APRES

Re: APRES

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Sat 16 Dec 2017, 11:14 pm

bucksmjb wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:Until such a point that APRES and UKHAT can prove that they are bona-fide Trusts or charities in the legal sense, and not assortments of shysters, children, dreamers, chancers and cretins of variable intellect, then I'm afraid they shall be looked at and treated with the disdain and contempt they currently enjoy.


brilliantly put - so everyone is guilty until proved innoocent?


If you're asking people for £52 a year for what amounts to the square root of nothing, then you certainly need to prove you're "innoocent". Trading standards and money under false pretences and all that...
Dan O'Hagan

Re: APRES

Postby boff180 on Sat 16 Dec 2017, 11:17 pm

Blunt question, are either of you anything to with APRES officially?
User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff

Re: APRES

Postby robterry99 on Sat 16 Dec 2017, 11:18 pm

boff180 wrote:Blunt question, are either of you anything to with APRES officially?


No, I'm not.
robterry99

Re: APRES

Postby bucksmjb on Sat 16 Dec 2017, 11:20 pm

robterry99 wrote:
bucksmjb wrote:very interesting - I have never posted on the APRES facebook page


Really?

So you aren't the same "bucksmjb" as @bucksmjb on Twitter, which is Mike Bowden, admin of the APRES Facebook page?


You really need to get a life - whoever you are !
bucksmjb has never posted on the apres facebook page and i havent used twitter in months


Just what do you want "robterry99" ? - you cherrypick all the little bits that suit your twisted little mind and broadcast them to all.
For your information: the charity application for APRES is still ongoing. Apres has some work to do but are confident that we can achieve what we set out to do.

We have no money - we lack aeromechanical experience - we have a good idea should we be allowed to utilise it. The hate and mistrust is totally without foundation and is simply fuelled by a few people who want to see anything fail that they havent thought of.

I wish you all a Merry Christmas
bucksmjb

Re: APRES

Postby bucksmjb on Sat 16 Dec 2017, 11:44 pm

robterry99 wrote:
boff180 wrote:Blunt question, are either of you anything to with APRES officially?


No, I'm not.


Yes I am and i reserve the right to defend against unfair and unprovacated attack.
bucksmjb

Re: APRES

Postby Tommy on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 12:16 am

So:

bucksmjb wrote:
boff180 wrote:Blunt question, are either of you anything to with APRES officially?

Yes I am...


And:
bucksmjb wrote:We have no money - we lack aeromechanical experience - we have a good idea should we be allowed to utilise it. The hate and mistrust is totally without foundation and is simply fuelled by a few people who want to see anything fail that they havent thought of.


But:
bucksmjb wrote:... I have never posted on the APRES facebook page


So you're involved, and to the extent that you know the financial well-being of whatever it is APRES is, but you've never posted on the official Facebook page? Yet your first post on this forum was to come here and rant about... those looking at the Facebook page?

Look, if you're involved with APRES, that's cool, and if you think this forum has been unfair on you guys, then that's also fine - put your side across. Don't throw tantrums, make compelling points.

If you're on here as the "official" voice of APRES, then from someone whom you're supposed to be marketing to, you're doing a very poor job of making any positive PR.

This is a forum for discussion, not for people to agree with you. You and your organisation is asking for our money. If you want it, you have to be prepared for hard questions. Getting grumpy and petty does nothing to progress APRES's cause, so why are you doing it?

Fine, people make snippy comments about your organisation. True, sometimes it hurts to read them. I have zero doubt airshow organisers have it when their hard work is received with something other than positivity. But true maturity (which I would respect dearly if some were shown) would be to rise above what you see as silly comments, and properly address the real questions being asked (see, you haven't once clarified the question of whether you guys are a Trust or not. Something you could have done in a single post that may or may not have immeasurably improved APRES's PR).

You know, comparatively, the real people who have respect on here? People who answer the hard questions as best and as maturely as they can, and move on. The Shackleton Preservation Trust had a PR nightmare last year when by all accounts they almost imploded from within, but lo and behold, a member from that organisation still pops up here and updates the thread from time to time, and you know what? Instead of childish comments filling that thread, it's a nice, informative place, and a lot of people have heard of the Shackleton Preservation Trust because of their hard work and positive PR.

