Stupid Stupid Rebranding

[dmr]

14 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Meanwhile fast-forward 20 years and three more re-brandings into the future. All over the internets and pubs up and down the cut... "Remember that old car tyre logo we had back in the early 20s? Those were the days. LOVED that logo. This new one we got that is supposed to remind us of a bridge and in oh-so-trendy black and white that only cost 20% of the maintenance budget is absolutely bloody awful, the management have totally lost the plot this time..."

That's probably a good prediction, 3 rebrandings in 20 years or one every 7 years is about right. Once organisations go down the rebranding route it does become a routine event. I'm an engineer, not a marketing man, and I can see the foolishness of this, CaRT is now full of marketing people and they can't see it. I s'pose if you employ loads of  graduates with second rate marketing degrees and careers this is what happens.

 

So, in my universe we have compulsory contraception and nobody can have kids till they prove they can bring up a sane and well adjusted dog (bit hard on dogs though), then everybody must do a first degree in engineering and only then can they do an Masters in the subject of their choice. ?

 

............Dave (been drinkin!)

[zenataomm]

It's already happening, (Go-C&RT) are rapidly rolling out their new logo.

 

 

[MtB]

4 minutes ago, dmr said:

That's probably a good prediction, 3 rebrandings in 20 years or one every 7 years is about right. Once organisations go down the rebranding route it does become a routine event. I'm an engineer, not a marketing man, and I can see the foolishness of this, CaRT is now full of marketing people and they can't see it. I s'pose if you employ loads of  graduates with second rate marketing degrees and careers this is what happens.

 

So, in my universe we have compulsory contraception and nobody can have kids till they prove they can bring up a sane and well adjusted dog (bit hard on dogs though), then everybody must do a first degree in engineering and only then can they do an Masters in the subject of their choice. ?

 

............Dave (been drinkin!)

 

Yes it's time I started. Now where's that wine?

 

I think re-branding is fine (well, understandable at least) for businesses that sell stuff e.g. Marks and Spencer, Heinz etc, but rebranding  business with no product to scale up and a fixed number of captive customers certainly seems supremely pointless to me. If CRT have a logical rationale for re-branding so soon after being launched I wish they'd share it with the general public. Or at least with their captive customers.

[Jerra]

8 hours ago, Neil2 said:

I think CRT could learn a lot from the National Trust, who by and large seem to manage the demand for access to our heritage in such a way that it never becomes overwhelming.   They seem to attract a lot of private funding too.

There is a big difference the NT have members with the power to vote at AGMs you can't do that with the CRT.  Perhaps they would be more successful if you could be a member.

 

I am not used to paying to be somebody's friend but I am used (and happy to) pay for being a member.

[Alan de Enfield]

8 hours ago, Jerra said:

I am not used to paying to be somebody's friend but I am used (and happy to) pay for being a member.

I'm told that there are a large number of both ladies and gentlemen that you can pay to be your 'friend' for varying time periods, so, the concept is not unknown.

[Neil2]

8 hours ago, Jerra said:

There is a big difference the NT have members with the power to vote at AGMs you can't do that with the CRT.  Perhaps they would be more successful if you could be a member.

 

I am not used to paying to be somebody's friend but I am used (and happy to) pay for being a member.

I think that's a good point, but I'm not sure if those who support the NT do so primarily because they have voting rights.  Those who join the NT do so because it is crystal clear what the Trust is about, and because members derive some financial benefit if they visit enough Trust sites routinely.  By comparison the CRT "project" fails on both counts.  It's the old W1FM cliche that sales/marketing trainers used to trot out - "What's in it for me" and if you can't answer that simply and positively you are not going to get folk to part with their money.

[Momac]

On 23/05/2018 at 21:49, adam1uk said:

But this is the whole point. CRT’s aim in all this is to get the government to continue the £50 million a year grant, by making the case that the money produces ‘wellbeing’ worth a lot more. It’s not about getting individual walkers or runners to pay

On that basis why do boaters have to pay?

[Alan de Enfield]

9 minutes ago, MartynG said:

On that basis why do boaters have to pay?

