BMFA National Flying Centre

[Erfolg]

John

I am afraid we see things very differently, I dreamt of cycling becoming popular again in the UK, in the 80-90s..

Prior to the International successes of recent years, I watched the Big Mig, Platini, Jan Uhlrich, and the Zabels and OGrady in the head lines, but not registering with the UK public. The best I hoped for was David Millar was to arouse British interest.

The game changer started with Chris Boardman (hour record and time trialling) and Jason Quelly (1 km). People started to take interest

At this time I used to ride at the Manchester Velodrome, with my club sessions and at the open sessions. There was no problem getting time at the Velodrome in that period.

Back then I would also ride every weekend with my club, doing our Sunday Club rides, a collection of old men in their 50s. The small number of young talented riders, would go abroad to ride as semi professional riders, mainly in France.

The game changer really was success on the track, with the Chriss Hoys, Quenn Victoria a whole host of other notables and finally Sir Bradley.

Prior to these events my thoughts were that mountain biking perhaps would keep UK cycling alive.

From what I have been told, my old club now is dominated by young dedicated riders, all due to cycling success displayed on the TV and written about in newspapers. Not just Cycling Weekly as it once was, for the results of the classics and the 3 big tours.

Yet the real issue is, is there a game changer for the aero modelling world. I personally do not believe it is a NC. Just because I was able to cycle for many years at the Manchester Velodrome,and no body cared that the facility existed. the young in general public did not care less about cycling. Certainly not on the track, road or the great British standard of road "time Trialling".

So what is our potential game changer?

[cymaz]

Erfolg, Sky Sports presents inter club touch and go competition from an old air field in deepest Lincolnshire on a damp Sunday morning.

Just think of the viewer ratings !

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

I don't disagree with most of that Erf was it Graham Obree as well as Boardman and for me big Mig was the best ever. But Brailsford and his team have had a massive impact, the medals have come by the bucket full and 2 tour de France yellow jerseys.

John

[Erfolg]

John, there is a real irony here, in that I agree with you, yet we have managed to misunderstand each other.

I do believe that we both recognise that the NSC was just a brick in the underpinnings to the medal winning, which changed everything.

Just like you I have been reminiscing, in my case about road sprinters primarily. I used to watch Cipollini and think how great he was, and just accept that he would climb of his bike at the first railway bridge. The sigh, we will never have such a rider, here. Then along came Mark Cavendish, who not only could sprint better than every one, but actually could manage to get over mountains, towards the back, but still there, a rival potentially to the record of Eric Zabel, one of my heroes, the complete cyclists in both.

We also as aero modellers have another disadvantage, not only are we by and large old. We do not have the likes of Nichol Cook, Rebbeca Romero, Queen Vicky, Laura Trot and so on, winners, young and easy on the eye. Such positive role models for approx, half the population.

[MattyB]

Posted by Colin Leighfield on 04/05/2015 16:26:04:

If a decent professional management team with properly defined objectives takes this on, it will be very beneficial for model aircraft enthusiasts, whether geographically close or not. It should be ambitious and have targets which are designed to raise and improve the profile of what we do and create a strong income stream as well.

As far as I'm concerned those should be our expectations. I'm not concerned about how we got here, but I am very interested in seeing a really good business plan which will take this forward in all of our best interests and expect nothing less.

I entirely agree. However when I raised the point that the feasibility study should be independent, professionally authored and deliver a costed business plan via the BMFA Q&A site here's what was posted by Manny...

Q) Feasibility study budget – If this study is going to be exhaustive and deliver pragmatic, realistic financials it needs to be done by real impartial experts in major infrastructure projects. The budget for the study simply does not represent this - £2k for consultancy would be lucky to buy a day or two of any decent consultant’s time. That means the prep work is either being done by less expert resources or by existing BMFA staff that are deeply involved and will therefore have a bias for or against the project. Neither is ideal in terms of obtaining a pragmatic, impartial outcome.

A) There is no doubt that the budget allocated to the study is low in terms of commercial costings and professional fees, however , whilst I have acted as the overall co-ordinator for the study as it fits squarely fits within my role as Development Officer, we are in addition benefitting from significant input and commitment from volunteers who fall very much into the “professional” category. The team working on the study is relatively small but contains individuals with professional qualifications and relevant experience who have chosen to provide their services to the BMFA at no cost. The possibility of appointing an external consultant was discussed at the instigation of the study, however, this route was felt to be problematic due to the specialized nature of the subject matter (it was felt that a broad knowledge of model flying and the BMFA was a useful attribute) and as you refer the appointment of such consultants comes at a high price which was felt in this context to not represent value for money. Whilst it could be viewed that members of the team (myself included) are essentially in favour of a long term strategy involving the purchase of land and establishing a facility, the report to the Executive Committee and Full Council has to be based primarily on facts rather than opinions, in terms of the reporting there is, as they say “nowhere to hide” the final report "is what it is" and Council will reach a decision on how to proceed based on their view of the information provided.

