong, but the concept that a shop should make less money because a bloke on the internet reckons he's getting ripped off when they have people buying the stuff at the price that's being asked is an odd one... And besides, if they offered a lower RRP, I'm betting you'd question those prices aswell...
9
1
In reply to beardy mike:
Actually at least the first two do. E.g. All students and faculty members get a discount for computers from Apple. And then have the better deals each fall, the going to school thing.
Actually at least the first two do. E.g. All students and faculty members get a discount for computers from Apple. And then have the better deals each fall, the going to school thing.
1
In reply to beardy mike:
All three of which are brand leaders with massive barriers to entry in the shape of huge R&D expenses and patents. Montane has far less technology than Apple or Microsoft, no blocking patents like Lego and is a minor rather than a major brand.
As a customer I'm not bothered about the list price of Montane or a nominal discount on it. What I'm usually interested in is whether the price of the Montane thing is sufficiently lower than the Rab/Arcteryx thing I actually want.
What's more there aren't any big dangerous mountains in England so there's not much brand image benefit in being associated with English Mountaineering for a company selling coats. It is not the same league as Sherpa playing on its connection with Nepal or French/German brands with the Alps.
> Microsoft and Apple and Lego.
All three of which are brand leaders with massive barriers to entry in the shape of huge R&D expenses and patents. Montane has far less technology than Apple or Microsoft, no blocking patents like Lego and is a minor rather than a major brand.
As a customer I'm not bothered about the list price of Montane or a nominal discount on it. What I'm usually interested in is whether the price of the Montane thing is sufficiently lower than the Rab/Arcteryx thing I actually want.
What's more there aren't any big dangerous mountains in England so there's not much brand image benefit in being associated with English Mountaineering for a company selling coats. It is not the same league as Sherpa playing on its connection with Nepal or French/German brands with the Alps.
Post edited at 13:37
2
8
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
That's a slightly weird point of view. For myself, when buying any stuff for use in the hills (not that I buy much), what I'm usually interested in is whether or not it's the right tool for the job. (Obviously I also have to be able to afford it.)
> As a customer I'm not bothered about the list price of Montane or a nominal discount on it. What I'm usually interested in is whether the price of the Montane thing is sufficiently lower than the Rab/Arcteryx thing I actually want.
That's a slightly weird point of view. For myself, when buying any stuff for use in the hills (not that I buy much), what I'm usually interested in is whether or not it's the right tool for the job. (Obviously I also have to be able to afford it.)
1
In reply to Neil Williams:
Sorry but this is exactly the mentality that I don't get.
'Proper' climbers?
Without the reinvestment of cash generated selling down the hill clothing there would not be any up the hill innovation.
Sorry but I don't think you really get how it all works ... or how little cash is left once everyone with a pair of Boreal Jokers in the loft asks for 10% off.
Sorry but this is exactly the mentality that I don't get.
'Proper' climbers?
Without the reinvestment of cash generated selling down the hill clothing there would not be any up the hill innovation.
Sorry but I don't think you really get how it all works ... or how little cash is left once everyone with a pair of Boreal Jokers in the loft asks for 10% off.
1
In reply to Rob Parsons:
It seems pretty normal to me. There's usually a few tools that are good enough for the job so then you trade off desirability against price. I may want an iPhone X but if there's a Samsung that's pretty much as good and a couple of hundred quid cheaper I might be persuaded. I may want a fancy Arcteryx jacket but if there's a Montane that's pretty OK and a hundred quid cheaper then maybe I'll go with that.
> That's a slightly weird point of view. For myself, when buying any stuff for use in the hills (not that I buy much), what I'm usually interested in is whether or not it's the right tool for the job. (Obviously I also have to be able to afford it.)
It seems pretty normal to me. There's usually a few tools that are good enough for the job so then you trade off desirability against price. I may want an iPhone X but if there's a Samsung that's pretty much as good and a couple of hundred quid cheaper I might be persuaded. I may want a fancy Arcteryx jacket but if there's a Montane that's pretty OK and a hundred quid cheaper then maybe I'll go with that.
Post edited at 15:50
2
3
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
I'm not really sure what you point is. I could have chosen any number of other consumer products. You simply don't expect to get a discount as standard on products unless they are in the sale, you are buying online where they have a different pricing strategy or the company as HeMa pointed out offers a discount to certain individuals ( which in the case of software is a way of achieving early buy in to a particular product). And being fair, if a company has to rely on reducing the price of it's goods on a regular basis that tells you something about the product. Montane and its retailers pretty obviously don't need to reduce the rrp - they are already competitive with other brands. The only reason shops reduce price is because for some reason the UK market seems to demand it. For example in Italy I have literally never seen or heard of discounted prices other than in end of year sales.
I'm not really sure what you point is. I could have chosen any number of other consumer products. You simply don't expect to get a discount as standard on products unless they are in the sale, you are buying online where they have a different pricing strategy or the company as HeMa pointed out offers a discount to certain individuals ( which in the case of software is a way of achieving early buy in to a particular product). And being fair, if a company has to rely on reducing the price of it's goods on a regular basis that tells you something about the product. Montane and its retailers pretty obviously don't need to reduce the rrp - they are already competitive with other brands. The only reason shops reduce price is because for some reason the UK market seems to demand it. For example in Italy I have literally never seen or heard of discounted prices other than in end of year sales.
In reply to beardy mike:
Really? When I was working in Turin in the mid 1980s it was not at all unexpected to ask for a discount on practically any non-food item, just because. I remember one shop knocked 20% off the price of a ski jacket at the till without being asked, apparently just because of where I worked. (I suspect that in reality they took pity on the poor Brit who was too shy to ask for his 'sconto'!) There was a ring of discount warehouse type places around the outskirts of Turin the sole function of which was to shift furniture, household goods, "fai da te", outdoor gear and heaven knows what else at substantially below RRP.
Maybe it's changed now, I don't know, but it was a pretty pervasive part of consumer culture there in those days.
That said, I do think that UK climbers as a group seem to be some of the grippiest when it comes to buying gear for a chosen leisure pursuit.
> For example in Italy I have literally never seen or heard of discounted prices other than in end of year sales.
Really? When I was working in Turin in the mid 1980s it was not at all unexpected to ask for a discount on practically any non-food item, just because. I remember one shop knocked 20% off the price of a ski jacket at the till without being asked, apparently just because of where I worked. (I suspect that in reality they took pity on the poor Brit who was too shy to ask for his 'sconto'!) There was a ring of discount warehouse type places around the outskirts of Turin the sole function of which was to shift furniture, household goods, "fai da te", outdoor gear and heaven knows what else at substantially below RRP.
Maybe it's changed now, I don't know, but it was a pretty pervasive part of consumer culture there in those days.
That said, I do think that UK climbers as a group seem to be some of the grippiest when it comes to buying gear for a chosen leisure pursuit.
1
In reply to Martin W:
Maybe it's just where I frequent, but the shops are very rigid in their approach and seem totally unused to the concept. Even our local shop owner who has known us for 5 years never discounts... it's not because he's mean or tight, just doesn't seem to occur to him...
Maybe it's just where I frequent, but the shops are very rigid in their approach and seem totally unused to the concept. Even our local shop owner who has known us for 5 years never discounts... it's not because he's mean or tight, just doesn't seem to occur to him...
In reply to beardy mike:
My point is that 20% off Montane list price is, for me and a lot of other people, completely irrelevant. I don't care about Montane's list price or a nominal discount on it. I have no expectations of a 'discount'.
The only relevant data is the actual price I'm going to be charged. If it is significantly less than the price I will be charged for the similar Rab or Arcteryx product then maybe I'll buy Montane. Also they've got a lot more chance of taking my money online, preferably on Amazon, than in a shop because, for me, buying online is far more convenient.
> I'm not really sure what you point is.
