Another YouTube video

[[email protected]]

Click on this You Tube link. Nice video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E

Lloyd Smith

[[email protected]]

On Aug 9, 2:12 pm, " >
wrote:
> Click on this You Tube link. Nice video.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E
>
> Lloyd Smith

I saw that the main video on avweb.com today was of a 1-26 flying
ridge, nice exposure.

[RL]

This is a very well done promotional video. It does remind me,
however, that we project an image of soaring that in the U.S. that
will go largely unfilled. The promise is aviating in a fine looking
modern sailplane as illustrated. The reality is, that in more cases
than not, we will stuff a student in some 40-year old claptrap 2-33
and try to convince them there is a relationship to the image in the
video. I like the video, the bigger question for the growth of
soaring is do we actually deliver on the promise?

Bob


On Aug 9, 3:16?pm, wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2:12 pm, " >
> wrote:
>
> > Click on this You Tube link. Nice video.
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E
>
> > Lloyd Smith
>
> I saw that the main video on avweb.com today was of a 1-26 flying
> ridge, nice exposure.

[Bill Daniels]

Well put, Bob.

"RL" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> This is a very well done promotional video. It does remind me,
> however, that we project an image of soaring that in the U.S. that
> will go largely unfilled. The promise is aviating in a fine looking
> modern sailplane as illustrated. The reality is, that in more cases
> than not, we will stuff a student in some 40-year old claptrap 2-33
> and try to convince them there is a relationship to the image in the
> video. I like the video, the bigger question for the growth of
> soaring is do we actually deliver on the promise?
>
> Bob
>
>
> On Aug 9, 3:16?pm, wrote:
>> On Aug 9, 2:12 pm, " >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Click on this You Tube link. Nice video.
>>
>> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E
>>
>> > Lloyd Smith
>>
>> I saw that the main video on avweb.com today was of a 1-26 flying
>> ridge, nice exposure.
>
>

[Frank Whiteley]

1. I agree with Bob's comment on the promise and delivery. Many
don't walk the talk.
2. I thought the narrative was very good. However, I could have done
with one, at the most, two launches and fly-bys. The touted
'experience' is weakly demonstrated as there are no in-flight
inspirational shots which should include perhaps a gaggle, a cruise,
and perhaps some wave moments, cloudbase, a ridge run, or even a
training shot, which could have replaced the clearly mundane (note
that video trickery was used instead). IOW, it's not as memorable as
it could be.
3. This type of promotional video doesn't have to be a lonely
effort. The Hines' have shown an interest, many more are interested,
why not put together a collected effort to gather some great snippets
that express what is being said and have another poke or three at it?
I'd recommend gaggling in the SSA Publicity Committee and starting a
media working group and getting a storyboard going.

Frank Whiteley

On Aug 9, 2:00 pm, RL > wrote:
> This is a very well done promotional video. It does remind me,
> however, that we project an image of soaring that in the U.S. that
> will go largely unfilled. The promise is aviating in a fine looking
> modern sailplane as illustrated. The reality is, that in more cases
> than not, we will stuff a student in some 40-year old claptrap 2-33
> and try to convince them there is a relationship to the image in the
> video. I like the video, the bigger question for the growth of
> soaring is do we actually deliver on the promise?
>
> Bob
>
> On Aug 9, 3:16?pm, wrote:
>
> > On Aug 9, 2:12 pm, " >
> > wrote:
>
> > > Click on this You Tube link. Nice video.
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E
>
> > > Lloyd Smith
>
> > I saw that the main video on avweb.com today was of a 1-26 flying
> > ridge, nice exposure.

[Adam]

On Aug 9, 3:46 pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> 2. I thought the narrative was very good. However, I could have done
> with one, at the most, two launches and fly-bys. The touted
> 'experience' is weakly demonstrated as there are no in-flight
> inspirational shots which should include perhaps a gaggle, a cruise,
> and perhaps some wave moments, cloudbase, a ridge run, or even a
> training shot, which could have replaced the clearly mundane (note
> that video trickery was used instead). IOW, it's not as memorable as
> it could be.

Something more along these lines?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aumO0ZHwAro

95,000+ views, favorited 500+ times.

Clearly it has the better chance of getting Gen Y to drop the Nitendo
and learn to fly.

/Adam

[Frank Whiteley]

On Aug 9, 3:16 pm, Adam > wrote:
> On Aug 9, 3:46 pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
>
> > 2. I thought the narrative was very good. However, I could have done
> > with one, at the most, two launches and fly-bys. The touted
> > 'experience' is weakly demonstrated as there are no in-flight
> > inspirational shots which should include perhaps a gaggle, a cruise,
> > and perhaps some wave moments, cloudbase, a ridge run, or even a
> > training shot, which could have replaced the clearly mundane (note
> > that video trickery was used instead). IOW, it's not as memorable as
> > it could be.
>
> Something more along these lines?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aumO0ZHwAro
>
> 95,000+ views, favorited 500+ times.
>
> Clearly it has the better chance of getting Gen Y to drop the Nitendo
> and learn to fly.
>
> /Adam

Yes, though that's a bit xtreme, mother may not approve.

There are several by Sebastian Kawa worth viewing
http://www.youtube.com/user/kawior10

Frank

[Frank Whiteley]

On Aug 9, 3:38 pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Aug 9, 3:16 pm, Adam > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 9, 3:46 pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
>
> > > 2. I thought the narrative was very good. However, I could have done
> > > with one, at the most, two launches and fly-bys. The touted
> > > 'experience' is weakly demonstrated as there are no in-flight
> > > inspirational shots which should include perhaps a gaggle, a cruise,
> > > and perhaps some wave moments, cloudbase, a ridge run, or even a
> > > training shot, which could have replaced the clearly mundane (note
> > > that video trickery was used instead). IOW, it's not as memorable as
> > > it could be.
>
> > Something more along these lines?
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aumO0ZHwAro
>
> > 95,000+ views, favorited 500+ times.
>
> > Clearly it has the better chance of getting Gen Y to drop the Nitendo
> > and learn to fly.
>
> > /Adam
>
> Yes, though that's a bit xtreme, mother may not approve.
>
> There are several by Sebastian Kawa worth viewinghttp://www.youtube.com/user/kawior10
>
> Frank

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zmubrM369o

This one's relatively new, but in the comments SK says he dropped his
camera.;^(

[alex8735]

> This is a very well done promotional video.

