Land for Archery.

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
Just a question and not a rant.
Is it feasible for AGB to create a program of using some of the members monies into purchasing land and buildings to be used solely by clubs for archery? At least members could see that some of their money is going into the roots of the sport.
 

Shirt

Well-known member
AGB income: say £2m per year.
Cost of building a 25m x 8m range: £80-100k depending on land ownership and planning permission. Worse in populated areas, ie where more of the members live.
So 8-10 ranges a year, say - leave some cash for the people to run it.
Lets say there are 250 clubs in the country. It'll be 'your turn' once in 25 years.

So I pay fees for 25 years and maybe see a benefit for it when I'm old, broken and taking up fishing... ;) :D Alternatively, clubs run events, raise money, and pay for it themselves. Even if AGB gave a 50% grant its still a 12 year cycle and reduces everything else AGB do - so may reduce membership and therefore income, and make it even worse... vicious cycle!
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
An old saying is that it takes a wise man to plant a tree when he knows he will never live to sit in its shade.
 
Last edited:

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
Archery needs land and tenure is the
AGB income: say £2m per year.
Cost of building a 25m x 8m range: £80-100k depending on land ownership and planning permission. Worse in populated areas, ie where more of the members live.
So 8-10 ranges a year, say - leave some cash for the people to run it.
Lets say there are 250 clubs in the country. It'll be 'your turn' once in 25 years.
So would it be feasible to say identify a cluster of clubs and invest initially in a few pieces of land on an annual basis. Perhaps if land enough for three ranges was purchased on the same site, it could be offered up to maybe three different clubs to utilise that still maintainedtheir independent identity. I am sure if individual clubs can work alongside rugby and cricket clubs, then a number of archery clubs could work together, to utilise and share the ranges. Resources could be pooled to develop facilities etc. Along obviously with the help of AGB who would have a more "hands on" and visible presence.
 

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
are we talking about buying land where there aren't clubs in the hope they'll come, or where there are clubs and effectively donating it to a club without a ground? And how do you chose that lucky club? Or is AGB running the ground and letting people turn up, in which case will they have to provide someone to keep an eye on the place, do maintenance?
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
are we talking about buying land where there aren't clubs in the hope they'll come, or where there are clubs and effectively donating it to a club without a ground? And how do you chose that lucky club? Or is AGB running the ground and letting people turn up, in which case will they have to provide someone to keep an eye on the place, do maintenance?
I don't know. Obviously where clubs are initially. Why not get region's involved and possibly some of their funds. If the regional funds were involved there would possibly be an impetus started, so that land could be purchased within each region in the first two years.
If a cluster of clubs were identified where land was available and at least three shared then perhaps, "just a guess" as many as twenty or thirty clubs could have outdoor site issues resolved in the first couple of years, over several regions.
The land would remain in AGB's and or regional ownership, giving clubs security and AGB and regions a positive spin on what they are there for..
 
Last edited:

inthemiddle

Active member
This will never happen. Archery is a minority Sport in the UK with very little interest from the public. Funding for sport is quite easy if people can make money from it and consider it an investment. Golf, football, tennis, cricket etc has no problem finding and owning land. What needs to happen to change this is make archery popular with lots of people. Professional sports make money, archery on the whole is just a hobby for most people with little to no money to be made from it. This won't change any time soon.
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
This will never happen. Archery is a minority Sport in the UK with very little interest from the public. Funding for sport is quite easy if people can make money from it and consider it an investment. Golf, football, tennis, cricket etc has no problem finding and owning land. What needs to happen to change this is make archery popular with lots of people. Professional sports make money, archery on the whole is just a hobby for most people with little to no money to be made from it. This won't change any time soon.
I am talking about monies already in the system.
Money that archers already pay. If AGB or regions were the landlords, then monies collected could be reinvested in more grass roots (land) eventually the land rental pays for more land that allows clubs to have secure tenure. It becomes self perpetuating.
It just needs that first bit of investment from Archery to invest in itself.