My point is that 20% off Montane list price is, for me and a lot of other people, completely irrelevant. I don't care about Montane's list price or a nominal discount on it. I have no expectations of a 'discount'.
The only relevant data is the actual price I'm going to be charged. If it is significantly less than the price I will be charged for the similar Rab or Arcteryx product then maybe I'll buy Montane. Also they've got a lot more chance of taking my money online, preferably on Amazon, than in a shop because, for me, buying online is far more convenient.
Post edited at 17:25
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Which begs the question, why are Montane having a financial deal with the BMC? Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales). Or for the dog walkers, think there are big scary mountains in England?
> What's more there aren't any big dangerous mountains in England so there's not much brand image benefit in being associated with English Mountaineering for a company selling coats. It is not the same league as Sherpa playing on its connection with Nepal or French/German brands with the Alps.
Which begs the question, why are Montane having a financial deal with the BMC? Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales). Or for the dog walkers, think there are big scary mountains in England?
In reply to Dr.S at work:
Well the story was that Montane was cancelling the main element of their deal with BMC.
> Which begs the question, why are Montane having a financial deal with the BMC? Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales). Or for the dog walkers, think there are big scary mountains in England?
Well the story was that Montane was cancelling the main element of their deal with BMC.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
But I assume there is still some financial benefit to the BMC - so Montane are still paying for something.
> Well the story was that Montane was cancelling the main element of their deal with BMC.
But I assume there is still some financial benefit to the BMC - so Montane are still paying for something.
In reply to Dr.S at work:
Grammatical pick: you are completing misusing the phrase 'to beg the question.' (Yes again, that's a 'pick' - but if you're 'Dr. S at work', perhaps it matters.)
To the wider (?) question you're talking about: if you consider Montane as UK brand, then there are plenty of 'scary mountains' within its range: bad conditions on the Scottish hills are a match for bad conditions anywhere on the planet.
> Which begs the question, why are Montane having a financial deal with the BMC? Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales). Or for the dog walkers, think there are big scary mountains in England?
Grammatical pick: you are completing misusing the phrase 'to beg the question.' (Yes again, that's a 'pick' - but if you're 'Dr. S at work', perhaps it matters.)
To the wider (?) question you're talking about: if you consider Montane as UK brand, then there are plenty of 'scary mountains' within its range: bad conditions on the Scottish hills are a match for bad conditions anywhere on the planet.
In reply to Rob Parsons:
In the classical sense true, but not in the common modern usage. I'll allow you to decide which is the best useage.
NSS. I was replying to Tom in Edinburghs petty nationalist fishing expedition branding the BMC as an English organisation.
> Grammatical pick: you are completing misusing the phrase 'to beg the question.' (Yes again, that's a 'pick' - but if you're 'Dr. S at work', perhaps it matters.)
In the classical sense true, but not in the common modern usage. I'll allow you to decide which is the best useage.
> To the wider (?) question you're talking about: if you consider Montane as UK brand, then there are plenty of 'scary mountains' within its range: bad conditions on the Scottish hills are a match for bad conditions anywhere on the planet.
NSS. I was replying to Tom in Edinburghs petty nationalist fishing expedition branding the BMC as an English organisation.
3
1
2
In reply to ukb & bmc shark:
Ah OK. I will then
The BMC works on behalf of hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers (including ski mountaineers) in England and Wales.
Ah OK. I will then
The BMC works on behalf of hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers (including ski mountaineers) in England and Wales.
In reply to jamscoz:
I'm not sure who you think you are quoting but Tom in Edinburgh hasn't said that and the specific snidely remark was this:
I'm not sure who you think you are quoting but Tom in Edinburgh hasn't said that and the specific snidely remark was this:
> there's not much brand image benefit in being associated with English Mountaineering for a company selling coats.
In reply to ukb & bmc shark:
Was quoting the BMC and the post from Tom I was looking at that mentioned Wales "Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales)" but it doesn't really matter...
Was quoting the BMC and the post from Tom I was looking at that mentioned Wales "Perhaps it's customer base are aware that BMC members climb the big dangerous mountains outside England (or indeed Wales)" but it doesn't really matter...
In reply to ukb & bmc shark:
Ah yes, matching people who have posted with comments they've posted isn't working for me today....
Ah yes, matching people who have posted with comments they've posted isn't working for me today....
2
In reply to ukb & bmc shark:
I was responding to a comment suggesting that Montane/BMC should be using the same strategies as Microsoft, Apple and Lego. My point is that Montane is not Microsoft, Apple or Lego it is more like MegaBlocks than Lego, more like htc than Apple. Also, BMC is not FFME or DAV. DAV gets to 900,000 members because Germany has the Alps, England and Wales don't. If you want to think about strategy you've got to work with facts even if you don't like them.
The pricing strategies leading brands use after they are dominant will not work for second and third tier players. If you want to copy Apple or Microsoft you need to look at what they did when they were small and fighting larger competitors, not what they can get away with after they won.
> I'm not sure who you think you are quoting but Tom in Edinburgh hasn't said that and the specific snidely remark was this:
I was responding to a comment suggesting that Montane/BMC should be using the same strategies as Microsoft, Apple and Lego. My point is that Montane is not Microsoft, Apple or Lego it is more like MegaBlocks than Lego, more like htc than Apple. Also, BMC is not FFME or DAV. DAV gets to 900,000 members because Germany has the Alps, England and Wales don't. If you want to think about strategy you've got to work with facts even if you don't like them.
The pricing strategies leading brands use after they are dominant will not work for second and third tier players. If you want to copy Apple or Microsoft you need to look at what they did when they were small and fighting larger competitors, not what they can get away with after they won.
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Dav gets so many because it has lots of sections scattered through the country who organise trips and training so that people with little or no experience can get out into the hills.
> Also, BMC is not FFME or DAV. DAV gets to 900,000 members because Germany has the Alps, England and Wales don't.
Dav gets so many because it has lots of sections scattered through the country who organise trips and training so that people with little or no experience can get out into the hills.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
With all this, and with your previous comments about the 'desirability' of certain brands - which I simply don't get - it seems like the advertising men have got you exactly where they want you.
> I was responding to a comment suggesting that Montane/BMC should be using the same strategies as Microsoft, Apple and Lego. My point is that Montane is not Microsoft, Apple or Lego it is more like MegaBlocks than Lego, more like htc than Apple. ...
With all this, and with your previous comments about the 'desirability' of certain brands - which I simply don't get - it seems like the advertising men have got you exactly where they want you.
2
In reply to jonnie3430:
If you climb indoors in Germany then quite likely the best wall(s) in your city are run by DAV. So indoor climbers have a pretty strong reason to join DAV. If you climb in the Alps you are going to want insurance and possibly access to huts, again a pretty strong reason to join DAV.
There isn't anything like as compelling a reason for someone in England or Wales to join BMC.
> Dav gets so many because it has lots of sections scattered through the country who organise trips and training so that people with little or no experience can get out into the hills.
If you climb indoors in Germany then quite likely the best wall(s) in your city are run by DAV. So indoor climbers have a pretty strong reason to join DAV. If you climb in the Alps you are going to want insurance and possibly access to huts, again a pretty strong reason to join DAV.
There isn't anything like as compelling a reason for someone in England or Wales to join BMC.
Post edited at 22:29
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
I know, which is why I wrote: "who organise trips and training so that people with little or no experience can get out into the hills."
BMC and mcos need to pull their fingers out and get local networks set up so that experienced people can get noobs outside.
> There isn't anything like as compelling a reason for someone in England or Wales to join BMC.
I know, which is why I wrote: "who organise trips and training so that people with little or no experience can get out into the hills."
BMC and mcos need to pull their fingers out and get local networks set up so that experienced people can get noobs outside.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
DAV gets to 900,000 because its the only 'game in town'. There is no club structure comparable to that in the UK.
And you should the the OAV headquarters; an old church in Didsbury it ain't!
> DAV gets to 900,000 members because Germany has the Alps, England and Wales don't.
DAV gets to 900,000 because its the only 'game in town'. There is no club structure comparable to that in the UK.
And you should the the OAV headquarters; an old church in Didsbury it ain't!
In reply to jonnie3430:
It won't make the slightest bit of difference because lack of skills is not what is stopping people going hillwalking. You don't need advice from an 'experienced person' or an organisation like MCofS to walk up a munro. The thing stopping people is if you live in one of the big cities and you want to walk up a munro or two you need a car, it will kill a whole day, you'll burn about 40 quid in fuel and you can't easily plan it in advance because it's weather dependent.
Munro bagging has turned into a sport for retired people in their 60s and 70s. I guess a fair number of them also join BMC/MCofS because they like the magazine. If you're a young city dweller then going indoor climbing or running is a better option. Cheaper, no car needed, more sociable, no investment in expensive gear, you spend the time exercising rather than sitting in the car and the exercise is a lot more intense.
> BMC and mcos need to pull their fingers out and get local networks set up so that experienced people can get noobs outside.
It won't make the slightest bit of difference because lack of skills is not what is stopping people going hillwalking. You don't need advice from an 'experienced person' or an organisation like MCofS to walk up a munro. The thing stopping people is if you live in one of the big cities and you want to walk up a munro or two you need a car, it will kill a whole day, you'll burn about 40 quid in fuel and you can't easily plan it in advance because it's weather dependent.
Munro bagging has turned into a sport for retired people in their 60s and 70s. I guess a fair number of them also join BMC/MCofS because they like the magazine. If you're a young city dweller then going indoor climbing or running is a better option. Cheaper, no car needed, more sociable, no investment in expensive gear, you spend the time exercising rather than sitting in the car and the exercise is a lot more intense.
Post edited at 14:19
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
What I'm saying is that the noob gets put in touch with someone that knows what they are doing, and they go out on the hills together. Not advice, actual action. "Meet me at anniesland cross station at 8 tomorrow morning and I'll pick you up."
> It won't make the slightest bit of difference because lack of skills is not what is stopping people going hillwalking. You don't need advice from an 'experienced person' or an organisation like MCofS to walk up a munro. The thing stopping people is if you live in one of the big cities and you want to walk up a munro or two you need a car, it will kill a whole day, you'll burn about 40 quid in fuel and you can't easily plan it in advance because it's weather dependent.
What I'm saying is that the noob gets put in touch with someone that knows what they are doing, and they go out on the hills together. Not advice, actual action. "Meet me at anniesland cross station at 8 tomorrow morning and I'll pick you up."
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
When I lived in Aberdeen it was common to catch the bus to Ballater or Braemar for a day or weekend in the hills (often based in a bothy), although many with even less money hitchhiked. Sure I've read of folk in Glasgow doing the same.
> ... if you live in one of the big cities and you want to walk up a munro or two you need a car, it will kill a whole day, you'll burn about 40 quid in fuel and you can't easily plan it in advance because it's weather dependent.
When I lived in Aberdeen it was common to catch the bus to Ballater or Braemar for a day or weekend in the hills (often based in a bothy), although many with even less money hitchhiked. Sure I've read of folk in Glasgow doing the same.
In reply to Doug and jonnie3430:
I'm sure a few people will do that and I'm sure there are a few people that would meet an old guy with a car at Anneisland station at 8am as well. I just don't think it is a hell of a lot of people compared to the numbers that will go for a run straight out their flat or get a bus to a bouldering wall. I don't think there is much MCofS can do about it because its driven by factors outside their control.
> When I lived in Aberdeen it was common to catch the bus to Ballater or Braemar for a day or weekend in the hills (often based in a bothy), although many with even less money hitchhiked. Sure I've read of folk in Glasgow doing the same.
I'm sure a few people will do that and I'm sure there are a few people that would meet an old guy with a car at Anneisland station at 8am as well. I just don't think it is a hell of a lot of people compared to the numbers that will go for a run straight out their flat or get a bus to a bouldering wall. I don't think there is much MCofS can do about it because its driven by factors outside their control.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
so you agree that "you need a car" was, at best, an exaggeration, if not completely wrong ?
so you agree that "you need a car" was, at best, an exaggeration, if not completely wrong ?
1
In reply to Doug:
No, it was a fair comment in context because the argument is about membership numbers in MCofS relative to DAV and whether clubs or mentoring by experienced people is going to do anything significant to grow them.
> so you agree that "you need a car" was, at best, an exaggeration, if not completely wrong ?
No, it was a fair comment in context because the argument is about membership numbers in MCofS relative to DAV and whether clubs or mentoring by experienced people is going to do anything significant to grow them.
1
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Mcos could, if they wanted to, run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. They could then say to anyone "join mcos of you want to get out, get in touch with your local group and they'll sort you out with someone to show you the ropes." The volunteer could take the person out, assess the person's competency at various basic skills against a wee logbook and then give them assurance that they'll be fine on their own, or with other people they've been introduced to through the group.
> I don't think there is much MCofS can do about it because its driven by factors outside their control.
Mcos could, if they wanted to, run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. They could then say to anyone "join mcos of you want to get out, get in touch with your local group and they'll sort you out with someone to show you the ropes." The volunteer could take the person out, assess the person's competency at various basic skills against a wee logbook and then give them assurance that they'll be fine on their own, or with other people they've been introduced to through the group.
In reply to Doug:
Glasgow you can get a bus to the start of the cobbler, anywhere up Glencoe and a train to bridge of orchy or corrour (as seen in trainspotting.)
Glasgow you can get a bus to the start of the cobbler, anywhere up Glencoe and a train to bridge of orchy or corrour (as seen in trainspotting.)
In reply to jonnie3430:
Why would a young person bother? Walking up a munro is a piece of p*ss if you are in your twenties.
> Mcos could, if they wanted to, run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. They could then say to anyone "join mcos of you want to get out, get in touch with your local group and they'll sort you out with someone to show you the ropes." The volunteer could take the person out, assess the person's competency at various basic skills against a wee logbook and then give them assurance that they'll be fine on their own, or with other people they've been introduced to through the group.
Why would a young person bother? Walking up a munro is a piece of p*ss if you are in your twenties.
1
1
In reply to jonnie3430:
Yeah, sure, spent a fair bit of time on that bus and train. It's not a lot of fun and it is not cheap. I'd rather go to Ratho or Alien Bloc and get a proper workout in a reasonable amount of time than spend a packet on fares and most of the day sat on a bus.
> Glasgow you can get a bus to the start of the cobbler, anywhere up Glencoe and a train to bridge of orchy or corrour (as seen in trainspotting.)
Yeah, sure, spent a fair bit of time on that bus and train. It's not a lot of fun and it is not cheap. I'd rather go to Ratho or Alien Bloc and get a proper workout in a reasonable amount of time than spend a packet on fares and most of the day sat on a bus.
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
As a fairly recent member of a university mountaineering club, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. If people think it's a piece of piss, crack on. There's plenty folks who don't, but are likely to be the keen ones in future.
> Why would a young person bother? Walking up a munro is a piece of p*ss if you are in your twenties.
As a fairly recent member of a university mountaineering club, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. If people think it's a piece of piss, crack on. There's plenty folks who don't, but are likely to be the keen ones in future.
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
You on the sauce? View from the top of the cobbler compared to an indoor bouldering venue. Have a word.
> Yeah, sure, spent a fair bit of time on that bus and train. It's not a lot of fun and it is not cheap. I'd rather go to Ratho or Alien Bloc and get a proper workout in a reasonable amount of time than spend a packet on fares and most of the day sat on a bus.
