LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

[timexit17]

If you're an LCGB member just go along to the AGM or post a simple question on the forum.
If you're polite and asking something genuine I'm sure it'll get answered.

As for the BLOA badge, imagery 'not being used' or 'being unloved' as has been previously stated, I've got several examples of this badge re-made by the LCGB and hundreds of the emblems images in LCGB jetsets and banner photographs over the past 2 decades, I didn't see anyone else re-making these badges but the LCGB, that might not be the same in some peoples minds as having a bit of official paper stating you have 'trademark' but it in itself proves pre existing historical usage which it would be very naive to underestimate IME.

In my honest opinion, there really was/is no need to try & resurrect a club name that any Lambretta owner must surely have known or suspected to still be in use -even if only on decorative badges.

I wish anyone luck putting on events and hope they cover their costs, one way to put people off from coming however is to start a dispute with established clubs as you're more likely to simply galvanise riders into taking against you if you start making it into a crusade, you're certainly far less likely to get other clubs to cooperate in making sure events don't clash- just my opinion.

There's been a fair amount of emotive language named about here too and perhaps those doing so can make it clear what is their opinion and what they can prove for a fact?

e.g KW being 'forced out' of the LCGB:

I was at the AGM where the proposal was made to allow a split off of a portion of the club which in effect would have also been a very significant part of the funding of the club to Kev alone, the club AGM (all seats full & standing room only) voted and the vast majority were not in favour of this, that's called democracy.

All points were heard, Kev went on a tour of he biggest clubs before hand also to argue his own point -all of which had a major representation at that AGM, some backed him, some didn't.
This wasn't an argument of Kev V the committee as some would like to paint it, I'm quite sure most there did as my club did -they decided whether they wanted the status quo or were persuaded by the presentation of the issues otherwise.

No one forced KW out and he is a life member IIRC?
There is still an interview with KW on the LCGB site btw, if KW was forced out why is that still there?
Kev Also was at the LCGB 70th anniversary dinner no more than six weeks ago too!

If I'd been forced out of anywhere they wouldn't be giving me a dinner, free membership and a forum page dedicated to me I am quite sure.

If you're referring to an earlier remark about the committee ousting him -where are the minutes for this?
I haven't seen them and I don't recall any such decision being made either, perhaps I'm wrong -but point out where the minutes are for this and I'll be sure to apologise on this thread.

i.e. I've left plenty of conversations, discussions, union meetings and stand up rows after disagreeing with someone/anyone/ no-one! I wouldn't say I was ousted if it was my decision to leave -just in case that was the truth of it.

[servetakid]

From the Scootering article on the LCGB. Paints a somewhat different picture of the relationship between the BLOA and the LCGB. Rebranding and defunct are quite different things? A bit like Wilkos and Wilkinsons?

"The very beginnings of the LCGB can be traced back to the days of The British Lambretta Owners Association (BLOA) which was formed by Lambretta Concessionaires during the 1950s. Anyone purchasing a new Lambretta automatically got membership to BLOA so it came as no surprise that the membership numbers would rise dramatically. By 1965, and now under the guidance of Bob Wilkinson, BLOA was rebranded the LCGB. The club was employing full-time staff to cope with the greater administration and organisation required of the large membership."

https://www.scootering.com/scootering-c ... 1977-1992/

[EddieStone]

As I see it, the LCGB is a club where (in theory) no one has sole access to the club funds. That's why there's a committee, AGM's and all that stuff.

BLOA is owned by one man, who can do what he likes with it (if he owns it). He could open a shop in Carnaby St and sell BLOA embossed sweatshirts and pocket the profit. Or he could operate a friendly inclusive and open association that has no need to generate a profit. The difference is, the members (in theory) have a say in how the LCGB is run, where this doesn't have to be the case when an organisation is run by one person.

If LCGB is mainly concerned with preserving the Lambretta heritage, why does a businessman own the name Lambretta, and Gav own BLOA? They've clearly taken their eye off the ball.

I hope that £7k in legal fees is going towards protecting whatever's left.

[drunkmunkey6969]

As best I can make out, the LCGB haven’t actually taken any formal legal action yet. If you read the bit in Jetset they say ‘steps are being taken to CONSIDER the Club’s legal position’.

It further reads that their objection to the Trademark, and the result of that objection, will form PART of the claim being PREPARED against Mr Frankland.

Looks like there’s a long way to go on this one yet...buckle up for the ride!

[storkfoot]

..... I have said what needs to be said from the horses mouth. Anything else mentioned apart from I've said here on this thread is hearsay. I will answer any questions but I will not be brought into an argument.....

Thanks for volunteering to answer questions. I too am looking to try and get my head around all this before I go to the AGM.

Three questions please:

1. The name you have chosen to use, and the hand drawn shield logo, are from a time long since past. Why did you choose to use them?

2. In my post yesterday, I gave a brief outline of why I don’t feel that your argument that the BLOA was totally separate to the LCGB is correct. When you replied to me, you did not dispute that what I said was broadly correct. So, can I assume that you accept that my post is correct, yes or no?

3. If no, why please?

[Gav BLOA]

No problem Mr Storkfoot, For those that know me I have almost 1 of every model, including a innocenti racer and other rare machines. I also have a vast memorabilia collection. The pattern here is that I'm not out to make a fast buck, I could have done that when I owned Lambretta innocenti ltd. My passion is with innocenti in its hay day. Up until mid 60's. I have no real interest in the sporting side of it when basically when the LCGB started that was really only keeping the momentum going. I can't say what you have said is either right or wrong. I personally dont have any issues with LCGB. I've bought bloa fair and square. The reason why I am using bloa I've mentioned before. This might not answer all questions but I can't really put a fight up because there isn't a fight. Thanks

[Rally220]

Thought you had them all nicked ?
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liv ... n-11369224

[Gav BLOA]

Eddie, yes some good points. Yes I could do what you have said, however I am a lambretta enthusiast. I've owned them for every single day since 1981. Bloa is a members club, we are currently deciding about the Welsh rally and where to have it. Everything is running at cost. There is no profit. I am paying for advertising from my own pocket, I even paid the last before my mortgage. There are not many on here that would do that. If any. BLOA is a members club, run by the members. Thanks Gav

[Gav BLOA]

I remember in 92 when LCGB and myself received letters from lambretta license, both the same letters. I went down to speak face to face with them. I come back with a car full of merchandise and they Lambretta had an order to make me 244 pairs of shoes. LCGB spent months fighting them spending £20k of members money and got there arse kicked. Kev got involved and drew up a deal. This my friends are the differences.

[Gav BLOA]

No Rally200, 18 or so, but all was returned by the new buyer. This was my own fault for getting behind in the rent. Nasty situation.