What's the alternative for clubs, other than going cap in hand to golf, cricket and rugby clubs?

"Aim Small, Miss Small"
or
"Think Small, Stay Small"

It doesn't make any difference to me, I don't even live in the UK. I just feel that archery to grow, needs to be on firm ground and not just be about an individual club but the collective.
 
Last edited:

inthemiddle

Active member
I am talking about monies already in the system.
Money that archers already pay. If AGB or regions were the landlords, then monies collected could be reinvested in more grass roots (land) eventually the land rental pays for more land that allows clubs to have secure tenure. It becomes self perpetuating.
It just needs that first bit of investment from Archery to invest in itself.

What's the alternative for clubs, other than going cap in hand to golf, cricket and rugby clubs?

"Aim Small, Miss Small"
or
"Think Small, Stay Small"

It doesn't make any difference to me, I don't even live in the UK. I just feel that archery to grow, needs to be on firm ground and not just be about an individual club but the collective.
I agree but AGB won't shell out a penny. It needs private investment
 

Shirt

Well-known member
If a cluster of clubs were identified where land was available and at least three shared then perhaps, "just a guess" as many as twenty or thirty clubs could have outdoor site issues resolved in the first couple of years, over several regions.
You're talking about British Archery Clubs here.
Half my bloody members won't talk to each other, let alone another club that is based... somewhere else! :eek: :eek: :eek:
While archery as a sport is doing a decent job of modernising, there's still an unfortunately large element of Little Britain mentality in most clubs that is incredibly selfish. Predictably, this group only gets really vocal at AGMs when they can be most obstructive.
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
You're talking about British Archery Clubs here.
Half my bloody members won't talk to each other, let alone another club that is based... somewhere else! :eek: :eek: :eek:
While archery as a sport is doing a decent job of modernising, there's still an unfortunately large element of Little Britain mentality in most clubs that is incredibly selfish. Predictably, this group only gets really vocal at AGMs when they can be most obstructive.
Are you saying that is endemic within the culture of UK olympic style archery?
If so, then you are probably right that it wouldn't work. So everyone looks after number one and buys their next upgrade and shiny bit of kit, or the culture is encouraged to changed from the top. I'm certain that there are many clubs out there that are progressive and inclusive of their members. Although I have seen some archery T shirt slogans recently that are totally "Red Neck"
 

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
I'm still just trying to understand the initial proposal... are we talking about AGB buying land to provide an open shooting ground to AGB members; buying land to provide a shooting ground for a particular club; or buying land to effectively set up an AGB run club in competition to the other local clubs?
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
What I am suggesting is the possibility of AGB investing in land and then leasing it to possibly up to three clubs. AGB own the land but can give a long lease to the clubs, they in turn could develop the facilities and any rental profits from this can then be reinvested by AGB into additional land.
This way the money stays in the sport and over time hopefully becomes self perpetuating.
AGB could use their newly elected people resources to full effect in helping, co-ordinating and developing a template that builds decent facilities which over time show members that their monies are actually being invested into something worthwhile and tangible.
Just a passing thought, I know some like the physical magazine but
how much could be saved by going digital with the magazine, then using the monies saved on paper and postage to buy land? Does it really matter who gets first divvy?
Also if regional associations released some of their funds to kick it off, then perhaps land could be bought in the first two years in all regions.
This would help to reduce the inevitable bickering of which area gets the first piece of land.
Anyway it is just a thought. Archery needs to stand on its own two feet, without the begging bowl asking for more.
 

dvd8n

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Just a passing thought, I know some like the physical magazine but how much could be saved by going digital with the magazine
AGB did do a request for feedback on the magazine recently. I don't know how many responded. I did, I sent them a really extensive response, but haven't heard a squeak about it since.
 