You on the sauce? View from the top of the cobbler compared to an indoor bouldering venue. Have a word.
5
In reply to jonnie3430:
Hillwalking has a very low barrier to entry - climbing much less so. Find a small, non-technical hill and go walk up it - then progressively upgrade the hill over the years.
Hillwalking has a very low barrier to entry - climbing much less so. Find a small, non-technical hill and go walk up it - then progressively upgrade the hill over the years.
In reply to jonnie3430:
Running - 1 hour exercise, 1.30 elapsed time including a shower. No cost. Indoor Climbing - 2 hours exercise, 3 hours elapsed time, about 3 quid if I divide the monthly membership by the amount of times I go. Walking up the Cobbler - maybe three hours not particularly intense exercise but a whole day burned most of it in buses or the car and about 50 quid in fares or fuel.
Yes, the view from the top of the Cobbler (if the weather is good) is very nice compared with the view of the wall at Alien Bloc. But overall it makes no sense as a regular activity for people with limited time or limited travel options. I'll give you that it is more accessible from Glasgow than Edinburgh but still nothing like as accessible as the climbing walls and parks in the city. The thing that would change the balance is more frequent and cheaper public transport - nothing that MCofS can do anything about.
> You on the sauce? View from the top of the cobbler compared to an indoor bouldering venue. Have a word.
Running - 1 hour exercise, 1.30 elapsed time including a shower. No cost. Indoor Climbing - 2 hours exercise, 3 hours elapsed time, about 3 quid if I divide the monthly membership by the amount of times I go. Walking up the Cobbler - maybe three hours not particularly intense exercise but a whole day burned most of it in buses or the car and about 50 quid in fares or fuel.
Yes, the view from the top of the Cobbler (if the weather is good) is very nice compared with the view of the wall at Alien Bloc. But overall it makes no sense as a regular activity for people with limited time or limited travel options. I'll give you that it is more accessible from Glasgow than Edinburgh but still nothing like as accessible as the climbing walls and parks in the city. The thing that would change the balance is more frequent and cheaper public transport - nothing that MCofS can do anything about.
1
2
5
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Lots of young people spend money on gym subscriptions too, when they could do stuff outdoors for free. So it's not quite so simple.
Lots of young people spend money on gym subscriptions too, when they could do stuff outdoors for free. So it's not quite so simple.
1
In reply to Coolmax:
I fully intend to do the munros. It will be a retirement project when I hit about 65 and I'm too knackered for bouldering and running. At that point I'll have a car and plenty of time on my hands and I'll probably have a lot of fun doing it. Ten years after that when I'm 75 I'll be the typical BMC or MCofS member sitting back on the sofa with the magazine and a nice cup of tea. Ten years after that I'll be ready for the final stage and be composing motions of no confidence and ranting letters about the IFSC.
> There are too many numpties on the hills already
I fully intend to do the munros. It will be a retirement project when I hit about 65 and I'm too knackered for bouldering and running. At that point I'll have a car and plenty of time on my hands and I'll probably have a lot of fun doing it. Ten years after that when I'm 75 I'll be the typical BMC or MCofS member sitting back on the sofa with the magazine and a nice cup of tea. Ten years after that I'll be ready for the final stage and be composing motions of no confidence and ranting letters about the IFSC.
Post edited at 19:07
7
2
3
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
What a load of drivel. What on earth are you comparing running round a city to a day in hills for? Units of elapsed time, hours of exercise?
If all you get out of a day in the hills is some units of exercise to stick in your logbook it's no wonder you're not keen. Stick to the city and the indoor walls........
What a load of drivel. What on earth are you comparing running round a city to a day in hills for? Units of elapsed time, hours of exercise?
If all you get out of a day in the hills is some units of exercise to stick in your logbook it's no wonder you're not keen. Stick to the city and the indoor walls........
8
1
In reply to galpinos:
Why don't you read the thread and get the context before saying drivel?
I'm arguing that MCofS/BMC are never going to grow their membership dramatically by "run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. " or anything like that.
In the UK, even in Scotland, hill walking is a niche activity and it has an aging demographic. In my view the reason is that getting to the hills takes too long and costs too much relative to other exercise options. It's easy to walk up Ben Lomond when you are in your twenties, the hard bit is finding the time and money to get there.
> What a load of drivel. What on earth are you comparing running round a city to a day in hills for? Units of elapsed time, hours of exercise?
Why don't you read the thread and get the context before saying drivel?
I'm arguing that MCofS/BMC are never going to grow their membership dramatically by "run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. " or anything like that.
In the UK, even in Scotland, hill walking is a niche activity and it has an aging demographic. In my view the reason is that getting to the hills takes too long and costs too much relative to other exercise options. It's easy to walk up Ben Lomond when you are in your twenties, the hard bit is finding the time and money to get there.
Post edited at 22:07
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
It's always been a niche activity, I've no idea if it has an aging demographic, it wouldn't surprise me.
My point was that you are viewing going out into the hills as "an exercise option". I don't, and I don't believe many others who enjoy it do either. As you say, it's does pretty poorly on a cost/time benefit analysis, especially when compared to something like running on roads from your door so why would you p;itch it as a competitor when it is something totally different? The problem is, they are not, in my mind, comparable activities. I also don't class going bouldering or climbing as "exercise options" and think that this is the nub of the issue that it causing you to disagree.
> In the UK, even in Scotland, hill walking is a niche activity and it has an aging demographic.
It's always been a niche activity, I've no idea if it has an aging demographic, it wouldn't surprise me.
> In my view the reason is that getting to the hills takes too long and costs too much relative to other exercise options. It's easy to walk up Ben Lomond when you are in your twenties, the hard bit is finding the time and money to get there.
My point was that you are viewing going out into the hills as "an exercise option". I don't, and I don't believe many others who enjoy it do either. As you say, it's does pretty poorly on a cost/time benefit analysis, especially when compared to something like running on roads from your door so why would you p;itch it as a competitor when it is something totally different? The problem is, they are not, in my mind, comparable activities. I also don't class going bouldering or climbing as "exercise options" and think that this is the nub of the issue that it causing you to disagree.
4
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Cobbler, bus from Glasgow 45 mins and £5.
Aerobic activity for 2-3 hrs to get up it, plus descent. Cost, time, fitness and view all far better than bumming around in a city.
Cobbler, bus from Glasgow 45 mins and £5.
Aerobic activity for 2-3 hrs to get up it, plus descent. Cost, time, fitness and view all far better than bumming around in a city.
2
In reply to Neil Williams:
Climbing- second someone up a vdiff= simple. You don't even need rock shoes.
> Hillwalking has a very low barrier to entry - climbing much less so. Find a small, non-technical hill and go walk up it - then progressively upgrade the hill over the years.
Climbing- second someone up a vdiff= simple. You don't even need rock shoes.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
I'm saying they could if they wanted to, numbers would go up, as would participation outdoors, where I think it matters more than a coffee shop/ bouldering wall. We have a far better opportunity than dav and aac because it's all on our doorstep and readily accessible.
> I'm arguing that MCofS/BMC are never going to grow their membership dramatically by "run basic assessment weekends for volunteers to show competence in the hills on on rock. They could then provide risk assessment, advice and insurance to those volunteers. " or anything like that.
I'm saying they could if they wanted to, numbers would go up, as would participation outdoors, where I think it matters more than a coffee shop/ bouldering wall. We have a far better opportunity than dav and aac because it's all on our doorstep and readily accessible.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
I agree with a lot of what you say, although I'm not sure about "an aging demographic", it may be that you need a certain level of disposable income that only comes as you get older, say over 30.
I do agree that the BMC are wasting their time and resources trying to attract younger members as they have little to offer for exactly the reasons describe.
I agree with a lot of what you say, although I'm not sure about "an aging demographic", it may be that you need a certain level of disposable income that only comes as you get older, say over 30.