So instead of taking huge offence at the slightest comment against your organisation, stand up tall and address the questions being asked. Put minds at ease, tell people "yes, we aren't yet a charity, but here's what we're going to do about it", "yes we are a Trust, our trustees are named and listed, but our website isn't up to date", "Comments noted Re. membership fee, but here's how we're going to address that".

Start responding in that way, and I guarantee that you'll put yourselves light years ahead of where you are now.

Presently, though, you're doing a great job of convincing people to go elsewhere with their £52 p/a.

Oh and I take issue with:

bucksmjb wrote:The hate and mistrust is totally without foundation and is simply fuelled by a few people who want to see anything fail that they havent thought of.


Nope. Quite incorrect. No-one wants to see projects fail. Look, from my own hands just earlier today:

Tommy wrote:I would love to be proven wrong


So, going on experience, one of three things tends to happen at this point; either carry on arguing petulantly and get nowhere, retreat back to the safe haven that is the organisation's Facebook Page, or properly and professionally present yourselves, address concerns as best you can, and make a really convincing case why people should give your organisation the time of day.

Go out and prove me wrong, mate. There's nothing I like more than seeing an ambitious project succeed, but to get there, you must make it succeed. Cool off over the weekend, and come back afresh, and say "alright chaps, here's what we are, and what we plan to do, and here's how we plan to do it" - I guarantee you'll be treated much more seriously than you are currently. Of course people will still disagree with you, and that's fine - it's double-standards to reserve the right to your own opinion if you're unhappy tolerating everyone else's. So yeah it's a tough ride at times, as is any project of this nature, especially if you want to convince people to give their hard-earned over to you guys. But it's a lot better in the end than the current approach you're taking.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: APRES

Postby bucksmjb on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 9:21 am

Ok - I obviously did some things wrong last night.

I will begin by apologising to "robterry99" for the "twisted little mind" comment - that was very wrong.

I am NOT a trustee of APRES and yes we do have Trustees - we have 4.
At this point - I would like to say that I am NOT the official voice of APRES.
We are in the process of applying to the Charity Commission to become a registered CIO.

We have some questions put to us by the CC and are working on them. We have NOT been rejected - as some people would like to think.

Tommy - you are right - its very hard to watch people attempt to destroy something you have worked on for a long time before its even been given a chance.

Apres has an idea, which we had hoped would be acceptable to the restoration/preservation industry. We discussed it with a number of projects and it was greeted favourably. We discussed the application with a Lawyer and we took business advice.

I refute any suggestion that we are a "scam" or that we are dishonest. The whole point of applying for Charity Status is to make ourselves OPEN and TRANSPARENT.
However, until such times as we are registered (and I fully believe we will be accepted) we are under no obligations to reveal anything to anyone. BUT as it seems a number of people wish to know exactly what we are doing, I will try to answer sensible questions if I can.

The much maligned £52 is simply £1 per week. Any monies taken in by us, go into a bank account requiring 2 signatures for any withdrawals.
None of the Trustees are getting paid. There will be operating costs but they will be kept to a minimum.
The Bank Account forms a Central Fund and from that we can (if we are successful) give money to projects who need it.

We will have (and are working on) a formal process for "granting" money which will be published and open to view.

We see a central fund as a better option than small amounts of money going into lots of different places. ALL donations are good of course, but we do believe that a Central Fund would be able to give larger sums to projects, thereby enabling them to do their work quicker without having to worry about raising funds. However, we are NOT for one moment suggesting that people stop giving directly to their favoured project.

The idea isnt perfect and i'm sure people will have lots to say - please do come up with constructive suggestions and we will look into them.
All constructive suggestions will be taken on board and discussed.

Once again - I apologise for being rude last night.

Just a small note in answer to some of the posts earlier - The photographs on our web page and on the Facebook page do not in any way even remotely attempt to suggest that we have any involvement with their upkeep, or with their restoration, or with their operation. they are photographs nothing more.

OH - and please could I request that the "war" against Caz McCall is dropped. She is passionate about aircraft and like all of us - sometimes says things she doesnt mean.

Thank you for reading - and I hope we can have some constructive conversations.

my email is: mike@apres.org.uk
bucksmjb

Re: APRES

Postby HeyfordDave111 on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 9:55 am

Not a bad reply, and one which, I’m sure, gives us all something to think about.

Can I suggest something for the betterment of your group?

