Answers to BA of Questions

[johng]

Can anybody tell me if the BAofE replied with the answers to the questions put to them by badders.com, if so....on what thread are they

[Michael Banks]

Site Support have already answered you on this John ;)

[Michael Banks]

Here you go John -

Jonathan Phillips who owns Badders.com sent all the questions to Stephen on behalf of the site.

and the response from Stephen was -

---------------------
Dear Jonathan,

Thank you for taking the time to compile this list.

Please suggest to your members that if they have questions for the BAofE, they should email me.

Kind regards

Stephen
---------------------

[johng]

Michael.

Thanks for your response

I was not clear from the reply that I received from site support as to whether that was the only response.or if they had actually replied with answers to the questions posed.

I must admit I find the BAofE response extremely puzzling ......Are they really saying that they would rather respond to a couple of hundred individual emails, than one that could be posted here for all to see.

It will be interesting to find out what the BAofE thinking is behind this.

[BillyBudd]

Look at it from their point of view John. They answer one question and people like you will bombard them with a hundred others. They are in a no win situation.

[Michael Banks]

BB, why are they in a no win situation? Surely paid up members deserve an answer to questions such as where does my money go? The reason they are in a no win situation is that they choose to ignore their membership.

[johng]

Billy

I understood that the idea was that Badders.com collate a list of the most popular questions and forward that to the BAofe so that only one set of answers is needed.......thus avoiding having to sent hundreds of replies

[BillyBudd]

John, you and I both know that whatever the response was from the BAofE that would not be the end of it.

Yourself , Michael Banks and George Forth would bang another 100 right back at them.

visit MK and ask your questions in person, post the answers on here if you feel the need.

[Michael Banks]

BB, for an organisation that is supposed to represent 50,000 members and many millions more casual players they operate a closed shop. Why not get their PR person to answer a few questions. What harm could that do? They are always banging on about not having enough members yet they NEVER go out of their way to find new, and keep existing members.

It is quite ironic but John, George Frith and I are three loyal supporters of the BAE. We will them to do well, but without them being challenged they will continue down the same route of lethargy and mediocrity.

Answer a few questions on a fan website for heavens sake, give non BAE members a taste of what the BAE can do for them and maybe they will receive more members. Good organisations use every opportunity to bang on about how good they are and the BAE certainly haven't grasped this yet. There are loads of casual members look at this site who have never heard of the BAE so why not speak to them?

[BillyBudd]

I just don't see where it will end Michael. Look at the differing views you see from posts on Badders, the BAofE haven't the time to deal with pointless questioning from part time enthusiasts.

[Morrissey]

**edited by site support due to inappropriate content**

We all know the truth. The chair committee at the BAofE is out dated and too stuck in their ways. Badminton is going nowhere (except maybe downwards?) until a change is made. Forget finding new members Michael Banks, I say find a new governing body!

[Michael Banks]

You don't get it do you. " pointless questioning from part time enthusiasts" - what does that mean??

99.9% of the BAE membership are - part time enthusiasts

100% of non BAE members in the UK are - part time enthusiasts

Sorry if the majority of us don't meet your high standards!!

[BillyBudd]

I think it's you Michael, you just don't get it!

The BAof E is a professional run organisation who are in headquarters paid for by a professional organisation and their funding is dependant upon professional results. If your livelihood depended on results would you waste your time on idle chit-chat with a bunch of part timers.

No neither would I.

Get over it Michael your voice in the world of badminton means next to nothing, accept it and move on.

Are they official figures you have quoted?

[danbelcher]

Initially I was disappointed when Stephen Baddeley declined to answer the questions on badders.com, however it is not suprising. Just look at how the site has been abused in recent weeks.

I do believe though that he could have answered the questions in an interview format which would also have been a great opportunity for the Baofe to acknowledge badders.com. A collaboration and understanding between the two could be mutually beneficial.

[johng]

Billy

You are totally missing the point......Badders.com had put together a number of questions suggested by people on this site, and then presented that list to The BAofE.

It would have been the work of perhaps half an hour for the relavant people at HQ to have given an answer, or an explanation, and for the collated replies to be returned to badders.com...and a lot of people would then have a greater understanding of what was going on.

As it is, nno doubt (unfortunatly) prompted by this thread, a growing number of people will simply assume that the conspirousy theories are correct..and the poor image that the BAofE has will simply grow.

Billy I am also puzzled by your comment 'pointless questioning'. The 'questions' were from people passionatly concerned about the sport, many of whom are BAofE subscription payers....how on earth can genuine fears and questions from people like this be considered 'pointless'.

Billy rest assured, when I next visit MK, as I do most weeks, I will indeed ask some questions.

[BillyBudd]

John, I am not missing the point at all, I just believe you, Michael and the rest of the enthusiasts are expecting too much from the BAofE. So what if you love the game , are members of the BAofE, help out at events or play tournaments, if you enjoy it then that's great, however it doesn't give you the right to demand answers from the association.

[Borak]

Yes helo. We here Russia have no alot of badminton but we like. I like. You like? I thinkings of no nice feeling of jumping at net and smash smash the shutle to the floor. I like. It's nice.

I thinkings of this BAofE of which you speakings. We have no BAofE in mother Russia. You lucky yes? We no lucky. Please no waste BAofE. You like.

What is militon keys that you write?

Me father he was badminton. He is now retard. He can no play as only one leg after sportings injury.

[johng]

Billy

The BAofE is indeed a professional organisation. However a large percentage of the funding for that 'profesional organisation' comes from the subscription fee levied on club and league players.

One of the largest problems facing the BAofE at this moment is the low number of affiliated players, hence the efforts being made to attract leagues and clubs back into the BAofE fold...and hence increase its revenue.

It is rather strange that an organisation that is striving hard to increase affiliation numbers should deem it appropriate to refuse to answer its paying members questions.

There livelyhood is far more dependant on affiliation fees than by results..Result funding comes mainly from lottery sources..and the vast majority of that is ringfenced to the playing side..not the admin

[johng]

morrisey....almost got me there.for a moment I almost though those comments of yours were meant to be serious

[Borak]

Yes helo. We here Russia have no alot of badminton but we like. I like. You like? I thinkings of no nice feeling of jumping at net and smash smash the shutle to the floor. I like. It's nice.

I thinkings of this BAofE of which you speakings. We have no BAofE in mother Russia. You lucky yes? We no lucky. Please no waste BAofE. You like.

What is militon keys that you write?

My father he was badminton. He is now retard. He can no play as only one leg after sportings injury.

[BillyBudd]

I totally disagree John.

The BAofE staff quota has almost tripled in the last few years and that is due to the increase of funds from the lottery.

Lose that funding and they will lose a great number of staff. Let's face it, the money from the enthusiasts will always be there whether they answer your questions or not.

I think some of the posters to this site ruin the chances of ever getting a response from the association by their constant enquiries. i believe they want a personal response from the likes of Mr Badderley so they can show to other posters on this site how important they are. I think you know who I mean

[Michael Banks]

BB, The reason people post on here is because there is no other option. Do the BAE have a forum to disuss their policies - no. Why not? Becasue you get all the jokers having a go and trying to pretend they are someone who they aren't bringing the whole tone down. This site is professionally run and managed despite the idiots trying to drag it down. At least we have a place to discuss the future of a sport that is declining at a great rate of knots. There is more voice on this forum than anywhere else and the if the BAE were smart they would be taking notice.

[johng]

Billy
The BAofE staff has indeed increased, by mainly in the world class departments and the training and coaching side which are funded by lottery money

However most of the questions that were put forward were I believe concerned about the day to day running of the BAofE unconnected with the lottery funding.

[BillyBudd]

....and what has that got to do with this thred Michael?

[BillyBudd]

Thank you John, a sensible post. ( take note MB )

I see a problem John. The overall running of the Association is under the leadership of the CE who has a great deal more staff to look after and therfore less time to deal with his already busy schedule. I believe the questions were put to him, correct me if I am wrong.

He hasn't the time to answer the questions, so who does?

[Michael Banks]

What has it got to do with this thread?

BB said - " just don't see where it will end Michael. Look at the differing views you see from posts on Badders, the BAofE haven't the time to deal with pointless questioning from part time enthusiasts."

The questioning isn't pointless and it is from a badminton fan base that SHOULD matter to the BAE. They have a duty to take notice.

All it takes is a spokesperson from the BAE to communicate with its members. Not much to ask for, but as you say, the 99% part-timers don't matter.

Interesting for an organisation to ignore and not care about 99% of its membership. But as long as the elite are looked after then badminton is in good hands.

As far as the questions - why not delegate them to someone else - common sense if you ask me.

[BillyBudd]

Michael, you need to calm down a little, I sense a great deal of anger in your posts. Have you ever thought of anger management courses, I think it will do you a great deal of good.

In business Michael you need to prioritise and therefore I believe you will never get a regular Q & A session from the BAofE.

Who shall we get to answer your questions Michael, it will have to be someone who has a great deal of time on their hands. The Cleaner

[johncurling]

Michael,
"Interesting for an organisation to ignore and not care about 99% of its membership". What are we to do about it? Nothing other than discuss it while they cash our membership cheques.

There's nothing we can do about it so why waste time talking to BB?

[Michael Banks]

BB, perfectly naive as are most of your answers :)

first rule of business is to look after your customers, if you don't they will leave.

PS. I'm as angry as I want to be and happily so ;)

[johncurling]

BB.
I agree, you have shown me the error of my ways. The BAE are happy doing as they do, maybe it's us interfeering that has resulted in the mess we're in?

[johncurling]

Michael,
Leave and go where? We have no choice and the BAE know this, they can afford to ignore you.

You just dont geddit do you.

[johng]

Billy
I think you are right...it is a question of prioritising (spelling?).

The questions were sent to the CE, but nobody was seriously suggesting that he ran around the HQ building trying to speak to all his staff

One would have expected him to simply mark up who was the person to answer which question then send an internal email........or get his secretary to do so.. probably 5 minutes of his time, not a great deal when dealing with your paying members

There is a side issue here, are you seriously suggesting that we, as affiliation paying members, should not ask question of the people we are funding

[BillyBudd]

But you are still here Mr Angry, you won't leave will you. They must be doing something right.....oh they are, they are ignoring your questions, have to give them credit for that!

Go and bang your head against a wall somewhere and leave this sensible discussion to others who have valid points to make!

[Michael Banks]

Well put John.

"There is a side issue here, are you seriously suggesting that we, as affiliation paying members, should not ask questions of the people we are funding".

[BillyBudd]

Thanks John , were back on track!

The problem would be whoever answers the questions will be a spokes person for the BAofE. At the end of the day the buck stops at the CE's door.

[Michael Banks]

BB, after all this I'm glad you now agree with us.

[BillyBudd]

Michael there is no us. You had your opinions and John had his. I thought John had some valid points to make, even though I didn't agree with them all I could see he had thought about what he wanted to say and I respect him for that.

You on the other hand just proved what I had suspected all along, you are a complete Michael Banker.