[HetheringtonClub] Business Plan Submission
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Seumas Bates
May 16, 2010, 3:50:07 PM5/16/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Hello all, I hope you're all very well.
We now enter a countdown towards the final verdict on the Business
Plan that we have all be working so hard on. It shall be reviewed at
the meeting of the Student Finance Sub-Committee this Friday 21st.
A series of Club-wide consultation meetings, Committee and Sub-
Committee meetings, forum debates, and hundreds of hours of devoted
labour have produced what I consider to be a first rate document, one
which I am proud to be associated with. As I type, one of my
colleagues is putting the final touches to the document which we hope
to upload to this website this evening.
I'd like to thank everyone who was involved in the creation of this
plan, I think the level of professionalism and originality speak of
the wonderful, diverse and unique community we are. I have no idea
whether our bid shall be successful on Friday, but I do know that
we've made every effort to revitalize and rejuvenate the Club we all
know and loved.
Thanks again,
Seumas Bates
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
To post to this group, send an email to hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
We now enter a countdown towards the final verdict on the Business
Plan that we have all be working so hard on. It shall be reviewed at
the meeting of the Student Finance Sub-Committee this Friday 21st.
A series of Club-wide consultation meetings, Committee and Sub-
Committee meetings, forum debates, and hundreds of hours of devoted
labour have produced what I consider to be a first rate document, one
which I am proud to be associated with. As I type, one of my
colleagues is putting the final touches to the document which we hope
to upload to this website this evening.
I'd like to thank everyone who was involved in the creation of this
plan, I think the level of professionalism and originality speak of
the wonderful, diverse and unique community we are. I have no idea
whether our bid shall be successful on Friday, but I do know that
we've made every effort to revitalize and rejuvenate the Club we all
know and loved.
Thanks again,
Seumas Bates
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
To post to this group, send an email to hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
Tom Coles
May 17, 2010, 3:03:59 AM5/17/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
This file is now available at:
http://hetheringtonclub-general.googlegroups.com/web/HRC+Business+Plan+Circulated+to+Membership+17May2010.pdf.
Thanks,
Tom
http://hetheringtonclub-general.googlegroups.com/web/HRC+Business+Plan+Circulated+to+Membership+17May2010.pdf.
Thanks,
Tom
Chris Young
May 17, 2010, 6:38:24 AM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
Please, please, please do not submit this. The formatting in the pdf is extremely clumsy. The pagination is all over the place, with the accounts inserted at random in the document. The punctuation is eccentric to say the least. It does not look good.
Sorry to be so negative at first, but first impressions do count. The presentation has distracted almost completely from the contents: I would not invest in such an amateur looking outfit. I am being cruel to be kind here. You need a proofreader / editor.
Turning more to the contents, I believe that branding the HRC "Centre for Academic Collaboration" gives substantially the wrong idea of what the club has been about in my experience, and what its attractions are or can be. It sounds to me far too much like an inter-University academic institution, or a formal interdisciplinary seminar house. This is wrong and deeply unsexy. We want to encourage people in to have a drink and a meal in an informal club where they feel they belong. A motto such as "Some work and some play" would be more accurate, but no motto at all would be better than a turn-off. I'm happy to do you something whimsical in Latin. What you could do with more is a single sentence explanation: "Catering for our members - postgraduates, mature students, staff and their guests" or something of that ilk.
Section 3b deals with licensing. It mentions a potential increase "such as this" but does not give any indication of what "such as this" might be - 80? 90? 350? In a business plan, you need to have some idea of what the capacity of your building is or could potentially be. This is pretty crucial to any viability. And I don't think it is good enough to leave the off-sales angle until later: this is a relatively simple revenue stream, as far as I know, and should really be factored in from the start so that bar layouts/practices can be established as they will need to be.
I also note in this document that there is no mention at all of obligations to previous members. I paid £12 membership (unwaged former member)) plus £10 deposit for a keycard (still in my possession). I do think that the club needs to mention explicitly that it will extend the membership of previous/existing members in order to gain an instant clientele. This also puts pressure on the University to move swiftly before all goodwill is lost. There is no mention of the value of goodwill at all: I think a sliding scale of value to the business in terms of reopening time may concentrate minds.
Again, sorry to come across as negative, but this needs more work or it will not work.
Chris
Sorry to be so negative at first, but first impressions do count. The presentation has distracted almost completely from the contents: I would not invest in such an amateur looking outfit. I am being cruel to be kind here. You need a proofreader / editor.
Turning more to the contents, I believe that branding the HRC "Centre for Academic Collaboration" gives substantially the wrong idea of what the club has been about in my experience, and what its attractions are or can be. It sounds to me far too much like an inter-University academic institution, or a formal interdisciplinary seminar house. This is wrong and deeply unsexy. We want to encourage people in to have a drink and a meal in an informal club where they feel they belong. A motto such as "Some work and some play" would be more accurate, but no motto at all would be better than a turn-off. I'm happy to do you something whimsical in Latin. What you could do with more is a single sentence explanation: "Catering for our members - postgraduates, mature students, staff and their guests" or something of that ilk.
Section 3b deals with licensing. It mentions a potential increase "such as this" but does not give any indication of what "such as this" might be - 80? 90? 350? In a business plan, you need to have some idea of what the capacity of your building is or could potentially be. This is pretty crucial to any viability. And I don't think it is good enough to leave the off-sales angle until later: this is a relatively simple revenue stream, as far as I know, and should really be factored in from the start so that bar layouts/practices can be established as they will need to be.
I also note in this document that there is no mention at all of obligations to previous members. I paid £12 membership (unwaged former member)) plus £10 deposit for a keycard (still in my possession). I do think that the club needs to mention explicitly that it will extend the membership of previous/existing members in order to gain an instant clientele. This also puts pressure on the University to move swiftly before all goodwill is lost. There is no mention of the value of goodwill at all: I think a sliding scale of value to the business in terms of reopening time may concentrate minds.
Again, sorry to come across as negative, but this needs more work or it will not work.
