Anglesey Subsidy

[Ainslie Bousfield]

Dear All,

I am concerned about a development that took place at Anglesey which seems contrary to our constitution items 10 and 11.

SEE BELOW

10. Application of profit

No money or property of the Club or any gain arising from the carrying on of the Club may be applied otherwise than for the benefit of the Club as a whole or for some charitable or benevolent purpose or purposes chosen by resolution of a general meeting.

11. Commission

11.1. No one may at any time receive at the expense of the Club or any member of the Club any commission percentage or similar payment on or with reference to any purchases made by the Club.

11.2. No one may directly or indirectly derive any pecuniary benefit from the activities of the Club and apart also from any benefit which a person derives indirectly by reason of the supply giving rise to or contributing to a general gain from the carrying on of the Club unless approved by a resolution of a general meeting.

[/u]


I understand all those who raced at Anglesy paid their entry fee to BARC but subsequently received a £180 cheque from the club.

As a paid up club member I don't remember voting that those who raced at Anglesey would get a subisdy (or 'application of profit').

I also do not recall this sudsidy being publicised to all members before the race to 'encourage' entries.

If this subsidy HAD been voted through at the AGM and given to those who entered all the races at the end of the season (as the BARC scheme), then perhaps there would be more cars out this season? At least everyone would have known of the opportunity in advance.

Whilst all those at Anglesey are hardly going to say 'no I don't want a subsidy' I kindly suggest the favoured 15 may have turned a blind eye to the rest of the members interests.

Are there not more effective ways to use the funds accumulated over the preceding years to benefit all, existing and future members, and safeguard the club?

Ainslie

[Derek Coghill]

Hi Ainslie, it strikes me that this part of what you've quoted is the relevant one - "No money or property of the Club or any gain arising from the carrying on of the Club may be applied otherwise than for the benefit of the Club as a whole" - Trevor was trying to get a reasonably-sized grid so that the race wasn't cancelled which would reflect badly on the club as a whole.

I paid my entry fee months beforehand because of my plan for the year (astounding - I actually had a plan...) and the partial refund was a pleasant surprise. If it comes to it, I'll give it back.

[Ainslie Bousfield]

Hi Derek,

Glad you and Nessie have a plan! (Is it as cunning as a cunning fox who has had a double helping of cunning for breakfast this morning?)

Just one query on your comment.

Could the subsidy have an effect on the number of entries for Anglesey, (to ensure we had a reasonably-sized grid so that the race wasn't cancelled,)
if no one knew about it before hand?

[Derek Coghill]

As far as I know, it was quite a late thing introduced to sway a few possibles into being definites, then applied to all other entries for even-handedness' sake.

Cunning doesn't have a look in (my sister used to buy that) - it's bloody daft, that's what it is. Having said that, I'm almost in the single figures bit of the championship table which is a bit odd but quite fun.

[Ben Allan]

Whilst I have several issues with the subsidy, to do with timing and communication, I do think that this is a good use of the clubs cash.

Derek bought his entries in advance and thereby strengthened the clubs reputation within BARC.  I always seem to be last minute and don't do all the races, thereby to an extent weakening the club's reputation within BARC.  It must be sensible for Derek's behaviour to be rewarded and encouraged at the cost of some of my club dues.

Ben

[David Sullivan]

The subsidy was given, i believe to benefit the club in the long run, by keeping a race on the calendar that due to the number of cars on the grid we didn't really deserve. If grid numbers stay down then the championship will fold, that seems a simple assumption to make doesn't it? I know that the subsidy was mentioned on the forum & what would habe been the point in sending it out to all the members via post when half of them only want to race in the 24hr & then forget about us until next year, thats a waste of club resources in a bad way were as making sure an event goes ahead is a good use of club funds, surely?

The message is a simple one which has been said over & over again in the past few weeks


IF YOU DON'T WANT THE CLUB SPENDING YOUR MONEY - COME OUT TO PLAY!

[Paul Robertson]

te="Ainslie Bousfield"]Dear All,

I am concerned about a development that took place at Anglesey which seems contrary to our constitution items 10 and 11.

SEE BELOW

10. Application of profit

No money or property of the Club or any gain arising from the carrying on of the Club may be applied otherwise than for the benefit of the Club as a whole or for some charitable or benevolent purpose or purposes chosen by resolution of a general meeting.

11. Commission

11.1. No one may at any time receive at the expense of the Club or any member of the Club any commission percentage or similar payment on or with reference to any purchases made by the Club.

11.2. No one may directly or indirectly derive any pecuniary benefit from the activities of the Club and apart also from any benefit which a person derives indirectly by reason of the supply giving rise to or contributing to a general gain from the carrying on of the Club unless approved by a resolution of a general meeting.