Make of that what you will, but personally I believe the feasibility study will feature a heavy bias towards the centre irrelevent of the facts (the idea that "a broad knowledge of model flying and the BMFA" was needed and prevents the use of impartial external consultants is nonsense; this is just a major infrastructure project to which all the usual rules apply). I also believe it is highly unlikely to include robust financial modelling of the type needed for a project which is likely to cost 2-3x the total net financial value of the BMFA at this time.

 

Edited By MattyB on 05/05/2015 09:55:12

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Dizz on 04/05/2015 19:51:22:

Further to my 16:42 post on 2/5/15, the information pack was waiting on the mat when I got back to Torbay this afternoon: 13 pages and 8 appendix to read and inwardly digest. As I am down in the SW, achieving one of the site visit slots is going to be challenging

I hope you manage to get there Dizz, should make an interesting day

John

[Colin Leighfield]

I think it is extremely likely that we have members with the professional qualifications and experience to do a good job of this on a voluntary basis. Apart from the issue of high consultancy costs which could be problematical, there will be plenty of free advice around and I don't doubt that decent approaches to organisations like National Motorcycle Museum and National Space Centre would be productive.

Banks will anyway insist on seeing a viable business plan before offering any support and once a draft is available, it will need to be reviewed independently. This is about more than just buying a field to fly model planes in, that would be pretty pointless. I'm very interested to hear what the current proposals are saying.

[Erfolg]

When will the report become public, that is available for members to view?

The major and at the time multi-national company I worked for had all proposals submitted, to a project appraisal group. The proposal would be examined by a broad group of expertise. The bases of the proposal would be considered from , why bother at all, what alternatives exist etc, the financial viability of the project, technical issues would be considered and any development programmes, the programme would be examined, finally the financial expenditure profile would be reviewed. Various risk assessment programmes would be used throughout the process as appropriate.

The critique would only then be provided to the investment board as an aid prior to considering the proposal when the sponsor made their pitch.

The important aspect here is, the investment board were not experts in everything. The expertise was provided by independent to the proposal, advisers. The board then were well armed to critically examine the sponsors proposal.

Some may wonder why go to so much trouble, it was a consequence of many millions of pound being wasted, because some proposers had the ear and favour of some senior staff. The process saved many, many millions of pounds and thousands of man-hours, just wasted.

I agree with Matty, a business plan does not need to know about the BMFA beyond what its role is, nor any great in depth knowledge of model flying. It does however need to understand what characteristics a good business plan has and make sure they are included. Perhaps the best analysts of the plan is the BMFA membership collective knowledge, who can spot a King with no clothes.

Edited By Erfolg on 05/05/2015 14:08:11

[Martyn K]

BMFA have just posted a bulletin on this.

Here

Enjoy

[cymaz]

Cheers Martin.

It seems to me that the bmfa is galloping ahead with the possible purchase of Laws Farm.

What I don't see is that there is no mention of offer subject to the approval of outlying planning permission for model flying and it's associated activities.

This is not unheard of in negotiations. I hope they have thought of that?..if not

Bolting the stable door after the horse has gone methinks.

[ken anderson.]

 

 

Bolting the stable door after the horse has gone methinks.

 

 

I think this horse has reached the finishing post before the bets have been put on! .... its all looking like a formality now - regardless of what some members may say/ think....

 

ken Anderson...ne....1........its reached a conclusion dept.

 

Edited By ken anderson. on 05/05/2015 17:14:06

[Martyn K]

Well they can always graze some sheep if it goes pear shaped

M

[cymaz]

Damn expensive lamb!

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Cheers Martyn and Manny.

John

[Erfolg]

The Elephant in the room is the total lack of any financial information with respect to any purchase.

Then of course it does appear that a decision has been made, that the NFC is viable.

I am less than impressed.

Although I can see the wisdom in converting any money sat in low interest investment, accruing a tax liability, whilst inflation takes it toll, into an asset that in principal increase in value with time, except that Capital Gains Tax would be liable on resale?

[cymaz]

Posted by cymaz on 05/05/2015 17:10:00:

Cheers Martin.

It seems to me that the bmfa is galloping ahead with the possible purchase of Laws Farm.

What I don't see is that there is no mention of offer subject to the approval of outlying planning permission for model flying and it's associated activities.

