Here’s why I think its wrong… “Climb Britain sounds superficial. It feels like a lesser, shrunken organisation than the British Mountaineering Council, a name with a legacy, gravitas and status. It fails to represent the depth of relationship many BMC members have with the mountains. It smacks of ‘brand new customers only’ and alienates the natives. The proposed name (& logo) is unstimulating, watered down and unrepresentative of the passionate adventuresome people who make up the BMC members. Yes, member do all ‘climb’ but so do road bikers - and runner beans.” I’ve worked for many years in marketing this would have been my feedback to any agency presenting Climb Britain to me (perhaps slightly more diplomatically). I’d have told them to come back when they has a deeper, ‘real-er’, grasp of the organisation and its members. What this agency have failed to understand is what members really have in common. In my opinion it is less about an ‘activity’ and more about a shared love of the mountains and the outdoors, a sense of adventure and freedom. In other words it is largely irrelevant what they are doing in the mountains - walking, climbing, running, skiing, or indeed biking, what they have in common is the desire to be there. I think the reason Climb Britain has had a less than favourable reception is because it misses the point. People who are often non-conformist, who don’t want to be labelled or told what to do, were never going to be happy being told they were part of what does indeed sound like a sponsored event! The logo is sterile and characterless and serves only to reinforce the whole sanitisation process. The BMC may well have needed to reposition themselves but making your brand current doesn’t necessarily mean changing it. There has been much chatter on the current use of ‘mountaineering’ in BMC so an example from elsewhere…The AA stands for Automobile Association but I’ve never heard a van owner say ‘I can’t use The AA as I don’t have a car.’ And nowadays who uses the word 'automobile’ ! But The AA made themselves current as ‘the 4th emergency service’. And, they built on their existing customer loyalty and retained all the heritage their brand represented. The CTC’s rebrand to Cycling UK has also come up. They represent a single pursuit – cycling so Cycling UK works, Climb Britain does not. What strategies, other than rebranding, were explored by the BMC? Though I don’t think it was their intent, it does look like the BMC are now serving Sports England and its associated targets to the detriment of non-bonus attracting, old fashioned long standing members - who are ironically now feeling Climb Britain is not relevant to them. I think asking the question ‘What do we need to do to stay relevant/current?’ is necessary to ensure a long term strategy; and I don’t object to money being spent on this. But I don’t think this name represents the raison d’etre of the BMC any better than it represents the members.