North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Perhaps we can now expect to hear an explanation of why the NYMR's costs for servicing its members are so high, since Lineisclear is so confident about stating them as fact! To be fair, the Bluebell Magazine costs surely cannot be £1.20 per issue when postal costs are included? Four issies plus an AGM notice must add substantially to that?

 

Do other railways not line their magazine dates up so they can send AGM papers out in the same envelope as one of their quarterly editions?

I forget our exact member cost for the GWRT, not got the figures immediately to hand, I think it's somewhere in the region of £12 per member, with a membership a little under half the size of NYMR/Bluebell as reported on here. It comes out as roughly half the membership fee gets to be kept for spending on the railway, a reasonable fraction I think.

 

Is this another result of the replacement of the old Moorsline with the new version?

 

In fairness to @Lineisclear, he has made similar points about the cost of membership since before the new format was introduced. The mischievous part of me is tempted to ask why, when MoorsLine has been repurposed beyond the membership, the full costs are allocated against membership subscriptions rather than, say, cost of fundraising or marketing.

 

Because he keeps repeating the claims doesn't necessarily make them more true (i.e. subject to his own selective interpretation!) though!

 

No. I understand that the current Moors Line is cheaper to produce than the old format. As Flying Scotsman points out having a net figure of around 50 % of the membership fee to spend on the railway is the experience elsewhere. Yes, the income from membership fees is important but it's only around 2 % of the cost of keeping the railway running. Calculating the cost of servicing membership is a bit of a black art but should ideally be on the basis of avoidable cost i.e. if items like Moors Line, copies of the Report and Accounts for each member did not have to be produced and posted what costs would be saved? That figure has to include the not inconsideerble cost of member administration. That's why I referrred to around 50% because it doesn't lend itself to precise calculation.
I gave the example of another heritage railway's approach to member benefits where interestingly special events are excluded so its members' £5 voucher would mean no discount at all off an event like SNG services.
There's justified concern in an earlier post about the state of the railway e.g. the number of TSRs and the absence of the teak set. They're all manifestations of the situation that many heritage lines find themslves in.................they're operating at a loss. Cutting costs hard, especially labour cost, means the ability to operate services safely at a level that attracts the public,and most importantly, volunteers would be undermined. Salvation has to come in the form of additional income from new sources and initiatives such as the SNG event.
It seems bizarre and depressing that when many heritage lines are hanging on by their financial fingertips (often thanks to their much derided management) the focus is on the level of discount their members should benefit from.

 

The SVR(G) do.

 

I'm not a member but from the outside looking in, given that it's been stated elsewhere that it is more or less a sales brochure and has moved away from the format much loved by members, this is an absolutely fair question to ask.

The railway I'm a member of produces a quarterly magazine too, but its fully about what's been going on around the railway during the previous quarter, plus interesting articles looking at the railway's history etc. It is extremely well-produced and was a factor in me taking out membership, because even though I can't visit as often as I want, I do feel like I'm part of that railway's wider family.

If I suddenly started receiving what was in effect a glossy corporate marketing leaflet, I'd be really upset.

 

It's a function of where NYMR has got to with members, and how it's managed change with those members.

To give an example, you give the glass half empty view of the value to a society of membership. In rightly pointing out that these costs exist, and need to be considered, the impression left (wittingly or not) is that membership is poor value for the organisation and because the sums involved are a small percentage of the total cost of running the railway, of low value.

For an organisation operating on tight margins, 2% can easily be the difference between making a loss and breaking even. That's before you consider that the membership are a key resource, and belonging is a gateway to greater involvement.

Instead of making members feel unvalued and unwanted, perhaps if the communications were clearer and framed in terms of a shared policy framework, and treating membership as an asset to be optimised, the response to the same practical manifestations might be rather smoother.

The organisers of SNG's trips have obviously felt that customer relations are important when setting a delay repay type policy, which I've never seen before in preservation. If you view that as a stop-loss position (predefined payment rather than arguing the toss) if there are delays, there's obviously value been calculated in giving visitors comfort that it's worth paying despite the potential cost. Yet members concessions are seemingly not being assessed through the same lens of trade-off.

 

There is an additional amount for postage listed in the accounts, but unclear what that is for. But the bottom line is that however you split the costs up, the direct costs of the society existing - magazine, AGM, maintaining the membership records and so on - amount to about £8 per member.

FWIW, on the Bluebell's official social media channels (which are run by the Plc), the benefits of joining the BRPS have been very heavily promoted over the winter, so someone clearly sees the benefit of having a large membership - even though those members get 50% discount on most tickets, including galas. I guess 50% of a sale that happens is better than 100% of one that doesn't. We have also had, either publicly or internally, a fair number of ads for specific specialist volunteer roles recently - everything from assistance with the website to someone to manage the project to install an RO plant.

(Oh - and the second Santa set, in daily use over Christmas, was mostly Teak. I say mostly because I think some was Mahogany ...)

Tom

 

A quick scan suggests Bluebell are not the only southern railway to give good incentives to members and at the same time encourage volunteering. They also seem to be the railways putting on family/children themed events which may not be totally historic but nevertheless is a way of encouraging families to come and see some nostalgia. There are plenty of other events and days for the purists I might add ! I guess is about getting a balance.

Sent from my SM-A556B using Tapatalk

 

...............as a whole host of members have stated they are on Facebook and elsewhere - to absolutely no sign of any change in the approach. The management say they are listening, but they are not hearing!

 

They are listening both to those who don't like change and to those who've expressed their support for the new format.

As to content I went back and looked at the Autumn edition. It oncluded articles about the new Mutual Improvement Class building, Conversion of Omaha to oil firing, an article about the contribution of a very long serving volunteer, another about the experince of a volunteer signalman, an explnation of plans for 2025, updates on the restoration of 3672 Dame Vera Lynn and the work of the lineside conservation team, an article highlighting the success of the junior volunteers scheme , heritage open days and loco by loco updates with photos on each member of the steam and diesel fleet, station and area group reports , updates from affilated groups like NELPG and LNERCA and, sadly but very properly, obituaries of recently deceased volunteers.

I'm struggling to see how that meets the description of a just "glossy corporate marketing leaflet"?

 

I was thinking much the same thing at about 2 am this morning. Too much on my mind.

 

Another reply that gives a selective and biased answer! How many pages did these selected articles amount to - and what percentage of the total did they form? I've already filed my copy in my floor mounted, round filing cabinet so cannot answer the question; had the same question been asked about its predecessor I could, though, as I still have all my copies dating back to the duplicated issue no. 4, from when I first joined the(as it was then) NYMRPS. I'm not uncritical of that previous version, though. In fairness, I always felt that the loco maintenance updates were too brief (terse might be a better description!) and the station reports were overlong, but that's a personal preference. It's right and proper for obituaries to be recorded, but I personally don't even bother to look at the personal accounts of "A day in the life of a signalman" or such - that's really part of the marketing component and seems to be a new introduction..

 

There is no doubt that the first revamped Moors Line was nothing more than a corporate marketing leaflet. The NYMR more or less admitted that it was produced primarily as a marketing tool in the face of a barrage of criticism. It has improved since then but is still largely based on what the so-called Communication Strategy Group feel would give a good impression to outside funders. Much of it is still primarily intended to do this but, at least, the subject matter has been broadened. Information on what is going on remains minimal with such wonderful reports as: SR West Country 4-6-2 34101 'Hartland' -"Work continues with this protracted rebuild." Some people did express their support for the new format but they were very few and far between and it was noticeable that most of those had connections with Park Street. Another one in support was that he liked the larger typeface. If someone wants to see the level of dissatisfaction they only have to visit the several NYMR related Facebook sites to see it.

 

All of which circles me back to my observation on change management, and the handling of existing members and supporters. These are the people who are already pre-disposed to give - if the reaction of the likes of @60044 and @Steve is widespread, that starts to pose a major risk to an organisation that claims to want to develop relations with key supporters.

 

I'm not familiar with the NYMR's usual February half term time table, but would there usually be 2 steam hauled trains on and would they both be usually heavily loaded during the week? Just thinking, that while a few other lines are trying to save money by swapping out a second steam hauled service for a diesel or DMU, might this be better regarded as a move to attract enthusiasts (at a time they are also likely to be able to travel) during a period where there are families, but not enough to utilise the services to capacity. The Autocar is an attraction over a regular diesel/DMU service and to enthusiasts might even be worth travelling to over a regular steam hauled service somewhere else.

 

Having studied last years accounts in a bit more detail now I'm in front of a laptop, I'm a bit intrigued. The reports mentions membership as being around 10,000 (page 18). However, note 4 to the accounts states 'membership income' to be £174,329. Now my maths implies that, with a membership of 10,000 and a membership fee of £40 it should be significantly higher than this figure. OK, there is life membership, junior members and spouses to take into account which will affect any calculation but the claimed membership and income don't appear to gel together.