- This topic has 92 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
I had a look at card printers and I was pleasantly surprised by what I found.
If we were to do this and I think it’s a very good idea, I’d suggest looking at the following two:
Both, but the time you’re done by the looks of it as I’ve not spoken to any of the companies that do this, run to about £2K plus all the accessories.
Here’s my idea though, as to produce the cards not including the labour time to do it is about 50 pence…
We could charge the subs for each card that means that it’s fair in respect to multi-engineer businesses -vs- sole traders on who pays what.
My suggestion would be £5 per card for anyone, the money pumped back into the subs fund, I’ll do the design etc. FOC and try to set up a quick way of dealing with the different details.
Next bit, for non-subs but UKW members that have signed the Charter we offer them the card as well, but at £10 per card.
Of course just my suggestion but it would hopefully allow the subs fund to recover pretty much from the investment the idea being that the cards are basically self-financing to a large extent. If it makes a bit and generate funds into the subs fund, great, we can move onto the next one.
The reason for thinking this way is that printers, as we all know, have a finite life and consumables aren’t the cheapest although overall the cost is low that doesn’t help with the sting for the films/cartridges much. The cards, well blanks without the hologram at least, are as cheap as chips.
K.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
kwatt wrote:
Next bit, for non-subs but UKW members that have signed the Charter we offer them the card as well, but at £10 per card.
K.Sorry dont agree, Further more if this is going to be the case then rest assured I wont be ordering any !
Sean
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
All the support and backing were are ever going have, either with regards developing UKW or a TA has always resided within the Subs forum.
These are the guy’s who have helped consistently within the forums sharing their expertise, hard earned knowledge and time as moderators. Who also take the time and trouble to turn up at meetings a suggest ideas that we can take forward and develop.
On many occasions Chris has explained the 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} formula of forming or running any type of mutual community or association.
I.e. 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} do all the organisation and support whilst the other 90{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} come along for the ride thinking that their commitment and responsibility to any such community or association is totally dispensed with by the payment of a subscription.
Having worked alongside many of you guys the subs on different tasks. I sometimes think that we agonise, debate, seek approval and try to convince others who neither contribute funds, assistance, opinion or even debate, let alone any of their precious time.
To my mind we have held the poll of the people who are likely to do anything to improve our trade so lets just get on with it. When we can demonstrate to others that by pulling together we can make a difference only then will others join us.
My reason for not wanting to sell UKW identity cards to anyone other than a full subscribing member is that to my mind no one other than a full subscribing member
demonstrates enough commitment.Always being one to seek a viable compromise, if your are going to sell them Ken then might I suggest a charge of £65 each with one years free subscription to UKW thrown in as a free gift .
You may think I’m joking but the guy’s in this forum already do just that along with hours and hours of free support to the site.
Seriously though I have had an extended telephone call with Ken on this subject today as a result I now withdraw my earlier concerns. Ken likes to achieve his results with honey rather than good honest vinegar.
Our methods may differ but our aims remain the same. Apparently I’m no ‘Marketing Man’Sean
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
Del wrote:Seriously though I have had an extended telephone call with Ken on this subject today as a result I now withdraw my earlier concerns. Ken likes to achieve his results with honey rather than good honest vinegar.
Our methods may differ but our aims remain the same. Apparently I’m no ‘Marketing Man’Forcing people to do things is, IMO, a bad thing.
Encouraging them to participate is far preferable IMO.
Yes, I do have a bit of a plan with this and TBH I couldn’t be bothered (after getting so little sleep last night due to some arse wannabe terrorist) to actually tap it all out.
But in short, use it to market the subs/TA.
K.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
kwatt wrote:
Forcing people to do things is, IMO, a bad thing.
K.
Thats the whole point Ken, you never once had to force a sub to do any thing. They do things out of conviction.
The others will eventually follow like sheep If we can show a degree of sucess but only after the subs and admin have done all the work for them 😉Sean
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
Sorry Sean, I never did have much respect for the chain of command or a traditional ways of doing things, especially when they don’t work.
I like being a loose cannon, keeps people on their toes as they don’t know what’s coming next but, as you said yourself, it makes perfect logical sense when it’s all explained.
I will explain all the stuff that’s in my head, eventually.
K.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
kwatt wrote:
Del wrote:
Yes, I do have a bit of a plan with this
But in short, use it to market the subs/TA.
K.
I don’t see those two things as being compatible Ken, to my mind the choice is one or the other…..
As you and others have rightly expressed, UKWhitegoods Ltd as a company is ultimately not going to be listened to in the corridors of power simply because it is a business. True, it has great clout in many other ways such as exposure of sharp practice from WP’s, manufacturers and very occasionally from within the repair/part supply trade too….and I see no reason for that to change.
So the two choices there as I see it are ;
1. Promote UKWhitegoods and all that it stands for in terms of standards of practice (The Charter), communication between members on all current issues facing the industry, and a general cohesiveness of members through open debate and collective decisions. To do this UKW itself needs to be promoted in such a way that the majority of guys in the trade become subs, let alone the majority of UKW members.
2. Create a standalone TA which is self funding to do what UKW is and has been doing so well but with the advantage of being listened to in a serious way by those who make the important decisions and ultimately the law. This also needs promoting in a big way so that the large majority of repairers become members.