Because laws / Acts of Parliament have been passed that say so.

[Jerra]

1 hour ago, Neil2 said:

I think that's a good point, but I'm not sure if those who support the NT do so primarily because they have voting rights.  Those who join the NT do so because it is crystal clear what the Trust is about, and because members derive some financial benefit if they visit enough Trust sites routinely.  By comparison the CRT "project" fails on both counts.  It's the old W1FM cliche that sales/marketing trainers used to trot out - "What's in it for me" and if you can't answer that simply and positively you are not going to get folk to part with their money.

I would totally agree but I can't help feeling member with some power over what is going on and the direction the organisation is taking would help improve matters.

[Alan de Enfield]

18 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I would totally agree but I can't help feeling member with some power over what is going on and the direction the organisation is taking would help improve matters.

See section 28 (page 20) of the C&RT "Articles of Association"

 

There are already members whose responsibility it is :

 

".............shall assist the Trustees in the formulation of policy and strategy by:
29.4.1 debating important points of principle to provide guidance and perspective from different beneficiary and stakeholder groups to the Trustees;
29.4.2 suggesting issues of concern for the Trustees to pursue; and
29.4.3 acting as a sounding board for the Trustees in relation to the development of proposals and policies.

 

There is also what is called a "B Member" .

The “B Member” shall be the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

 

If there are concerns that C&RT are not fulfilling their role and 'doing what they were set up to do' then the B Member has a range of powers :

 

30. The B Member

30.1 Subject to Article 30.2, the B Member shall have the Special Powers prescribed in Article 30.4.
Invoking the Special Powers

30.2 The Special Powers may only be exercised by the B Member if they have been brought into effect as follows:
30.2.1 circumstances have arisen such that the B Member has become entitled to serve written notice on the Trust terminating its trusteeship of the Waterways Infrastructure Trust pursuant to the terms of the Trust Settlement (whether or not the B Member intends to, or does, serve such notice of termination of trusteeship on the Trust); and
30.2.2 the B Member has notified the Trust in writing of such circumstances and that the Special Powers are being brought into effect by the B Member.
Suspending the Special Powers

30.3 If the Special Powers have been brought into effect pursuant to Article 30.2 and the circumstances which led to the Special Powers being brought into effect are considered by the B Member to cease to exist, the B Member may determine that the Special Powers are no longer to be in effect, and shall notify the Trust in writing accordingly. The B Member shall have due regard to any request from the Trust that the Special Powers should cease to have effect pursuant to this Article 30.3. If the Special Powers cease to have effect pursuant to this Article 30.3 this shall not prevent the B Member from invoking the Special Powers again on future occasions in accordance with Article 30.2.

Exercise of the Special Powers

30.4 The Special Powers are as follows:
30.4.1 the B Member may remove any or all of the Trustees of the Trust and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the Trustee Replacement Power”);
30.4.2 the B Member may remove any or all of the A Members and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the A Member Replacement Power”); and
30.4.3 the B Member may direct that the Protected Assets (subject to attendant liabilities) shall be transferred to another institution which is regarded as charitable under the law of England and Wales with objects compatible with those of the Trust or to be held upon trust for the objects of the Trust by a person or institution which has been appointed as trustee of the Waterways Infrastructure Trust on such terms as the B Member thinks fit (subject to the requirements of charity law) (“the Transfer of Assets Power”).

30.5 The B Member may exercise the Trustee Replacement Power at any time once the Special Powers have been brought into effect pursuant to Article 30.2. In addition the B Member may exercise either the A Member Replacement Power or the Transfer of Assets Power, but he or she shall not be permitted to exercise both the A Member Replacement Power and the Transfer of Assets Power simultaneously (as the A Member Replacement Power and the Transfer of Assets Power are intended to provide alternative options for the B Member to facilitate the ongoing application of the Protected Assets in furtherance of the objects for the public benefit).

