North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

This event seems tto me to be a product of confused and poor thinking. If it is a result of trying to cut the cost of a two train service there are other, cheaper options possible - use the O4 shunter with 2 x Mk1 opens (no hire or transport charges) and a better experience for non-enthusiasts in the trailer car, plus the possibility of a catering trolley and usable toilets; if .on the other hand, there is the intention of attracting an enthusiast market, then a little more effort to give the event an NER feel by the use of the J27 or No. 29 on the steam service could and should have been advertised.

 

I’ve often thought that the people we wish to attract are on a journey that can roughly be described as Visit —> Join —> Donate —> Volunteer.

Each step along that journey represents a greater commitment (whether you measure that in cash, time, or just emotional investment). But each step is progressively more valuable. So if I have visited - yes, I can be enticed to visit again, but how do you translate the visitor into a member? Or the member into a donor? Or the donor into a volunteer?

Each step delivers more value to the organisation. It feels like the NYMR is bound up in the “visit” part of the journey, and are seeing no value in the “join” part. But if you devalue members, where do your future donors and volunteers come from?

Tom

 

The O4 wouldn’t be able to heat the Mk1 opens, not very attractive to anyone in February.

 

In issue 2 of the poor sakes brochure was a letter saying that the writer wasn’t too impressed with issue 1 ..but thought issue 2 much improved …written and published in issue 2 …!

How do the 60007 services escape the gift aid repeat visit rules ,when 46100 services didn’t ?

My gold card says valid on all NYMR services but cannot find the PLM category on the website booking system ..not that I have any intention visiting that week .

 

If everyone else in the NYMR hierarchy has the same mindset as Lineisclear, members and volunteers are seen as an ongoing cost. We have earlier been told that there is a cost to servicing members and elsewhere on another forum that volunteers cost the railway money in such things as training, management and PPE. It is about time this mindset was turned on its head and we start to be told that every member brings in funding and every volunteer saves employing people to do a job and thus money, however small that job is. They both have a positive impact on that all important bottom line but it seems that those in charge know the cost of everything and the value of nothing, to quote a well-known saying.

 

This thread has previously discussed how the Gift Aid rules work, and why 60007's services are able to be excluded. It is a perfectly correct means of addressing the issue that repeat visits for an "ordinary" price undermine the economics of a "special" day.

I should imagine that the same applies to PLM members on special workings - and while I disagree with much @Lineisclear's view on the value of members, a comment like that does tend to make me think that there may be a point.

 

Perhaps the journey is simpler than that Tom ? Visitors and passengers can be seen as "supporters" whether or not they become members or volunteers particularly when the purchase of one Gift Aided ticket puts more in the railway's coffers than an adult member's annual subscription. Some railways have removed the requirement for volunteers to be members. Recent legislation on mandatory cooling off periods for membership might make that prudent. Surely all potantial supporters need to be encouraged? One of the sometimes missed advantages of pre-booking and Gift Aid is that it creates contact data for the ticket purchaser that can be used to encourage future support. Those contact details were once largely confined to members but there's a whole new world of potential support that such data can unlock.

 

True, I'd forgotten about that! How the )4 + Lucy to provide steam heat and a little extra oomph if needed? Probably still cheaper - and more interesting!

 

In purely financial terms, that might be true. But how does that relate to emotional investment, and sustaining that link over time? If I'm a customer, and I allow marketing, I'm saying "I might come again", but I still have limited commitment to where I've visited. That changes markedly if I sign up as a supporter of that organisation - that is a clear commitment and, where I've done so in the past, it's something that has tended to be self-reinforcing (my wife was very keen when we moved away from London to get me to relinquish my Friends of Covent Garden membership...)

Not least, I would not assume that a Gift Aid visitor is necessarily someone you can contact - the permissions and purposes for retaining someone's personal details in connection with the administration of a donation are not the same as a marketing permission.

Similarly, though I wouldn't favour it, if cooling off periods are a thing and it's not possible to recover discounts granted in the cooling off period, I could understand not granting concessions as an incentive.

 

I've no real clue about the workings of gift aid but aren't we talking about separate instances here? The first is that 60007 workings are not valid for use by people who have paid the annual fee and signed up for gift aid, but why cannot anyone who has turned up solely for these services and is paying separately to travel on them also sign up for gift aid if they are paying a separate fare?

 

A pure guess on my part but these trains are essentially limited to one week of operation so could not allow a full 12 months of use. As the fare is only £30 as well, that is a whole lot cheaper than the £49.50 currently charged for a gift aided ticket. It is a special event, like the Santas, and there is no alighting at intermediate stations. If the 10% higher ticket price was available as an option that would probably qualify for GA but not for multiple journeys.