Chris
Thomas Coles
May 17, 2010, 8:09:51 AM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
Hi Chris,
regarding the formatting: this is an artifact of the conversion to PDF, and is completely my fault. I apologize. The original MSWord documents that were submitted to the Finance Committee do not contain these problems. I did not wish to alter the document any more than the > PDF conversion would have done.
Your concern about the "Centre for Academic Collaboration" refocusing has been noted and widely debated on this group. The problem, as previously outlined, is that "a drink and a meal in an informal club where they feel they belong" was not the sort of institution that was going to be resurrected. Of course it will still be this, but we have to differentiate ourselves from the other models available: catering for a community of researchers, not pub-denizens. We 'cater' to all the needs of the members, not just the gastro- booze-nomical. This has been an explicit requirement of the University. I realize that everyone wants the club that used to exist: but that club was abandoned by its membership and went bankrupt. There has to be a clear reason why that wont and can't happen again. The plan is not to be a formal institution, but an informal institution: yes "interdisciplinary" (if by that we mean people chatting outside their own heads) and, yes "seminars" (if we mean people being encouraged to talk about their work). The idea of a place for 'academic social networking', or a 'Centre for Academic Collaboration' was an attempt to rebrand towards this. When we finalize these ideas prior to the (I hope) relaunch in September, please come along and add your views.
We cannot define the capacity of the venue without consulting a licensing lawyer: very expensive considering our total lack of resources. However, from venues of a similar size, we would be surprised if the capacity was not 150+. This may rely on re-organizing the building regarding fire escapes, bathrooms etc, which would involve capital costs. It is not as simple as stuffing people in and counting.
Regarding previous membership: we do not have useful access to membership details due to the process of insolvency, we have had tor rely on piecing together accounts and details from various sources. We have been given no explicit access, beyond a quick walk-around, to the documents of the HRC from previous years. We would of course come to an agreement with membership as to membership arrangements due to the extraordinary issues in 2009-10. However it should be remembered: we (the CoM) are also membership, the club is the membership: the obligation is primarily from the membership to sustain the club, and reciprocally for the elected officers to manage the club. Our finances are such that we may not be able to do without the revenue stream provided early in the year by membership fees. Granted, membership are out of pocket for 2009-10 and might balk therefore at paying again for 2010-11. There will have to be a compromise between the club's sustainability and people's genuine grievance over its closure.
Goodwill, we hope, has been demonstrated to University Management by the deluge of supportive emails sent on our behalf. The University is interested somewhat in the goodwill of students/staff, but they are equally happy if they are not explicitly embarrassed. We have tried to show that we are a positive force, a bonus for the University, rather than a potential financial and public embarrassment.
I'm sorry you weren't impressed with the formatting, this was after all a draft. Unfortunately it has been circulated to the Committee of Finance preemptively. Therefore we have included a cover-sheet addressing some of these issues, and others, raised by those with which we have consulted.
I hope this goes some way towards allaying your fears. The plan wasn't perfect (it couldn't be in the time available to the committee), but we've done our best and I think we have a great and workable plan.
Tom
regarding the formatting: this is an artifact of the conversion to PDF, and is completely my fault. I apologize. The original MSWord documents that were submitted to the Finance Committee do not contain these problems. I did not wish to alter the document any more than the > PDF conversion would have done.
Your concern about the "Centre for Academic Collaboration" refocusing has been noted and widely debated on this group. The problem, as previously outlined, is that "a drink and a meal in an informal club where they feel they belong" was not the sort of institution that was going to be resurrected. Of course it will still be this, but we have to differentiate ourselves from the other models available: catering for a community of researchers, not pub-denizens. We 'cater' to all the needs of the members, not just the gastro- booze-nomical. This has been an explicit requirement of the University. I realize that everyone wants the club that used to exist: but that club was abandoned by its membership and went bankrupt. There has to be a clear reason why that wont and can't happen again. The plan is not to be a formal institution, but an informal institution: yes "interdisciplinary" (if by that we mean people chatting outside their own heads) and, yes "seminars" (if we mean people being encouraged to talk about their work). The idea of a place for 'academic social networking', or a 'Centre for Academic Collaboration' was an attempt to rebrand towards this. When we finalize these ideas prior to the (I hope) relaunch in September, please come along and add your views.
We cannot define the capacity of the venue without consulting a licensing lawyer: very expensive considering our total lack of resources. However, from venues of a similar size, we would be surprised if the capacity was not 150+. This may rely on re-organizing the building regarding fire escapes, bathrooms etc, which would involve capital costs. It is not as simple as stuffing people in and counting.
Regarding previous membership: we do not have useful access to membership details due to the process of insolvency, we have had tor rely on piecing together accounts and details from various sources. We have been given no explicit access, beyond a quick walk-around, to the documents of the HRC from previous years. We would of course come to an agreement with membership as to membership arrangements due to the extraordinary issues in 2009-10. However it should be remembered: we (the CoM) are also membership, the club is the membership: the obligation is primarily from the membership to sustain the club, and reciprocally for the elected officers to manage the club. Our finances are such that we may not be able to do without the revenue stream provided early in the year by membership fees. Granted, membership are out of pocket for 2009-10 and might balk therefore at paying again for 2010-11. There will have to be a compromise between the club's sustainability and people's genuine grievance over its closure.
Goodwill, we hope, has been demonstrated to University Management by the deluge of supportive emails sent on our behalf. The University is interested somewhat in the goodwill of students/staff, but they are equally happy if they are not explicitly embarrassed. We have tried to show that we are a positive force, a bonus for the University, rather than a potential financial and public embarrassment.
I'm sorry you weren't impressed with the formatting, this was after all a draft. Unfortunately it has been circulated to the Committee of Finance preemptively. Therefore we have included a cover-sheet addressing some of these issues, and others, raised by those with which we have consulted.
I hope this goes some way towards allaying your fears. The plan wasn't perfect (it couldn't be in the time available to the committee), but we've done our best and I think we have a great and workable plan.
Tom
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Chris Young
May 17, 2010, 9:51:42 AM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for your responses. More cruelty, I'm afraid, in the name of kindness...