30.6 For the avoidance of doubt, the exercise of the Special Powers by the B Member shall not be subject to any rights or powers or require the consent of any of the A Members, but in determining whether the B member has become entitled to exercise the Special Powers or in exercising them, the B Member must act in the way that he or she reasonably and in good faith considers to best further the objects of the Trust for public benefit.

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Tanglewood]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

29.4.1 debating important points of principle to provide guidance and perspective from different beneficiary and stakeholder groups to the Trustees;
29.4.2 suggesting issues of concern for the Trustees to pursue; and
29.4.3 acting as a sounding board for the Trustees in relation to the development of proposals and policies.

Anyone know whether re-branding was an important point of principle  or concern - or whether the Trustees were used as a sounding board?

 

 

[rusty69]

....... ouija board is more likely 

 

[dmr]

Branding is a major and fundamental issue and really should have been subject to scrutiny. Its not just changing the logo on letterheads and sweatshirts, its making a fundamental change to the appearance of our historic waterway, and like wot I keep sayin, they will try to paint the locks and railings blue before too long.

 

It might be possible to reduce the damage. When they tried to replace all the lovely old water taps with the nasty stainless steel ones they did back down at "heritage locations" so maybe where a lock is a listed structure they could be forced to retain the old more appropriate black and white signs.

 

history can be protected, it can't be modernised

 

........Dave

[Alan de Enfield]

26 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Anyone know whether re-branding was an important point of principle  or concern - or whether the Trustees were used as a sounding board?

 

 

I doubt they did, I expect it would be viewed as an 'operational' decision

 

Quote :

........shall not determine policy or strategy, nor may it fetter the discretion of the Trustees to exercise their powers as set out in Article 7, the Council shall assist the Trustees in the formulation of policy and strategy

 

Article 7 

 

7. Trustees’ general authority
Subject to the Articles, the Trustees are responsible for the management of the Trust’s business, for which purpose they may exercise all the powers of the Trust.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Jerra]

51 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

See section 28 (page 20) of the C&RT "Articles of Association"

 

There are already members whose responsibility it is :

 

".............shall assist the Trustees in the formulation of policy and strategy by:
29.4.1 debating important points of principle to provide guidance and perspective from different beneficiary and stakeholder groups to the Trustees;
29.4.2 suggesting issues of concern for the Trustees to pursue; and
29.4.3 acting as a sounding board for the Trustees in relation to the development of proposals and policies.

 

There is also what is called a "B Member" .

The “B Member” shall be the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

 

If there are concerns that C&RT are not fulfilling their role and 'doing what they were set up to do' then the B Member has a range of powers :

 

30. The B Member

30.1 Subject to Article 30.2, the B Member shall have the Special Powers prescribed in Article 30.4.
Invoking the Special Powers

30.2 The Special Powers may only be exercised by the B Member if they have been brought into effect as follows:
30.2.1 circumstances have arisen such that the B Member has become entitled to serve written notice on the Trust terminating its trusteeship of the Waterways Infrastructure Trust pursuant to the terms of the Trust Settlement (whether or not the B Member intends to, or does, serve such notice of termination of trusteeship on the Trust); and
30.2.2 the B Member has notified the Trust in writing of such circumstances and that the Special Powers are being brought into effect by the B Member.
Suspending the Special Powers

30.3 If the Special Powers have been brought into effect pursuant to Article 30.2 and the circumstances which led to the Special Powers being brought into effect are considered by the B Member to cease to exist, the B Member may determine that the Special Powers are no longer to be in effect, and shall notify the Trust in writing accordingly. The B Member shall have due regard to any request from the Trust that the Special Powers should cease to have effect pursuant to this Article 30.3. If the Special Powers cease to have effect pursuant to this Article 30.3 this shall not prevent the B Member from invoking the Special Powers again on future occasions in accordance with Article 30.2.

Exercise of the Special Powers

30.4 The Special Powers are as follows:
30.4.1 the B Member may remove any or all of the Trustees of the Trust and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the Trustee Replacement Power”);
30.4.2 the B Member may remove any or all of the A Members and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the A Member Replacement Power”); and
30.4.3 the B Member may direct that the Protected Assets (subject to attendant liabilities) shall be transferred to another institution which is regarded as charitable under the law of England and Wales with objects compatible with those of the Trust or to be held upon trust for the objects of the Trust by a person or institution which has been appointed as trustee of the Waterways Infrastructure Trust on such terms as the B Member thinks fit (subject to the requirements of charity law) (“the Transfer of Assets Power”).