I found the video quite boring. It may appeal to older generations but
on younger viewers it won't survive the first 30 seconds. A succesfull
promo video has to be short, exciting an convey emotions.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nzcBKavHk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BjUIFgSZRU

or the sex sells approach:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I

[Mitch]

This reminds me of the movies they showed in High School telling us to
stay off of drugs. All it's missing is the "Fwap, fwap, fwap" of the
reel-to-reel projector spooling out at the end.

[shawn]

Mitch wrote:
> This reminds me of the movies they showed in High School telling us to
> stay off of drugs. All it's missing is the "Fwap, fwap, fwap" of the
> reel-to-reel projector spooling out at the end.
>
LOL. Knew it reminded me of something :-)



Shawn

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"alex8735" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> This is a very well done promotional video.
>
> I found the video quite boring. It may appeal to older generations but
> on younger viewers it won't survive the first 30 seconds. A succesfull
> promo video has to be short, exciting an convey emotions.


Define "older" - I found it kind of slow myself, and I'm old enough that the
AARP is convinced that I should be a member...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[[email protected]]

I appreciate the effort that people put into making and encourage the
SSA and folks to keep trying. However I also agree the video just
personally did not excite me and I found two parts bordeline annoying

One is the asking of the Question "What is Soaring", it is just
annoying - if the viewer has no clue please tell them instead of
torturing them with a rhetorical question. Why not just tell them
then what soaring means and say it is an art and science. Actually if
you need a detailed voice over all mentioning that soaring means
staying aloft using air currents and that allows long cross country
flights... might be useful since many people with no exposure to
soaring think all we can do is sled rides (and wouldn't that get
boring quick). Generally I'd not rely on a voice over and stick with
the visuals and a call to action at the end. Putting much in a voice
over and it probably is hard to avoid it sounding like those high
school education films...

I also think the family angle was greatly oversold. I'm not sure why
that was even emphasized. I'd just have not gone there. While some
families do participate in soaring for the bulk of people I fly with
it is really more a solo than a family experience.

Darryl

On Aug 10, 4:59 am, alex8735 > wrote:
> > This is a very well done promotional video.
>
> I found the video quite boring. It may appeal to older generations but
> on younger viewers it won't survive the first 30 seconds. A succesfull
> promo video has to be short, exciting an convey emotions.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-nzcBKavHk
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BjUIFgSZRU
>
> or the sex sells approach:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I

[Andy Blackburn]

At 12:00 10 August 2007, Alex8735 wrote:

>or the sex sells approach:
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I

We have something to learn from the Argentinians.

9B

[Andy Blackburn]

At 12:00 10 August 2007, Alex8735 wrote:

>or the sex sells approach:
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I

We have something to learn from the Argentinians.

9B

[Doug]

Watching the SSA video was like watching videos of 50ish year old women
holding open canopies on 50ish SGS 2-33's for their 50ish husbands. Not
very exciting and certainly not good for promotion with younger people.

My 21 year old sons favorite video for excitement/promotion is the British
5-8 minute one of flying very close to ridges, low passes, aerobatics and
flying in very close formations. Unfortunately, I can't find the link right
now. The video is something along the lines of
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BjUIFgSZRU posted earlier and may have been
a long version of this video.

It got his attention whereas the SSA one kept his attention .............
for.............twenty...........seconds. Snore.

Doug

"Andy Blackburn" > wrote in message
...
> At 12:00 10 August 2007, Alex8735 wrote:
>
>>or the sex sells approach:
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I
>
> We have something to learn from the Argentinians.
>
> 9B
>
>
>

[Bill Daniels]

Agreed. Soaring shouldn't be presented as something for the porch swing and
croquet set, which would be, given the current unfortunate soaring
demographics, 'preaching to the choir'. We should make our pitch to the
NEXT generation of pilots - those in their 20's who don't yet know they want
to be glider pilots.

Although many will disagree, soaring is, in fact, an extreme adventure sport
in the mold of mountain climbing and skiing. We need to pitch it as such.

And yes, we can learn something from the Argentines.

Bill Daniels


"Doug" > wrote in message
. ..
> Watching the SSA video was like watching videos of 50ish year old women
> holding open canopies on 50ish SGS 2-33's for their 50ish husbands. Not
> very exciting and certainly not good for promotion with younger people.
>
> My 21 year old sons favorite video for excitement/promotion is the British
> 5-8 minute one of flying very close to ridges, low passes, aerobatics and
> flying in very close formations. Unfortunately, I can't find the link
> right now. The video is something along the lines of
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BjUIFgSZRU posted earlier and may have
> been a long version of this video.
>
> It got his attention whereas the SSA one kept his attention .............
> for.............twenty...........seconds. Snore.
>
> Doug
>
> "Andy Blackburn" > wrote in message
> ...
>> At 12:00 10 August 2007, Alex8735 wrote:
>>
>>>or the sex sells approach:
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dD-ZIILtI2I
>>
>> We have something to learn from the Argentinians.
>>
>> 9B
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

Doug wrote:
> My 21 year old sons favorite video for excitement/promotion is the British
> 5-8 minute one of flying very close to ridges, low passes, aerobatics and
> flying in very close formations. Unfortunately, I can't find the link right
> now.
>
Is this the link? http://www.smokinvid.co.uk/

If so, its sold out with apparently no plans to make more copies, though
the website hints that they may be open to persuasion.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Dan G]

I believe the British videos lead to/were the result of the "Smokin"
films. I think there's been several variations on those too, the
latest being http://www.liftedfilms.com/ . (I note the description on
the World Juniors film says "the idea was never used..." I wonder why
not?)

Mind you, there's actually good reasons for appealing to the older
demographic, rather than the younger. They tend to have plenty of
money and, post kids, plenty of time. A person who takes up gliding at
50 can be an active member for 20 years or more. Young people tend to
be the opposite - no money, no time. I personally think "targetting" a
particular demographic is a waste of time - make the sport accessible,
and you'll get people of all types rolling up.


