SVR General Discussion

On another matter, congratulations on your appointment!

 

I don't think we're disagreeing - just in case that was a direct response to my post that you quoted! It can't work in every case (45110), it does in some (4930) - but the point is that if you don't actually try at all then you can't rely on someone else to do it for you.

 

As someone who was around as a member when 45110 arrived at the Valley I can understand why there is so much sadness at its departure but it should be looked at as a positive move. I don’t think it’s gone to Carnforth to be dumped at the back of the shed and in the future it will acquire a much larger following as a mainline runner again. More important for the focus of any support group raising money for putting a loco back in service is 46443. Along with 3205 it worked the opening day trains on the Valley, it was always known as the people’s engine and could be a rallying point for a revived SVR.
It’s good to see the SVR gradually getting back to the railway it should be. I just hope when they appoint a new permanent CEO they chose carefully and find someone with the business experience needed but who also has an interest in railways.

 

I wouldn't be that prescriptive - just someone who can demonstrate their ability to work with and motivate volunteers and supporters, and show that they "get" the SVR.

 

I think you wil, find that the two go hand in hand.

 

Generally, yes. But they aren't the same, and it's possible to have someone with the interest who can't motivate volunteers and supporters.

 

Much less likely. Generally speaking what I call the men in suits haven’t been very successful in the heritage railway sector.

 

I'm not arguing with that - just observing that the open question leaves more scope to get the right person than a very focused one.

 

My experience suggests that the ability to listen and to empathise with volunteers is the key skill. I think an enthusiasm for railways per se is a nice to have. A strong appreciation (or a structured training course) in the complexity of heritage railway operations is important.

One thing though that is different with railways and needs to be understood by any CEO/GM AND their boards, is that the degree of commitment by volunteers is far greater than most volunteer situations. It takes roughly 10yrs to create a driver for example. The volunteer is very committed if they stick that out. They are also very valuable and represent an enormous investment. They need to be looked after, which means doing what you can to not p**** them off. Leadership and persuasion with empathy!

 

A timely reminder to all about 'SVR 46443 Fund developments' https://www.svrlive.com/bljul23

I suspect it's all moot as by 2028 it might have around 9 locos in ticket - 4150, 4930, 5164, 7802, 7812, 13268, 34027, 75069 and 82045. There's little prospect of SVR(H) funding much/anything in the short term beyond what's in works now and any contribution it's committed to on 5164.

A weakness in the model of relying on independent loco owning groups is the diffused fundraising efforts - 48773, 46443, 4566, 2857, 5164 and others have appeals and are mostly chasing the same pot. The Friends of 4930 HH, adopted by the Charitable Trust. cut through that as it had SVR support for a SVR(H) owned engine. I think the only ones that would fit that status would be Holdings-owned 600 0r Charitable Trust-owned 7819. IMO it would be impolitic of the Railway to rally around 46443 or another engine, as whatever selection criteria you used it would prompt myriad calls from dissatisfied other groups. 'Why them? We've more volunteer support? We've raised more cash? We've been out of ticket longer? You promised us we were next? When will we be?' etc

 

I’m not so sure they are all chasing the same money. I became a founder and Covenanter of the P2 because I wanted to see a P2 on the mainline. If the project didn’t exist the money would not have gone anywhere else. It’s a matter of appealing to people who would have an affinity ti the project.

 

The question is though, how many are uniquely attracted to that locomotive, rather than transferring between one railway linked appeal and another? None of the locos listed in this thread have the uniqueness and charisma of the P2; I suspect that running a standalone appeal would draw some genuinely new money but that most would go from general donations to that specific appeal.

 

I had self-edited from 'the same pot' to 'mostly' with that in mind

 

Is the current MD not now permanent as I've noticed Jonathan Dunster is no longer referred to as the interim MD?

 

{Dons newsletter co-editor's hat}

Nothing's been said, and from my side I've drifted into writing it like that. Point taken though

{/editor}

 

I believe someone has wanted to do the same with 600 but the previous GM shut them down…
From a recent conversation with them they seem to be willing to try again with the current GM.
And it makes me wonder.

 

From a 2857 point of view we have no current appeal launched. We are actively fundraising but there is no appeal and we are not chasing any pot. We have made decisions, which our members were informed of at our AGM, but currently we are not actively going out there with an appeal. We are happy to sell our merchandise, etc and raise funds but we are not appealing currently.

 

And honestly what good would 600 be?

It’s huge. Almost a 2nd Taw Valley if you like. The amount of coal it would take just to get the thing in steam is uneconomical currently. And the cost of an overhaul would need more than a friends group. You’d need huge, huge sums of cash.