30.5 The B Member may exercise the Trustee Replacement Power at any time once the Special Powers have been brought into effect pursuant to Article 30.2. In addition the B Member may exercise either the A Member Replacement Power or the Transfer of Assets Power, but he or she shall not be permitted to exercise both the A Member Replacement Power and the Transfer of Assets Power simultaneously (as the A Member Replacement Power and the Transfer of Assets Power are intended to provide alternative options for the B Member to facilitate the ongoing application of the Protected Assets in furtherance of the objects for the public benefit).

30.6 For the avoidance of doubt, the exercise of the Special Powers by the B Member shall not be subject to any rights or powers or require the consent of any of the A Members, but in determining whether the B member has become entitled to exercise the Special Powers or in exercising them, the B Member must act in the way that he or she reasonably and in good faith considers to best further the objects of the Trust for public benefit.

 

You clearly miss  my point when I mention friends V members.  I mean the rank and file of canal users boaters, dog walkers, naturalists, cyclists, Mums with pushchairs etc (Those who have a vested interest in the canal and its environments) being able to be members.

 

I think this would have two effects.  Firstly it would make a safety valve where the discontent could be aired and listened to at an AGM and secondly I am certain it would bring ion more funds.  I would happily be a member (as I am of the SNT) if |I got something for my money i.e. a feeling of worth/being listened to I won't pay to be a "friend" I have never bought friendship and don't intend to start.

 

Can I pay to be one of these members you mention?  I very much doubt it that would allow people who might not agree with the management a  say.

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, Jerra said:

You clearly miss  my point when I mention friends V members.  I mean the rank and file of canal users boaters, dog walkers, naturalists, cyclists, Mums with pushchairs etc (Those who have a vested interest in the canal and its environments) being able to be members.

 

I think this would have two effects.  Firstly it would make a safety valve where the discontent could be aired and listened to at an AGM and secondly I am certain it would bring ion more funds.  I would happily be a member (as I am of the SNT) if |I got something for my money i.e. a feeling of worth/being listened to I won't pay to be a "friend" I have never bought friendship and don't intend to start.

 

Can I pay to be one of these members you mention?  I very much doubt it that would allow people who might not agree with the management a  say.

No I didn't miss your point with the comparisons to the NT and members - however, the Members that C&RT do have are 'elected representatives of user groups' and are available to us (Joe Public) to air our concerns which they can then use to try and influence the Trustees who in turn can "try" and influence the operation management of C&RT.

 

The Rules shall be formulated in such a way that the Council (Council = Members) provides a fair reflection of the diversity of the beneficiaries of the Trust and other stakeholder bodies or electorates interested in the Trust’s affairs. The Rules shall provide that certain members of the Council shall be nominated (and such nominations will be undertaken by the bodies identified by the Appointments Committee as specified in Article 27) and certain members shall be directly elected by the relevant electorates, with up to 50% of the members of the Council being elected to their positions. 

 

Here is the list of the 'Members' and their backgrounds. I understand that is to them we should direct any issues / complaints about the way the Trust is run.

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/about-us/how-we-are-run/the-council#a

Edited May 28, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Jerra]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

No I didn't miss your point with the comparisons to the NT and members - however, the Members that C&RT do have are 'elected representatives of user groups' and are available to us (Joe Public) to air our concerns which they can then use to try and influence the Trustees who in turn can "try" and influence the operation management of C&RT.

 

The Rules shall be formulated in such a way that the Council (Council = Members) provides a fair reflection of the diversity of the beneficiaries of the Trust and other stakeholder bodies or electorates interested in the Trust’s affairs. The Rules shall provide that certain members of the Council shall be nominated (and such nominations will be undertaken by the bodies identified by the Appointments Committee as specified in Article 27) and certain members shall be directly elected by the relevant electorates, with up to 50% of the members of the Council being elected to their positions. 

So not really something a member of Joe Public has access to!  They have to first be sufficiently interested to be a find a "user group" and be sufficiently interested to find out how the user group decided on nominees and then try to be come one.  A member in my terms has the right to attend the AGM at least needs no nomination and can put forward theiur own position without having to "toe the party line" of the "interest group".

 

IMO the members you speak of are a sop to try to make CRT look something it clearly isn't. 

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, Jerra said:

So not really something a member of Joe Public has access to!  They have to first be sufficiently interested to be a find a "user group" and be sufficiently interested to find out how the user group decided on nominees and then try to be come one.  A member in my terms has the right to attend the AGM at least needs no nomination and can put forward theiur own position without having to "toe the party line" of the "interest group".

 

IMO the members you speak of are a sop to try to make CRT look something it clearly isn't. 

Agree with all of the above.

[Tanglewood]

Annex 8: Defra objectives for funding under the Grant Agreement

1. To reduce dependence on Government Grant and to foster increasing self- sufficiency, by providing access to new charitable income streams and stimulating new efficiencies. Over time, to increase overall funding available for the waterways. A prerequisite for this is to support the viability of CRT – especially in its early days - and so minimise the risk that Government has to intervene to take responsibility for the waterways from CRT.

2. To move the long term cost of maintaining the inland waterways and the associated heritage infrastructure (estimated at around £4 billion in nominal net present value terms) from the public sector to civil society.

3. To support localism and give waterways users and communities greater involvement in the management and long term sustainability of the waterways.

4. To safeguard:

    the canals and associated heritage infrastructure through the Trust Settlement, in perpetuity, for the benefit of the nation; and

    free pedestrian access to the towpaths.

5. To ensure that the waterways continue to deliver and increase public benefits across the areas of:

   1. a)  public safety

   2. b)  public access, recreation, amenity and health

   3. c)  environment

   4. d)  urban and rural regeneration

   5. e)  heritage.

This is what CRT have agreed to do in order to get grant funding.  Interesting that it doesn't require free cycle access to tow-paths - this is something CRT has decided to add to the mix. 

 

Point 3 - Support Localism - but Woughton on the Green (Milton Keynes - Grand Union) wanted to designate the Canal Tow-path as Local Green Space in their Neighbourhood Plan.  What did CRT do? mount a strongly worded objection, claiming it might interfere with 'commercial interests' or developments alongside the canal.  Fortunately the Examiner did not agree, and it has thus been so designated. 

[manxmike]

I have little say in the matter as I live in the Isle of Man which has its own Government, but surely the same rules apply there as here - you can lobby your MP. If sufficient people write/email/telephone/attend surgeries then one of the MPs might actually ask a question in the house. 

Of course I imagine the usual "someone else will do it" attitude will apply and we'll all carry on moaning and not bother doing anything about it.

[dmr]

32 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Annex 8: Defra objectives for funding under the Grant Agreement

1. To reduce dependence on Government Grant and to foster increasing self- sufficiency, by providing access to new charitable income streams and stimulating new efficiencies. Over time, to increase overall funding available for the waterways. A prerequisite for this is to support the viability of CRT – especially in its early days - and so minimise the risk that Government has to intervene to take responsibility for the waterways from CRT.

2. To move the long term cost of maintaining the inland waterways and the associated heritage infrastructure (estimated at around £4 billion in nominal net present value terms) from the public sector to civil society.

3. To support localism and give waterways users and communities greater involvement in the management and long term sustainability of the waterways.

4. To safeguard:

    the canals and associated heritage infrastructure through the Trust Settlement, in perpetuity, for the benefit of the nation; and

    free pedestrian access to the towpaths.

5. To ensure that the waterways continue to deliver and increase public benefits across the areas of:

   1. a)  public safety

   2. b)  public access, recreation, amenity and health

   3. c)  environment

   4. d)  urban and rural regeneration

   5. e)  heritage.

This is what CRT have agreed to do in order to get grant funding.  Interesting that it doesn't require free cycle access to tow-paths - this is something CRT has decided to add to the mix. 

 

Point 3 - Support Localism - but Woughton on the Green (Milton Keynes - Grand Union) wanted to designate the Canal Tow-path as Local Green Space in their Neighbourhood Plan.  What did CRT do? mount a strongly worded objection, claiming it might interfere with 'commercial interests' or developments alongside the canal.  Fortunately the Examiner did not agree, and it has thus been so designated. 

So a very mixed performance from Cart, but more fails than successes. If I was the government I would not be impressed and not give any more money without a hard commitment to doing better.

 

1 Total fail

2 Total fail

3 Some success with volunteering, but absolutely no management power given to anybody

4 Some very bad heritage mistakes, selling off important heritage building, carving poetry on locks, unsightly inappropriate water taps, rebranding signs with a modern

rather than heritage style.

5.1 Far too many cycle related accidents

5.2  probably ok except Pedestrian access seriously degrades by encouraging high speed cycling.

5.3 mostly ok but much too much unsympathetic tarmac on towpaths

5.4 some but not much

5.5 not good, some degraded but at least no major things destroyed.

 

must try harder!

 

............Dave

[mayalld]

On ‎24‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 17:40, adam1uk said:

So it’s ok to be rude to them?

Hmm!

 

I hear it trotted out that certain people are "only doing their job" as if that requires me to not be rude to them.

 

I actually consider anybody coming up to me in a public place with a view to parting me from my cash as being pretty damn rude in the first place (on no amount of dressing the approach up in pleasantries or obsequiousness changes the underlying rudeness of it.

 

So, to my mind chuggers have imposed upon me uninvited, with no realistic expectation that I will be pleasant to them, because they don't know whether I'm a nice man or not, and been rude to me asking me for money. If I am anything other than rude back to them, that is really down to the fact that I actually am a fairly nice bloke (but keep that quiet, I have a reputation to maintain).

 

As it happens, I was approached by a towpath chugger this weekend.

 

I informed him that I did not wish to become a friend of CRT, as my putative friend already gets a sizeable wedge from my pocket each year, and also because I am very well aware of how little of what friends pay actually goes to the waterways, and that I am fairly unhappy about the money that is being wasted by CRT on this rebranding exercise.

 

He had clearly been briefed with an answer!

 

I was told that the rebranding was only costing 1% of the marketing budget. So, if the rebranding cost £60k as has been suggested, that means that they have a marketing budget of 6 million a year, so I asked how he thought CRT could justify having a ,marketing budget of £6 million when they have the begging bowl out to find 3 million to fix a canal. He had no answer.

 

I also asked whether the new signs that are springing up are included in the £60k, or whether they are coming from the maintenance budget (and lets face it, after Jeremy, Tarquin and co have had a slice of the money for the rebrand, there isn't much to buy and erect new signs). He spun the line about signs being replaced as the wear out, so I showed him some pictures, and asked him what was wrong with the signs in the pictures. Again, he had no answer.

 

So the chuggers have some trite answers to trot out, but in the face of actual facts, they have no answers.

 

The thing here is that I have always supported CRT against the knockers, and have even been called a CRT apologist. This exercise is losing them the supporters that they do have. It is a disaster!

 

[Sbg]

3 hours ago, mayalld said:

Hmm!

 

I hear it trotted out that certain people are "only doing their job" as if that requires me to not be rude to them.

 

I actually consider anybody coming up to me in a public place with a view to parting me from my cash as being pretty damn rude in the first place (on no amount of dressing the approach up in pleasantries or obsequiousness changes the underlying rudeness of it.

 

So, to my mind chuggers have imposed upon me uninvited, with no realistic expectation that I will be pleasant to them, because they don't know whether I'm a nice man or not, and been rude to me asking me for money. If I am anything other than rude back to them, that is really down to the fact that I actually am a fairly nice bloke (but keep that quiet, I have a reputation to maintain).

 

As it happens, I was approached by a towpath chugger this weekend.