Dan

[Bill Daniels]

"Dan G" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>I believe the British videos lead to/were the result of the "Smokin"
> films. I think there's been several variations on those too, the
> latest being http://www.liftedfilms.com/ . (I note the description on
> the World Juniors film says "the idea was never used..." I wonder why
> not?)
>
> Mind you, there's actually good reasons for appealing to the older
> demographic, rather than the younger. They tend to have plenty of
> money and, post kids, plenty of time. A person who takes up gliding at
> 50 can be an active member for 20 years or more. Young people tend to
> be the opposite - no money, no time. I personally think "targetting" a
> particular demographic is a waste of time - make the sport accessible,
> and you'll get people of all types rolling up.
>
>
> Dan

Dan, I don't agree. Young people can't be pigeonholed that easily. Some
are poor and have little time but others are in a position to enjoy our
sport. We only need as many as we have gliders and instructors for.

Kids 'make time' for whatever they want to do. Obviously more than a few
have both time and money. Take a look at other extreme outdoor sports and
the marketing. They all pitch expensive sports to young people. They
wouldn't do this if it didn't work.

I think the real problem with youth recruiting is that we just drive them
away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.

Bill Daniels

[Greg Arnold]

The planes in that video look expensive. I wonder why anyone would pay
that kind of money just to take off, fly around for a few minutes, and
then come back and land? Maybe the point of this sport is to have an
after-launch-and-landing-BBQ? Could this be the family angle mentioned
by the yes-I-talk-very-slowly narrator? Very confusing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E

>
> I think the real problem with youth recruiting is that we just drive them
> away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.
>
> Bill Daniels
>
>

[Papa3]

Anyone who spends any time on "marketing" will tell you that step 1 is
to carefully segment your market. Having done that, you then figure
out what appeals to each of your segments and market appropriately.
In our case, it's pretty clear that we can/should have many target
markets. What works for the under 25 set may not and probably will
not appeal to the 50 and over set.

My neighbor recently left a cushy corporate marketing job to found his
own firm which specifically targets the under 30 crowd. Recently,
he's been involved in huge marketing efforts for NASCAR. Surprisingly
(at least ot me), NASCAR has an image problem in being perceived as
having a redneck, low income fan base (no offense to anyone who fits
into either or both of those categories). NASCAR wants to get more
advertising and sponsorship dollars from a different group of
companies. They go to a marketing firm which caters to the new
segment to drive interest, which then convinces the sponsoring
companies to sign up.

Anyway, this is a good discussion, since it helps to highlight the
fact that what we're selling depends to some extent on who we're
selling to. It's very hard for the adherents to step out of their
shoes and remember that it may not be easy to convert the great
unwashed.

Anyway, here's to hot chicks, indie rock, and slick video editing
(yeah, I know, I'm in trouble now).

P3

On Aug 13, 4:37 pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> "Dan G" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
> >
> > Mind you, there's actually good reasons for appealing to the older
> > demographic, rather than the younger. They tend to have plenty of
> > money and, post kids, plenty of time. A person who takes up gliding at
> > 50 can be an active member for 20 years or more. Young people tend to
> > be the opposite - no money, no time. I personally think "targetting" a
> > particular demographic is a waste of time - make the sport accessible,
> > and you'll get people of all types rolling up.
>
> > Dan
>
> Dan, I don't agree. Young people can't be pigeonholed that easily. Some
> are poor and have little time but others are in a position to enjoy our
> sport. We only need as many as we have gliders and instructors for.
>
> Kids 'make time' for whatever they want to do. Obviously more than a few
> have both time and money. Take a look at other extreme outdoor sports and
> the marketing. They all pitch expensive sports to young people. They
> wouldn't do this if it didn't work.
>
> I think the real problem with youth recruiting is that we just drive them
> away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.
>
> Bill Daniels- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Del C]

The commentator on the SSA video sounds to me as if
he is either bored to death, or gliding is dead boring!

Have a look at this video produced by the Polish Gliding
Team - much better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTR93Hf9gjI

Del C

At 21:12 13 August 2007, Greg Arnold wrote:
>The planes in that video look expensive. I wonder
>why anyone would pay
>that kind of money just to take off, fly around for
>a few minutes, and
>then come back and land? Maybe the point of this sport
>is to have an
>after-launch-and-landing-BBQ? Could this be the family
>angle mentioned
>by the yes-I-talk-very-slowly narrator? Very confusing!
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgvVA5jXO2E
>
>>
>> I think the real problem with youth recruiting is
>>that we just drive them
>> away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.
>>
>> Bill Daniels
>>
>>
>

[Sally W]

At 20:42 13 August 2007, Bill Daniels wrote:
<snip>

>I think the real problem with youth recruiting is that
>we just drive them
>away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.


Personally I think the biggest problem (and with recruiting
women as well) is a youngster or woman turning up at
a club to find they are the only one, or almost the
only one. I'm suggesting there is a 'critical mass'
kind of thing going on.

[Dan G]

On Aug 13, 10:20 pm, Papa3 > wrote:
> Anyone who spends any time on "marketing" will tell you that step 1 is
> to carefully segment your market. Having done that, you then figure
> out what appeals to each of your segments and market appropriately.
> In our case, it's pretty clear that we can/should have many target
> markets. What works for the under 25 set may not and probably will
> not appeal to the 50 and over set.

You can "target" some products, but only if you can tailor the product
to the market. If you can't you start selling a perception, rather
than a reality, which leads to rapid turn-over in members (to keep the
discussion to gliding).

I'm 26, and I fly in a club that happens to have a lot of younger
members, and several women too, so have a good idea of what I'm
talking about, because I'm talking about my friends and myself. There
is a high turnover in the young members in the club - only a *very*
few young people will stick with gliding through their career
advancement and starting a family. Older members have no such
limitations, and typically stacks of cash they're having trouble
spending now their children have flown the nest.

The few young people who stick with gliding for any length of time
almost always receive a lot of money from their parents, one of whom
is usually already a glider pilot. There are not many people in that
category, so it's not worth "targetting" that "market".

(Rock climbing, which is "another extreme outdoor sport" and one that
has a "young" image, is something I used to to, and I reckon that cost
me about 10% of what gliding has for the same period of time. I've
managed to stick with gliding because our club is very cheap, but as a
result has poor facilities, and it's only through drive and
stubborness that I've managed to progress at all. Many of my peers
give up and leave.)

Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
the challenge.

If gliding clubs are interested in expansion there are lots of things
they can do. If you want to know what, the GFA have literally written
the book:

http://www.gfa.org.au/development/guide.php

Download the draft guide from the third box on the right. (There's
also the SSA Growbook, of course, which has lots of good stuff in it
too.)

Clubs have two options: follow the advice of the GFA and SSA and grow,
ignore it and shrink. As the IGC president said earlier this year,
glider pilots will place all the obstacles in the world before
themselves before they'll actually do anything, so I don't expect to
see any clubs following that guide (someone prove me wrong).


Dan

[Del C]

I can't quite agree that you shouldn't try to recruit
younger people, as they often have a reasonable amount
of disposable income for a few years, until they get
married, take on a mortgage to buy a house and have
children. Even if they have to give up gliding for
a few years due to financial restraints, like born
again bikers they often come back to it in middle age.
As an instructor at a large club I have had several
students recently who fit into this category. At least
they know that gliding exists.

Del C

At 10:18 14 August 2007, Dan G wrote:
>>
>
>I'm 26, and I fly in a club that happens to have a
>lot of younger
>members, and several women too, so have a good idea
>of what I'm
>talking about, because I'm talking about my friends
>and myself. There
>is a high turnover in the young members in the club
>- only a *very*
>few young people will stick with gliding through their
>career
>advancement and starting a family. Older members have
>no such
>limitations, and typically stacks of cash they're having
>trouble
>spending now their children have flown the nest.
>
>The few young people who stick with gliding for any
>length of time
>almost always receive a lot of money from their parents,
>one of whom
>is usually already a glider pilot. There are not many
>people in that
>category, so it's not worth 'targetting' that 'market'.
>
>(Rock climbing, which is 'another extreme outdoor sport'
>and one that
>has a 'young' image, is something I used to to, and
>I reckon that cost
>me about 10% of what gliding has for the same period
>of time. I've
>managed to stick with gliding because our club is very
>cheap, but as a
>result has poor facilities, and it's only through drive
>and
>stubborness that I've managed to progress at all. Many
>of my peers
>give up and leave.)
>
>Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty
>of trial flight
>customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the
>sport for years is
>the challenge.
>
>If gliding clubs are interested in expansion there
>are lots of things
>they can do. If you want to know what, the GFA have
>literally written
>the book:
>
>http://www.gfa.org.au/development/guide.php
>
>Download the draft guide from the third box on the
>right. (There's
>also the SSA Growbook, of course, which has lots of
>good stuff in it
>too.)
>
>Clubs have two options: follow the advice of the GFA
>and SSA and grow,
>ignore it and shrink. As the IGC president said earlier
>this year,
>glider pilots will place all the obstacles in the world
>before
>themselves before they'll actually do anything, so
>I don't expect to
>see any clubs following that guide (someone prove me
>wrong).
>
>

[Tony Verhulst]

> Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
> customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
> the challenge.

This is the absolute truth, as I see it. Thanks for writing this, Dan.

Tony V.

[toad]

On Aug 14, 5:09 am, Sally W >
wrote:
> At 20:42 13 August 2007, Bill Daniels wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >I think the real problem with youth recruiting is that
> >we just drive them
> >away with videos like this unfortunate SSA release.
>
> Personally I think the biggest problem (and with recruiting
> women as well) is a youngster or woman turning up at
> a club to find they are the only one, or almost the
> only one. I'm suggesting there is a 'critical mass'
> kind of thing going on.

Both of these points are accurate and need to be addressed.

Soaring should be marketed as exciting as possible, (XC, ridge,
contest, acro) and the reality should be made to fit this image. Too
many glider clubs are really, "hang around the airport all day, maybe
fly within 5 miles of the airport" clubs.

If we actually make soaring exciting again, then people will stick
with it.

On the 'critical mass' issue, I think that the best way to get youth
into it, is to work our way down from the 50yo's to the 40's, then the
30's and then 20's. It there are lots of people 5-10 years older than
you, you don't feel as out of place as if the next older person is 20+
years older.

Todd Smith
3S

[Dan G]

On Aug 14, 12:27 pm, Del C
> wrote:
> I can't quite agree that you shouldn't try to recruit
> younger people, as they often have a reasonable amount
> of disposable income for a few years, until they get
> married, take on a mortgage to buy a house and have
> children. Even if they have to give up gliding for
> a few years due to financial restraints, like born
> again bikers they often come back to it in middle age.
> As an instructor at a large club I have had several
> students recently who fit into this category. At least
> they know that gliding exists.

Good point.

To take a broader view: if a club wants to grow, it needs to make
pilots stay. To do that, it needs to make gliding more fun than mowing
the lawn, otherwise members will stop coming and mow the lawn instead
(as the GFA Dev Guide memorably states). There's a whole raft of
measures that can be done to achieve that - keep one glider for
bookable training so you don't always have to spend all day on a cold
field for 20 mins flying. Give structured post-solo support and
guidance, explaining what people need to do to progress and helping
and encouraging them every step of the way. Have a mid/high-
performance two-seater than can be used for XC training, even if it's
just a K21, and *use* it for that, not just circuits.

Once that is in place and working, then focus on marketing. Your
marketing efforts will be that much more successful as satisfied new
members having fun will tell their peers, and then they will come
gliding too.

Making the sport accessible to younger people is important (I
mentioned accessibility before). Offer under-25s substantially
discounted membership and flying fees so younger people can actually
afford the sport in the first place, but treat them as equals.


Dan

[Bill Daniels]

If I read modern demographics right, something like 30% never marry and
raise children. A few of those should make good candidates. It's very
important to keep in mind that we are talking about less than 1% of the
general population. In that light, generalizations always fail. We recruit
one-by-one. In our sport, mass marketing is an oxymoron.