[/u]


I understand all those who raced at Anglesy paid their entry fee to BARC but subsequently received a £180 cheque from the club.

As a paid up club member I don't remember voting that those who raced at Anglesey would get a subisdy (or 'application of profit').

I also do not recall this sudsidy being publicised to all members before the race to 'encourage' entries.

If this subsidy HAD been voted through at the AGM and given to those who entered all the races at the end of the season (as the BARC scheme), then perhaps there would be more cars out this season? At least everyone would have known of the opportunity in advance.

Whilst all those at Anglesey are hardly going to say 'no I don't want a subsidy' I kindly suggest the favoured 15 may have turned a blind eye to the rest of the members interests.

Are there not more effective ways to use the funds accumulated over the preceding years to benefit all, existing and future members, and safeguard the club?

Ainslie[/quote]



quote="Trevor Williams"]Anglesey Entries:

Confirmed: Me, Sammie, Phil, Helen, Aubrey, Derek, Wayne, Matt, Neil, Steve P, Andy Smith, Graham Harper.
Going to Enter: Peter Rigg, Darren Baker

That makes 14. One more and they definately cannot cancel it.

All the above will be receiving their subsidy at the track.

If you dont like the club spending your money going racing, ENTER THE BL**DY RACES!

Trevor[/quote]
NO BODY QUESTIONED THIS POST AT THE TIME .IT HAD ALREADY BEEN SUGGESTED THAT A SUBSIDY WAS FORTHCOMING .
Get off your high horse and get your car out.

[helen deeley]

Dear All,

the favoured 15 may have turned a blind eye to the rest of the members interests.


Excuse me, but the "favoured 15" were the ones of us who actually bothered to make the trek to Anglesey, in the interests of having a good weekends racing & keeping the club alive- surely thats in other members interests? And I paid the entry before the subsidy was even thought of, so it wasnt a bribe!

[Andy Craig-Smith]

Mmmm,
Its the issue of endurace races, most drivers double up which halves the grid and longer races increasing cost.
I was going to double up with the Ginger Prince, but as I knew of the refund from the club ( In advance ) and lack of numbers I took my own car.
So originally it would of cost me £555 /2 = £277.50 as there was no refund.
Actual cost with refund £555-180 = £375 plus petrol/transport for extra car.
But it made it affordable. That said nobody else made the same decision!

[Mary Lindsay]

As a newcomer to the club, but not to motor sport, it seems to me that the  subsidy was a perfectly sensible thing to do.

When the Morgan series encountered similar problems with filling grids, the small nucleus of regular and reliable competitors all contributed money from their own pockets to put into a fund which enabled us to buy grids when entries fell below the organiser's mimimum.

The intention to pay the subsidy was made in advance and no adverse comment was made at the time. When unpaid club officials are struggling to keep the club going we should be grateful that they use their initiative on our behalf.

[Mary Lindsay]

most drivers double up which halves the grid

Perhaps this is the root of the problem. You have the same number of competitors to draw from but you reduce the number of cars on the grid.

Not having been a party to the discussions leading to this way of doing things I am not qualified to comment. No doubt I will incur the wrath of those who were but it does seem to me that if you only have one driver per car you could potentially have twice the number of cars on the grid.

[David Sullivan]

For once, no wrath in your direction!  :D You are right in the fact that we could have twice the number of cars on the grid, but due to the enduro format which is in place (which i like by the way) then our races are a little more expensive to enter but laps per pound are more cost effective, some drivers share a car because like me, dont have one of their own or because they don't have the funding to compete alone.

[Paul Robertson]

Mary ,you would think that this would be the case wouldn't you? But at anglesey there was only one car driven by two drivers in which the second driver owned another car ,and he had his caterham there and was competing in the caterham races as well .

[Mary Lindsay]

Paul, as I have no knowledge of how the 2CV racing scene has evolved over the years can you tell me what it was like before and why it was decided to change to the current format?

It seems very odd that it should change so quickly from what appeared to be a thriving and enthusiastic set-up to the current apparently apathetic and fragmented situation.

All I can suggest (from a self-confessed position of complete ignorance) is that each registered racing member is circulated either by email or in writing (or both) with a dire warning about what is happening and that if they don't support it now it will die.

Clearly the forum is an area where a few active and interested members take part in debate but my guess is that the silent majority are in blissful ignorance of what is happening and how serious things are becoming. It is typical of most of us that unless we are individually given a short sharp shock we assume that all will be well and that others will sort things out.

Who knows a volunteer or two might even emerge from the woodwork!

[Trevor Williams]

Done that too many times over the past few years
Had enough of banging my head against a brick wall