 

I think the most important part of your post is loadings. I have no idea what there have been pre and post Covid but I know a visit to Yorkshire in February is not something I would be looking at, the weather is far too unpredictable.
What I have seen here in Swanage that post Covid the town is much quieter in the Feb halt term than pre Covid and from random observation to and from the town hence so do the trains.
My point being I guess that what may have worked in 2019, may no longer be at all relevant now.

 

That's part of the problem with cooling off periods. I haven't had the chance to study the legislation yet but my understanding is that it gives the right to canel during a fourteeen day period and would apply to renewals. If the membership is cancelled the fee has to be refunded (which is another administrative headache). Not only would concessions during the pre cancellation period be irrecoverable but if the condition of being a member in order to volunteer remains how would cancellation affect volunteer turns already rostered?

 

There's obvious truth in that but it ignores the generally accepted view that around five to seven part time volunteers are needed to generate the same output as one full time employee. That's five to seven times more people to train and manage. It's not an academic point. The new terrorism protection legislation is going to require that many volunteers will have to undergo mandatory terrorism response training every year. The HRA has pointed out that the compliance burden for organisations that depend on volunteers is likely to be much greater than for those relying on employees. Volunteers are not paid but they're not free labour!

 

I might be wrong but I don't think the NYMR has had a Feb half term timetable in recent years , although I think Royal Scot's visit last year was at half-term. Back when they did run in Feb I seem to recall it was one steam plus DMU Pickering- Grosmont . This year it's Goathland-Whitby due to engineering works.

Jon

 

Surely concessions would be conditional on continued membership, and benefits received could be deducted from a repayment? In just the same way, the member notifying their resignation (or exercise of cooling off rights) would cease to benefit from the privileges from the point at which that resignation became effective. The only challenge for the organisation would be to ensure that, where this happens, there is the ability to act quickly and maintain communications between membership and operations functions.

If the estimate of relative output is correct, it doesn't necessarily follow that the ratios then work as you suggest. Some of that can be dealt with effectively by good use of tools like HOPS, and by well planned video briefings. Other aspects may be trickier, but the key will remain to keep the level of training low key and to consider whether everyone needs to be trained in everything.

Again, it comes back to whether the glass is half full or half empty. Those volunteers are people willing to give up time and effort to an organisation, and frequently to pay for the privilege. That makes them a huge asset, and any discussion of costs (and I'm in not doubt that those costs are real) needs to be focused on how volunteers are enabled to do as much as possible, not represented as an unfortunate sign of how difficult it is to use volunteers.

 

There you go again with your 'volunteers cost money' attitude. Strangely enough, if I was in business and sold goods then I would have to buy them or the raw materials in to sell in the first place, typically, at 66% of the price I would sell them for. Adopting your philosophy, I would be begrudging a first principle of business in that you don't get anything for nothing. Even me, as a Yorkshireman, understands that.

 

The income shown excludes anything from life members who joined in previous years. Note 2.3 (p.35) states inter alia that "Life memberships are accounted for in the year of receipt. Three year memberships are deferred and allocated over the period of membership.". My sense from perusing the accounts of other entities is that life memberships are typically amortised over a period of probably at least 10 years but in this case it is effectively accounted for on a cash basis and these is nothing dripping into P&L after the date of payment. Perhaps statistically the annual take up of life memberships is consistent over time.

 

The NYMR gave up on running at February half term several years ago as it had a significant effect on the major civil engineering works traditionally done at this time of year, not to mention the likelihood of bad weather. However, it was brought back as a means of providing cash flow at a time when it was much needed.

 

Crikey, it is like wrestling jelly sometimes!

Yes, surely all potential supporters should be encouraged. Yes, it is at least feasible that someone may become a volunteer or donor without having first joined the organisation.

But when someone is a member, you know something very valuable about them, which is that they have made a step that is an emotional commitment. I visit many tourist attractions every year, but there are very few organisations that I am member of. So while potentially any member of the public might give you some money as a donation, the probability is far higher for someone who has already made that connection by being a member. Basic marketing would say if you have a certain ability to market, you should spend that effort where it is most likely to be successful. So your ability to convert people to donors or volunteers is surely so much greater for people who have already started along that emotional journey.

Whenever there is a suggestion here, you seem to introduce some problem why it can't happen. Now the objection is "mandatory cooling off periods". I wonder how any organisation survives given how many road blocks there are preventing things happening! Or is it that you simply don't see any value in members, volunteers or - surely it is only a matter of time - donors?

Tom