The explanation for the formatting doesn't address the appalling punctuation, I note.
I still think that the complete omission of goodwill is a mistake. It forms a vital part of any business dynamic. And it DOES make a huge difference if you have a pre-existing customer base who are almost guaranteed to turn up to give the new venture a try. (Given that 2009-2010 members were issued with key cards, access to membership records, while preferable, may not be necessary to recognising those to whom the club is in moral if not technical debt.)
If you believe that the University will require a more "academic" remit for the Club, may I suggest that this should actually make it into the business plan in a more developed form? It's not going to happen spontaneously. If you market something as if it were an academic department but don't offer any academic product, you will likely be disappointed in levels of uptake. It seems like the worst sort of window dressing. It is hollow. An example of how the remit may be achieved is required: weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, actively targeting student societies with ideas for hosting joint events, or something like that. In the absence of any meaningful supporting detail, the rebranding will be ineffectual and, in fact, counterproductive.
Even if the University like what they see in the business plan, we cannot afford to win the battle of University support and then lose the war of marketability.
I am sorry again if I sound like I'm being unnecessarily nasty. I am not a current postgrad so I have tried to keep a dignified distance for the most part, only chipping in on a few specifics. Now seemed the time, with an actual document to critique, to check in again and see what's what. I have to say that I am disappointed. This may not be due to lack of hard work on anyone's part, but it is the results of that hard work on which any proposals will be judged.
If this were Dragon's Den, I would be out. If the University buy it, well done. But you will need much more detail before the business is viable. I think you are in grave danger of turning away your existing membership base without anything to entice new members in.
Re "Centre for Academic Collaboration", I perhaps should have spoken against this earlier; it never occurred to me that this working motto could possibly survive scrutiny for marketing purposes. I just don't see it flying. People effectively want a "Senior Common Room, Cafe-Bar and Events Venue" or words to that effect.
It occurs to me that there is a fatal flaw in going all-out for the "academic collaboration" thing: you may attract people for specific seminars but end up having to turn them away when they balk at the membership fee. And you cannot justify charging a membership fee for access to academic and pastoral services. The bar and catering has to be key. The business plan has to understand that; the University has to be persuaded.
Alternatively, make membership free like a postgrad Students' Union. This could potentially save a lot of admin and would encourage on-spec custom. But it would be dependent upon a licence for at least double the current 60 customers.
For what it's worth, my strategy would be to work up two alternative models: the "common room" (much like the old club, but more business-savvy) membership model and the Postgrad Students' Union (feeless) model. Trying to fudge it seems a recipe for failure.
Yours, concerned,
Chris
The explanation for the formatting doesn't address the appalling punctuation, I note.
I still think that the complete omission of goodwill is a mistake. It forms a vital part of any business dynamic. And it DOES make a huge difference if you have a pre-existing customer base who are almost guaranteed to turn up to give the new venture a try. (Given that 2009-2010 members were issued with key cards, access to membership records, while preferable, may not be necessary to recognising those to whom the club is in moral if not technical debt.)
If you believe that the University will require a more "academic" remit for the Club, may I suggest that this should actually make it into the business plan in a more developed form? It's not going to happen spontaneously. If you market something as if it were an academic department but don't offer any academic product, you will likely be disappointed in levels of uptake. It seems like the worst sort of window dressing. It is hollow. An example of how the remit may be achieved is required: weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, actively targeting student societies with ideas for hosting joint events, or something like that. In the absence of any meaningful supporting detail, the rebranding will be ineffectual and, in fact, counterproductive.
Even if the University like what they see in the business plan, we cannot afford to win the battle of University support and then lose the war of marketability.
I am sorry again if I sound like I'm being unnecessarily nasty. I am not a current postgrad so I have tried to keep a dignified distance for the most part, only chipping in on a few specifics. Now seemed the time, with an actual document to critique, to check in again and see what's what. I have to say that I am disappointed. This may not be due to lack of hard work on anyone's part, but it is the results of that hard work on which any proposals will be judged.
If this were Dragon's Den, I would be out. If the University buy it, well done. But you will need much more detail before the business is viable. I think you are in grave danger of turning away your existing membership base without anything to entice new members in.
Re "Centre for Academic Collaboration", I perhaps should have spoken against this earlier; it never occurred to me that this working motto could possibly survive scrutiny for marketing purposes. I just don't see it flying. People effectively want a "Senior Common Room, Cafe-Bar and Events Venue" or words to that effect.
It occurs to me that there is a fatal flaw in going all-out for the "academic collaboration" thing: you may attract people for specific seminars but end up having to turn them away when they balk at the membership fee. And you cannot justify charging a membership fee for access to academic and pastoral services. The bar and catering has to be key. The business plan has to understand that; the University has to be persuaded.
Alternatively, make membership free like a postgrad Students' Union. This could potentially save a lot of admin and would encourage on-spec custom. But it would be dependent upon a licence for at least double the current 60 customers.
For what it's worth, my strategy would be to work up two alternative models: the "common room" (much like the old club, but more business-savvy) membership model and the Postgrad Students' Union (feeless) model. Trying to fudge it seems a recipe for failure.
Yours, concerned,
Chris
On 17 May 2010 13:27, Seumas Bates <seumas...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah, it seems Tom has beaten me to the chase with a response. Such is
the nature of internet forums I suppose.
> > On 17 May 2010 08:03, Tom Coles <tomco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> This file is now available at:
>
> >> hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com<hetheringtonclub-gene ral%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >> .
> >> > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> >> groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
> >> To post to this group, send an email to
> >> hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com<hetheringtonclub-gene ral%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
> > To post to this group, send an email to
> > hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com<hetheringtonclub-gene ral%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General ...
>
> read more »
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
To post to this group, send an email to hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
Thomas Coles
May 17, 2010, 10:24:29 AM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
1. Re: the punctuation, do you have any examples? I agree there are some slips (after all, it was a draft. We expected a final editing process, though events have overtaken us)
2. "For what it's worth, my strategy would be to work up two alternative models: the "common room" (much like the old club, but more business-savvy) membership model and the Postgrad Students' Union (feeless) model. Trying to fudge it seems a recipe for failure."
The University doesn't want that and wouldn't allow it: in the two cases you have described the only differentiation between the HRC and the other unions (and other bars) is in the fact that it excludes Undergraduates. It is a negative definition rather than a positive definition.
The bar and catering are key to the Club-as-Business, and we have ascertained that we can make this aspect of the HRC profitable simply by following industry standards and paying attention to costs. People may WANT a "Senior Common Room, Cafe-Bar and Events Venue" but unfortunately one of our jobs has been to disabuse people of that possibility. Unless it is as part of a more academically progressive "value added" 'Club-as-Club' etc institution that is attractive to the University. The Financial Officers are not going to subsidize a student-led initiative just because students want it, not in the current political climate. We WILL be a catering operation, but we will be more
3. "And you cannot justify charging a membership fee for access to academic and pastoral services." We would not exclude people from these services: we would aim to campaign on behalf of all post-grads for better university support. The Postgrad position on the SRC has been empty for years, for example: we would campaign to fill it. We would be a natural central point of support for the whole range of activities that PGs and Researchers are involved in.
3. Obviously if we were inviting people in for seminars they would have temporary membership. We would expect them to sign up if they are eligible and continue to use the facilities.
4. Please not that we have only posted the Exec summary to the boards, I'm sorry this wasn't made clear. Because we have used information provided from external sources (that we do not have permission to redistribute) we have not included the appendices provided by each subcommittee. Events, Publicity and Marketing eventually ran to 22 pages and included "weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, actively targeting student societies with ideas for hosting joint events,". You can see a (much) earlier (and incomplete) drafting document at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ARkxf__hUKBdZGR6bXE5ejhfMTlkcmdrcXRmNQ&hl=en. I'll see what I can do about providing you with a copy of the final draft.
Though the Exec Summary was 18 pages, the entire document ran to around 70 pages, including detailed menu development, product costings, timetables of social activities and so on.
5. "Centre for Academic Collaboration": this is of course not unalterable, however we would have to come up with an alternative that embodied the range of activities ("weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, etc", and GTA Survival Groups, editing workshops, conference development, internal conferences, networking events etc) that we would offer and encourage. I don't think "Senior Common Room etc" embodies this. I agree there might be better choices.
6. The fee is a minor revenue stream, but important (it also stops people from losing their card/keys). It is a minor investment, but a psychological investment. Also, surely encouraging 'on-spec' custom directly contradicts the central requirement of membership for a space that they feel they own?
Tom
2. "For what it's worth, my strategy would be to work up two alternative models: the "common room" (much like the old club, but more business-savvy) membership model and the Postgrad Students' Union (feeless) model. Trying to fudge it seems a recipe for failure."
The University doesn't want that and wouldn't allow it: in the two cases you have described the only differentiation between the HRC and the other unions (and other bars) is in the fact that it excludes Undergraduates. It is a negative definition rather than a positive definition.
The bar and catering are key to the Club-as-Business, and we have ascertained that we can make this aspect of the HRC profitable simply by following industry standards and paying attention to costs. People may WANT a "Senior Common Room, Cafe-Bar and Events Venue" but unfortunately one of our jobs has been to disabuse people of that possibility. Unless it is as part of a more academically progressive "value added" 'Club-as-Club' etc institution that is attractive to the University. The Financial Officers are not going to subsidize a student-led initiative just because students want it, not in the current political climate. We WILL be a catering operation, but we will be more
3. "And you cannot justify charging a membership fee for access to academic and pastoral services." We would not exclude people from these services: we would aim to campaign on behalf of all post-grads for better university support. The Postgrad position on the SRC has been empty for years, for example: we would campaign to fill it. We would be a natural central point of support for the whole range of activities that PGs and Researchers are involved in.
3. Obviously if we were inviting people in for seminars they would have temporary membership. We would expect them to sign up if they are eligible and continue to use the facilities.
4. Please not that we have only posted the Exec summary to the boards, I'm sorry this wasn't made clear. Because we have used information provided from external sources (that we do not have permission to redistribute) we have not included the appendices provided by each subcommittee. Events, Publicity and Marketing eventually ran to 22 pages and included "weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, actively targeting student societies with ideas for hosting joint events,". You can see a (much) earlier (and incomplete) drafting document at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ARkxf__hUKBdZGR6bXE5ejhfMTlkcmdrcXRmNQ&hl=en. I'll see what I can do about providing you with a copy of the final draft.
Though the Exec Summary was 18 pages, the entire document ran to around 70 pages, including detailed menu development, product costings, timetables of social activities and so on.
5. "Centre for Academic Collaboration": this is of course not unalterable, however we would have to come up with an alternative that embodied the range of activities ("weekly interdisciplinary seminar, monthly policy debate, etc", and GTA Survival Groups, editing workshops, conference development, internal conferences, networking events etc) that we would offer and encourage. I don't think "Senior Common Room etc" embodies this. I agree there might be better choices.
6. The fee is a minor revenue stream, but important (it also stops people from losing their card/keys). It is a minor investment, but a psychological investment. Also, surely encouraging 'on-spec' custom directly contradicts the central requirement of membership for a space that they feel they own?
Tom
Chris Young
May 17, 2010, 11:55:31 AM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
1. The Capitalisation throughout is very Random. And there are at least two; Incorrect semicolons;
It being a pdf (why this format?), it is difficult to provide you with a corrected proof.
2. Whatever range of services you offer, it makes sense to market what will sell best and get most immediate footfall. By all means sell the support services to the University, but to be commercially viable, you have to get the punters in. Or the business will fail. This is not just cosmetic. Get the marketing wrong and nobody will join.
3. How are you going to police non-members coming in to use the academic/support facilities and then staying on for a drink? Either you tell them their booze money is not welcome or you give them no incentive to join. It would be in danger of being even more haphazard than the unpoliced signing in of old.