However, I do agree that there is a 'critical mass' for attracting women and
youth. I'm sure being the only one present is uncomfortable

Bill Daniels


"Dan G" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Aug 13, 10:20 pm, Papa3 > wrote:
>> Anyone who spends any time on "marketing" will tell you that step 1 is
>> to carefully segment your market. Having done that, you then figure
>> out what appeals to each of your segments and market appropriately.
>> In our case, it's pretty clear that we can/should have many target
>> markets. What works for the under 25 set may not and probably will
>> not appeal to the 50 and over set.
>
> You can "target" some products, but only if you can tailor the product
> to the market. If you can't you start selling a perception, rather
> than a reality, which leads to rapid turn-over in members (to keep the
> discussion to gliding).
>
> I'm 26, and I fly in a club that happens to have a lot of younger
> members, and several women too, so have a good idea of what I'm
> talking about, because I'm talking about my friends and myself. There
> is a high turnover in the young members in the club - only a *very*
> few young people will stick with gliding through their career
> advancement and starting a family. Older members have no such
> limitations, and typically stacks of cash they're having trouble
> spending now their children have flown the nest.
>
> The few young people who stick with gliding for any length of time
> almost always receive a lot of money from their parents, one of whom
> is usually already a glider pilot. There are not many people in that
> category, so it's not worth "targetting" that "market".
>
> (Rock climbing, which is "another extreme outdoor sport" and one that
> has a "young" image, is something I used to to, and I reckon that cost
> me about 10% of what gliding has for the same period of time. I've
> managed to stick with gliding because our club is very cheap, but as a
> result has poor facilities, and it's only through drive and
> stubborness that I've managed to progress at all. Many of my peers
> give up and leave.)
>
> Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
> customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
> the challenge.
>
> If gliding clubs are interested in expansion there are lots of things
> they can do. If you want to know what, the GFA have literally written
> the book:
>
> http://www.gfa.org.au/development/guide.php
>
> Download the draft guide from the third box on the right. (There's
> also the SSA Growbook, of course, which has lots of good stuff in it
> too.)
>
> Clubs have two options: follow the advice of the GFA and SSA and grow,
> ignore it and shrink. As the IGC president said earlier this year,
> glider pilots will place all the obstacles in the world before
> themselves before they'll actually do anything, so I don't expect to
> see any clubs following that guide (someone prove me wrong).
>
>
> Dan
>

[Bruce]

Bill Daniels wrote:
> If I read modern demographics right, something like 30% never marry and
> raise children. A few of those should make good candidates. It's very
> important to keep in mind that we are talking about less than 1% of the
> general population. In that light, generalizations always fail. We recruit
> one-by-one. In our sport, mass marketing is an oxymoron.
Now there is the truth and challenge of it Bill.
Mass marketing to such a bunch of misanthropic mavericks is indeed a
contradictory process.

Half the attraction for me is the solitude and self reliance and challenges
involved in taking a single seat glass slipper (OK mine is a little woolly from
age) and doing incredible things. All alone, no excuses, nobody else to blame.
Incredibly selfish.

Conversely,the other half of the attraction for me is the shared experience and
social part of a club operation. Making it work requires a strong sense of
community with the bunch of reprobates at the club.

One problem here is the increasingly commercial mindset. People simultaneously
complain of the cost of things, and insist on paying for instant gratification
rather than investing time and effort to obtain the same result without the
cost. It is the difference in mindset between enjoying the journey, and the
"are we there yet?" approach. If you can get people to see the value of and
pleasure to be had in the "journey" part of the sport they will stay. Even if
the day is not flyable, a day spent tinkering with the toys with like minded
people is more fun for me than most alternatives. But if you have the mindset
that the only purpose of this is the time spent in the air you are going to feel
he return is inadequate. Interestingly this appears to be learned behaviour - we
take 14/15 year olds and give them responsibilities and value the contribution
they make, and they develop a sense of pride and achievement. They start getting
a reward from contributing - which is noticeably absent from most of the 20
somethings we attract to intro flights.

It is not just age related, although age and gender magnify the differences. Any
time you get such a high concentration of individualists as opposed to the bland
masses who can't see the point, there are going to be some challenges.

So - to (eventually ) get to the point. It is not about mass marketing, it is
about finding the reward for the individual when he/she presents at the field.



>
> However, I do agree that there is a 'critical mass' for attracting women and
> youth. I'm sure being the only one present is uncomfortable
>
> Bill Daniels
>
>
> "Dan G" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> On Aug 13, 10:20 pm, Papa3 > wrote:
>>> Anyone who spends any time on "marketing" will tell you that step 1 is
>>> to carefully segment your market. Having done that, you then figure
>>> out what appeals to each of your segments and market appropriately.
>>> In our case, it's pretty clear that we can/should have many target
>>> markets. What works for the under 25 set may not and probably will
>>> not appeal to the 50 and over set.
>> You can "target" some products, but only if you can tailor the product
>> to the market. If you can't you start selling a perception, rather
>> than a reality, which leads to rapid turn-over in members (to keep the
>> discussion to gliding).
>>
>> I'm 26, and I fly in a club that happens to have a lot of younger
>> members, and several women too, so have a good idea of what I'm
>> talking about, because I'm talking about my friends and myself. There
>> is a high turnover in the young members in the club - only a *very*
>> few young people will stick with gliding through their career
>> advancement and starting a family. Older members have no such
>> limitations, and typically stacks of cash they're having trouble
>> spending now their children have flown the nest.
>>
>> The few young people who stick with gliding for any length of time
>> almost always receive a lot of money from their parents, one of whom
>> is usually already a glider pilot. There are not many people in that
>> category, so it's not worth "targetting" that "market".
>>
>> (Rock climbing, which is "another extreme outdoor sport" and one that
>> has a "young" image, is something I used to to, and I reckon that cost
>> me about 10% of what gliding has for the same period of time. I've
>> managed to stick with gliding because our club is very cheap, but as a
>> result has poor facilities, and it's only through drive and
>> stubborness that I've managed to progress at all. Many of my peers
>> give up and leave.)
>>
>> Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
>> customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
>> the challenge.
>>
>> If gliding clubs are interested in expansion there are lots of things
>> they can do. If you want to know what, the GFA have literally written
>> the book:
>>
>> http://www.gfa.org.au/development/guide.php
>>
>> Download the draft guide from the third box on the right. (There's
>> also the SSA Growbook, of course, which has lots of good stuff in it
>> too.)
>>
>> Clubs have two options: follow the advice of the GFA and SSA and grow,
>> ignore it and shrink. As the IGC president said earlier this year,
>> glider pilots will place all the obstacles in the world before
>> themselves before they'll actually do anything, so I don't expect to
>> see any clubs following that guide (someone prove me wrong).
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>
>

[Papa3]

On Aug 14, 6:15 am, Dan G > wrote:
> On Aug 13, 10:20 pm, Papa3 > wrote:
>
> > Anyone who spends any time on "marketing" will tell you that step 1 is
> > to carefully segment your market. Having done that, you then figure
> > out what appeals to each of your segments and market appropriately.
> > In our case, it's pretty clear that we can/should have many target
> > markets. What works for the under 25 set may not and probably will
> > not appeal to the 50 and over set.
>
> You can "target" some products, but only if you can tailor the product
> to the market. If you can't you start selling a perception, rather
> than a reality, which leads to rapid turn-over in members (to keep the
> discussion to gliding).
>
> I'm 26, and I fly in a club that happens to have a lot of younger
> members, and several women too, so have a good idea of what I'm
> talking about, because I'm talking about my friends and myself. There
> is a high turnover in the young members in the club - only a *very*
> few young people will stick with gliding through their career
> advancement and starting a family. Older members have no such
> limitations, and typically stacks of cash they're having trouble
> spending now their children have flown the nest.
>
> The few young people who stick with gliding for any length of time
> almost always receive a lot of money from their parents, one of whom
> is usually already a glider pilot. There are not many people in that
> category, so it's not worth "targetting" that "market".
>
>
> Dan


Someone already beat me to part of the punch, but...

I'm a good example of someone who doesn't fit the model you describe.
Took up gliding at age 18 in college, and I'm still at it 23 years
later after a "real job" and "real kids". Sadly, I'm still among the
youngest at any contest I go to. If you look around, there are
more than a few folks who came in young and stuck with it, but they
came from clubs or operations where there was some level of interest
in and support for youth. Harris Hill comes to mind as one example of
a place (in the US) that's produced many lifelong soaring pilots.

So, I don't agree that we shouldn't market to youth. As someone else
pointed out, it's also the case that many people who get their first
experience when they're young and carefree come back after the kids
are in high school or college.

As far as the product is concerned, I couldn't agree more that the
real issue is keeping people interested for the long haul. And, all
of the comments about making the sport more appealing on all levels
ring true. I was just focused on the marketing side for this
thread.

Cheers,
P3

[Sally W]

At 14:54 14 August 2007, Bill Daniels wrote:
<snip>
>
>However, I do agree that there is a 'critical mass'
>for attracting women and
>youth. I'm sure being the only one present is uncomfortable

My own background includes doing science at school
(mostly male), working in a mainly male industry (IT),
and a lot of single-handed dinghy racing (also mostly
male) so it wasn't usually a problem for me but that
is probably unusual.

Of course once I'd got hooked (about 30 seconds after
1st launch - I got hooked on dinghy sailing just as
quickly, but 40 years ago!) I soon found that regardless
of age or gender we all had something in common - we
like gliding. But it's getting through to realising
that that matters.

[Vsoars]

On Aug 14, 3:07 pm, Sally W >
wrote:
> At 14:54 14 August 2007, Bill Daniels wrote:
> <snip>
>
>
>
> >However, I do agree that there is a 'critical mass'
> >for attracting women and
> >youth. I'm sure being the only one present is uncomfortable
>
> My own background includes doing science at school
> (mostly male), working in a mainly male industry (IT),
> and a lot of single-handed dinghy racing (also mostly
> male) so it wasn't usually a problem for me but that
> is probably unusual.
>
> Of course once I'd got hooked (about 30 seconds after
> 1st launch - I got hooked on dinghy sailing just as
> quickly, but 40 years ago!) I soon found that regardless
> of age or gender we all had something in common - we
> like gliding. But it's getting through to realising
> that that matters.


We have watched some great soaring videos. Now what? The discussion
inspired me to begin the process of setting up a Web page to serve as
a collection point for the best soaring videos. Go to my web site and
see the ones I've imported.

www.soar.weebly.com

Please nominate videos you think I should add, and check back as the
site evolves.

As chair of the SSA Publicity Committee, I'm looking for good
promotional materials and people to use the materials. Consider
joining the Promote Soaring Team. For more information, check out the
Publicity Homepage. You can get there from the SSA page on the SSA
web site. Click on the "Publicity" tab.

[Nyal Williams]

One thing we did in our club. After drifting up and
down between 60 - 90 members, (mostly down for the
last 10 years and including just two women), we halved
the initiation fee and put on a campaign to attract
new members -- flyers sent to registered airplane pilots
in our area, and a couple of other things. We've had
an influx of 22 new members and 5 of them are young
women! I don't know how that happened because they
were not pilots. They are highschool age, college
age, and one young mother. Don't discount serendipity,
but don't count on it either!

At 21:36 14 August 2007, Vsoars wrote:
>On Aug 14, 3:07 pm, Sally W
>wrote:
>> At 14:54 14 August 2007, Bill Daniels wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >However, I do agree that there is a 'critical mass'
>> >for attracting women and
>> >youth. I'm sure being the only one present is uncomfortable
>>
>> My own background includes doing science at school
>> (mostly male), working in a mainly male industry (IT),
>> and a lot of single-handed dinghy racing (also mostly
>> male) so it wasn't usually a problem for me but that
>> is probably unusual.
>>
>> Of course once I'd got hooked (about 30 seconds after
>> 1st launch - I got hooked on dinghy sailing just as
>> quickly, but 40 years ago!) I soon found that regardless
>> of age or gender we all had something in common -
>>we
>> like gliding. But it's getting through to realising
>> that that matters.
>
>
>We have watched some great soaring videos. Now what?
> The discussion
>inspired me to begin the process of setting up a Web
>page to serve as
>a collection point for the best soaring videos. Go
>to my web site and
>see the ones I've imported.
>
>www.soar.weebly.com
>
>Please nominate videos you think I should add, and
>check back as the
>site evolves.
>
>As chair of the SSA Publicity Committee, I'm looking
>for good
>promotional materials and people to use the materials.
>Consider
>joining the Promote Soaring Team. For more information,
>check out the
>Publicity Homepage. You can get there from the SSA
>page on the SSA
>web site. Click on the 'Publicity' tab.
>
>

[[email protected]]

YouTube and community generated content certainly has it's place, and
there is a lot of great material out there, but here is a hint on
production values for any "officially produced" media:

http://iwc-media.futurecom.ch/technics/pilots/_mov/pilots_big.wmv

While the storyline in this marketing flick is not anything special,
we would likely benefit from some material which is closer to these
production values.

Another example is the Van Nuys video. http://www.onesixright.com/

I don't know the background story for One Six Right, but if the
creators could mine the nostalgia and passion for old airports and
aircraft in such a way, I'm quite certain that they could tell a great
story for a broad audience about modern soaring, competition, raw
speed/grace/beauty, accessibility, and throw in a bit about the
classics for those types. If someone could follow-up with the
producers/directors/backers of OSR, there might already be a
passionate soaring pilot amongst them, or maybe they just need to be
"steered" towards their next project.

Neither of the above examples is perfect -- both are a bit too
nostalgic and cheesy for my tastes -- but again, the production values
of these two flicks are a good reference point for future work.

Regarding marketing via the web. See: http://www.londonglidingclub.co.uk/.
The designer pretty much hit the sweet spot as far as marketing
soaring to the public online. I believe that the designer is a pilot
and has posted on RAS previously. Perhaps the designer is available
to consult on other online PR efforts, or perhaps they can recommend
other sources if not.

Disclaimer: All these links have likely surfaced on RAS previously.
But hey, this very thread is probably a dupe.

P.S. Another example. The Grand Prix videos are going in the right
direction but are perhaps a bit too focused on "racing" and
competition to truly reach a wide audience.

[ContestID67]

I think we are all missing a point about why other sports attract kids
and soaring generally doesn't.

Think about things that kids get into (other than video games). Snow
boarding. Mountain biking. Sky Diving. Scuba diving. Para-
whatever. What do they have in common? The turnaround time from
beginner to the point of "pushing the edge" is short. There is little
regulation (or self regulated) in the sport to create stumbling
blocks. The sports are edgy and are immediately thrilling (and sound
thrilling to your friends). All the sports (and power flying also)
mentioned above can be done nearly any day of the week. It's all
about short attention spans, busy lives and needing immediate
gratification.

Now let's take the sport we know and love. This great video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aumO0ZHwAro is very, very appealing to
kids because it presents the exciting side of the sport and shows kids
doing it. Unfortunately, getting to the point of being able to do any
of these things requires years of practice and is generally frowned
upon or considered outright illegal by our regulators. Therefore
soaring is bound to disappoint the crowd that wants this kind of
immediate rush.

What to do about this inherent liability of soaring? There are some
smart people in the sport that may be able to help but some things we
just cannot fix. We can't fly every day. We can't get someone solo-
ing after a few flights. These things aren't fixable by the very
nature of the sport.

My club tries very hard to attract youngsters and keep them involved
but we loose them unless they are inherently drawn to what we do.
Some are, most aren't. CAP is great but the kids that go for CAP are
viewed by the "cool" kids like being a "uncool" Boy Scout (I think
otherwise). Too bad.

I think that our sport will survive. We just need to understand that
it will never be the big bang that the latest trendy thrill-fest is.

Thanks, John "67R" DeRosa

PS One small point - When I am talking about what soaring I use the
word "racing". I don't fly a glider, I fly a "racing sailplane". I
amaze people with tales of stay up (all of) three hours!! Its my way
of making the sport a "thrill-fest".

[Dan G]

On Aug 20, 2:43 am, ContestID67 > wrote:
> I think we are all missing a point about why other sports attract kids
> and soaring generally doesn't...

A good post, but I can't decide if I agree with you or not.
Absolutely, the things in those videos are not the reality of gliding
- useful for raising awareness perhaps, but if we sold gliding on
those we'd be misleading potential pilots.

On the other hand, gliding is a lot more immeadiate and rewarding than
you give it credit for - I think you're a little harsh on the
differences between gliding and other "extreme" sports. I learnt to
glide on the winch, and my first half-dozen or so winch launches were
the most exciting thing I've ever done, and I've done a fair few
things.

Even after those first few flights, I never found the early parts of
learning to fly anything other than a thrill - I still remember the
buzz when my instructor said "now you're going to fly the top part of
the launch" - whoa! Or my first attempt to fly the glider down the
approach - utterly crap, speed and reference point all over the shop,
but I so desperately wanted to do it again and again and finally get
the thing on the deck properly. I've sailed, rock climbed and mountain
biked and learning to fly easily equalled any of those.

It was later that the problems start, and why I wrote:

> Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
> customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
> the challenge.

I became incredibly frustrated in my club as getting instruction
became harder and harder during the winter (I joined in the autumn).
Ask any pre-solo pilot who quits and they'll tell you that's why.
Being at the airfield is less fun than something else they could be
doing. I personally desperately wanted to become a soaring pilot and
wasn't going to let these problems stop me, but it shouldn't be that
hard. Post-solo has been equally difficult - everybody knows many solo
pilots soon jack it in as their progression stops.

What to do about that? It's not hard. Have a glider that can be booked
for instruction, so the trainee knows it's worth their while to go to
the field. Have an instructor incentive scheme that's actually
worthwhile - ask the instructors what they want, and give them it, so
you have enough to provide flight instruction. Encourage your field to
be run better - get it going at 9am in the morning, not 10.30. Make it
clear to everyone what time they should get there in the morning -
they'll moan, but soon find that it's worthwhile as everything starts
happening faster rather than waiting around for instructors, marshalls
and winch/tug drivers to turn up in their own sweet time. Get the
launch rate up through good training and support for people are doing
the ground-handling (i.e. not shouting at people when they make
mistakes, but actually helping them to do it better). Have a post-solo
development system.

The trouble is, it *is* hard. Clubs are mostly made up of people who
have been gliding for years and have a fixed view of "the way things
should be done". Getting them to change is nigh-on impossible. I have
no idea if it's even possible.

If a gliding club wants to grow, it needs to put these things in
order. "Marketing" is, if anything, a distraction away from the real
problems gliding faces.

But does any of this matter? Gliding worldwide is declining quickly.
German gliding is imploding and in the UK membership is at it's lowest
point for decades. Is this a problem? Hard to say. Most clubs are big
enough for it not to be a problem for a while yet. Having fewer people
in the sport will mean clubs are less congested and it will be easier
to get a launch when you want. There will be fewer people trying to
fly the club aircraft. As the number of pilots declines and there are
still a few sales of new sailplanes, second hand glider prices will
drop.

