I'm just wading my way through the accounts section and it reveals quite 
a lot.

 From the FL the RSGB made £41,000
 From the IL the RSGB made only £16,000
 From the Full licence the RSGB made but £9,000

This tells us what we already knew, this no incentive to upgrade farce 
is a joke.

One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I 
wonder who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!

G3PSM continues in denial - this is the man who stated elsewhere that 
the RSGB really didn't want the 3 tier scheme or the FL but that Ofcom 
forced it upon them. He states that the future looks promising! Earth 
calling Colin....

"The One"  wrote in message 
news:9I1ak.140548$Ek2.40612@newsfe17.ams2...
> I'm just wading my way through the accounts section and it reveals quite a 
> lot.
> From the FL the RSGB made £41,000
> From the IL the RSGB made only £16,000
> From the Full licence the RSGB made but £9,000

But why should an organisation that claims to represent the interests
of Radio Hammery make _ANY_ money out of their claimed interest?

> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I wonder 
> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!

Disgraceful. That's £1 out of the pocket of each member. If the RSCB were to
sack that particular parasite, then there's an attention seeker in this NG
who'd do the job for nothing, if only he thought he was getting plaudits
for doing it!

There's a very strong case for _ALL_ minor clerics in the employ of
a book publisher to be paid at the minimum wage, or not to be paid
at all. If you consider that most of the board members do not get paid,
then why should any board member be paid? They all will share the
responsibility equally when the time comes for criminal proceedings
against the RSCB.

"The One"  wrote in message 
news:9I1ak.140548$Ek2.40612@newsfe17.ams2...
> G3PSM continues in denial - this is the man who stated elsewhere that the 
> RSGB really didn't want the 3 tier scheme

So why did they not fight a rear guard action by furnishing an exam
that covered all three levels at the same time (such as the International 
RAE?)

Looks like all RSCB representatives speak with forked tongue!

"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
> "The One"  wrote in message 
> news:9I1ak.140548$Ek2.40612@newsfe17.ams2...
>> I'm just wading my way through the accounts section and it reveals quite 
>> a lot.
>> From the FL the RSGB made £41,000
>> From the IL the RSGB made only £16,000
>> From the Full licence the RSGB made but £9,000
>
> But why should an organisation that claims to represent the interests
> of Radio Hammery make _ANY_ money out of their claimed interest?
>


I agree, but do the figures include  the profits from selling the "required" 
books as well? (I say required as most all clubs tell you that you need the 
book to take the course.)
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highfields Amateur Radio Club: http://highfields-arc.co.uk

No trees were destroyed in the sending of this contaminant-free message.
However, a significant number of electrons have been inconvenienced.

"The One"  wrote in message 
news:9I1ak.140548$Ek2.40612@newsfe17.ams2...
> the RSGB really didn't want the 3 tier scheme or the FL but that Ofcom 
> forced it upon them. He states that the future looks promising! Earth 
> calling Colin....
>

Of course (no pun intended) they did. 3 times income streams is more profit 
than 1!

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highfields Amateur Radio Club: http://highfields-arc.co.uk

No trees were destroyed in the sending of this contaminant-free message.
However, a significant number of electrons have been inconvenienced.

On Jun 30, 10:29 am, The One  wrote:
> I'm just wading my way through the accounts section and it reveals quite
> a lot.
>
>  From the FL the RSGB made £41,000
>  From the IL the RSGB made only £16,000
>  From the Full licence the RSGB made but £9,000
>
> This tells us what we already knew, this no incentive to upgrade farce
> is a joke.
>
> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I
> wonder who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!
>
> G3PSM continues in denial - this is the man who stated elsewhere that
> the RSGB really didn't want the 3 tier scheme or the FL but that Ofcom
> forced it upon them. He states that the future looks promising! Earth
> calling Colin....

Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the
accounts list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn’t
list the outgoings. You can’t tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or
loss on the scheme from the published accounts.

If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
write to the RSGB. You could even list the figure here for all to see.

Anyway I though you’d be interested more in the IRTS figures rather
than the RSGB’s since your club is affiliated to that.

http://www.irts.ie/cgi/affiliat.cgi

Club:	City of Belfast Radio Amateur Society
Call Sign:	GI2BX
Venue:	Shorts Sports and Recreational Club, Holywood Road Belfast.
Meetings:	First Monday of each month.
Contact:	Frank Hunter GI4NKB



Woof, woof.

Len GM0ONX

"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
>
>> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I wonder 
>> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!
>

Care to tell us how much you think, lets say, the MD of a software company 
should earn PA?

Thought not...

"GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
news:f6fedb51-e5e5-43f7-8326-28b034a99bac@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
> write to the RSGB. You could even list the figure here for all to see.

The accounts are not a true picture, then?

GM0ONX wrote:

> Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the
> accounts list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn’t
> list the outgoings. You can’t tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or
> loss on the scheme from the published accounts.

Bollox. The whole scheme is run by clubs and volunteers, the figures 
represent pure profit and likely not all the profit as they don't seem 
to take in to account the purchase of study material printed and sold by 
the RSGB.

> If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
> write to the RSGB. 

Why should I? You're the one casting doubt on the validity of the 
published report.

> You could even list the figure here for all to see.

I'll leave that for Len seeing as how you're doubting the figures 
published by your firm of book sellers. There you go:

http://www.rsgb.org/rsgbinfo/annualreport/annualreport.pdf

Woof Woof!

> Anyway I though you’d be interested more in the IRTS figures rather
> than the RSGB’s since your club is affiliated to that.

Why would I? The IRTS is run by _AMATEURS_ for _AMATEURS and unlike you 
I do not cast doubt on the credibility of the society I belong to.

> http://www.irts.ie/cgi/affiliat.cgi
> 
> Club:	City of Belfast Radio Amateur Society
> Call Sign:	GI2BX
> Venue:	Shorts Sports and Recreational Club, Holywood Road Belfast.
> Meetings:	First Monday of each month.
> Contact:	Frank Hunter GI4NKB

Your deduction skills are, well, woeful Sherlock.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:31:48 +0100, "12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>The accounts are not a true picture, then?

The accounts are but what is represented in this news group is only part of
the accounts

On Jun 30, 1:01 pm, The One  wrote:
> GM0ONX wrote:
> > Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the
> > accounts list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn’t
> > list the outgoings. You can’t tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or
> > loss on the scheme from the published accounts.
>
> Bollox. The whole scheme is run by clubs and volunteers, the figures
> represent pure profit and likely not all the profit as they don't seem
> to take in to account the purchase of study material printed and sold by
> the RSGB.
>
> > If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
> > write to the RSGB.
>
> Why should I? You're the one casting doubt on the validity of the
> published report.
>
> > You could even list the figure here for all to see.
>
> I'll leave that for Len seeing as how you're doubting the figures
> published by your firm of book sellers. There you go:
>
> http://www.rsgb.org/rsgbinfo/annualreport/annualreport.pdf
>
> Woof Woof!
>
> > Anyway I though you’d be interested more in the IRTS figures rather
> > than the RSGB’s since your club is affiliated to that.
>
> Why would I? The IRTS is run by _AMATEURS_ for _AMATEURS and unlike you
> I do not cast doubt on the credibility of the society I belong to.
>
> >http://www.irts.ie/cgi/affiliat.cgi
>
> > Club:      City of Belfast Radio Amateur Society
> > Call Sign: GI2BX
> > Venue:     Shorts Sports and Recreational Club, Holywood Road Belfast.
> > Meetings:  First Monday of each month.
> > Contact:   Frank Hunter GI4NKB
>
> Your deduction skills are, well, woeful Sherlock.

Really, on what basis to you say that.  The clubs don't prepare the
exams; update OFCOM on who has passed so that the licence can be
issued online etc.

You really are truly ignorant of how the scheme works aren’t you.

Len GM0ONX

"Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:

>
>"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
>>
>>> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I wonder 
>>> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!
>>
>
>Care to tell us how much you think, lets say, the MD of a software company 
>should earn PA?
>
>Thought not...

Do you mean one who '...has been continuously employed for a number of
years...'?

After all, they should earn more than a newcomer of only a year or two
in the job....oh, wait a minute...<cough, splutter>....
-- 

from
Aero Spike

GM0ONX wrote:

> You really are truly ignorant of how the scheme works aren’t you.

You're truly incapable, nay, ignorant of how to reply to the points 
raised in a properly constructed and composed posting aren't you?

"Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message 
news:muhh64do6eh70geiuonhvffevmhvk1lqo1@4ax.com...
>
> "Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>
>>
>>"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
>>>
>>>> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I 
>>>> wonder
>>>> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!
>>>
>>
>>Care to tell us how much you think, lets say, the MD of a software company
>>should earn PA?
>>
>>Thought not...
>
> Do you mean one who '...has been continuously employed for a number of
> years...'?
>
> After all, they should earn more than a newcomer of only a year or two
> in the job....oh, wait a minute...<cough, splutter>....
> -- 

Indeed Spike.


One also wonders, if the RSGB were dumb enough to offer him a job at say 
£50k PA

Would he say...

"Disgraceful. That's £1 out of the pocket of each member" No thanks...

tox

On Jun 30, 1:21 pm, The One  wrote:
> GM0ONX wrote:
> > You really are truly ignorant of how the scheme works aren’t you.
>
> You're truly incapable, nay, ignorant of how to reply to the points
> raised in a properly constructed and composed posting aren't you?

WWell lets look at your points one by one.

You claim the clubs do all the work - Wrong

You claim its income is 100% profit and there are no other costs -
wrong.

I have no issues with the IRTS and have not said anything negative
about them. They just have no mandate to do anything in Northern
Ireland and to the best of my knowledge have no wish to do so.

You infer that you know how the licence scheme works by knowing about
the cost structure (ie its all profit), yet neither you nor your club
are registered to conduct exams(or am I wrong). Were did you get your
knowledge from then, Kellogg’s?

On Jun 30, 1:31 pm, "Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks
place.comco> wrote:
> "Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:muhh64do6eh70geiuonhvffevmhvk1lqo1@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>
> >>"12 WPM Class A" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> >>news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
>
> >>>> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I
> >>>> wonder
> >>>> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages> >>Care to tell us how much you think, lets say, the MD of a software company
> >>should earn PA?
>
> >>Thought not...
>
> > Do you mean one who '...has been continuously employed for a number of
> > years...'?
>
> > After all, they should earn more than a newcomer of only a year or two
> > in the job....oh, wait a minute...<cough, splutter>....
> > --
>
> Indeed Spike.
>
> One also wonders, if the RSGB were dumb enough to offer him a job at say
> £50k PA
>
> Would he say...
>
> "Disgraceful. That's £1 out of the pocket of each member" No thanks...
>
> tox- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

nearer £2.50 ;0)

"Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:

>
>"Spike" <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:muhh64do6eh70geiuonhvffevmhvk1lqo1@4ax.com...
>>
>> "Your Worst Nightmare" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>>
>>>"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>>>news:g4a9kc$77f$1@news.albasani.net...
>>>>
>>>>> One employee "earned" more than 50,000 pieces of siver. Mmmmmmm, I 
>>>>> wonder
>>>>> who that was? The income from the farce just about covered his wages!
>>>
>>>Care to tell us how much you think, lets say, the MD of a software company
>>>should earn PA?
>>>
>>>Thought not...
>>
>> Do you mean one who '...has been continuously employed for a number of
>> years...'?
>>
>> After all, they should earn more than a newcomer of only a year or two
>> in the job....oh, wait a minute...<cough, splutter>....
>
>Indeed Spike.
>
>One also wonders, if the RSGB were dumb enough to offer him a job at say 
>£50k PA
>
>Would he say...
>
>"Disgraceful. That's £1 out of the pocket of each member" No thanks...

ROFL!

-- 

from
Aero Spike

GM0ONX wrote:
> On Jun 30, 1:21 pm, The One  wrote:
>> GM0ONX wrote:
>>> You really are truly ignorant of how the scheme works aren’t you.
>> You're truly incapable, nay, ignorant of how to reply to the points
>> raised in a properly constructed and composed posting aren't you?
> 
> WWell lets look at your points one by one.

No. You will address the points I raised in my original post in context 
or not at all. I refuse to reply to something you have deliberately 
skewed to misrepresent what I actually posted in an attempt to paint a 
false impression and gain advantage.

GM0ONX wrote:

> nearer £2.50 ;0)

Quite. The RSGB has nowhere near 50,000 members.

"The One"  wrote in message
news:uU4ak.49880$Kb.38284@newsfe29.ams2...
>
> No. You will address the points I raised in my original post in context or
> not at all. I refuse to reply to something you have deliberately skewed to
> misrepresent what I actually posted in an attempt to paint a false
> impression and gain advantage.

Get real, OM :-)

You're talking to an RSCB representative where downright lies,
side-stepping,
bullshit and deceit are the order of the day in an atmosphere
of "Do as I say but not as I do", and if their mendacious propaganda fails
they resort to infantile remarks as with the recent one of £2-50 aimed
at me.

12 WPM Class A wrote:

> Get real, OM :-)

I try, Lord knows I try :-)

> You're talking to an RSCB representative where downright lies,
> side-stepping,
> bullshit and deceit are the order of the day in an atmosphere
> of "Do as I say but not as I do", and if their mendacious propaganda fails
> they resort to infantile remarks as with the recent one of £2-50 aimed
> at me.

It's hard to believe that this monkey is disputing with me the figures 
published by his organ grinder!! I expect the other monkey will be along 
shortly to correct us all. :)

> G3PSM continues in denial - this is the man who stated elsewhere that the 
> RSGB really didn't want the 3 tier scheme or the FL but that Ofcom forced 
> it upon them. He states that the future looks promising! Earth calling 
> Colin....

Wake up you loony!!

Firstly, the company is RSGB Limited, they publish magazines, they have fuck 
all to do with amateur radio except that they try and sell their wares to 
people in the amateur radio community.
OFCOM did not force anything upon them, in fact, how can a license issue be 
connected with publishing a magazine?

Dozy wassock!

G8ASO <(o¿o)> © wrote:

> Wake up you loony!!

What?!

> Firstly, the company is RSGB Limited, they publish magazines, they have 
> fuck all to do with amateur radio except that they try and sell their 
> wares to people in the amateur radio community.
> OFCOM did not force anything upon them, in fact, how can a license issue 
> be connected with publishing a magazine?

Haven't I been saying something like this all along?!

> Dozy wassock!

Ignorant knuckle shuffler!

On Jun 30, 5:02 pm, The One  wrote:
> 12 WPM Class A wrote:
>
> > Get real, OM :-)
>
> I try, Lord knows I try :-)
>
> > You're talking to an RSCB representative where downright lies,
> > side-stepping,
> > bullshit and deceit are the order of the day in an atmosphere
> > of "Do as I say but not as I do", and if their mendacious propaganda fails
> > they resort to infantile remarks as with the recent one of £2-50 aimed
> > at me.
>
> It's hard to believe that this monkey is disputing with me the figures
> published by his organ grinder!! I expect the other monkey will be along
> shortly to correct us all. :)

For those RSGB MEMBERS who wish to know the actual cost of running the
RCE exams its on item 3.18

http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0308.pdf

GM0ONX wrote:

> 
> For those RSGB MEMBERS who wish to know the actual cost of running the
> RCE exams its on item 3.18
> 
> http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0308.pdf
> 

I see item 1.1 shows that Brian has some remorse .....

Steve H

"GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
news:9c77f37a-6711-4194-b26b-3bc4b17ee19b@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>On Jun 30, 5:02 pm, The One  wrote:
>> 12 WPM Class A wrote:
>> > You're talking to an RSCB representative where downright lies,
>> > side-stepping,
>> > bullshit and deceit are the order of the day in an atmosphere
>> > of "Do as I say but not as I do", and if their mendacious propaganda 
>> > fails
>> > they resort to infantile remarks as with the recent one of £2-50 aimed
>> > at me.
>> It's hard to believe that this monkey is disputing with me the figures
>> published by his organ grinder!! I expect the other monkey will be along
>> shortly to correct us all. :)
>
>For those RSGB MEMBERS who wish to know the actual cost of running the
>RCE exams its on item 3.18
>http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0308.pdf

That looks like the "downright lies, side-stepping,  bullshit and deceit " 
referred to
above.

This is a public forum. Discuss things publicly.

Any RSCB member willing to partake openly in this public discussion in 
respect
of the above reference?

In message <g4frmf$q0o$1@news.albasani.net>, Steve H 
<steveqqqqqqqqqqwwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttttttttyyyyyyy
yyyyyyyyyyaaaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssssssddddddddddddddddddffffffffffffffggg
gggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh@tfif.co.uk> writes
>GM0ONX wrote:
>
>>  For those RSGB MEMBERS who wish to know the actual cost of running 
>>the
>> RCE exams its on item 3.18
>>  http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0308.pdf
>>
>
>I see item 1.1 shows that Brian has some remorse .....
>
>Steve H

I much preferred things when the 'Board' was the 'Council', and the 
'Board Members' were 'Council Members'. Why was it thought necessary to 
change things?
-- 
Ian

12 WPM Class A wrote:

> That looks like the "downright lies, side-stepping,  bullshit and deceit " 
> referred to
> above.
> 
> This is a public forum. Discuss things publicly.
> 
> Any RSCB member willing to partake openly in this public discussion in 
> respect
> of the above reference?
> 
> 
> 

http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0108.pdf

What do you make of item 5.2.1 ?

I thought that the RCF was for

"The Radio Communications Foundation is an initiative by the 60,000 UK 
amateur radio operators to create a fund which can support their 
volunteer efforts to bring radio communications into the classroom, our 
universities, and any place where hands-on public demonstration can 
deliver our message."

Not to prop up the accounts of a failing book publisher.

Steve H

12 WPM Class A wrote:

> That looks like the "downright lies, side-stepping,  bullshit and deceit " 
> referred to
> above.

Of course it is.

> This is a public forum. Discuss things publicly.

Correct. If we let this trend continue the RSGB minions in here will be 
insisting on funny handshakes before being allowed to post.

> Any RSCB member willing to partake openly in this public discussion in 
> respect of the above reference?

Bwahaha! The society that represents all UK amateurs keeps the vast 
majority of UK amateurs in the dark as to what it's up to. SAY NO MORE!

On Jul 2, 1:30 pm, "12 WPM Class A" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "GM0ONX"  wrote in message
>
> news:9c77f37a-6711-4194-b26b-3bc4b17ee19b@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 30, 5:02 pm, The One  wrote:
> >> 12 WPM Class A wrote:
> >> > You're talking to an RSCB representative where downright lies,
> >> > side-stepping,
> >> > bullshit and deceit are the order of the day in an atmosphere
> >> > of "Do as I say but not as I do", and if their mendacious propaganda
> >> > fails
> >> > they resort to infantile remarks as with the recent one of £2-50 aimed
> >> > at me.
> >> It's hard to believe that this monkey is disputing with me the figures
> >> published by his organ grinder!! I expect the other monkey will be along
> >> shortly to correct us all. :)
>
> >For those RSGB MEMBERS who wish to know the actual cost of running the
> >RCE exams its on item 3.18
> >http://www.rsgb.org/membersonly/information/minutes/bm0308.pdf
>
> That looks like the "downright lies, side-stepping,  bullshit and deceit> referred to
> above.
>
> This is a public forum. Discuss things publicly.
>
> Any RSCB member willing to partake openly in this public discussion in
> respect
> of the above reference?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why would you as a non member care how much the RSGB spends. Its not
your money and it doesn't make a profit on exams.

"Steve H" 
 
 > What do you make of item 5.2.1 ?
> I thought that the RCF was for
> "The Radio Communications Foundation is an initiative by the 60,000 UK 
> amateur radio operators to create a fund which can support their volunteer 
> efforts to bring radio communications into the classroom, our 
> universities, and any place where hands-on public demonstration can 
> deliver our message."

It's bullshit and deceit.

It's certainly not an initiative by me and before it can be claimed
to be by the whole body of Radio Hammery in Britland then
a poll is required, and not just a "club nite survey", either.

No normal sane person wishes to attract younger people into the
confines of their shacks and when that fails, to intrude into
classrooms.

Are the directors of the RSCB paedophiles as well as being
obsessed with racially-aggravated bestial pornography?

What is "our message" that they wish to deliver? 25+ years of mediocrity?
An obsession with sheep-shagging? The deceit that goes with wearing
a rug?

"GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
news:4036ac8c-787c-4507-ad82-55ca38cffd6a@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Why would you as a non member care how much the RSGB spends. Its not
> your money and it doesn't make a profit on exams.

Why would I care about decency and honesty on the part of someone who
claims to represent me?

GM0ONX wrote:

> Why would you as a non member care how much the RSGB spends. Its not
> your money and it doesn't make a profit on exams.

RSGB claims to represent all UK radio amateurs, but it can't have it
both ways.

Either stop claiming to represent non-members or allow non-members
access to details they currently are not permitted to see.

-- 

Brian

Steve H wrote:
> 
> 
> I thought that the RCF was for
> 


The RCF have no staff to do anything and depend on the RSGB to do all 
the administration. The links below should explain who does what.

http://www.commsfoundation.org/about/
http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/moursgbrcfsept07.pdf
http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/2007-01-16-ofcomrcfagreement.pdf

Len GM0ONX

Len GM0ONX wrote:
> Steve H wrote:
>>
>>
>> I thought that the RCF was for
>>
> 
> 
> The RCF have no staff to do anything and depend on the RSGB to do all 
> the administration. The links below should explain who does what.
> 
> http://www.commsfoundation.org/about/
> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/moursgbrcfsept07.pdf
> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/2007-01-16-ofcomrcfagreement.pdf
> 
> Len GM0ONX

It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.

Steve H

"Steve H" 
 
wrote in message news:g4gao5$ouo$1@news.albasani.net...
>
> It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.

It would seem that the RCF is a con-trick in the deceitful traditions
of the RSCB to get money from people into the coffers of the RSCB.

Perhaps it is time for the Charities Commission to look at the way
that the RCF is not independent of the RSCB?

12 WPM Class A wrote:
> "Steve H" 
>  
> wrote in message news:g4gao5$ouo$1@news.albasani.net...
>> It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.
> 
> It would seem that the RCF is a con-trick in the deceitful traditions
> of the RSCB to get money from people into the coffers of the RSCB.
> 
> Perhaps it is time for the Charities Commission to look at the way
> that the RCF is not independent of the RSCB?
> 
> 
> 

I would think that anyone who has donated cash to the RCF would be 
rather perturbed to find cash re-donated to the RSGB.

Steve H

"Steve H" 
 
wrote in message news:g4gcen$sf4$1@news.albasani.net...
>
> I would think that anyone who has donated cash to the RCF would be rather 
> perturbed to find cash re-donated to the RSGB.

If there were to be a board member of the RSCB who read this NG and
who was also essentially decent, honest and truthful, then perhaps such
a board member could comment on the above?

( A mournful hope because no such decent, honest and truthful board
member has ever been seen here to this day)

12 WPM Class A wrote:
> "Steve H" 
>  
> wrote in message news:g4gcen$sf4$1@news.albasani.net...
> 
>>I would think that anyone who has donated cash to the RCF would be rather 
>>perturbed to find cash re-donated to the RSGB.
> 
> 
> If there were to be a board member of the RSCB who read this NG and
> who was also essentially decent, honest and truthful, then perhaps such
> a board member could comment on the above?
> 
> ( A mournful hope because no such decent, honest and truthful board
> member has ever been seen here to this day)

At least one has, though it might have been when you were removed from 
an internet connection though.

Dave

"Dave"  wrote in message 
news:POadnbvubMeJWvbVnZ2dnUVZ8rGdnZ2d@bt.com...
> At least one has, though it might have been when you were removed from an 
> internet connection though.

G6KHP, you need to take a step back and think about the way
in which you are portraying yourself as a small-minded poison
pen with no life of his own but obsessed with pursuing a vendetta
against me.

Hey !!!!!!!!! Have you ever thought about joining your spawn in
the ploddery? Your personality defects described above would mean
you'd fit in so well that not even an interview would be necessary!

Steve H wrote:
> Len GM0ONX wrote:
>> Steve H wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought that the RCF was for
>>>
>>
>>
>> The RCF have no staff to do anything and depend on the RSGB to do all 
>> the administration. The links below should explain who does what.
>>
>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/about/
>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/moursgbrcfsept07.pdf
>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/2007-01-16-ofcomrcfagreement.pdf
>>
>> Len GM0ONX
> 
> It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.
> 
> Steve H

Or paying them back for costs incurred by the RSGB on their behalf for 
exams. See second part of 3.18 about it costing more than income from 
exams. The £20K doesn't cover the difference of cost over expenditure.

Len GM0ONX wrote:
> Steve H wrote:
>> Len GM0ONX wrote:
>>> Steve H wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought that the RCF was for
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The RCF have no staff to do anything and depend on the RSGB to do all 
>>> the administration. The links below should explain who does what.
>>>
>>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/about/
>>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/moursgbrcfsept07.pdf
>>> http://www.commsfoundation.org/rce/pdf/2007-01-16-ofcomrcfagreement.pdf
>>>
>>> Len GM0ONX
>>
>> It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.
>>
>> Steve H
> 
> Or paying them back for costs incurred by the RSGB on their behalf for 
> exams. See second part of 3.18 about it costing more than income from 
> exams. The £20K doesn't cover the difference of cost over expenditure.

The RCF now supports the exams?  I was under the impression that the 
RSGB were running the exam system.  Why should the RCF bail out the RSGB 
when the RCF was set up to fund projects like the GB4FUN vehicle that 
has been off the road for months due to lack of funds?  Why is the 
examination scheme not making a profit?  Is it due to the spiraling 
costs of the train the trainers scheme?

Stev eH

"Len GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
news:g4ghkd$7go$1@news.albasani.net...
> Or paying them back for costs incurred by the RSGB on their behalf for 
> exams. See second part of 3.18 about it costing more than income from 
> exams. The £20K doesn't cover the difference of cost over expenditure.

But an organisation that really represented all of Britland's Radio Hammery
simply would not incur costs of that magnitude, run as it is by volunteers, 
the
volunteers that you are repeatedly so emphatic about.

By the same token, such an organisation would not run up the
costs for the gravy trains to Dayton. (And it won't wash to claim
that those costs were paid out of pocket, because that pocket
was already funded in advance by £50K of the members' money)

"Steve H" 
 
wrote in message news:g4gipn$9nj$1@news.albasani.net...
> Why is the examination scheme not making a profit?  Is it due to the 
> spiraling costs of the train the trainers scheme?

It would be interesting to see how the person who proposed the TtT
and is now basking as the centre of attention from that scheme is now
benefiting from all-expenses paid trips in fancy hotels, expensive meals
and all washed down with alcohol.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:16:25 -0700, GM0ONX wrote:


> Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the accounts
> list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn’t list the
> outgoings. You can’t tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or loss on the
> scheme from the published accounts.
> 
> If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
> write to the RSGB. You could even list the figure here for all to see.

Hmmmm, that reminds me of when, as a member, I wrote to Peter Kirby 
asking just how much of the members' money had been wasted by the RSGB's 
ill-fated attempt to run a magazine (HRT) that relied on sales through 
newsagents. I got a very curt reply from Peter that basically said that 
this blunder was none of my business as a member and that it was 
commercially sensitive information that would never be released to 
members.

Perhaps "The One" might have more luck than me and actually solicit some 
facts and figures from them but I doubt it very much.   

It seems that this society that claims to represent all UK amateurs is 
not very keen on telling us much or anything about how they are doing 
this and they certainly can't deal with being asked any questions.

 
-- 
SteveE

"SteveE"  wrote in message 
news:cBQak.19650$E41.19589@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:16:25 -0700, GM0ONX wrote:
>> Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the accounts
>> list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn't list the
>> outgoings. You can't tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or loss on the
>> scheme from the published accounts.
>> If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
>> write to the RSGB. You could even list the figure here for all to see.
> Hmmmm, that reminds me of when, as a member, I wrote to Peter Kirby
> asking just how much of the members' money had been wasted by the RSGB's
> ill-fated attempt to run a magazine (HRT) that relied on sales through
> newsagents. I got a very curt reply from Peter that basically said that
> this blunder was none of my business as a member and that it was
> commercially sensitive information that would never be released to
> members.

It seems inconceivable that an organisation of members that is run
for the members and financed by subscriptions from those members
could ever have secrets from those members.

Perhaps even now, M3OSN could find the information and publish it
here?

>>>
>>> It looks to have taken 20K worth of peoples donations from the RCF.
>>>Why should the RCF bail out the RSGB
 > when the RCF was set up to fund projects like the GB4FUN vehicle that
 > has been off the road for months due to lack of funds?

I believe this was related to GB4FUN which is part of the RFC 
activities. I do know the current vehicle is being replaced with 
something more cost effective due to high repair and running costs. 
That's in the minutes too.


> The RCF now supports the exams?  I was under the impression that the 
> RSGB were running the exam system.  

See the MOI links previously listed for information on who does what.


>Why is the examination scheme not making a profit?  Is it due to the spiraling 
> costs of the train the trainers scheme?
>

The TtT scheme isn't funded by the RCF nor the exam fees etc. It comes 
from mainstream RSGB funds.

Len GM0ONX

"Len GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
news:g4gm5k$ggc$1@news.albasani.net...
> The TtT scheme isn't funded by the RCF nor the exam fees etc. It comes 
> from mainstream RSGB funds.

By "mainstream" do you mean the hard-earned money paid out
by members' subscriptions?

I am sure that those members would rather that they could use their
own money to entertain themselves and their families rather than 
entertaining the
proposer of the TtT scheme who now enjoys all-expenses paid
hotel accommodation with meals and alcoholic refreshment thrown in.

SteveE wrote:

> Perhaps "The One" might have more luck than me and actually solicit some 
> facts and figures from them but I doubt it very much.   

No chance, people have been banging their heads against this financial 
wall for decades now.

12 WPM Class A wrote:

> Perhaps even now, M3OSN could find the information and publish it
> here? 

Is there a blue moon tonight? Are all pigs fuelled and ready to fly?

"The One"  wrote in message 
news:LnRak.226517$M63.195039@newsfe13.ams2...
> 12 WPM Class A wrote:
>> Perhaps even now, M3OSN could find the information and publish it
>> here?
> Is there a blue moon tonight? Are all pigs fuelled and ready to fly?

The pigs around here fly dangerously low in built-up areas.

Is it me, or is it really one law for them and a different law for us?

"12 WPM Class A" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:g4gmfc$h6j$1@news.albasani.net...
> "Len GM0ONX"  wrote in message 
> news:g4gm5k$ggc$1@news.albasani.net...
>> The TtT scheme isn't funded by the RCF nor the exam fees etc. It comes 
>> from mainstream RSGB funds.
>
> By "mainstream" do you mean the hard-earned money paid out
> by members' subscriptions?

Hard earned money and members subscriptions?

That's you ruled out on both counts!

On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:47:57 +0100, 12 WPM Class A wrote:

> "SteveE"  wrote in message
> news:cBQak.19650$E41.19589@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:16:25 -0700, GM0ONX wrote:
>>> Only one problem with your statement Frank is that although the
>>> accounts list the income from the exam scheme separately it doesn't
>>> list the outgoings. You can't tell if the RSGB is making a surplus or
>>> loss on the scheme from the published accounts.
>>> If you are really interested it the actual figures perhaps you should
>>> write to the RSGB. You could even list the figure here for all to see.
>> Hmmmm, that reminds me of when, as a member, I wrote to Peter Kirby
>> asking just how much of the members' money had been wasted by the
>> RSGB's ill-fated attempt to run a magazine (HRT) that relied on sales
>> through newsagents. I got a very curt reply from Peter that basically
>> said that this blunder was none of my business as a member and that it
>> was commercially sensitive information that would never be released to
>> members.
> 
> It seems inconceivable that an organisation of members that is run for
> the members and financed by subscriptions from those members could ever
> have secrets from those members.

It does indeed. Up to then, I naïvely believed that they were accountable 
for their actions to the membership. That illusion was shattered by that 
debacle.  
> 
> Perhaps even now, M3OSN could find the information and publish it here?

In fairness, I can't blame M3OSN for this. But soon after, he renounced 
his anti-RSGB views and jumped onto the gravy train. That probably says 
more about him than it says about RSGB ineptitude. So I would not expect 
him to want to dig up dirt about his new chums.


-- 
SteveE