There is a lot of very unhappy club members

I'm lost. Perhaps DSB can explain it all.

There again, perhaps it's better left. RIP.

MC, I feel I must reply to your first paragraph.

I, for one, have never felt of lesser importance to other members when on sites or briefly on CT, conversely, neither have I deemed myself more important than any other member.

I just enjoy and relax wherever I go, be it CL's or Club Sites, or even on here. Live and let Live is my motto, lifes too short for grievances, enjoy it while you can......

We've been members for 20yrs and always use the CMC sites and CL,s.we think the sites are great the staff are excellent and will certainly continue to support the club where we can.I think the whinging and moaning will always occur in any club.We just ignore it.You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time .

Brian & Jo

Here's my two-penneth:  If there are a lot of unhappy members about, as a consequence of the rebrand, really, what is that about? At some level I think I get it - we are in a member based organisation with a  deep history and people have strong emotional bonds associated with that, often going back several generations in families and there is a perhaps natural resistance to change. However some of the negative reactions to it that I have read - not here actually, more on Facebook groups - has been absolutely extraordinary. One poster said that the name change had "destroyed my family's history" - seriously!! To me, it's just too deeply cynical to regard the HO decision makers as not knowing what they are doing, underemployed, distant etc. They will have done their research and built a business case in support of their change proposals. No doubt they now have to deliver on that - it has to be backed up with action and members have to 'feel' the benefits of it. That will take time. As far as I am concerned, as long as I can access the CL network, get the club's fantastic insurance products, continue to enjoy the high standards aways set on club sites, and feel that my interests as a caravanner are represented politically (the Club has always been an effective political lobbyer for caravanners' and motorhomes' interests), then I'm fine with it. Onwards and upwards.

As a member of some 20 years standing, I have to say that I am ambivalent regarding the change of name. Having said that, I have experience of major rebranding exercises and these certainly don't come cheap. I'd be interested to know how much the whole thing is going to cost as I presume the money will coming from membership funds.

In addition, as well as the obvious changes to signage, uniforms, documentation, etc, there must be a lot of merchandise which is now obsolete.

I have no prejudice against motorhomes, far from it, I probably aspire to one myself at some time in the future. However, I think I'm right in saying that motorhomes still represent a small percentage of the "camping & caravanning community", albeit that is growing.

Anyway, I realise my views won't change policy but it would have been nice to have consulted the membership.

Hicap

A very sensible post if I may say so. Like you I can't understand some of the venom expressed by a lot of members re the rebrand. OK people will have a view, that is to be expected, but some of the comments and suggestions of not subscribing to membership as result seems to completely defy logic.Why are people here, I doubt its for the name of the Club or the new brand colours? The Club is not a democratic organisation in the accepted meaning of the word. We have a management and an executive who work together and make decisions on behalf of members. If ordinary members want a say in thing they have to commit to becoming involved with the Club by putting themselves forward for either Centres or various committees. All members have a vote but how many of us actually use that vote? I just wonder if people were more objective and measured in their criticisms of the rebrand that perhaps their voice would have been more closely listened to. For myself I think they have got the colours wrong and I wouldn't be surprised if that is one element of the rebrand that will eventually change. However I am not on the verge of sending my membership card back just because I don't like the colour!!!

David

Having worked for many years in both the commercial and charitable sectors, it's worth just pointing out that most customers (aka members) see their needs in the 'here and now' whereas the role of boards in developing strategy must, by definition, be based on the future. To stand still is to lag behind.

its more than possible that things such as logo and name changes are to broaden the FUTURE appeal of the club, to what is an ever changing demography. Every business faces this challenge.

I'm one of the happy ones, and until I seek to be elected to the Board, I shall trust them to do things to the best of their abilities. This is not Microsoft or Google, the Club does not have endless resources and is staffed by humans, so may make mistakes.

That's all very well but I still cannot see how a bland and colourless rebrand will attract the younger families that is aimed at, they expect something eye catching at the very least.

How much did the re branding of the club cost?I wonder if we will ever be told, I would sugest it was a large amount if that being the case surely it would have only been courteous to consult the membership

To me the 'rebrand' is all hype and no substance. Buzz words do not impress. If you are going to rebrand with a fanfare then have something exiting to offer. As they say 'put up or shut up and if you have nowt to offer then sit down and be quiet'. Changing the name I have little problem with. Talk of a brave new world is laughable.