Shirt

Well-known member
Just a passing thought, I know some like the physical magazine but
how much could be saved by going digital with the magazine, then using the monies saved on paper and postage to buy land?
It's an interesting one, but the magazine is actually a profit generator for AGB. Because of the way that newspaper / magazine taxes work, you get to multiply cover price (which is the notional £4.75) by circulation (number of members) and then there's a formula to determine costs for tax - which are way greater than they really are. So by having a physical magazine you effectively pay less tax than if you went purely digital.
 

dvd8n

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
It's an interesting one, but the magazine is actually a profit generator for AGB. Because of the way that newspaper / magazine taxes work, you get to multiply cover price (which is the notional £4.75) by circulation (number of members) and then there's a formula to determine costs for tax - which are way greater than they really are. So by having a physical magazine you effectively pay less tax than if you went purely digital.
I'm sure that you're right but AGB, apart from a one-off issue, haven't produced a paper magazine for yonks now.

And yes, I know, covid has made publishing difficult but loads of other publications have kept going over the last two years.

I did wonder, at the time of the consultation, whether they were genuinely looking for input on the magazine or just looking for permission to discontinue it.

Maybe, even with the tax breaks, it is still to much overhead for them?
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
I'm still just trying to understand the initial proposal... are we talking about AGB buying land to provide an open shooting ground to AGB members; buying land to provide a shooting ground for a particular club; or buying land to effectively set up an AGB run club in competition to the other local clubs?
I'm asking is it feasible that AGB use an annual amount of funds towards the purchase of land to provide a shooting ground for initially 2 or 3 clubs.

If so, is it then feasible for AGB to work with the clubs on a plan for facilities. The clubs would work together and pool their resources towards an agreed plan.
Land stays in AGB ownership (clubs may come and go)
Any profits from lease or rental is then put back into purchasing more land.

More of members monies stays within archery and hopefully AGB would be seen as a much more positive "hands on" organisation to its members.

Members see a tangible product of their fees and that they are investing in their sport for the likes of themselves.

The knock on effect over a decade could be very positive for archery in the UK.

It's just a question to perhaps invoke some thought and discussion.
I don't mean to be a black cloud or maybe a troll..
 

little-else

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
I can see the rationale behind Chris' argument as AGB doesnt own Lillieshall but to purchase a HQ and land for a suitable national facility for the benefit or use of all is different to what he proposes. Bearing in mind how little money is available to any sports governinging body other than a couple of exceptions the idea that AGB becomes a land speculator with our subs would soon have them out of office.
Now, if such a scheme was successful you can bet your bottom dollar that some carpet baggers would come along and join AGB jsut to use it as a vehicle to grab that land.It happens with companies, pension schemes and village greens.
So, should AGB have its own central HQ with attached facilities for use by coaches, national squad, counties, regions etc? Yes but I cant see anyone affering them the land and a big wedge to build th new HQ and we certainly cant afford it.
I would estimate that you would need around £5m to buy a suitable patch with existing suitable building. Thats a lot of money for 40000 people to find on top of their subs when the benefit will be minimal to them personally
 

Ian

Member
AIUK Saviour
quote "I would estimate that you would need around £5m to buy a suitable patch with existing suitable building. Thats a lot of money for 40000 people to find on top of their subs when the benefit will be minimal to them personally. "

In principal I agree that if we could get grass roots field,target and clout archers fired up and involved in fund raising,sourcing and buying suitable land for long term archery use it would be great but if AGB were in over all charge I for one would want nothing to do with it.
 

chrisgas

Supporter
Supporter
I would estimate that you would need around £5m to buy a suitable patch with existing suitable building. Thats a lot of money for 40000 people to find on top of their subs when the benefit will be minimal to them personally
Has anyone ever bequeathed land to AGB. Or AGB considered encouraging it?
Maybe land that someone doesn't wish it to be overdeveloped. I know that land is often bequeathed to the likes of the national trust or the RSPB for obvious reasons but the RSPB have been known to then sell it onto housing developers.

I'm sure that archery can make a case for why archery can help land to remain more natural and also be developed for wildlife etc.

It doesn't have to be used for a central HQ just another place to develop clubs and archery.
 
Top