Page 3 of 4
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:24 pm
by Diamond Dave
Ditto mate see the post abov by Jack Walker and
stop being so gullible....
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:30 pm
by goose1
Diamond Dave wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:24 pm
Ditto mate see the post abov by Jack Walker and
stop being so gullible....
What are you on about? The post from Jack Walker backs up BBs figures? The drop in the RPRA membership has been mirrored with the SHU. You said if you were proved wrong you would accept it...you just have been...
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:41 pm
by king
goose1 wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 2:27 pm
king wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 1:52 pm
Bowbroom wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 1:38 pm
The RPRA is in financial surplus now the cynical might say that’s because subs have gone from £10 to £38 in 3 years
simple maths. Less members MUST PAY MORE.
Their still in surplus. So whatever way you look at it and however much it might hurt you king that's a positive. The current team at the RPRA have certainly done a better job at sorting things than in the past I don't think that can be argued against.
It doesn't hurt me goose I'm not a RPRA member. It's a positive they have a surplus, but that's ONLY because the remaining members are paying MORE. I wouldn't call that doing a better job, the set up hasn't changed. Unless the RPRA address the problem of expensive running costs the problem will not go away. They are just not facing the root problem. Soon there will be more chiefs than lndians.
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:45 pm
by king
Bowbroom wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 2:43 pm
No one be it an association or individual is responsible for the decline in members in the U.K. and the near continent it’s a simple fact of life, the hobby no longer appeals to the majority of youngsters and that is the end of the matter.
100% correct. The RPRA has many faults but the declining membership is not their fault. ALL Unions in Europe are in decline.
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:48 pm
by jack walker
HI i know there is a federation down here that fly under NWHU rules and distances that will leave the RPRA with this rule change . Sorry i should have said from south west ,bristol,wales through the midlands up to leeds .cheers jack
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 4:02 pm
by goose1
king wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 3:41 pm
goose1 wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 2:27 pm
king wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 1:52 pm
simple maths. Less members MUST PAY MORE.
Their still in surplus. So whatever way you look at it and however much it might hurt you king that's a positive. The current team at the RPRA have certainly done a better job at sorting things than in the past I don't think that can be argued against.
It doesn't hurt me goose I'm not a RPRA member. It's a positive they have a surplus, but that's ONLY because the remaining members are paying MORE. I wouldn't call that doing a better job, the set up hasn't changed. Unless the RPRA address the problem of expensive running costs the problem will not go away. They are just not facing the root problem. Soon there will be more chiefs than lndians.
That is correct they are paying more although still not enough in my opinion given it works out around 75p per week. They have done a better job in actually raising fees that should have been raised a long time ago and also successfully worked out what their running costs for the year would be and basically charged accordingly. That is better than what has happened in the past just allowing a hemorrhaging of money. I do agree they need to find ways of bringing the running costs down. Although to be honest whoever and whatever system is in place it isn't going to stop the inevitable decline in the sport. We are past the point of no return and that has nothing to do with the way the RPRA has been ran or is ran. Some people live in fantasy land thinking if we change the RPRA everything will be rosey. Anyone with half a brain knows the reasons are natural wastage, peregrines and a world that no longer lends itself to pastimes like pigeon racing.
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 5:45 pm
by Steve Howells
Bowbroom wrote: Wed Nov 26, 2025 7:38 pm
For those interested, here’s a couple of further points
1. 2026 subs £38 per member (£33 to HQ £5 to region)
2. Membership decrease of 1896 (14%) last year at this rate there’ll not be many left in 5 years time
#
I wonder how many of tht 14% are like me, in a partnership with a deseased partner, who I used to pay for until they upped the subs.
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 7:04 pm
by Anthony webster
I think alot of members missing last 2 years is simple because the rise in fees 95 percent of partnerships have gone back to flying under one name .
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:43 pm
by Diamond Dave
GOOSE, I was actually refering to the money that went missing in Jacks first post.
Perhaps you can explain to him where it went.
Maybe you were in office at the time as well and no doubt you never noticed where it went either and -never said anything like most of the other officials.
You make me laugh - I wonder if you was in office when the hall report was thrown out as well - no doubt you probably wouldve turned a blind eye to that too as did most of the other officials who stayed stum.