4. I look forward to seeing more detail. You will appreciate the difficulty of well-wishing onlookers not wishing to take over but wanting to help make things work. The Executive Summary seems unnecessarily vague, even allowing for the omission of confidential figures.
5. I think an appropriate strapline is important. Unless you can sell the Club, you won't be able to sell the Club. Whatever the University requires in terms of remit, it needs to be marketed positively. This must take priority or all your hard work will come, financially, to nothing. At the moment, I just can't get excited; more than that, I am actively turned off. Yet you should be appealing to me as part of your second-tier membership. I want to come in to an environment where I can bump into people with the chance of intelligent banter, somewhere I can read and/or write, with or without laptop, where I don't need to take out a mortgage for a meal. That's what I paid my subs for; that's what might entice me back. I don't mind at all the better outreach for student services and support and greater use for academic jamming sessions, but if you ram "academic collaboration" down my throat, I'm unlikely to feel any ownership, let alone any sense of refuge in which the support services would most likely be taken up. The Club needs to be seen as a desirable place to escape to, a safe house with food, drink, company and support services. May I suggest some urgent ideas-jamming around the concept of an "academic safe house" - not necessarily those words, but something along those lines.
6. In practice, membership in the last 6 years was rarely policed. Many people got away without being members; without their custom, maybe the Club would have folded earlier. I suggested free membership (for PG/mature students) as an alternative model, which does offer some benefits, not least in admin and staffing, but also in toe-in-the-water custom. Many people don't even discover the Club until November, by which time their opportunity to try it out for free has passed. It's either pay up for a pig in a poke (for an organisation with a poor record of staying open) or not bother. Most choose the latter. If you add to this scenario the awkwardness of providing seminar and support access to certain non-members, you have one hell of a cumbersome admissions policy. If membership conveyed some other tangible benefits (like snapfax-style discounts, or something similar) and/or was lowered to, say, £5, then there might be more incentive to join. It would not take much in the way of additional custom to pay for reduction or even abolition of membership fees for PG/mature students. The club needs to run at closer to capacity to be viable, but this can be done sensitively (remembering previous discussion of different areas of the building). Every first visit is "on spec".
Chris
It being a pdf (why this format?), it is difficult to provide you with a corrected proof.
2. Whatever range of services you offer, it makes sense to market what will sell best and get most immediate footfall. By all means sell the support services to the University, but to be commercially viable, you have to get the punters in. Or the business will fail. This is not just cosmetic. Get the marketing wrong and nobody will join.
3. How are you going to police non-members coming in to use the academic/support facilities and then staying on for a drink? Either you tell them their booze money is not welcome or you give them no incentive to join. It would be in danger of being even more haphazard than the unpoliced signing in of old.
4. I look forward to seeing more detail. You will appreciate the difficulty of well-wishing onlookers not wishing to take over but wanting to help make things work. The Executive Summary seems unnecessarily vague, even allowing for the omission of confidential figures.
5. I think an appropriate strapline is important. Unless you can sell the Club, you won't be able to sell the Club. Whatever the University requires in terms of remit, it needs to be marketed positively. This must take priority or all your hard work will come, financially, to nothing. At the moment, I just can't get excited; more than that, I am actively turned off. Yet you should be appealing to me as part of your second-tier membership. I want to come in to an environment where I can bump into people with the chance of intelligent banter, somewhere I can read and/or write, with or without laptop, where I don't need to take out a mortgage for a meal. That's what I paid my subs for; that's what might entice me back. I don't mind at all the better outreach for student services and support and greater use for academic jamming sessions, but if you ram "academic collaboration" down my throat, I'm unlikely to feel any ownership, let alone any sense of refuge in which the support services would most likely be taken up. The Club needs to be seen as a desirable place to escape to, a safe house with food, drink, company and support services. May I suggest some urgent ideas-jamming around the concept of an "academic safe house" - not necessarily those words, but something along those lines.
6. In practice, membership in the last 6 years was rarely policed. Many people got away without being members; without their custom, maybe the Club would have folded earlier. I suggested free membership (for PG/mature students) as an alternative model, which does offer some benefits, not least in admin and staffing, but also in toe-in-the-water custom. Many people don't even discover the Club until November, by which time their opportunity to try it out for free has passed. It's either pay up for a pig in a poke (for an organisation with a poor record of staying open) or not bother. Most choose the latter. If you add to this scenario the awkwardness of providing seminar and support access to certain non-members, you have one hell of a cumbersome admissions policy. If membership conveyed some other tangible benefits (like snapfax-style discounts, or something similar) and/or was lowered to, say, £5, then there might be more incentive to join. It would not take much in the way of additional custom to pay for reduction or even abolition of membership fees for PG/mature students. The club needs to run at closer to capacity to be viable, but this can be done sensitively (remembering previous discussion of different areas of the building). Every first visit is "on spec".
Chris
David Russell
May 17, 2010, 5:32:19 PM5/17/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Rebuilding the club as a 'Centre for Academic Collaboration' is a good
idea, but this is a functional description rather than a motto. If the
new club is to have a motto at all then it needs to be a motto - the
idea mentioned above of using Latin is perhaps one to consider. But I
don't think that the motto is likely to be a key factor in the
University's decision as to whether the club starts again, and nor is
it something that will be at all difficult to change if indeed the
club is to be restarted.
Perhaps a new thread could be started on here with motto suggestions?
Something to reflect the dual nature of the club (as both a place to
relax and a place to discuss academics) but not a plain descriptive.
On the more general topic, I think there are some issues with the
proposal (while it's true that a pure 'social' space competes with the
unions, a mixed social/work space competes with the brand new Level 3
Annexe in the library). However the simple fact is that without this
proposal there would be no club at all - a possibly imperfect revival
is better than no revival at all, and if approved it will give the
wider student body (as opposed to this group, which is something of an
echo chamber) the chance to pass verdict.
David Russell
PS: On the point of the PDF conversion, I would suggest either PDF
Creator (which works as a 'virtual printer' and thus exactly
duplicates how the document would look on paper) or OpenOffice, both
of which I have used for years without trouble. Both are free and
OpenOffice is on the university CSCE machines.
idea, but this is a functional description rather than a motto. If the
new club is to have a motto at all then it needs to be a motto - the
idea mentioned above of using Latin is perhaps one to consider. But I
don't think that the motto is likely to be a key factor in the
University's decision as to whether the club starts again, and nor is
it something that will be at all difficult to change if indeed the
club is to be restarted.
Perhaps a new thread could be started on here with motto suggestions?
Something to reflect the dual nature of the club (as both a place to
relax and a place to discuss academics) but not a plain descriptive.
On the more general topic, I think there are some issues with the
proposal (while it's true that a pure 'social' space competes with the
unions, a mixed social/work space competes with the brand new Level 3
Annexe in the library). However the simple fact is that without this
proposal there would be no club at all - a possibly imperfect revival
is better than no revival at all, and if approved it will give the
wider student body (as opposed to this group, which is something of an
echo chamber) the chance to pass verdict.
David Russell
PS: On the point of the PDF conversion, I would suggest either PDF
Creator (which works as a 'virtual printer' and thus exactly
duplicates how the document would look on paper) or OpenOffice, both
of which I have used for years without trouble. Both are free and
OpenOffice is on the university CSCE machines.
Thomas Coles
May 17, 2010, 8:24:08 PM5/17/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
(I have uploaded the Events, Publicity and Marketing Appendix: http://hetheringtonclub-general.googlegroups.com/web/BusinessPlanEventsPublicityMarketingv1.1.pdf)
Hi David,
I disagree with a Latin motto on principle: in that it is needlessly obscure and does not reflect the ethos of most students these days. Unless we believe that everyone should learn Latin, then why use it as a key descriptive item? English is good enough. As you say, the current choice/placeholder can be debated. For the moment it does the job. I do think it should be descriptive, rather than something like "the future: today!" "I'm research'n it" "come on in!" or anything like that. I'm willing to give up if something good enough comes along, but I haven't seen any suitable alternatives (yet).
I agree we are competing on many different levels: however the distinction is that we are a democratic organization (although participation has been an issue historically), I think that is a real gamechanger. A socio-academic institution ran by researchers? Yes please.
Re the echo chamber: only those who choose to step into the chamber get to be heard at all. Reaching/building a consensus of sorts (and there has been a lot of debate, all available here) was neccessary to produce anything in such a short time period.
Thanks for the input, please post any motto suggestions to the Events and Publicity thread: http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general/browse_thread/thread/92e249dedb83d1d0?hl=en-GB
Tom
p.s. re: PDFs, I was using Adobe Acrobat (which you would think would be half competent)
Hi David,
I disagree with a Latin motto on principle: in that it is needlessly obscure and does not reflect the ethos of most students these days. Unless we believe that everyone should learn Latin, then why use it as a key descriptive item? English is good enough. As you say, the current choice/placeholder can be debated. For the moment it does the job. I do think it should be descriptive, rather than something like "the future: today!" "I'm research'n it" "come on in!" or anything like that. I'm willing to give up if something good enough comes along, but I haven't seen any suitable alternatives (yet).
I agree we are competing on many different levels: however the distinction is that we are a democratic organization (although participation has been an issue historically), I think that is a real gamechanger. A socio-academic institution ran by researchers? Yes please.
Re the echo chamber: only those who choose to step into the chamber get to be heard at all. Reaching/building a consensus of sorts (and there has been a lot of debate, all available here) was neccessary to produce anything in such a short time period.
Thanks for the input, please post any motto suggestions to the Events and Publicity thread: http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general/browse_thread/thread/92e249dedb83d1d0?hl=en-GB
Tom
p.s. re: PDFs, I was using Adobe Acrobat (which you would think would be half competent)
Morag Hunter
May 17, 2010, 9:28:36 PM5/17/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Hi all
First thanks to Chris for his input. Well said, that man. Formatting
is one thing, poor punctuation is another. And poor it is. We should
not have to tell you where the mistakes are, any budding academic
should be able to spot them. CoM - please correct them. Your high
minded "motto" (which I also dislike very much) is not borne out by
the standard of English you are presenting on - oh, wait - OUR behalf.
Tom - why is Latin needlessly obscure? Are you aware that GU has a
Latin motto? Is it impossible for you to understand? If so, you must
be in the tiny minority of people who cannot Google. I actually don't
think, given the huge problems being faced, that the motto is
particularly important, but I do find your attitude odd.
I also struggle to see what you think is so different with your new
proposal. Lots of rhetoric, little content. Maybe everything is
explained in the full docoment (I've only read the 18 page summary),
but I cannot see how you are going to increase your profit margins and
return the profit you are predicting. It looks as if you are staying
with Northern Services, who never seemed to give a particularly good
deal; paying more for staff than the old overstaffed model (2
chefs???? - why?); charging less for food, having no block grant ...
so where is the extra profit coming from? As I can see nothing that
will generate more income on what you have shown.
Anyway, good luck for Friday. I'll have my fingers crossed for flying
pigs, snowflakes in hell, and your proposal being successful.
On 18 May, 01:24, Thomas Coles <tomco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (I have uploaded the Events, Publicity and Marketing Appendix:http://hetheringtonclub-general.googlegroups.com/web/BusinessPlanEven...
> )
> > hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com<hetheringtonclub-general%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
First thanks to Chris for his input. Well said, that man. Formatting
is one thing, poor punctuation is another. And poor it is. We should
not have to tell you where the mistakes are, any budding academic
should be able to spot them. CoM - please correct them. Your high
minded "motto" (which I also dislike very much) is not borne out by
the standard of English you are presenting on - oh, wait - OUR behalf.
Tom - why is Latin needlessly obscure? Are you aware that GU has a
Latin motto? Is it impossible for you to understand? If so, you must
be in the tiny minority of people who cannot Google. I actually don't
think, given the huge problems being faced, that the motto is
particularly important, but I do find your attitude odd.
