Proposal for a Seagull Owners Association

[Buzzook]

As far as we can determine, there is no organisation, club, association etc directly representing the owners of British Seagulls anywhere in the world.

What we do have is a diverse and dispersed bunch of enthusiasts who use, mess about with, restore, race and collect British Seagulls.

Given the 'no new 2-strokes ban' recently introduced in Europe, and the limits on petrol-driven motors on many reservoirs and waterways already, it seems likely this situation is only going to get worse over time.

Without a representative body - an "entity" that can be "recognised" as a "stakeholder" by the authorities, our voice will never be heard. We simply don't exist as far as officialdom is concerned.

An international "owners association" would provide a degree of 'respectability' or at least 'credibility' and enable any owners interested to participate in boating related 'official' groups around the world, under the auspices of the 'official club'. It would also enable us to register as a 'stakeholder' with groups like boating industry associations, marine managers and other official departments. This would enable us to be kept in the loop and provide opportunities for 'official comments' on boating policies, with a view to protecting our hobby and interests.

It would enable a "British Seagull" presence at local boat shows, wooden boat regattas, marine festivals and other events many of us already go to. This would further broaden awareness of the British Seagull, its ongoing existence and the fun you can have restoring and running them.

Very much a 'thumbnail sketch' at this stage, but meetings etc would be online, not too often, and local Chapters would essentially be autonomous. The idea is to set up a couple of mirrors, blow some smoke about, and let the rest of the world know we are still here!

What we're looking for is a basic 'straw poll' of how many people think such an association would be useful, or at least, not a bad idea, before we go any further.

If there is to be a membership fee (yet to be decided) it would be small, as an 'online' association would need very little cash to keep it running, enough to cover bank charges and website hosting etc.

[Buzzook]

Hmmm. 66% of votes not opposed to the idea so far.

But only 9 votes? C'mon you lurkers out there, voice your feelings.

[Keith.P]

Too many clubs end up hierarchical, been there done that and not interested.
planned days out still go ahead without an association, would love to see more but that's down to location which is good for some, but not good for others and that cannot be helped.
Seen too many sites/forums with members access only, not helpful for the first time user, with access to a tip/problem page.

[Buzzook]

Hmmmm. On the surface, that's not a bad idea.

But I bet I know what John will say: "and leave me to do all the b***y work??"

Not sure he'd be happy about the lack of independence of the club/assoc from him.

But he's a big boy, he can answer that himself!

Certainly don't see any reason to change the forum per se. And you're right, it would be just like adding another layer to what's already there.

And as KeithP says, we'd need to ensure it did not become some hierarchical behemoth. Thin, light and one level.

Rather than an "organising group" as so many clubs are, it should be more of 'referring group'. As issues come up, people local to the issues could advise adn be advised, but importantly, any response would have the imprimatur of a "legitimate democratic organisation".

We don't need to tell anyone we're really just a loosely aligned bunch of enthusiasts. Need to know basis. We just need to 'look' official.

[charlesp]

Actually I personally would much rather didn't look 'official'. That way I can do a show (boat or other) off my own bat without having to refer to some governing body. I don't have to pay anyone anything, nothing needs organising, help is available almost instantly. Spares and new bits are easy to obtain, you can even buy hats and tee shirts if you want.

And, to be honest, I don't feel the need for representation anywhere.

Charles and I keep the register of the older motors.

What more do you want? I don't understand what anyone would gain.

[Keith.P]

I do have more than just a seagull hobby, so I spend a lot of time hunting around the Net for info on other things and one thing I do come across is, if anyone needs information on Seagull outboards, they always get sent to SOS, so its not as if the site is unknown and seems to be well respected for its users and information.
Its a nice simple site without multiple post categories to worry about, why fix what's not broken.
As far as I'm aware , the seagulls register is not compulsory and is a collection of data that has been collected over some time and surely its up to him what he does with it.

[charlesp]

Currently the vast majority of spares for most Seagulls from the mid fifties onwards and some earlier models are available from British Seagull, who are alive and kicking and actively marketing the stuff, just as they actively market their range of spares books, owners manuals, workshop manuals, baseball caps and the like.

If you can't get it from them, then John is your next stop. He is likely to have a used part (or sometimes new old stock) and will happily and promptly supply it. He also supplies new stuff at the same prices as British Seagull, so in fact he could be your first stop, too.

In the unlikely event that you're unsuccessful then there's the wanted pages on this forum. The example of a coolie hat magneto cover is indeed a good one - the tooling was made up by one of the forum members and a batch of aluminium covers were made. Over the last two years one has been sold. Single digit sales also apply to intakes, early 102 decals, posters etc. So clubbing together to manufacture things is a bit of a non - starter. It's worth mentioning that British Seagull vigorously pursue people who take their copyright in vain, so trying to sell anything under the 'British Seagull' name isn't going to work either.

Advice - come here like almost everyone else. It's free, has the benefit of virtually all of the Seagull collector fraternity as members, the benefit of actual trading experience, engineering expertise from past franchised repairers or indirectly those who did the job for British Seagull, and all manner of ideas and shared projects.

The main SOS web site is full of interesting stuff, and is frequently augmented as new articles, adverts, motors and discoveries come to light. And it's instant. And free.

So what exactly would you gain from an owners' club?

[Charles uk]

Manifold would you care for me to publish a list of all your precious items on the internet for all to see, I bet that any smart 16 year old could find your full postal address in 15 minutes & 1 minute later he would be looking at the access to your garage & shed on google earth.

A fully restored SD probably owes it owner £500 including labour & parts, it might only be worth £200 on the bay, but it's a lot of work to replace one especially when it's not possible to insure them.

Now can you understand why no one wants this info on general release?

I have looked at several Seagull collections whose ebay values exceed £10,000.

If there is anything you want to know then ask myself or the other Charles but don't expect the answers to be for public consumption.

[outboard]

Mmmmmmmmmmmm, is this a can of worms being opened??? Yes it would be nice to be official but what would be gained? I'm sure I'm not alone when I ask who would benefit from this? I see from earlier posts there are people happy to have information which may or may not interest Seagull owners however this information is not for public viewing so what does this say? Seems to me the thought of an official club would rustle the feathers of certain people. An official site would be expected to share all information available, especially if fees are involved.
I would think the guys who run this site would probably take control of the next one so why bother, this one's free, the help is available and you take what you want and let the rest flow.

I wouldn't bother with it.

[charlesp]

As I've said if you want information from the registry all you have to do is ask, but you won't get names or addresses.

But speaking personally my own research has been conducted by me, paid for by me, interviews conducted by me, motors and artefacts bought by me, manuals and documents purchased be me, and until such time as I choose to publish it then that's the way it stays.

Having said that I do share it when someone asks a direct question. But that's my choice, as it's my choice not to hand over my manuscript to everyone who asks.

No can of worms, no ruffled feathers. just a genuine surprise that there could be anything to be gained by making us 'official'.

[Buzzook]

There's some good ideas and equally valid points being raised via this debate - and interestingly the stats are pretty much split down the middle, with a slight leaning towards "an official presence".

So, with hindsight and logical extrapolation of some of the ideas raised, perhaps it would make more sense to simply add the 'ability to represent' to the functionality that the SOS forum already supplies?

Maybe something like a fixed thread for "notification of possible threats to Seagulldom" or something, where anyone who hears of such bureacratic manouvres can post them up, and the international Seagull community can then debate them here on the forum? Surely someone would be willing to volunteer to write whatever submission was necessary? Not quite the same as having someone 'delegated' to attend and report back, but the next best thing, surely?

As far as the idea of registrars goes, with both Charles's maintaining the privacy of owners - as CharlesP says, very necessary these days - 'we' would only need to be sure that in the event of the untimely and unlooked for demise of either gent that their 'knowledge' was not lost forever. Has that been thought of?

And to satify the anoraks and the merely curious, could not the 'statistics' at least be publishable without breaching anyone's privacy?

For example, how many of each model are still running and/or in regular use? How many exist in any given country? Simple stuff like that.

My guess is the reason this does not appear is because it would be a lot of work for either or both the Charles's to extract from their separate databases. Is that right guys?

And if so, would it be possible to seek out a computer program, piece of software, or whatever, that could automate such stats, so that they change automatically as any new stat is added? If that was internet based, or linked to the SOS forum, it could also be 'published' automatically, too.

No extra work for the Charles's, once set up, but a useful and interesting set of stats available for public viewing.

If something like that could be arranged/organised/whatever, without the need for a 'club' or 'organisation' beyond what we have now, then why not do it?

[charlesp]

Extracting records from a database, now there's a giggle. Have you actually looked around this forum, had a look for anything about this register?

If you have you will know that there are very few Marstons surviving. No need to 'extract records from a database' because Charles and I together with Rick and John probably own, or know the owners of, the majority of that handful.

Don't imagine numbers on a scale requiring databases.

What on earth does 'Right to Represent' mean?

Do you actually own a Seagull?

[Collector Inspector]

Aztec Calender and end of days I know!

But.............WOW!

B

[Buzzook]

CharlesP, I get the distinct feeling you are being deliberately provocative, and some of your comments border on the offensive. There is no need to be unpleasant.

Yes, I do own a Seagull, and will shortly be purchasing another. Which ought to give me as much right to comment, ask questions, make proposals, without being flamed for my temerity.

For the record, the expression I used was 'ability to represent' NOT as you have translated it 'right to represent'. The two are quite different in meaning I believe.

You say there is no database for the early Seagulls. Well, why not? Do you have the names of the owners (that you know of) inscribed in cuneiform on clay tablets wrapped in animal skins stored in your cellar?

Or as I assume you can use a computer (you are able to access the forum at least) that you may have them in an MS Word doc as a list or in a table? Or perhaps in an MS Excel document?

Either qualifies, by definition, as a 'database'.

If it's still in a card index form, fine, but it 'could' and perhaps 'should' be computerised for posterity, see my previous comments about people dropping off twigs or making close personal acquaintance with bus bumpers.

If it is already in an Excel spreadsheet (and I'm guessing it might be) than it is relatively easy to export the csv file to another application and/or convert it to html. Strip and 'clean' the personal data using filters, and it's a 5 sec job.

It appears from other comments (further back up the thread) that people want to see this data, so what, really is your objection?

[Keith.P]

It sounds like your flogging a dead horse, this is more about DATA SHARING, than about a Seagull club or organisation.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the data will not become public, names or not, unless its in a book and I suspect the position of some people on this forum has helped the collection of said data, but so what, I don't have a problem with that, maybe you should have thought of it first.


But what did get up my nose was the huff about a pdf manual being offered on the site, so does this mean that all other manuals are fare game as long as its not a seagull ones.

Whiter than white, Ha.

Read in to it what you like, that's why I don't like clubs or organisation.