On the other hand, clubs may well shrink to the point where mid-week
launching is unviable due to lack of demand. Prices will have to rise
to make up for falling numbers. Smaller clubs will close. Gliding will
have a quieter voice as airline travel and demand for airspace grows.

This is something for individual clubs to decide about for themselves.
Either they want to grow or they're happy as they are. (Some clubs
that own their fields are cunningly off-setting their shrinking
membership and rising costs by building power hangars and renting them
out.) National bodies can do little or nothing - they can't tell the
clubs how to run themselves, only give advice if they want it.

If you want to grow your club, download the GFA Development Guide and
implement it's advice. Don't talk it to death, just do it.


Dan

[Bruce]

People keep going on about the decline in membership.
Funny, but our club is busier now than at any time in the last 6 years (that I
have been a member).
The cost of gliding.
Winches work - old rag and tube gliders get expensive to maintain eventually. By
comparison the workhorse glass gliders seem to be cheapest in the long run. They
make better trainers because of better performance and handling, and certainly
are more "sexy" for attracting students.
Nicer facilities would be nice - but then we would lose members because costs
would go up. (play to your market?)
Those looking at the decline in membership in the EU at the moment need to
consider the demographics and economics contributing. New rules suddenly prevent
a lot of the gliding population from flying solo because of age. The BGA members
now have a lot more bureaucracy to deal with, not much fun. Germany has a
rapidly ageing population, has high unemployment, and is losing economically
active people at the highest rate since the second world war. Hardly a growth
market for any recreation activity.
Presumably this will stabilise, but statistically we can expect the number of
EASA regulated pilots to decrease. Largely due factors unrelated to gliding per se.

What we focus on, is that club activity should be fun. That simple - this is why
people do recreation activities - if it is no longer fun, it stops happening. So
those who make it no fun for others find the advantages of joining another club,
or taking up knitting being explained to them. Works wonders.

Dan G wrote:
> On Aug 20, 2:43 am, ContestID67 > wrote:
>> I think we are all missing a point about why other sports attract kids
>> and soaring generally doesn't...
>
> A good post, but I can't decide if I agree with you or not.
> Absolutely, the things in those videos are not the reality of gliding
> - useful for raising awareness perhaps, but if we sold gliding on
> those we'd be misleading potential pilots.
>
> On the other hand, gliding is a lot more immeadiate and rewarding than
> you give it credit for - I think you're a little harsh on the
> differences between gliding and other "extreme" sports. I learnt to
> glide on the winch, and my first half-dozen or so winch launches were
> the most exciting thing I've ever done, and I've done a fair few
> things.
>
> Even after those first few flights, I never found the early parts of
> learning to fly anything other than a thrill - I still remember the
> buzz when my instructor said "now you're going to fly the top part of
> the launch" - whoa! Or my first attempt to fly the glider down the
> approach - utterly crap, speed and reference point all over the shop,
> but I so desperately wanted to do it again and again and finally get
> the thing on the deck properly. I've sailed, rock climbed and mountain
> biked and learning to fly easily equalled any of those.
>
> It was later that the problems start, and why I wrote:
>
>> Marketing is almost a side-show; most clubs get plenty of trial flight
>> customers. Turning them into pilots who stay in the sport for years is
>> the challenge.
>
> I became incredibly frustrated in my club as getting instruction
> became harder and harder during the winter (I joined in the autumn).
> Ask any pre-solo pilot who quits and they'll tell you that's why.
> Being at the airfield is less fun than something else they could be
> doing. I personally desperately wanted to become a soaring pilot and
> wasn't going to let these problems stop me, but it shouldn't be that
> hard. Post-solo has been equally difficult - everybody knows many solo
> pilots soon jack it in as their progression stops.
>
> What to do about that? It's not hard. Have a glider that can be booked
> for instruction, so the trainee knows it's worth their while to go to
> the field. Have an instructor incentive scheme that's actually
> worthwhile - ask the instructors what they want, and give them it, so
> you have enough to provide flight instruction. Encourage your field to
> be run better - get it going at 9am in the morning, not 10.30. Make it
> clear to everyone what time they should get there in the morning -
> they'll moan, but soon find that it's worthwhile as everything starts
> happening faster rather than waiting around for instructors, marshalls
> and winch/tug drivers to turn up in their own sweet time. Get the
> launch rate up through good training and support for people are doing
> the ground-handling (i.e. not shouting at people when they make
> mistakes, but actually helping them to do it better). Have a post-solo
> development system.
>
> The trouble is, it *is* hard. Clubs are mostly made up of people who
> have been gliding for years and have a fixed view of "the way things
> should be done". Getting them to change is nigh-on impossible. I have
> no idea if it's even possible.
>
> If a gliding club wants to grow, it needs to put these things in
> order. "Marketing" is, if anything, a distraction away from the real
> problems gliding faces.
>
> But does any of this matter? Gliding worldwide is declining quickly.
> German gliding is imploding and in the UK membership is at it's lowest
> point for decades. Is this a problem? Hard to say. Most clubs are big
> enough for it not to be a problem for a while yet. Having fewer people
> in the sport will mean clubs are less congested and it will be easier
> to get a launch when you want. There will be fewer people trying to
> fly the club aircraft. As the number of pilots declines and there are
> still a few sales of new sailplanes, second hand glider prices will
> drop.
>
> On the other hand, clubs may well shrink to the point where mid-week
> launching is unviable due to lack of demand. Prices will have to rise
> to make up for falling numbers. Smaller clubs will close. Gliding will
> have a quieter voice as airline travel and demand for airspace grows.
>
> This is something for individual clubs to decide about for themselves.
> Either they want to grow or they're happy as they are. (Some clubs
> that own their fields are cunningly off-setting their shrinking
> membership and rising costs by building power hangars and renting them
> out.) National bodies can do little or nothing - they can't tell the
> clubs how to run themselves, only give advice if they want it.
>
> If you want to grow your club, download the GFA Development Guide and
> implement it's advice. Don't talk it to death, just do it.
>
>
> Dan
>