Either way it will need a stick and carrot approach in order to achieve the required membership, the stick being the very real threat of outside regulation from those perhaps don’t fully grasp the situation at the ‘front end’, and the carrot being the communication from within giving a feeling of unity, and a direct financial reward from higher respect gained from the public and WP’sPersonally speaking FWIW I would go the second option, it’s a mountain to climb with either choice but ultimately that choice needs to be made or nothing will change for the good.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
One other thing 😀
As far as cards go, would someone explain to me the benefit please? The more I think about it the more negative I become 😕
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
Clive, if I start prattling, it’s because I’m really tired and enjoyed a small quantity of Vodka this evening…
You are correct and that would be the view held by many that read these pages I expect, that you need to use both the carrot and the stick and, TBH, it’s something that I considered a long time ago. I came to the conclusion that, if the community was to be as inclusive as possible, that the stick just wouldn’t work were we the ones to wield it. Apart from which, what right have I or UKW as an organisation to do so?
I’ve got a kinda warped view of the world. 😉
K.
(who really should go to sleep and stop drinking 😉 :lol:)
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
The problem will manifest itself when the HSE or the government wields the stick. Then the trade will be running around trying to get the necessary qualifications/paperwork or approvals to continue working.
Think of the electricians and the Part P fiasco. Everyone needed to qualify immediately; no spaces at college. Legislation comes into force and you can’t work until you comply. This is the only big stick that worries me.
Clive is right, but I can see Ken’s point of view. DASA in effect, was the carrot. After all, I admit that I at first held the view that my prospects would improve if I joined them.
Maybe the lack of ‘stick’ in the past has bred a sense of apathy and a feeling of ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ mentality in this trade.
But the distinct probability of government regulation (sooner or later) could catch us unprepared. And possibly out of a job. :hitfan:
And as sure as sheep need a sheep dog, we have to round up the flock and point it in the right direction. UKW is living proof that working together is in everyone’s interest and the TA should be promoted as such. Anyone using this site could only agree with that. Money spent on advancing this plan is worthwhile IMO.Steve.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
Whichever way you cut the ice we need to get sorted. Regarding the government, I’ve seen this fiasco twice already, once with regard to refrigeration and recently with the WEEE directive. It may well be that we end up with only afew doing all the work but thats normal what we don’t want is to find half our forum out of a job because no-one was around to stand up for the trade.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
Yeah it will very likely be some form of legislation that will affect us and, in all likelihood it won’t be directed at us, it will just affect our little sphere of operations. If you look back we had CORGI, only affects a small part of what we do, WEEE, again, only a small part, Part P, only affects a small number of us that also did a little electrical work and so on. Refrigerant handling, exactly the same.
In a lot of ways it’s just being nibbled away at, not directly legislated and not affecting too many of us at one time. So nobody really bothers apart from the few affected and then it’s just a few voices against whomever wants to introduce whatever and any protest is often futile.
We appear to come under the umbrella of “servicing sector” and we’re just lumped in with browngoods servicing and a host of other things. Right now I don’t think that we’re important enough, in other’s eyes, to be on the radar as it were fro being directly targeted. But I wouldn’t rule it out and I certainly wouldn’t rule out the possibility of some other change or changes that would directly affect us.
K.
Re: UKW Subs Funding – the future?
clivejameson wrote:So the two choices there as I see it are ;
1. Promote UKWhitegoods and all that it stands for in terms of standards of practice (The Charter), communication between members on all current issues facing the industry, and a general cohesiveness of members through open debate and collective decisions. To do this UKW itself needs to be promoted in such a way that the majority of guys in the trade become subs, let alone the majority of UKW members.
2. Create a standalone TA which is self funding to do what UKW is and has been doing so well but with the advantage of being listened to in a serious way by those who make the important decisions and ultimately the law. This also needs promoting in a big way so that the large majority of repairers become members.
Either way it will need a stick and carrot approach in order to achieve the required membership, the stick being the very real threat of outside regulation from those perhaps don’t fully grasp the situation at the ‘front end’, and the carrot being the communication from within giving a feeling of unity, and a direct financial reward from higher respect gained from the public and WP’sPersonally speaking FWIW I would go the second option, it’s a mountain to climb with either choice but ultimately that choice needs to be made or nothing will change for the good.
Clive, perhaps we have not made ourselves clear enough. Neither Ken or I see the formation of a TA as being a sub division of UKW Ltd.
We only see our contribution as facilitators in allowing a totally stand alone
independent and democratic TA to be formed.Believe me, as part of a team who have tried their level best to contact every repairer in the land to bring them things like :- the existence of UKW, detergent training, ISE and other ideas
I can assure you that it is an up hill task, even when you are giving stuff away for free. Just to illustrate this point, we trained over 1500 engineers throughout the UK from Inverness to Truro, Norwich to Holyhead.
Our conversion rate from repairer contacted to bum on seat at a training session was at best 20{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} not least because over 25{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} of firms registered on yellow pages data base we were using no longer existed.
UKW is without doubt the best information channel to the UK independent service provider, and that didn’t happen by accident. We have always seen our primary role as that of information providers and have always taken onboard the ideas and suggestions of our members, trying to develop and facilitate those ideas with various degrees of success.
UKW Ltd has over the years stood the costs of attending various meetings with regard to things like exploring, Training schemes, Trust Mark, and various other government bodies. Costs that should be met by a TA and shared by its membership, not a single private company like UKW.
We have no wish to control the suggested TA merely allow and assist it to be formed and become one of its most ardent members and supporters.
Would we express an opinion as to how effective and efficiently it is operated? You bet your life, in that respect it would be treaded no differently than DASA has been.
I hope this explains where I am coming from at least.
Sean
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.