You choose a spokesperson from within and tell the others to shut the cluck up! Loose cannons posting whatever and whenever they feel like it will undermine you quicker than you can blink. They have no place in any organisation.
Got to love Russianhardware
HeyfordDave111

Re: APRES

Postby bucksmjb on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 11:25 am

HeyfordDave111 wrote:Not a bad reply, and one which, I’m sure, gives us all something to think about.

Can I suggest something for the betterment of your group?

You choose a spokesperson from within and tell the others to shut the cluck up! Loose cannons posting whatever and whenever they feel like it will undermine you quicker than you can blink. They have no place in any organisation.


Good suggestion and thank you for it.
I will of course have to put it to the Trustees if we are to operate properly.

In the meantime, I will continue to answer reasonable questions where I am able to.
bucksmjb

Re: APRES

Postby CJS on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 4:58 pm

HeyfordDave111 wrote:Not a bad reply, and one which, I’m sure, gives us all something to think about.

Can I suggest something for the betterment of your group?

You choose a spokesperson from within and tell the others to shut the cluck up! Loose cannons posting whatever and whenever they feel like it will undermine you quicker than you can blink. They have no place in any organisation.


This is so important these days. Social media is a blessing and a huge curse. I don't doubt that APRES have good intentions, but

bucksmjb wrote:At this point - I would like to say that I am NOT the official voice of APRES.


Get someone to be, it adds legitimacy and consistency to everything you say as a group.

bucksmjb wrote:We are in the process of applying to the Charity Commission to become a registered CIO.

We have some questions put to us by the CC and are working on them. We have NOT been rejected - as some people would like to think.


But why make yourselves public until such matters are no longer in the pipeline, but are set in stone?

bucksmjb wrote:The much maligned £52 is simply £1 per week. Any monies taken in by us, go into a bank account requiring 2 signatures for any withdrawals.
None of the Trustees are getting paid. There will be operating costs but they will be kept to a minimum.



If there are operating costs of any description (which I guess there must be) then I'm afraid I don't think many will buy in to...

bucksmjb wrote:We see a central fund as a better option than small amounts of money going into lots of different places. ALL donations are good of course, but we do believe that a Central Fund would be able to give larger sums to projects, thereby enabling them to do their work quicker without having to worry about raising funds. However, we are NOT for one moment suggesting that people stop giving directly to their favoured project.


I would argue that you are suggesting just this - with the best will in the world, and like I said I don't doubt that is what you have, people are not going to give to a central 'bank' when they can donate straight to the cause. If I donate to you, let's say £50, and you need to take a bit, again let's say 10%, so £5, then my donation to aviation heritage is £45. But if you then pass that on to another group directly involved in the restoration of an aircraft (for arguments's sake let's choose TPM) then they will need to tale a bit of that for their running costs, which reduces my (now) £45 a little bit more...

To use a successful example of what you are trying to do, Children in Need is a central 'bank' of money which is then used to help projects across the UK. But the difference with CIN (Oxfam is another) is that you genuinely don't mind how the money is spent as it's going to a general ethos or cause you believe in.

Now, clearly we all want to see heritage aircraft restored and looked after, but it seems to me from being on this forum for over 7 years that us aviation enthusiasts are pretty picky about which aircraft projects we want to sponsor. Even the much maligned 'Joe Public' are unlikely to 'drop a coin in a bucket' which is for general 'aviation heritage' I would have thought, although clearly I don't have any evidence to back this up.

bucksmjb wrote:OH - and please could I request that the "war" against Caz McCall is dropped. She is passionate about aircraft and like all of us - sometimes says things she doesnt mean.



Again, the perils of social media. Admins or those officially commenting on behalf of a social media group really have to conduct themselves professionally these days. If she can't stop saying things she doesn't mean then quite frannkly she shouldn't be posting on the page because she is doing your cause no favours at the moment.

Just my tuppence worth, for what it's worth my 'drivel' comment last night was perhaps a bit harsh, so apologies for that.
"Forewarned is forearmed"
How do you know I didn't?
User avatar
CJS

Re: APRES

Postby bucksmjb on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 7:09 pm

To CJS

We have taken on board the spokesperson suggestion and the Trustees will make a decision as soon as possible.
It will in all probability be myself.


With regard to making ourselves public - YES, in retrospect we were a bit hasty, mainly due to over keen ness. We had the website ready and were anxious to get going, BUT we agree that we were perhaps wrong and should have waited. Unfortunately what has been done cannot be undone, but we can do our best to get things done properly from now onwards.


Regarding memberships/ donations etc - I hear what you say, but we would be crazy to try and stop anyone from donating to their own choice of project, but the example you chose (CIN) the donor doesnt have a choice there? Yet he can still donate to his own favourite at any point? CIN is a good example to have chosen I think but we will see how it pans out.

I thank you for your apology but none was necessary
bucksmjb

Re: APRES

Postby Pringles on Sun 17 Dec 2017, 8:17 pm

Nowadays most aviation charities offer their own membership rewards/perks. What incentive is cheaper museum parking (TBC?!) when you could join the Typhoon restoration membership days, get newsletters from TPM, or get Duxford perks with the Sally B supporters group? Plus my chosen charity gets all the money, rather some dodgy Facebook group taking a slice?
If life gives you melons then you're probably dyslexic
User avatar
Pringles

Re: APRES

Postby cg_341 on Mon 18 Dec 2017, 8:46 am

My question is this; Why the fascination with directing any and all questions away from the forum or Facebook group and on to email?

If you want donations, you need transparency, so you need to answer questions - not put us blocks and try to conduct conversation in secrecy.
cg_341

Re: APRES

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Mon 18 Dec 2017, 8:54 am

Tell you what APRES (and the UKHAT after school club), go away, formulate an intelligent plan, obtain a specific airframe, get people on board who know the subject and have a track record in succeeding, go to the Charities Commission, set up a Trust, get a good PR spokesperson and then join the queue for money behind the projects with the common-sense and brains to have done all this in the first place.

Right now, at best you look like simpletons, at worst scammers asking for money for the vaguest of reasons.
Dan O'Hagan

Re: APRES

Postby Ken Shabby on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 10:32 am

Dan O'Hagan wrote:Tell you what APRES (and the UKHAT after school club), go away, formulate an intelligent plan, obtain a specific airframe, get people on board who know the subject and have a track record in succeeding, go to the Charities Commission, set up a Trust, get a good PR spokesperson and then join the queue for money behind the projects with the common-sense and brains to have done all this in the first place.

Right now, at best you look like simpletons, at worst scammers asking for money for the vaguest of reasons.


A bit harsh Dan. I personally am leading the set- up of the Give Us Some Money And We'll Get It All Sorted Later For You Trust. We have emailed a number of high-profile people in the aviation preservation sector and will enter into negotiations with them when they reply to us. A major milestone in our project was reached yesterday when we opened a bank account.

I am the official spokesperson for our group. Please don't believe anything you hear from anyone else. They are imposters and are trying to undo the work we're doing.
Ken

I came here for a shoot-out right, a proper shoot-out, with some proper men.
Ken Shabby

Re: APRES

Postby Brevet Cable on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 10:54 am

You'll have to work on the name.....GUSMAWGIASLFTYT doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, does it :lol:
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: APRES

Postby aceyone on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 11:18 am

Brevet Cable wrote:You'll have to work on the name.....GUSMAWGIASLFTYT doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, does it :lol:


Well take the first 4 letters , rearrange and you get a snappy little title :lol:
Don't know about those jets ,they spoil a very nice place
User avatar
aceyone

Re: APRES

Postby HeyfordDave111 on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 11:44 am

Ken Shabby wrote:
Dan O'Hagan wrote:Tell you what APRES (and the UKHAT after school club), go away, formulate an intelligent plan, obtain a specific airframe, get people on board who know the subject and have a track record in succeeding, go to the Charities Commission, set up a Trust, get a good PR spokesperson and then join the queue for money behind the projects with the common-sense and brains to have done all this in the first place.

Right now, at best you look like simpletons, at worst scammers asking for money for the vaguest of reasons.


A bit harsh Dan. I personally am leading the set- up of the Give Us Some Money And We'll Get It All Sorted Later For You Trust. We have emailed a number of high-profile people in the aviation preservation sector and will enter into negotiations with them when they reply to us. A major milestone in our project was reached yesterday when we opened a bank account.

I am the official spokesperson for our group. Please don't believe anything you hear from anyone else. They are imposters and are trying to undo the work we're doing.


Hi Ken,
without trying to be a smart A**, how do we now know who is telling us the truth form the postings here?

