West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I take this statement is from WSR.org. Nothing on the WSR official web site.


I wonder why.

 

Grateful thanks to Jonathan for posting this letter which confirms, as many suspected that the "problems" lay in the administrative side of the WSR and can be fixed with minimum delay subject to a short closure at the beginning of 2019. I hope his honesty is rewarded with the solid foundations he now seeks to create and that the support shown on this forum is not allowed to lapse by further seeds of doubt from some posters.

I wish the WSR well in its efforts.

 

I shouldn't read much into that yet, quite likely that Steve is just a bit quicker off he mark. I wouldn't be getting my big wooden spoon out until this time tomorrow on that front!

 

I am assured it will appear on the official website - do remember the Plc staff have homes to go to...

Steve
(layabout pensioner)

 

Great news, can’t wait see odney manor back in Dec.

 

This letter only came into my email in box at 16:44 and at 17:24 West Somerset Wizard was still waiting for the green light to put it on his site. (at 17:00 I phoned the railway up to see if I could put the letter on this site but at that stage it was a no) So not much time for them to put it up on their web site yet.

Also I think I have found a hopefully only a mistake in it and sent a amended copy back to the railway this evening.

 

I hope this puts and end to the negative comments, speculation and views of the last xxx pages and that people can help the WSR move forward in anyway they can.

I have now lets see how many else can .....

 

Whilst I cautiously welcome this it is very disappointing that it is not addressed to shareholders. I am bound to say that the ORR letter should be published, if necessary, with redactions. The WSR management still need to get some professional advice on PR.

 

I think you place too much importance on being a shareholder. Sorry to say, but it doesn't make you that special. Why should it specifically be addressed to shareholders? I always tread carefully here, because I am extremely grateful to the people who donate in some cases significant sums of money to allow our railways to develop. But it is to all intents and purposes a donation. The letter is addressed to staff, volunteers and supporters. Shareholders do not get anything out of their shareholdings except the feel good factor of supporting their railway, so therefore they are all supporters. What exactly is the Plc's current PR problem? I'd say it isn't the Plc that has an image problem, but the whole of the railway. That's down to it's seemingly ingrained attitude (supported by its structure IMHO) to not work together properly. A PR firm wont solve that, but organisations on the railway working much closer together than before just might.

The first JJP letter suggested we'd see the ORR letter before we heard anything else from him, have I missed something?

 

I have probably missed it among the pages of what Boris would call piffle, but I was not aware that the ORR had in fact written a letter as such. Sure there has been discussion between the WSR and the ORR but who says it has resulted in any form of publishable letter. The ORR talks to railways big and small all the time but only on the WSR do some consider this to be of major significance. I'm sure the WSR has been talking to them for years and it is only natural that they would discuss the current planned improvements with them - so what? It is part of everyday railway organisation and not particularly to heritage railway organisation either. I can't help feeling that this is a storm in a West Somerset teacup.

Just a personal opinion

Peter

 

Create a vacuum and something will fill it - like the speculation here on this thread. Untill we know what the deficiencies were no one can make any measured observation. If there truly are only bullet points it seems odd they canot be published so we may all learn from WSR experience an ask ourselves do we meet these standards

 

Remaining temporarily 'off topic' (and now there is a good reason for being 'on topic, with the Chairman's letter!), Safeguarding is for all, so safeguarding those undertaking home is very as much a core part of it, as well as safeguarding those 'using' and organisation's 'services'.

Steven

 

What I feel has emerged as the biggest drawback of the 'PLC' funding model is that a purchase of shares is a 'one-off' contribution, although certain benefits continue to flow to the shareholder from it. Maintaining shareholder contact details can be a nightmare, specifically because there is not the same incentive for regular contact from either side as a membership that renewals (with on-going payments!) usually annually ('3 year discount' schemes can be great cash generators).

Hence, there isn't perhaps in many cases the same on-going relationship, and raising further funds generally involves specific projects and considerable cost in legal expenses. Launching Appeals is much simpler and cheaper.

I would tend to agree however that a letter addressed to 'supporters' should be seen as including past purchasers of shares in that category.

Steven

 

Given the acknowledged financial pressure that the PLC is under, have you any idea how much sending an individual letter to thousands and thousands of shareholders would cost? And what exactly would you want it to say that is not already covered in the letter from the Chairman already widely disseminated?

That letter itself seemed to strike the right balance between reassurance and challenge to the wider group of WSR stakeholders, including all of paid staff, volunteers, donors, shareholders and visitors.

Tom

 

I am grateful to JJP for publishing the latest statement, and I am pleased to see Mark Smith back on the plc board. I am, however, slightly confused by one part of the statement. In several places, it refers to the railway being closed for three months, whilst other places refer to closure from the New Year to the end of April, which is four months. Is anyone in a position to clarify this?

Thanks, DaveB

 

I have corrected the mistake in the letter after getting a conformation there was a mistake this morning, as the closure was to the end of March and not April as stated in the letters sent out.

 

Thanks for the initial error "spot" and for then getting confirmation, @GWR Man I have amended the online PDF.

Steve

 

It is the shareholders who have the powers to vote at AGMs including voting for directors. This shareholder is totally fed up with the secrecy and shenanigans of the board and will take some persuading to vote most of directors back.

 

One thing that is usually learned in the early days of working life is to keep supporters and friends on your side. It makes life easier.

One thing the latest PLC letter tried to combat was the interpretations - particularly from the local press - that the current situation the WSR find themselves in is a safety issue. That, I am sure, was seen as damaging to the line especially for local readers who are potential passengers.
Sadly the WSR does make the local press pages far too often for not the best reasons. I doubt most non enthusiast passengers make a distinction between the PLC, WSRA et al. To them it is just the railway.

 

The key point here



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk