AkronOrange Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 So you are for closing trails that thousands use vs trail that a couple hundred sleds use? I'm saying there should be a compromise. I see all of the trails as more of a system, the first priority should be to maintain the integrity of the system - even if it means taking resources from some other areas or increasing permit prices. Would Ontario allow portions of highway 11 to close if some communities didn't have adequate funds to keep it open? Sorry New Liskeard and points north; Temagami ran out of money, highway 11 won't be maintained between North Bay and New Liskeard, you're on your own.... That would never be allowed to happen, when there are shortages they get together and figure it out, they don't just forget about entire regions of the province Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I'm saying there should be a compromise. I see all of the trails as more of a system, the first priority should be to maintain the integrity of the system - even if it means taking resources from some other areas or increasing permit prices. Would Ontario allow portions of highway 11 to close if some communities didn't have adequate funds to keep it open? Sorry New Liskeard and points north; Temagami ran out of money, highway 11 won't be maintained between North Bay and New Liskeard, you're on your own.... That would never be allowed to happen, when there are shortages they get together and figure it out, they don't just forget about entire regions of the province Poor comparison. The highway system is funded by the province. There isn't any quibbling between towns (i.e. individual snowmobile clubs). The MTO decides what it will do and that is the end of it. You don't get one town saying I need more money and I will decide how it is spent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XTC500 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Poor comparison. The highway system is funded by the province. There isn't any quibbling between towns (i.e. individual snowmobile clubs). The MTO decides what it will do and that is the end of it. You don't get one town saying I need more money and I will decide how it is spent. It's a good comparison in that the trails should be viewed as a system. An area that has a good "system" of trails offers the sledder choices. And that's a factor when deciding where to go for a week or even a weekend. It doesn't mean the sledder will travel every km of every trail. Even though the MTO doesn't have to compromise, the best solution for snowmobile trails is cooperation, compromise, & future vision between the groups. Remember where there may still be some snow as our winters get warmer, the north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 It's a good comparison in that the trails should be viewed as a system. An area that has a good "system" of trails offers the sledder choices. And that's a factor when deciding where to go for a week or even a weekend. It doesn't mean the sledder will travel every km of every trail. Even though the MTO doesn't have to compromise, the best solution for snowmobile trails is cooperation, compromise, & future vision between the groups. Remember where there may still be some snow as our winters get warmer, the north. It would be nice if that sense of compromise & future vision between the groups was widespread however with the structure we have today, sorry to say that is a vision through rose coloured glasses. So many clubs/districts are concerned about themselves and themselves alone without thinking of the bigger picture. In that vision of compromise there must also be the realities of what is the vast majority of those riding snowmobiles looking for. Is that vast majority looking to do week long trips at 300 km a day or is that rider looking to do close to home 80 km to 150 km day trips. Figure out what the riders want, I am sure there are some of each and provide proportionate solutions within the limits of the funds available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I'm saying there should be a compromise. I see all of the trails as more of a system, the first priority should be to maintain the integrity of the system - even if it means taking resources from some other areas or increasing permit prices. Would Ontario allow portions of highway 11 to close if some communities didn't have adequate funds to keep it open? Sorry New Liskeard and points north; Temagami ran out of money, highway 11 won't be maintained between North Bay and New Liskeard, you're on your own.... That would never be allowed to happen, when there are shortages they get together and figure it out, they don't just forget about entire regions of the province Bad example as that is the TRANS CANADA HWY and billions of dollars flow along that corridor Sledding for a a few tourist not much $$$$, plus as discussed locals up their that sled want loop trails not one double back trail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronOrange Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Bad example as that is the TRANS CANADA HWY and billions of dollars flow along that corridor Sledding for a a few tourist not much $$$$, plus as discussed locals up their that sled want loop trails not one double back trail I don't think it is: How different is a major highway compared to a major trunk trail? The dollars are relative. Currently, for the OFSC, it's a matter of selflessness; if it's in the best interest of the sport there should be compromise, if there is a lack of snow in some areas; there should be a willingness to help, if all of the trails in my district have been maintained, we should help our neighbor, if a groomer breaks down, float one to help, if a district is struggling to keep trails open; everyone chips in to help. I understand this may be unrealistic, but one can dream... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faceman Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Good post. FFC was designed to dismantle single club "kingdoms" and move funds to the specific districts to work with. The sooner we all understand that we need to do what is in the best interest of the sport the better. I think we are on the right track. Are things perfect...not even close! Are we moving forward?? I think so. Apparently the permit numbers will reflect the winter but will these numbers cover cost of operating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperules700 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 We need the whole system to remain in tact. It is tough though with trails being trails, they aren't engineered highways that receive regular funding for infrusture to ensure they remain open. It would be nice if Mto signed, groomed and otherwise maintained the top trunk trails throughout ontario, something like Quebec does with funding. Until the ontario government recognizes the spin off benefits from snowmobiling in the province, it is going to be tough to keep what we have here open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultrafrozen Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Got this this morning, not enough time to verify if it was already posted. Congratulations Everyone! Your bold decision at last September’s AGM to make fundamental changes for organized snowmobiling is a HUGE success! This result is especially impressive considering that the initial goal of A Framework For Change was simply to stop the downward trend of permit sales and revenues. Instead, in its first transitional year, A Framework For Change achieved that and much, much more: Participation Up: Snowmobilers registered over 104,000 sleds for a 2014 Snowmobile Trail Permit of one type or another. This is the highest number of permitted sleds and participants in the last ten years. Permit Sales Up: 2014 full season permit sales (Seasonal and Classic) are up 21 percent over the 2012/13 season. This is the second highest number of full season permits sold in the last eight years. Permit Revenue Up: 2014 permit revenue is 20 percent more than Framework For Change projections and 13 percent higher than in 2012/13. Online Sales Up: Online sales increased by almost 400 percent this season, with two thirds of riders doing their permit transactions online, thereby substantially reducing your permit administration workload. Certainly it was a great winter, but your decision to implement A Framework For Change was the major driver for our success. Almost 80 percent of 2014 full season permits were bought pre-December 1 (compared to 74 percent last season) – that’s over 15,000 additional sales before anyone knew what kind of a winter it would actually be. So what’s next? As soon as all permits are reconciled and operations reports are in, the data will be analyzed and evaluated to determine what worked well with A Framework For Change, including the new funding model, and what needs to be improved. The board will receive a full report at their July meeting and the OFSC will ensure that this information is available to member clubs and that clubs are included going forward. If you have any questions or concerns, please discuss them with your governor. Meanwhile, give yourself a big pat on the back. You made the right choice to secure a strong future for organized snowmobiling in Ontario, so let’s celebrate at our 2014 convention in Ottawa, September 18 to 20! A Framework For Change Bulletin UpdateMay 14, 2014This club bulletin email address does not reply to any inquiries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweese Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Permit Revenue Up: 2014 permit revenue is 20 percent more than Framework For Change projections and 13 percent higher than in 2012/13. So if I understand that right, sales are up 20% more than what FFC projected, and 13% higher than last year... That means that the FFC actually figured a 7% loss over 12/13 the season... How did a calculated 7% loss over the last season justify the implementation of the FFC? Unless the projected numbers using the status quo system projected a greater loss, and because of the early snow more people jumped, making it look like the FFC actually worked.. When really most of it, has to do with winter coming early. The number is like to see is the post Dec 1 sales... How many people took the wait and see, then kicked themselves for not buying early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doogirl69 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Got this this morning, not enough time to verify if it was already posted. Congratulations Everyone! Your bold decision at last September’s AGM to make fundamental changes for organized snowmobiling is a HUGE success! This result is especially impressive considering that the initial goal of A Framework For Change was simply to stop the downward trend of permit sales and revenues. Instead, in its first transitional year, A Framework For Change achieved that and much, much more: Participation Up: Snowmobilers registered over 104,000 sleds for a 2014 Snowmobile Trail Permit of one type or another. This is the highest number of permitted sleds and participants in the last ten years. Permit Sales Up: 2014 full season permit sales (Seasonal and Classic) are up 21 percent over the 2012/13 season. This is the second highest number of full season permits sold in the last eight years. Permit Revenue Up: 2014 permit revenue is 20 percent more than Framework For Change projections and 13 percent higher than in 2012/13. Online Sales Up: Online sales increased by almost 400 percent this season, with two thirds of riders doing their permit transactions online, thereby substantially reducing your permit administration workload. Certainly it was a great winter, but your decision to implement A Framework For Change was the major driver for our success. Almost 80 percent of 2014 full season permits were bought pre-December 1 (compared to 74 percent last season) – that’s over 15,000 additional sales before anyone knew what kind of a winter it would actually be. So what’s next? As soon as all permits are reconciled and operations reports are in, the data will be analyzed and evaluated to determine what worked well with A Framework For Change, including the new funding model, and what needs to be improved. The board will receive a full report at their July meeting and the OFSC will ensure that this information is available to member clubs and that clubs are included going forward. If you have any questions or concerns, please discuss them with your governor. Meanwhile, give yourself a big pat on the back. You made the right choice to secure a strong future for organized snowmobiling in Ontario, so let’s celebrate at our 2014 convention in Ottawa, September 18 to 20! A Framework For Change Bulletin Update May 14, 2014 This club bulletin email address does not reply to any inquiries On the BOLD. I know Girl's aren't good at math but this makes no sense. So there was 6% more permits sold before December 1st this year than last year. 80% vs 74% = 6% 15,000 more permits were sold before December 1st this year than last year. So if 15,000 more permits equates to 6%, help me out here but that would mean there was about 250,000 permits sold before December 1st this year??? We know that is not true so what are they trying to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I know my club sold well over 100 post Dec 1 permits. I will always buy the pre Dec 1, it doesn't make sense to buy the pre Nov 1. The only thing I like about the online crap is the fact the club doesn't have to enter the data into the pts. I am looking forward to seeing the AGM package to see what kind of numbers they decide to share with us, and see if they are skewed one way or another. I believe ffc numbers are deceiving considering the winter we had, I don't want a mediocre winter, but that is the only way to get a real feel for the changes. I really don't like the $180 permit, and untill I take the time to study the numbers, I can't say whether it was a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 The best news was that the revenues are reported as being up 13%, paid permit sales are up 21% over the previous season and 80% of the sales were made pre December 2nd. Obviously FFC was a success given all 3 of those percentage increases. Lets give them their due, they predicted sales would increase with a lower price point and it worked. Given that there was a very short window to sell the $180 TP's, I expect they will sell like hotcakes next season as more people jump on the lower price and undoubtedly revenues may suffer. There is also the likelihood of selling even TP's this season given the big uptick in new sled sales and the euphoria of a great sledding season just past. In my opinion the widespread winter across the province and the lengthy season undoubtedly increased total operational costs more than the 13% increase in revenues but that was an abnormal year. There will be many Clubs digging into their bank accounts to pay for fuel, groomer and drag repairs and possibly more groomers replaced as well. I intend on moving a Motion to scrap the Family Day Weekend and hopefully that will sell a few more TP's and get some of those 14,000 Freebies into paying along with the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I don't think it is: How different is a major highway compared to a major trunk trail? The dollars are relative. Currently, for the OFSC, it's a matter of selflessness; if it's in the best interest of the sport there should be compromise, if there is a lack of snow in some areas; there should be a willingness to help, if all of the trails in my district have been maintained, we should help our neighbor, if a groomer breaks down, float one to help, if a district is struggling to keep trails open; everyone chips in to help. I understand this may be unrealistic, but one can dream... Dollars are NOT relative the TransCanada HWY is a NOT made specifically for tourist it is there for the transportation of goods, the TransCanada has billions of dollars driving along it , Top trails up north have more moose than sledders riding them, down south different story when it comes to TOP trails Why should a club help another clubs trails a good distance away that see 1% of the use of their trails, they are struggling because they have NO volounteers and lack of population. Again why should an area with X amount of trails that get used all the time and have a good permit buying base support another areas trail that see little to no use. All you see is a bunch of trails you as a tourist rider is not interested in and will not use, yet thousand use them to ride locally Snowmobile exist because of locals NOT because of tourist in many areas, without locals you have no trails, without local trails you have no local riders The OFSC tried to think big in the 90s and failed as there just is NOT enough bodies in many areas to maintain trails and now look where we are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 The best news was that the revenues are reported as being up 13%, paid permit sales are up 21% over the previous season and 80% of the sales were made pre December 2nd. Obviously FFC was a success given all 3 of those percentage increases. Lets give them their due, they predicted sales would increase with a lower price point and it worked. Given that there was a very short window to sell the $180 TP's, I expect they will sell like hotcakes next season as more people jump on the lower price and undoubtedly revenues may suffer. There is also the likelihood of selling even TP's this season given the big uptick in new sled sales and the euphoria of a great sledding season just past. In my opinion the widespread winter across the province and the lengthy season undoubtedly increased total operational costs more than the 13% increase in revenues but that was an abnormal year. There will be many Clubs digging into their bank accounts to pay for fuel, groomer and drag repairs and possibly more groomers replaced as well. I intend on moving a Motion to scrap the Family Day Weekend and hopefully that will sell a few more TP's and get some of those 14,000 Freebies into paying along with the rest of us. What is the thought on making the Classic Permit a permit for a second sled as in if you have a second sled that is 15yrs or older you get a discount? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I believe the plan is to move the Classic to a 20 year old model, one year at a time, as 15 year old sleds are starting to form a much larger proportion of the total sleds buying permits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweese Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 The best news was that the revenues are reported as being up 13%, paid permit sales are up 21% over the previous season and 80% of the sales were made pre December 2nd. Obviously FFC was a success given all 3 of those percentage increases. Lets give them their due, they predicted sales would increase with a lower price point and it worked. No they didn't predict sales would increase... The opposite actually...Permit sales up 20% over FFC projections. Permit sales up 13% over last year. Do the math on that one, It shows the FFC projections actually figured for a 7% drop in sales this year over last.. Thankfully it didn't turn out that way, but it's clear whoever ran the numbers for the FFC in the first place figured we would loose 7% on permit sales over last year.... This means one of two things.... 1. They got dumb lucky with the winter and people bought a lot more permits than expected. 2. Those behind the FFC are completely out of touch with what we the sledders think... By thinking your new plan is actually going to lower sales. I'm going with #2, because if you project a 7% loss and end up with a 13% gain, than you really have no idea what your customers want.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggie Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 No they didn't predict sales would increase... The opposite actually... Permit sales up 20% over FFC projections. Permit sales up 13% over last year. Do the math on that one, It shows the FFC projections actually figured for a 7% drop in sales this year over last.. Thankfully it didn't turn out that way, but it's clear whoever ran the numbers for the FFC in the first place figured we would loose 7% on permit sales over last year.... This means one of two things.... 1. They got dumb lucky with the winter and people bought a lot more permits than expected. 2. Those behind the FFC are completely out of touch with what we the sledders think... By thinking your new plan is actually going to lower sales. I'm going with #2, because if you project a 7% loss and end up with a 13% gain, than you really have no idea what your customers want.. Read the email again, they aren't talking about permit sales but PERMIT REVENUE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Dweese, You are not interpreting the numbers correctly. For example, on Permit Revenues, if FFC predicted a 6% increase in revenues and they were actually 20% higher than predicted! then the revenues would be another 1.2% icoming in and I don't having the actual % increase that they did predict. Better to be conservative, the actual increase in revenues is reported as being 13% over last year! that is what really matters. Bottom line, permits sales up 21% and revenues up by 13%, that shows FFC worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweese Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Sorry I meant revenue.... Permit Revenue Up: 2014 permit revenue is 20 percent more than Framework For Change projections and 13 percent higher than in 2012/13.If FFC revenue is 20% higher then projected and 13% higher than what it was in 12/13... That means FFC revenue original projections were 7% below the 12/13 revenues... I'm not doubting the fact that the FFC worked.. Based on the numbers for revenue, it worked much better than anyone was able to project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I believe the difference in the projection is of where we would have ended up had we stayed with status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Why should a club help another clubs trails a good distance away that see 1% of the use of their trails, they are struggling because they have NO volounteers and lack of population. Again why should an area with X amount of trails that get used all the time and have a good permit buying base support another areas trail that see little to no use. All you see is a bunch of trails you as a tourist rider is not interested in and will not use, yet thousand use them to ride locally Snowmobile exist because of locals NOT because of tourist in many areas, without locals you have no trails, without local trails you have no local riders The OFSC tried to think big in the 90s and failed as there just is NOT enough bodies in many areas to maintain trails and now look where we are I agree with you to a certain point freezie, but we need to keep as much open as possible, the fine line is how much do you take away from an area that supports their sport to give to an area that doesn't support. The people that preach about making change to support these areas have no clue, they cannot fathom the amount of traffic some areas see. As a groomer coordinator, sometimes all these trails drive us nuts, but without them, it would be so overcrowded it would become unsafe. On a week night between 8 and 11pm it is not uncommon to see up to 40 sleds at either of our warm up shacks. I know it's not like that everywhere, but it is where there is lots of support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronOrange Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Dollars are NOT relative the TransCanada HWY is a NOT made specifically for tourist it is there for the transportation of goods, the TransCanada has billions of dollars driving along it , Top trails up north have more moose than sledders riding them, down south different story when it comes to TOP trails Why should a club help another clubs trails a good distance away that see 1% of the use of their trails, they are struggling because they have NO volounteers and lack of population. Again why should an area with X amount of trails that get used all the time and have a good permit buying base support another areas trail that see little to no use. All you see is a bunch of trails you as a tourist rider is not interested in and will not use, yet thousand use them to ride locally Snowmobile exist because of locals NOT because of tourist in many areas, without locals you have no trails, without local trails you have no local riders The OFSC tried to think big in the 90s and failed as there just is NOT enough bodies in many areas to maintain trails and now look where we are I suppose you're right. It has transitioned to a "me" mentality. I'm from the States; I get it. I expect more from a volunteer organization. I expect there to be a desire to help struggling communities. I have talked with trail coordinators from those populated areas; I know there are trails in some areas that are not necessary, I know that grooming is done on trails when it is not needed. When there isn't snow in those areas, those guys ride in the north. When they have a few beers they almost boast about the abuse. The larger population do have more resources, seems they have used those resources, at least in part, to figure out how to best manipulate the system. You're right I tour and that is what I care about most and I'll continue to post messages, send emails and call everyone I can to express my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Dweese, You are not interpreting the numbers correctly. For example, on Permit Revenues, if FFC predicted a 6% increase in revenues and they were actually 20% higher than predicted! then the revenues would be another 1.2% icoming in and I don't having the actual % increase that they did predict. Better to be conservative, the actual increase in revenues is reported as being 13% over last year! that is what really matters. Bottom line, permits sales up 21% and revenues up by 13%, that shows FFC worked. revenue up 13% due to increase in sales = positive Clubs spent a lot more than the 13% increase though,good winter is to blame Had the reg price stayed at $210 and not the super early $180, what would have been the revenue increase been after all permits sold? The $180 was great for a bargain to begin with add a superb long season everyone got more than their moneys worth and probably would have bought at $210 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I suppose you're right. It has transitioned to a "me" mentality. I'm from the States; I get it. I expect more from a volunteer organization. I expect there to be a desire to help struggling communities. I have talked with trail coordinators from those populated areas; I know there are trails in some areas that are not necessary, I know that grooming is done on trails when it is not needed. When there isn't snow in those areas, those guys ride in the north. When they have a few beers they almost boast about the abuse. The larger population do have more resources, seems they have used those resources, at least in part, to figure out how to best manipulate the system. You're right I tour and that is what I care about most and I'll continue to post messages, send emails and call everyone I can to express my opinion. I get your point btw, if their was volounteers and population they would have the $$$ to stay open And there is no conspiracy on keeping the less populated areas without $$$$, it is just the cold hearted reality of the system being to big to be supported in all areas And if a club is grooming again when the trail is perfectly fine,that would need to be stopped, but that is not the same as have a few local loop trails that hundred uses . The system out here is all clubs are allotted 12 grooming runs per trail and after that they are founded at 50% IF the provincial grooming association meets and agrees winter is hanging on and some trails can be groomed a while longer. Provincial Park trails they groom as much as they want though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.