Imposters? ok, could and does happen, but you could be one. I cant be bothered to search the web for confirmation, but there is your problem...... sort it out on your website, sort out the cr*p there, the misleading pictures, the terrible prose, and the rubbish that states pretty much 'we are setting ourselves up as the 'bank of aviation heritage'', and get it together, and quickly as credibility is lost and is very hard to recover if you dont have a united front.
Get rid of the loose canons too if they cannot tow the line!
Got to love Russianhardware
HeyfordDave111

Re: APRES

Postby cg_341 on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 11:48 am

Dave, I'm pretty sure 'Ken Shabby' (not his real name?) is nothing to do with APRES, but rather is taking the proverbial!
cg_341

Re: APRES

Postby GertrudetheMerciless on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 1:02 pm

There is no money in aviation heritage, restoration or preservation, unless you have a very specific type, collection or the dataplate and mortal remains of a Spitfire or Hurricane. Or a huge bank account to start with. The other live effectively on scraps, or hard earned revenue.

Much as I think the aim to create a central fund is admirable, it rather ignores the fact that the public will give their money to projects they have a personal connection to, can gain something from (which ultimately was the USP of the pre-grounding Vulcan operation, as opposed the the multi-million pound debacle since), a well organised collection, or can get get hold of something associated to the project or aircraft (merchandise).

The danger of a central funding source is you have the potential to divert that very rare commodity, money, from viable, well organised (in terms of personnel and fundraising), well resourced projects to those (for example) such as the Siegfried and Digest QY-7 Agribomber, which no one has the slightest sustainable interest in, who have admirable intentions but no practical future sustainability.

And I wish they'd remove photos of aircraft they're not associated with from their social media platforms.
GertrudetheMerciless

Re: APRES

Postby Ken Shabby on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 6:34 pm

Thanks to everyone for the feedback which we at GUSMAWGIASLFTYT will take on board.

We, of course, disagree that a central fund isn't a good idea. Joe or Joanne Public need a simple way of donating to aircraft preservation without having to bother about what they're actually donating to. We at GUSMAWGIASLFTYT will make donating easy and we can then decide where their money is best spent.

GUSMAWGIASLFTYT will be acutely aware of our responsibilities as a registered charity once we get all that sorted out. The money we raise will be charitable funds so we won't be able to hand it out willy nilly to any so and so who comes to us for help. There will be an application process, with strict criteria that will have to be met before we hand over any cash. The lucky recipients will need to enter into a funding agreement with GUSMAWGIASLFTYT to make sure they don't run off with the money and that they actually use it to restore their aeroplane. The agreement will also make sure that, once restored, the aeroplane will be accessible to the public (either in a museum or flying at air displays) and that it's not kept locked away in someone's shed or flogged off to some rich American.

I hope that sets everyone's mind at rest. At some stage GUSMAWGIASLFTYT will let you know who our trustees are. We will also set up a website and will have a presence on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, the Post Office Telegram system and PowerPoint.

Ken
Ken

I came here for a shoot-out right, a proper shoot-out, with some proper men.
Ken Shabby

Re: APRES

Postby Amp on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 7:21 pm

Ken,
You seem to have omitted to mention how much % you would need to retain for costs and expenses... Might I suggest a start up to coincide with the next fiscal year at 1 April. I will be in contact when I win the lottery. :lmao:
Amp

Re: APRES

Postby Ken Shabby on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 7:41 pm

Amp wrote:Ken,
You seem to have omitted to mention how much % you would need to retain for costs and expenses... Might I suggest a start up to coincide with the next fiscal year at 1 April. I will be in contact when I win the lottery. :lmao:


Inevitably there will some overheads in an operation such as ours. We will do all we can to keep them at 5% or lower, in line with Government requirements on lottery distributors.

If you win the lottery please do let us know. I won £25.00 last week which I used to open our bank account, so we are on our way now. We are also expecting some exciting news in the next few days, so please watch this space.

Ken
Ken

I came here for a shoot-out right, a proper shoot-out, with some proper men.
Ken Shabby

Re: APRES

Postby jalfrezi on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 8:00 pm

Please try and stay on topic people....
User avatar
jalfrezi
UKAR Staff

Re: APRES

Postby Ken Shabby on Tue 19 Dec 2017, 8:07 pm

jalfrezi wrote:Please try and stay on topic people....


Ooh, you misery!
Ken

I came here for a shoot-out right, a proper shoot-out, with some proper men.
Ken Shabby

PreviousNext

Return to Aviation Waffle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ColeTheDemolisher, LittleRedTrain, Yahoo [Bot] and 30 guests