 

I informed him that I did not wish to become a friend of CRT, as my putative friend already gets a sizeable wedge from my pocket each year, and also because I am very well aware of how little of what friends pay actually goes to the waterways, and that I am fairly unhappy about the money that is being wasted by CRT on this rebranding exercise.

 

He had clearly been briefed with an answer!

 

I was told that the rebranding was only costing 1% of the marketing budget. So, if the rebranding cost £60k as has been suggested, that means that they have a marketing budget of 6 million a year, so I asked how he thought CRT could justify having a ,marketing budget of £6 million when they have the begging bowl out to find 3 million to fix a canal. He had no answer.

 

I also asked whether the new signs that are springing up are included in the £60k, or whether they are coming from the maintenance budget (and lets face it, after Jeremy, Tarquin and co have had a slice of the money for the rebrand, there isn't much to buy and erect new signs). He spun the line about signs being replaced as the wear out, so I showed him some pictures, and asked him what was wrong with the signs in the pictures. Again, he had no answer.

 

So the chuggers have some trite answers to trot out, but in the face of actual facts, they have no answers.

 

The thing here is that I have always supported CRT against the knockers, and have even been called a CRT apologist. This exercise is losing them the supporters that they do have. It is a disaster!

 

We should soon see if it cost £60K as I've submitted a Freedom of Information request on the subject. Of course, what they tell me it cost and the real figure may (will) bear little resemblance to each other....

Edited May 28, 2018 by Sbg

[zenataomm]

I do not invite people I don't know to interrupt me during my day by either ….

* Walking up to me and talking to me

* Phoning me

* Knocking my door

 

They don't really care what sort of day I'm having, so the whole premise is based on a lie.  They are attempting to make me gullible because they perceive I shall be too embarrassed to be as rude back to them as they are being by interrupting me in the first place.

 

They are wrong.  My response is generally down to who they are and how I feel at the moment.

In the past I have responded to Morons and Jehovah's Witless by inviting them in as "we are just about to commence Devil Worship and would love to convert them". 

 

Chuggers are generally asked who they work for, it's usually an agency.  I ask them how many tabards they have at home with different Charities logos on. I ask them what % of any amount I sign up for goes to the charity.  Finally I enquire how they know the people they are entrapping are not vulnerable like Poppy seller Olive Cooke who killed herself after being hounded by charities and was on 99 organisations' hit lists, the report revealed - including 70 that BOUGHT or traded her personal details.

 

Phone cold callers I turn the conversation round and start asking them the question they just asked me, I managed to keep one of those going nearly 7 minutes (personal best)

 

When they knock the door, I look delighted to see them, I tell them they look younger than I remembered them.  Telling them to wait a moment I grab my coat and exit the house to join them in the garden. Looking around me with a puzzled face I ask them where their car is.  No matter what they try to tell me, I try to shake them warmly by the hand and thank them for agreeing to represent me in court and suggest they take me to a pub where we can go over the details. Suspiciously glancing at the neighbours' houses I turn deaf to their protestations and assure them I'm not really guilty ….. after all, "I ask you Great Crested Newts???  …….. and what would the PDSA know about them and their feelings towards commitment?

 

However, if I'm not in a playful mood, I merely ask them when I invited them to interrupt me?  As I suspect I didn't ,they can bugger off!

 

So far as I am concerned it's my time (to do with as I please) I have chosen to be where I am (I didn't choose to involve them) At no point did I wake up this morning and decide I wanted to give money away, and if I had I'd give it to whomever I chose and not the first liar that approaches me asking me how I am myself today.

It's their choice to try it on …….. ergo, it's my choice to be as bloody rude as I want.
 

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, zenataomm said:

Phone cold callers I turn the conversation round and start asking them the question they just asked me, I managed to keep one of those going nearly 7 minutes (personal best)

 

I generally tell them I'm busy at the moment but if they give me their home phone number I'll call them back on Sunday afternoon, would that be ok? 

 

Curiously then always decline, often saying they are not working. I point out they are calling me on my home phone so what's the difference?