I do agree that the BMC are wasting their time and resources trying to attract younger members as they have little to offer for exactly the reasons describe.
1
In reply to jonnie3430:
Arrochar, bus from Glasgow 1:10 there, another 1:10 back, and there's a few in the morning, a few in the evening and hours between them in the middle of the day, £12.60 for a return. Realistically, even from Glasgow it will take a whole day.
> Cobbler, bus from Glasgow 45 mins and £5.
Arrochar, bus from Glasgow 1:10 there, another 1:10 back, and there's a few in the morning, a few in the evening and hours between them in the middle of the day, £12.60 for a return. Realistically, even from Glasgow it will take a whole day.
1
In reply to Coolmax:
You need disposable income for a car and disposable time and once you get kids you don't have disposable time. The demographic with both free time and a car are older people.
> I agree with a lot of what you say, although I'm not sure about "an aging demographic", it may be that you need a certain level of disposable income that only comes as you get older, say over 30.
You need disposable income for a car and disposable time and once you get kids you don't have disposable time. The demographic with both free time and a car are older people.
2
2
In reply to jonnie3430:
I'm quite curious about this. The concept of young people wanting a course before they feel able to go hill walking just seems really strange.
If BMC/MCofS have a better opportunity how do you explain that DAV has 939,000 members and BMC 61,500.
> I'm saying they could if they wanted to, numbers would go up, as would participation outdoors, where I think it matters more than a coffee shop/ bouldering wall. We have a far better opportunity than dav and aac because it's all on our doorstep and readily accessible.
I'm quite curious about this. The concept of young people wanting a course before they feel able to go hill walking just seems really strange.
If BMC/MCofS have a better opportunity how do you explain that DAV has 939,000 members and BMC 61,500.
1
In reply to jonnie3430:
Yes, but to do that you have to know the person who led it or pay someone to do so. Hillwalking you can just start doing it yourself. If you're not confident with navigation etc you can start with low-level walks around your local area using OpenStreetmap and go from there.
As for ages, I find the clientelle at places like the Old Dungeon Ghyll to be very mixed in age range - yes, there are older hillwalkers, but also younger ones. And Scouting still does lots of it.
> Climbing- second someone up a vdiff= simple. You don't even need rock shoes.
Yes, but to do that you have to know the person who led it or pay someone to do so. Hillwalking you can just start doing it yourself. If you're not confident with navigation etc you can start with low-level walks around your local area using OpenStreetmap and go from there.
As for ages, I find the clientelle at places like the Old Dungeon Ghyll to be very mixed in age range - yes, there are older hillwalkers, but also younger ones. And Scouting still does lots of it.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Hillwalking is also an excellent family activity, even with a baby in one of those baby rucksack things.
I'm not talking Grade 3 scrambles here, I'm talking stuff like walking up the Llanberis path to Snowdon, or something like Cat Bells (yes, I know it has a little scrambly bit if you'd call it that), or whatever. Or round by you, a nice little bimble in the Pentland Hills, accessible easily by bus if you prefer.
Munro bagging may be an older person's thing, but it is by no means the only thing coming under the category of "hillwalking". I suspect most people who do what we would consider to be hillwalking don't even consider that kind of undertaking.
> You need disposable income for a car and disposable time and once you get kids you don't have disposable time. The demographic with both free time and a car are older people.
Hillwalking is also an excellent family activity, even with a baby in one of those baby rucksack things.
I'm not talking Grade 3 scrambles here, I'm talking stuff like walking up the Llanberis path to Snowdon, or something like Cat Bells (yes, I know it has a little scrambly bit if you'd call it that), or whatever. Or round by you, a nice little bimble in the Pentland Hills, accessible easily by bus if you prefer.
Munro bagging may be an older person's thing, but it is by no means the only thing coming under the category of "hillwalking". I suspect most people who do what we would consider to be hillwalking don't even consider that kind of undertaking.
Post edited at 00:15
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
It's nothing to do with access or cost, many young folk are spending their money on other things, it's not that they don't have any. MTB participation has never been higher for example.
> You need disposable income for a car and disposable time and once you get kids you don't have disposable time. The demographic with both free time and a car are older people.
It's nothing to do with access or cost, many young folk are spending their money on other things, it's not that they don't have any. MTB participation has never been higher for example.
In reply to Neil Williams:
I think this is how most people get into the outdoors - by being taken there as kids. It's not 'cool' or instant-enough gratification for a teenager, and for most adults, it's a long way to go for a day to make the effort from a city if you don't know what it is you're missing. If we want to seriously increase participation it has to be via inspiring young children.
In this sense the hill walking community needs to take inspiration from the indoor bouldering community. It can be done. When you are age 7, walking up the llanberis path with some friends (and an adult) is still really exciting!
There are all sorts of means, and of course many (like some cub/scout groups) already exist.
> Hillwalking is also an excellent family activity, even with a baby in one of those baby rucksack things.
> I'm not talking Grade 3 scrambles here, I'm talking stuff like walking up the Llanberis path to Snowdon, or something like Cat Bells (yes, I know it has a little scrambly bit if you'd call it that), or whatever. Or round by you, a nice little bimble in the Pentland Hills, accessible easily by bus if you prefer..
I think this is how most people get into the outdoors - by being taken there as kids. It's not 'cool' or instant-enough gratification for a teenager, and for most adults, it's a long way to go for a day to make the effort from a city if you don't know what it is you're missing. If we want to seriously increase participation it has to be via inspiring young children.
In this sense the hill walking community needs to take inspiration from the indoor bouldering community. It can be done. When you are age 7, walking up the llanberis path with some friends (and an adult) is still really exciting!
There are all sorts of means, and of course many (like some cub/scout groups) already exist.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
It's not the young people wanting a course, it's people (of any age,) wanting to go hill walking or outdoor climbing, not knowing where to start, have anyone to start it with, not having an obvious solution in front of them that is backed by a national body and, above all, is cheap. You say that young people find it easy to do, I have met countless students, all mad keen for the hills, but unsure of the first steps. Sometimes it can take a day and that's all they need, sometimes they want the assurance that when something happens, whiteout, dodgy navigation, rain, etc. That they'll be fine. If people don't want that then fine, I think enough do, and would be grateful to the organisation sorting it out that they hang around themselves.
I can't speak for the dav, I tried joining once when I lived in Germany, but found it too tricky. I can say that the difference in activities anyone can do fairly cheaply is very different when you compare summit/ Scottish mountaineer to the aac magazine when it comes out. Requests for work parties, trips being organised local events. And the aac in the UK is about 13,000. If I ask myself what I want from my national body, aac does a better job than mcos/ BMC.
> I'm quite curious about this. The concept of young people wanting a course before they feel able to go hill walking just seems really strange.
It's not the young people wanting a course, it's people (of any age,) wanting to go hill walking or outdoor climbing, not knowing where to start, have anyone to start it with, not having an obvious solution in front of them that is backed by a national body and, above all, is cheap. You say that young people find it easy to do, I have met countless students, all mad keen for the hills, but unsure of the first steps. Sometimes it can take a day and that's all they need, sometimes they want the assurance that when something happens, whiteout, dodgy navigation, rain, etc. That they'll be fine. If people don't want that then fine, I think enough do, and would be grateful to the organisation sorting it out that they hang around themselves.
> If BMC/MCofS have a better opportunity how do you explain that DAV has 939,000 members and BMC 61,500.
I can't speak for the dav, I tried joining once when I lived in Germany, but found it too tricky. I can say that the difference in activities anyone can do fairly cheaply is very different when you compare summit/ Scottish mountaineer to the aac magazine when it comes out. Requests for work parties, trips being organised local events. And the aac in the UK is about 13,000. If I ask myself what I want from my national body, aac does a better job than mcos/ BMC.