Perhaps you could tell us why meetings cost 7k as has been stated when a zoom meeting would cost nothing!
I am obviously not as eloquent as you goose cos I have differnt names for things than you - You call them meetings when the correct pronunciation should be "Jollys for the ol boys". A total waste of members money and its still going on which the correct pronunciation is "taking the piss". A ZOOM MEETING COSTS NOTHING and has done for at least the last 4/5 years - work it out how much couldve been savedand then honestly, tell me how the feck can you justify it mate....???
You know that if that the hall report had been instated the Rpra wouldnt be in the state it is now and we would be looking forward to a better future than you have just painted in yr last post.
You dont have the right to shut me up mate and if, Ill say again 'if,' you were in office at the time any of that shit went down you should be ashamed because stayin stum is party to the act in my mind. Like you are still in iffice and not questioned any of your own reasons you have just given in your own feckin post - just happy to carry on with your own little jollys and let it all spiral downwards and worse still you are paising them for doing well ffs.
You, your values and the RPRA are totally out of cinque with the modern world mate and have been for the last 10 /15 years, yes, the membership is falling rapidly but it is a cataclysmic failure of our union to adapt to that scenario that will without doubt be the final nail!
Time to take stock and move over mate!
Re: RPRA Oct meeting
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 9:45 pm
by goose1
Diamond Dave wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:43 pm
GOOSE, I was actually refering to the money that went missing in Jacks first post.
Perhaps you can explain to him where it went.
Maybe you were in office at the time as well and no doubt you never noticed where it went either and -never said anything like most of the other officials.
You make me laugh - I wonder if you was in office when the hall report was thrown out as well - no doubt you probably wouldve turned a blind eye to that too as did most of the other officials who stayed stum.
Perhaps you could tell us why meetings cost 7k as has been stated when a zoom meeting would cost nothing!
I am obviously not as eloquent as you goose cos I have differnt names for things than you - You call them meetings when the correct pronunciation should be "Jollys for the ol boys". A total waste of members money and its still going on which the correct pronunciation is "taking the piss". A ZOOM MEETING COSTS NOTHING and has done for at least the last 4/5 years - work it out how much couldve been savedand then honestly, tell me how the feck can you justify it mate....???
You know that if that the hall report had been instated the Rpra wouldnt be in the state it is now and we would be looking forward to a better future than you have just painted in yr last post.
You dont have the right to shut me up mate and if, Ill say again 'if,' you were in office at the time any of that shit went down you should be ashamed because stayin stum is party to the act in my mind. Like you are still in iffice and not questioned any of your own reasons you have just given in your own feckin post - just happy to carry on with your own little jollys and let it all spiral downwards and worse still you are paising them for doing well ffs.
You, your values and the RPRA are totally out of cinque with the modern world mate and have been for the last 10 /15 years, yes, the membership is falling rapidly but it is a cataclysmic failure of our union to adapt to that scenario that will without doubt be the final nail!
Time to take stock and move over mate!
Wow even by your usual standards the nonsense in that post is off the scale. Right we'll start where we were because you've changed subject conveniently...your first bit of baseless (and laughable) nonsense was to suggest that other unions membership would be increasing
while the RPRAs was falling. You then said if you had proof you would accept it...you received proof and changed the subject to what can only be described as nonsense on steroids
Just to be clear I've NEVER had ANYTHING to do with the RPRA other than be a member and hold a position of federation delegate to my local region. I have little to no knowledge of what you are on about. Because as I've said time and time again I'm not pro RPRA or against the RPRA. What I am against is idiots like you spouting things that just aren't true like the nonsense about membership numbers in unions before. Because some people may read such rubbish and actually think its true. And this absolutely insane view that the RPRA are responsible for the falling number of fanciers in this country it just simply isn't true, the figures in this country fall firmly in line with what we're once viewed as strongholds for the sport (Belgium and Holland) Do you blame the RPRA for the decline in the sport in these countries too? As I've said above the rest of what your on about (Hall reports and the likes) I don't know enough about to engage in a debate about them but one thing I can promise you after reading the rest of your nonsense I'll take what you say on the subject with a very big pinch of salt.
Oh and one other thing as I sense their may have been a bit of age discrimination sneaking in to your last post I'm younger than you