I also struggle to see what you think is so different with your new
proposal. Lots of rhetoric, little content. Maybe everything is
explained in the full docoment (I've only read the 18 page summary),
but I cannot see how you are going to increase your profit margins and
return the profit you are predicting. It looks as if you are staying
with Northern Services, who never seemed to give a particularly good
deal; paying more for staff than the old overstaffed model (2
chefs???? - why?); charging less for food, having no block grant ...
so where is the extra profit coming from? As I can see nothing that
will generate more income on what you have shown.
Anyway, good luck for Friday. I'll have my fingers crossed for flying
pigs, snowflakes in hell, and your proposal being successful.
On 18 May, 01:24, Thomas Coles <tomco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (I have uploaded the Events, Publicity and Marketing Appendix:http://hetheringtonclub-general.googlegroups.com/web/BusinessPlanEven...
> )
>
> Hi David,
>
> I disagree with a Latin motto on principle: in that it is needlessly obscure
> and does not reflect the ethos of most students these days. Unless we
> believe that everyone should learn Latin, then why use it as a key
> descriptive item? English is good enough. As you say, the current
> choice/placeholder can be debated. For the moment it does the job. I do
> think it should be descriptive, rather than something like "the future:
> today!" "I'm research'n it" "come on in!" or anything like that. I'm willing
> to give up if something good enough comes along, but I haven't seen any
> suitable alternatives (yet).
>
> I agree we are competing on many different levels: however the distinction
> is that we are a democratic organization (although participation has been an
> issue historically), I think that is a real gamechanger. A socio-academic
> institution ran by researchers? Yes please.
>
> Re the echo chamber: only those who choose to step into the chamber get to
> be heard at all. Reaching/building a consensus of sorts (and there has been
> a lot of debate, all available here) was neccessary to produce anything in
> such a short time period.
>
> Thanks for the input, please post any motto suggestions to the Events and
> Publicity thread:http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general/browse_thread...
> Hi David,
>
> I disagree with a Latin motto on principle: in that it is needlessly obscure
> and does not reflect the ethos of most students these days. Unless we
> believe that everyone should learn Latin, then why use it as a key
> descriptive item? English is good enough. As you say, the current
> choice/placeholder can be debated. For the moment it does the job. I do
> think it should be descriptive, rather than something like "the future:
> today!" "I'm research'n it" "come on in!" or anything like that. I'm willing
> to give up if something good enough comes along, but I haven't seen any
> suitable alternatives (yet).
>
> I agree we are competing on many different levels: however the distinction
> is that we are a democratic organization (although participation has been an
> issue historically), I think that is a real gamechanger. A socio-academic
> institution ran by researchers? Yes please.
>
> Re the echo chamber: only those who choose to step into the chamber get to
> be heard at all. Reaching/building a consensus of sorts (and there has been
> a lot of debate, all available here) was neccessary to produce anything in
> such a short time period.
>
> Thanks for the input, please post any motto suggestions to the Events and
>
> Tom
>
> p.s. re: PDFs, I was using Adobe Acrobat (which you would think would be
> half competent)
>
> Tom
>
> p.s. re: PDFs, I was using Adobe Acrobat (which you would think would be
> half competent)
>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
> To post to this group, send an email to hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
> >http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general?hl=en-GB.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group" group.
> To post to this group, send an email to hetherington...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hetheringtonclub-g...@googlegroups.com.
Morag Hunter
May 17, 2010, 9:41:40 PM5/17/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
PS - your "business plan" says "circulated to members". I think many
members are not aware that this has been done. Can you please ensure
that this document is mailed to the membership list? It is being
presented on behalf of the HRC. ALL members, not just those that log
in here, should have a chance to comment on it. At the time of
posting, no member that I know has received a copy. Seumas has
already assured us that he has a membership list. You should be using
it to post minutes and documents such as this. It is bad management
not to do so.
members are not aware that this has been done. Can you please ensure
that this document is mailed to the membership list? It is being
presented on behalf of the HRC. ALL members, not just those that log
in here, should have a chance to comment on it. At the time of
posting, no member that I know has received a copy. Seumas has
already assured us that he has a membership list. You should be using
it to post minutes and documents such as this. It is bad management
not to do so.
Seumas Bates
May 18, 2010, 8:37:51 AM5/18/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Thanks guys, I think there's some really interesting debate coming out
of this discussion.
Morag, could you perhaps direct me to where I stated that we had a
full membership list? I'll have to correct that as we in fact have
nothing of the sort. The full membership list was apparently deleted a
few months prior to the Club's closure and the few e-mail addresses we
have since been able to accrue are a small minority of the Club's old
membership. At present there are clear messages here and on the
Facebook group.
I think the debate around 'to motto or not to motto' is really part of
the debate surrounding the continued re-banding of the Club. Just as
anyone trying out a new 'look' will make a few fashion faux pas so to
I am sure will we.
Actually David, I'm not sure the Club does really compete with the
Unions particularly. I sometimes go in there for lunch etc. but I
don't think it'd be my first port of call to socialize. Not any more
anyway! I think our main competitor is Ashton Lane / Byres Road and in
that sense we need to set ourselves apart somewhat in terms of what we
offer. I think the Academic and Welfare stuff is where that comes in.
But ultimately as you say, a slightly altered Club is better than no
Club at all.
Morag, clearly I disagree that the Business Plan is full of rhetoric
as opposed to content otherwise we would not have posted it here.
However, I'll address the points you make;
I'm not sure where your information on Northern Services comes from
but in actual fact they give us a far better deal than we could get
without them. In the recent past it seems the Club has been buying its
stock from the high street rather then through N.S. and thus getting a
terrible deal.
Our staff & management costs go down compared with previous years.
We need to make a distinction between a 'Chef' and a 'chef' as we are
certainly not looking to employ two Chefs to work in the kitchen. What
we are looking to do is ensure that there is always proper line
management, waste control, and adequate speed and quality in the
kitchen for the duration of the day. One has to remember that with
proper systems in place our % profit will increase dramatically.
We are not choosing to give up our block grant however we were asked
to produce the document with the assumption we would not get one.
of this discussion.