2
In reply to jonnie3430:
There's also the cultural difference that the Germans are natural club-joiners and we aren't. I recognise the benefits of the BMC and am a member, but realistically in the UK people are no more inclined to join a club for walking up hills than they are for walking to the local shop.
It's of more relevance to climbers where there are much greater access issues in practice.
There's also the cultural difference that the Germans are natural club-joiners and we aren't. I recognise the benefits of the BMC and am a member, but realistically in the UK people are no more inclined to join a club for walking up hills than they are for walking to the local shop.
It's of more relevance to climbers where there are much greater access issues in practice.
Post edited at 09:40
2
In reply to Neil Williams:
What a lovely sweeping stereotype. I look forward to seeing your evidence.
I'm not suggesting a club either, just scattered cores of volunteers that are happy to spend some spare time getting people out until they are comfy finding their own partners.
> There's also the cultural difference that the Germans are natural club-joiners and we aren't. I recognise the benefits of the BMC and am a member, but realistically in the UK people are no more inclined to join a club for walking up hills than they are for walking to the local shop.
What a lovely sweeping stereotype. I look forward to seeing your evidence.
I'm not suggesting a club either, just scattered cores of volunteers that are happy to spend some spare time getting people out until they are comfy finding their own partners.
In reply to Neil Williams:
I think it's much more straightforward. If you want to go in the Alps then you need insurance and may well want access to huts. If you want to climb indoors in many large German cities then the best wall is run by DAV and you save money by being a member. In the UK you don't need insurance because mountain rescue is free, you don't need huts and BMC/MCofS don't operate climbing walls.
> There's also the cultural difference that the Germans are natural club-joiners and we aren't.
I think it's much more straightforward. If you want to go in the Alps then you need insurance and may well want access to huts. If you want to climb indoors in many large German cities then the best wall is run by DAV and you save money by being a member. In the UK you don't need insurance because mountain rescue is free, you don't need huts and BMC/MCofS don't operate climbing walls.
2
In reply to jonnie3430:
Here's just one piece, written by a respected German spoken-word radio station, Deutsche Welle:
http://www.dw.com/en/the-german-obsession-with-clubs/a-40369830
> What a lovely sweeping stereotype. I look forward to seeing your evidence.
Here's just one piece, written by a respected German spoken-word radio station, Deutsche Welle:
http://www.dw.com/en/the-german-obsession-with-clubs/a-40369830
Post edited at 10:52
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
That's also a good point. So what they provide in that sense is more an attractive commercial offering rather than club membership per-se.
> I think it's much more straightforward. If you want to go in the Alps then you need insurance and may well want access to huts. If you want to climb indoors in many large German cities then the best wall is run by DAV and you save money by being a member. In the UK you don't need insurance because mountain rescue is free, you don't need huts and BMC/MCofS don't operate climbing walls.
That's also a good point. So what they provide in that sense is more an attractive commercial offering rather than club membership per-se.
Post edited at 10:53
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Is there not about 5000+ members of the climbers club that may disagree with you about not needing huts?
Is there not about 5000+ members of the climbers club that may disagree with you about not needing huts?
In reply to Neil Williams:
So if the BMC/mcos had been a bit more forward thinking they could have more of a presence at climbing walls that the check your knot signs. We seem to have an established private climbing wall scene, but the gap is still getting people from the wall into the outdoors.
So if the BMC/mcos had been a bit more forward thinking they could have more of a presence at climbing walls that the check your knot signs. We seem to have an established private climbing wall scene, but the gap is still getting people from the wall into the outdoors.
1
In reply to jonnie3430:
It's fairly niche, though. Most if not all UK mountains can be easily done comfortably in a day (if sometimes a long one). That's not true of the Alps necessarily.
It's fairly niche, though. Most if not all UK mountains can be easily done comfortably in a day (if sometimes a long one). That's not true of the Alps necessarily.
1
1
In reply to jonnie3430:
There's not really much comparison between the Count House and the Knorrhütte, though. And 5000+ members is a lot fewer than 939,000, so yes, I'd say that British walkers and climbers don't depend on huts in anything like the same way that Alpine walkers and climbers do.
Tom's basic point seems entirely valid - the DAV is a much bigger organization than the BMC because they provide a load of stuff that British walkers and climbers can either get by without or get from an independent commercial operator. This isn't a failing of the BMC, it's just them having a different model.
> Is there not about 5000+ members of the climbers club that may disagree with you about not needing huts?
There's not really much comparison between the Count House and the Knorrhütte, though. And 5000+ members is a lot fewer than 939,000, so yes, I'd say that British walkers and climbers don't depend on huts in anything like the same way that Alpine walkers and climbers do.
Tom's basic point seems entirely valid - the DAV is a much bigger organization than the BMC because they provide a load of stuff that British walkers and climbers can either get by without or get from an independent commercial operator. This isn't a failing of the BMC, it's just them having a different model.
2
In reply to jonnie3430:
Can't offer statistical evidence, but as a German I can assure you that NW is correct!
That said, the majority of DAV members such as me and my family do not regularly take part in the club activities of our local section, but are in it for the insurance and the discounts in huts and climbing walls.
CB
Can't offer statistical evidence, but as a German I can assure you that NW is correct!
That said, the majority of DAV members such as me and my family do not regularly take part in the club activities of our local section, but are in it for the insurance and the discounts in huts and climbing walls.
CB
2
In reply to cb294:
How much does membership cost for the DAV?
I've looked at a few European organisations and been able to derive comparable costs, but couldnt for the DAV.....
It could answer several perceived problems of the BMC for various parties - at the cost level of the AAC, FFME or FEDME, the BMC's income would increase significantly enough for them to be able to park all thoughts of commercial partnerhips / Sport England funding. But as there have been lengthy "debates" at Nat Council meetings on small increases in subs, I cant think that an increase to European levels will go down well........
Having said that, if there are 13k AAC members in the UK, maybe its something to be considered.
But as Ramblin Dave said above, we operate a different model in thr UK (not just BMC / DAV / AAC etc), but in or mountaineering / climbing heritage. In Germany for eg, there just isnt the equivalent of the AC / Climbers Club / Vagabond etc (correct me if I'm wrong, cb294), it all gets organised via the DAV.
How much does membership cost for the DAV?
I've looked at a few European organisations and been able to derive comparable costs, but couldnt for the DAV.....
It could answer several perceived problems of the BMC for various parties - at the cost level of the AAC, FFME or FEDME, the BMC's income would increase significantly enough for them to be able to park all thoughts of commercial partnerhips / Sport England funding. But as there have been lengthy "debates" at Nat Council meetings on small increases in subs, I cant think that an increase to European levels will go down well........
Having said that, if there are 13k AAC members in the UK, maybe its something to be considered.
But as Ramblin Dave said above, we operate a different model in thr UK (not just BMC / DAV / AAC etc), but in or mountaineering / climbing heritage. In Germany for eg, there just isnt the equivalent of the AC / Climbers Club / Vagabond etc (correct me if I'm wrong, cb294), it all gets organised via the DAV.
In reply to Ian W:
Membership at the Sektion Erlangen costs €68 for the first adult in a family, €40 for a second adult, €40 for young adults/students (1993-2000), €20 for children. Families are €117 for all. I think fees are identical elsewhere.
There are local hiking clubs like the Schwäbische-Alb-Verein, but the DAV is clearly the dominating organisation.
CB
Membership at the Sektion Erlangen costs €68 for the first adult in a family, €40 for a second adult, €40 for young adults/students (1993-2000), €20 for children. Families are €117 for all. I think fees are identical elsewhere.
There are local hiking clubs like the Schwäbische-Alb-Verein, but the DAV is clearly the dominating organisation.
CB
In reply to cb294:
Thanks for that - so for family membership its €117, AAC = £87.75, FEDME approx €90 - 110, FFME = €139. BMC = £52.50. for 2 adults and one child (my membership option). And the arguments that take pace over a rise of £1.50...........
But noting that the European ones also include an element of insurance for rescue that is free in UK.
All figs approximate, but fairly accurate as a comparison from the various websites, with the caveat that the Spanish one has a pretty extensive menu of choices, so I picked the middle one, based on Catalonia federation and my limited knowledge of Catalans / Spanish.......
Thanks for that - so for family membership its €117, AAC = £87.75, FEDME approx €90 - 110, FFME = €139. BMC = £52.50. for 2 adults and one child (my membership option). And the arguments that take pace over a rise of £1.50...........
But noting that the European ones also include an element of insurance for rescue that is free in UK.
All figs approximate, but fairly accurate as a comparison from the various websites, with the caveat that the Spanish one has a pretty extensive menu of choices, so I picked the middle one, based on Catalonia federation and my limited knowledge of Catalans / Spanish.......
In reply to Ian W:
I've not checked the latests subs for FFME (or CAF as I still think of it) but is that including the membership of a local section ? Most BMC members are also paying at least one other subscription
I've not checked the latests subs for FFME (or CAF as I still think of it) but is that including the membership of a local section ? Most BMC members are also paying at least one other subscription
1
In reply to Doug:
I think similar to the German one, you join a local club / section, and then pay a supplement to join the national body, which I think is included in the €139. They also have an option to just join the FFME itself directly, I suspect for insurance purposes if you dont want to get involved in the local structure. €89 I think, but I just did a quick survey.
I think similar to the German one, you join a local club / section, and then pay a supplement to join the national body, which I think is included in the €139. They also have an option to just join the FFME itself directly, I suspect for insurance purposes if you dont want to get involved in the local structure. €89 I think, but I just did a quick survey.
In reply to Ian W:
An annual sub for MCofS plus a weeks worth of BMC insurance for a family of three costs a fair bit more than 120 euros.
If BMC/MCofS membership included enough insurance for a climbing holiday in Europe once a year they could justify a higher sub. Wouldn't need to be the comprehensive travel insurance they sell now, just the extra bit specific to climbing that isn't covered by normal insurance.
Another idea would be a national scheme for a climbing wall membership which worked at a large number of partner walls.
> Thanks for that - so for family membership its €117, AAC = £87.75, FEDME approx €90 - 110, FFME = €139. BMC = £52.50. for 2 adults and one child (my membership option). And the arguments that take pace over a rise of £1.50...........
An annual sub for MCofS plus a weeks worth of BMC insurance for a family of three costs a fair bit more than 120 euros.
If BMC/MCofS membership included enough insurance for a climbing holiday in Europe once a year they could justify a higher sub. Wouldn't need to be the comprehensive travel insurance they sell now, just the extra bit specific to climbing that isn't covered by normal insurance.
Another idea would be a national scheme for a climbing wall membership which worked at a large number of partner walls.
In reply to Ian W:
Have you done a calculation between UK and say Germany, to include-
BMC and Club membership or DAV/local section
Annual wall membership
Annual insurance (equivalent provided by DAV)?
> Thanks for that - so for family membership its €117, AAC = £87.75, FEDME approx €90 - 110, FFME = €139. BMC = £52.50. for 2 adults and one child (my membership option). And the arguments that take pace over a rise of £1.50...........
Have you done a calculation between UK and say Germany, to include-
BMC and Club membership or DAV/local section
Annual wall membership
Annual insurance (equivalent provided by DAV)?
In reply to Jim Hamilton:
No. As described above, I just tried to get a comparison to what I get from BMC as a "standard" membership package.
No. As described above, I just tried to get a comparison to what I get from BMC as a "standard" membership package.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Agree the insurance inclusive option you suggest here would be good - i have read many comments on here about the AAC especially having a more suitable policy . Cant believe this wont have been thought of in Didsbury......
And yes it would, but its hardly a new idea! You try getting that many competing commercial bodies to agree on something like that! Not a dig at any walls / owners, its just not an easy thing to coordinate.
> An annual sub for MCofS plus a weeks worth of BMC insurance for a family of three costs a fair bit more than 120 euros.
> If BMC/MCofS membership included enough insurance for a climbing holiday in Europe once a year they could justify a higher sub. Wouldn't need to be the comprehensive travel insurance they sell now, just the extra bit specific to climbing that isn't covered by normal insurance.
> Another idea would be a national scheme for a climbing wall membership which worked at a large number of partner walls.
Agree the insurance inclusive option you suggest here would be good - i have read many comments on here about the AAC especially having a more suitable policy . Cant believe this wont have been thought of in Didsbury......
And yes it would, but its hardly a new idea! You try getting that many competing commercial bodies to agree on something like that! Not a dig at any walls / owners, its just not an easy thing to coordinate.
Post edited at 14:58
In reply to Ian W:
I think the insurance is cheap for the continental clubs as more or less everyone is covered although for many the risk of a claim is slight - in effect the many walkers subsidise the alpinists.
I suspect the BMC may have had this model in mind when it first offered insurance back in the mid 1970s. The first year it was something like £5 and there was a note somewhere suggesting that the following year it might be cheaper. Instead, only alpinists used it & there were so many claims that the next year was much more expensive.
I think the insurance is cheap for the continental clubs as more or less everyone is covered although for many the risk of a claim is slight - in effect the many walkers subsidise the alpinists.
I suspect the BMC may have had this model in mind when it first offered insurance back in the mid 1970s. The first year it was something like £5 and there was a note somewhere suggesting that the following year it might be cheaper. Instead, only alpinists used it & there were so many claims that the next year was much more expensive.
1
In reply to Ian W:
I'm not sure how this would work in practice, though? If you make "insurance inclusive" an option then I can't see how they're going to offer it cheaper than the current cost of membership plus insurance, whereas if you make it an obligatory part of membership then you're probably going to lose a lot of members who won't use it and don't want to pay extra to subsidise other people's holidays. There might be an argument for better tailored policies in some cases, but I'm not sure that that'd drive a tenfold increase in membership or anything....
> Agree the insurance inclusive option you suggest here would be good - i have read many comments on here about the AAC especially having a more suitable policy . Cant believe this wont have been thought of in Didsbury......
I'm not sure how this would work in practice, though? If you make "insurance inclusive" an option then I can't see how they're going to offer it cheaper than the current cost of membership plus insurance, whereas if you make it an obligatory part of membership then you're probably going to lose a lot of members who won't use it and don't want to pay extra to subsidise other people's holidays. There might be an argument for better tailored policies in some cases, but I'm not sure that that'd drive a tenfold increase in membership or anything....
In reply to Ian W:
School Uniform syndrome. School does an exclusive deal with a shop that sells uniforms, uniform supplier rips off the parents something terrible then donates a few quid to school funds and takes the headmaster to the golf once a year. School thinks its a good deal because it's money for near zero effort.
I'm sure it wouldn't be easy and getting the initial sign ups from walls would almost certainly involve acting in ways completely incompatible with BMC politics. Possibly insurance could play a part e.g. if there was a BMC policy covering any indoor climbing accidents/injuries wall and paid out before the walls own insurance maybe that would be worth a small discount on entry. Or a scheme where a BMC/MCofS membership card avoided the need for wall registration charges and belay tests.
£53.50 for two adults and all children.
https://www.mountaineering.scot/members/renew-your-membership
> Agree the insurance inclusive option you suggest here would be good - i have read many comments on here about the AAC especially having a more suitable policy . Cant believe this wont have been thought of in Didsbury......
School Uniform syndrome. School does an exclusive deal with a shop that sells uniforms, uniform supplier rips off the parents something terrible then donates a few quid to school funds and takes the headmaster to the golf once a year. School thinks its a good deal because it's money for near zero effort.
> And yes it would, but its hardly a new idea! You try getting that many competing commercial bodies to agree on something like that! Not a dig at any walls / owners, its just not an easy thing to coordinate.
I'm sure it wouldn't be easy and getting the initial sign ups from walls would almost certainly involve acting in ways completely incompatible with BMC politics. Possibly insurance could play a part e.g. if there was a BMC policy covering any indoor climbing accidents/injuries wall and paid out before the walls own insurance maybe that would be worth a small discount on entry. Or a scheme where a BMC/MCofS membership card avoided the need for wall registration charges and belay tests.
> Whats the membership part of McoS calc without the insurance for a family of 3?
£53.50 for two adults and all children.
https://www.mountaineering.scot/members/renew-your-membership
In reply to jonnie3430:
"But more members!" doesn't trump every possible consideration about what sort of organisation we want the BMC to be, though. I'm quite happy for it to have a smaller membership and be a relatively down-to-earth membership-led campaigning organisation and representative body rather than rushing headlong into being a massive corporate provider of climbing and accommodation facilities.
> And if you want more members...
"But more members!" doesn't trump every possible consideration about what sort of organisation we want the BMC to be, though. I'm quite happy for it to have a smaller membership and be a relatively down-to-earth membership-led campaigning organisation and representative body rather than rushing headlong into being a massive corporate provider of climbing and accommodation facilities.
Post edited at 15:45
2
In reply to Ramblin dave:
Sorry, I haven't been pushing for climbing and accommodation. I've been pushing for a better system for newbies to get outdoors, both climbing and walking.
Sorry, I haven't been pushing for climbing and accommodation. I've been pushing for a better system for newbies to get outdoors, both climbing and walking.
In reply to Doug:
I thought IMs outnumbered club members now...?
> Most BMC members are also paying at least one other subscription
I thought IMs outnumbered club members now...?
In reply to cb294:
It´ s variable, my various local sections are €61, €63, €80 and €81, Munich is €97 for a single member.
> Membership at the Sektion Erlangen costs €68 for the first adult in a family, €40 for a second adult, €40 for young adults/students (1993-2000), €20 for children. Families are €117 for all. I think fees are identical elsewhere.
It´ s variable, my various local sections are €61, €63, €80 and €81, Munich is €97 for a single member.
In reply to jonnie3430:
I think the walls are quite good at providing "move outside" type courses for people who want them. For walking...er...go for a walk! Do people need formal training in everything these days?
> Sorry, I haven't been pushing for climbing and accommodation. I've been pushing for a better system for newbies to get outdoors, both climbing and walking.
I think the walls are quite good at providing "move outside" type courses for people who want them. For walking...er...go for a walk! Do people need formal training in everything these days?
Post edited at 21:25
2
In reply to Neil Williams:
Meh, courses don't sort you out with someone local that does what you want to do.
I agree, formal training isn't great hence why I'm suggesting a bit more informal training.
Meh, courses don't sort you out with someone local that does what you want to do.
I agree, formal training isn't great hence why I'm suggesting a bit more informal training.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
I wasn't suggesting they should use the same pricing tactics as Apple. My point was that in general day to day life you don't go into a shop expecting the shop to discount an item because it happens to be that you want it for less. If you like the retail price, you buy it, if you don't you buy something else. It seems to me that the climbing and walking market are in a habit of thinking their kit should be cheaper than retail. In normal life the price is pretty much the price unless the shop decides they need a sale on the item and drop the price. This whole third or fourth tier stuff is a load of cobblers. Montane will already take that into consideration - beside which I'm not sure they are third or fourth tier. If they dropped their prices to a "reasonable rrp" the same market would still expect discount and you enter a game whereby the manufacturer has to defeature their kit to sell at that price rather than make a loss.
> I was responding to a comment suggesting that Montane/BMC should be using the same strategies as Microsoft, Apple and Lego. My point is that Montane is not Microsoft, Apple or Lego it is more like MegaBlocks than Lego, more like htc than Apple. Also, BMC is not FFME or DAV. DAV gets to 900,000 members because Germany has the Alps, England and Wales don't. If you want to think about strategy you've got to work with facts even if you don't like them.
> The pricing strategies leading brands use after they are dominant will not work for second and third tier players. If you want to copy Apple or Microsoft you need to look at what they did when they were small and fighting larger competitors, not what they can get away with after they won.
I wasn't suggesting they should use the same pricing tactics as Apple. My point was that in general day to day life you don't go into a shop expecting the shop to discount an item because it happens to be that you want it for less. If you like the retail price, you buy it, if you don't you buy something else. It seems to me that the climbing and walking market are in a habit of thinking their kit should be cheaper than retail. In normal life the price is pretty much the price unless the shop decides they need a sale on the item and drop the price. This whole third or fourth tier stuff is a load of cobblers. Montane will already take that into consideration - beside which I'm not sure they are third or fourth tier. If they dropped their prices to a "reasonable rrp" the same market would still expect discount and you enter a game whereby the manufacturer has to defeature their kit to sell at that price rather than make a loss.
In reply to jonnie3430:
Isn't that what a club is ?
> Meh, courses don't sort you out with someone local that does what you want to do.
> I agree, formal training isn't great hence why I'm suggesting a bit more informal training.
Isn't that what a club is ?
1
In reply to beardy mike:
That depends on what it is. In some markets there's an expectation of discounts e.g. sofas or cars.
I don't think Montane and BMC are large enough to set expectations in the market. The leaders set the customer expectations and the smaller players with less presence follow them. It seems like in the outdoor market the leaders like the high list price and regular discounts model rather than just offering a reasonable price all the time.
As I said, personally I find this a nuisance which is one of the reasons I buy on Amazon. I get to see several sellers and find the lowest actual price without any hassle. Shops offering 10% off if you are a member of BMC or you happen to have a particular stupid little card with you is just a nuisance. Half the time I won't remember I could get a discount and just look at the price, remember I've seen it lower online and walk away.
>This whole third or fourth tier stuff is a load of cobblers. Montane will already take that into consideration - beside which I'm not sure they are third or fourth tier. If they dropped their prices to a "reasonable rrp" the same market would still expect discount and you enter a game whereby the manufacturer has to defeature their kit to sell at that price rather than make a loss.
I actually said 'second or third tier' not 'third or fourth tier'. I think that's reasonable: Montane is one of the smaller brands.
> I wasn't suggesting they should use the same pricing tactics as Apple. My point was that in general day to day life you don't go into a shop expecting the shop to discount an item because it happens to be that you want it for less.
That depends on what it is. In some markets there's an expectation of discounts e.g. sofas or cars.
> If you like the retail price, you buy it, if you don't you buy something else. It seems to me that the climbing and walking market are in a habit of thinking their kit should be cheaper than retail. In normal life the price is pretty much the price unless the shop decides they need a sale on the item and drop the price.
I don't think Montane and BMC are large enough to set expectations in the market. The leaders set the customer expectations and the smaller players with less presence follow them. It seems like in the outdoor market the leaders like the high list price and regular discounts model rather than just offering a reasonable price all the time.
As I said, personally I find this a nuisance which is one of the reasons I buy on Amazon. I get to see several sellers and find the lowest actual price without any hassle. Shops offering 10% off if you are a member of BMC or you happen to have a particular stupid little card with you is just a nuisance. Half the time I won't remember I could get a discount and just look at the price, remember I've seen it lower online and walk away.
>This whole third or fourth tier stuff is a load of cobblers. Montane will already take that into consideration - beside which I'm not sure they are third or fourth tier. If they dropped their prices to a "reasonable rrp" the same market would still expect discount and you enter a game whereby the manufacturer has to defeature their kit to sell at that price rather than make a loss.
I actually said 'second or third tier' not 'third or fourth tier'. I think that's reasonable: Montane is one of the smaller brands.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...