This is not unheard of in negotiations. I hope they have thought of that?..if not

Bolting the stable door after the horse has gone methinks.

I stand corrected HERE

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Erfolg on 05/05/2015 17:20:46:

Although I can see the wisdom in converting any money sat in low interest investment, accruing a tax liability, whilst inflation takes it toll, into an asset that in principal increase in value with time, except that Capital Gains Tax would be liable on resale?

Capital gains tax only applies to individuals, a company or organisation would pay corporation tax on any profit, which is about the same as tax on interest earned.

They also do say in the proposal that if the membership doesn't approve the NFC then should recover their outlay and probably make a profit.

Having seen the on/off status of the nationals and the fact that the Middle Wallop aerotows I like to attend were under threat (due to the increase terrorist threat) I can see the sense of a NFC which can be used to host various events all year round. If they had events every weekend it would generate some reasonable income on its own. I'm probably going against most posters on this thread but think that looking for a NFC is not a bad move by the BMFA.

[Erfolg]

Frank

My lack of certainty on the status of CGT was the reason I used a question mark. I get the impression that one party wants to increase corporation tax by sum significant margin. Although on the whole I can see that capital is not the obvious choice at present.

I do accept that a well judged purchase should return a profit, perhaps a substantial on, dependant on future events. A annual increase in population just by immigration of 300, 000 points that way, a lot of building.

With respect to a flying field essentially for the Nats seems extravagant from the perspective of the average member, although a necessity from the perspective of a competitive flyers. If it were not for my view that assets like land are much better than capital, I would be opposed to the purchase for a favoured few.

However until the BMFA tells the members a bit of detail with respect to our finances, I will remain concerned.

[cymaz]

Has anyone contacted the AMA to ask them how they run/ provide funds for their flying site at Muncie.

Here

[Colin Leighfield]

Good one Cymaz, I think's an excellent example of some of the things that we should be doing. This hobby has a future way beyond us older types ( me anyway) if this is done properly and we should expect it to be, I think.

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Erfolg on 05/05/2015 18:14:28:

With respect to a flying field essentially for the Nats seems extravagant from the perspective of the average member, although a necessity from the perspective of a competitive flyers. If it were not for my view that assets like land are much better than capital, I would be opposed to the purchase for a favoured few.

I'm only an average member, not a competitive flyer, but I do enjoy visiting the nationals. I was more thinking of a flying site that was open for lots of different events, if 20-30 events were held a year there, it could generate quite a bit of revenue, think fly-ins, aerotow meets, jet meets etc etc not out and out competitions. Any income from the gate money would go direct to the upkeep, in some respects the UK is better positioned than the US in that on this crowded island more of us would live within a reasonable travelling distance.

[MattyB]

What a total joke. I remain supportive of the NC if the economics are sound, but proceeding with the transaction with no published financials, zero member consultation, no planning permission and little regard for their own governance processes is nothing short of ridiculous. How can an offer have been placed without full council agreement?

If this was a plc and the Exec team made a purchase of 2x the net worth of the company without due process they would be held to accountant the AGM or by the board and almost certainly dismissed. Will BMFA members do the same? Is there even a mechanism to do so? Interestingly I can find no BMFA constitution online... 

Edited By MattyB on 05/05/2015 22:59:37

[Frank Skilbeck]

Matty, I read the proposal to the full council meeting differently, in that while they were in the process of making contact with the selling agent and making planning searches etc they have raised a proposal for full council support in this course of action to be voted on at the meeting on 16th May. I assume if it is accepted that there will be subsequent proposals and votes before proceeding with any purchase etc.

[Dave Hopkin]

It also says in the third Item 1 (logically item 11) that there is a proposed contract date of 5th June <feasibility study report due 16th May) with a completion date of the 1st September

So the BMFA is not committed until September

[MattyB]

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 05/05/2015 23:06:40:

Matty, I read the proposal to the full council meeting differently, in that while they were in the process of making contact with the selling agent and making planning searches etc they have raised a proposal for full council support in this course of action to be voted on at the meeting on 16th May. I assume if it is accepted that there will be subsequent proposals and votes before proceeding with any purchase etc.

I was not referring to the proposal to the full council meeting, but the new update on the BMFA site published today. That states as point 11 (erroneously numbered 1 again!) "Offer accepted with a proposed contract date of June 5th and completion date of September 1st". That there is a meeting between now and Sept is irrelevant; it seems someone/a group of individuals at the BMFA has taken the decision to go ahead and offer in the region of £1.25m without any formal internal review or agreement to do so. 

Edited By MattyB on 05/05/2015 23:37:50