Morag, could you perhaps direct me to where I stated that we had a
full membership list? I'll have to correct that as we in fact have
nothing of the sort. The full membership list was apparently deleted a
few months prior to the Club's closure and the few e-mail addresses we
have since been able to accrue are a small minority of the Club's old
membership. At present there are clear messages here and on the
Facebook group.
I think the debate around 'to motto or not to motto' is really part of
the debate surrounding the continued re-banding of the Club. Just as
anyone trying out a new 'look' will make a few fashion faux pas so to
I am sure will we.
Actually David, I'm not sure the Club does really compete with the
Unions particularly. I sometimes go in there for lunch etc. but I
don't think it'd be my first port of call to socialize. Not any more
anyway! I think our main competitor is Ashton Lane / Byres Road and in
that sense we need to set ourselves apart somewhat in terms of what we
offer. I think the Academic and Welfare stuff is where that comes in.
But ultimately as you say, a slightly altered Club is better than no
Club at all.
Morag, clearly I disagree that the Business Plan is full of rhetoric
as opposed to content otherwise we would not have posted it here.
However, I'll address the points you make;
I'm not sure where your information on Northern Services comes from
but in actual fact they give us a far better deal than we could get
without them. In the recent past it seems the Club has been buying its
stock from the high street rather then through N.S. and thus getting a
terrible deal.
Our staff & management costs go down compared with previous years.
We need to make a distinction between a 'Chef' and a 'chef' as we are
certainly not looking to employ two Chefs to work in the kitchen. What
we are looking to do is ensure that there is always proper line
management, waste control, and adequate speed and quality in the
kitchen for the duration of the day. One has to remember that with
proper systems in place our % profit will increase dramatically.
We are not choosing to give up our block grant however we were asked
to produce the document with the assumption we would not get one.
Norman Gray
May 18, 2010, 9:20:56 AM5/18/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
Greetings.
On 2010 May 17, at 22:32, David Russell wrote:
> Rebuilding the club as a 'Centre for Academic Collaboration' is a good
> idea, but this is a functional description rather than a motto.
There were several possibilities canvassed, all of which managed to suggest the same thing more or less efficiently. One I particularly liked, which was if I recall correctly due to Sara T, was the phrase 'academic social networking': the Club is certainly a social space; 'networking' is the job of talking and persuading and interstitiallly creating which is our profession and our bread-and-butter as academics; 'social networking' is hep and kewl and all that; and prefixing it with 'academic' gives it an unexpectedly fusty spin. It's supposed to be suggestive rather than pinning us down to anything. All it really has to do is to make someone look twice.
A 'motto' I would vote down, myself.
> On the more general topic, I think there are some issues with the
> proposal
Oh yes; oh indeed. I think several of us had lists of edits to suggest, from typos to structure, on what was believed to be a near-final draft. For who knows what reason, it was the posted draft which ended up being distributed in the papers for the meeting. This seemed calamitous when we first heard about it, but on reflection it's probably not that big a deal. The Club will not be won or lost on the basis of a few typos or an inadequately snappy summary. The proposal is specific where it has to be specific -- money, margins, and market -- and vague where it cannot predict the future -- how a to-be-appointed manager will police the door, and how the committee can best propagate experience in the next couple of years.
All the best,
Norman
--
Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
Norman Gray
May 18, 2010, 9:38:50 AM5/18/10
to hetherington...@googlegroups.com
Greetings.
On 2010 May 18, at 02:41, Morag Hunter wrote:
> PS - your "business plan" says "circulated to members". I think many
> members are not aware that this has been done.
There isn't a membership list as such. There's a list of email addresses collected on paper after one of the early meetings, and a three-or-four year old Yahoo list. I think we can reasonably take it that this current hetheringtonclub-general list contains everyone who might reasonably be troubled to read the document. I think we can take this to have been 'gazetted', no?
* The various files are at http://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general
* The business plan specifically is at http://bit.ly/dkBylS
Disseminate broadly, everyone!
> should have a chance to comment on it.
Sarah
May 19, 2010, 10:29:25 AM5/19/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Hi Seumas, et al
Just to say thanks to all of you for all the time and effort that you
have put into this. I'm disseminating it broadly!
Sarah
On 18 May, 14:38, Norman Gray <nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk> wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> On 2010 May 18, at 02:41, Morag Hunter wrote:
>
> > PS - your "business plan" says "circulated to members". I think many
> > members are not aware that this has been done.
>
> Then tweet it and blog it, and mail it to everyone you think might be interested. I take it someone has mentioned the document on the Facebook page.
>
> There isn't a membership list as such. There's a list of email addresses collected on paper after one of the early meetings, and a three-or-four year old Yahoo list. I think we can reasonably take it that this current hetheringtonclub-general list contains everyone who might reasonably be troubled to read the document. I think we can take this to have been 'gazetted', no?
>
> * The various files are athttp://groups.google.com/group/hetheringtonclub-general
> * The business plan specifically is athttp://bit.ly/dkBylS
Just to say thanks to all of you for all the time and effort that you
have put into this. I'm disseminating it broadly!
Sarah
On 18 May, 14:38, Norman Gray <nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk> wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> On 2010 May 18, at 02:41, Morag Hunter wrote:
>
> > PS - your "business plan" says "circulated to members". I think many
> > members are not aware that this has been done.
>
> Then tweet it and blog it, and mail it to everyone you think might be interested. I take it someone has mentioned the document on the Facebook page.
>
> There isn't a membership list as such. There's a list of email addresses collected on paper after one of the early meetings, and a three-or-four year old Yahoo list. I think we can reasonably take it that this current hetheringtonclub-general list contains everyone who might reasonably be troubled to read the document. I think we can take this to have been 'gazetted', no?
>
> * The business plan specifically is athttp://bit.ly/dkBylS
Seumas Bates
May 19, 2010, 11:05:59 AM5/19/10
to Hetherington Research Club - General Discussion Group
Thanks Sarah, and thanks for spreading the word about it. The more
folk who read it the better.
folk who read it the better.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages