 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
I bet the OP's issue is with the bait-and-switch. If this limitation was part of the deal when he paid his money, it's a different matter. But when you pay x amount of dollars for something, and they you get "less" than that something, you have a legitimate beef.
It is the lack of notification that his type of membership was no longer valid that is causing the issue.Originally Posted by CaberTosser
The point is the membership changed midyear without any notice (from what the OP is saying). So yes he is right to complain.
If i paid money for the year and the range decides to change the rules midyear and now my membership is useless to me (maybe i can only make it out on weekends) then id be pissed off as well.
But if they decided to change the rules and let all the associate members know "hey people are complaining about such and such so starting next year we have decided...." im sure would have went over better.
Sweet songs never last too long on broken radios
I would be more pissed about the change of conditions after I bought my membership especially if there was no mention that the range reserves the right to change the conditions of my membership when I signed up.Oi. Another TSE bashing thread.
They have made it so that only full members and unlicensed guests with an RO can use the rifle range on the weekends. This is because full members pay $600 for a membership and have come on a weekend where it's all full with morons with their SKS dumping rounds downrange with their bros. I would be pissed off too. I think it's a good idea, keep the loyal full members happy first.
You spend $80 a year for a membership mostly to own Restricted guns, which is a nice option they provide instead of the full $600. What? You want a private reserved bay and bathroom stall too?
Go read that shlock to a soldier or a fireman or a football player or a bloody barber Theyll all knock your "this" right down your throat while sippin a beer and eating chicken wings.Then wipe their wee fingers on your pretty little pouch"
I don't think that's an "ethics" issue. The associate membership is $80/year, and the regular membership is $600/year - seems reasonable that you get less for the associate membership but maybe that should have been communicated more clearly. The associate membership appears to be for people who don't shoot a lot and primarily want membership for the purpose of satisfying the CFO's gun range membership requirements.
I know for a fact that when you're filling out the membership waiver BEFORE getting a membership, there is an area for your email address and a question of if you want to receive email updates about stuff around the range, and that they sent out an email a few weeks ago about the change to everyone on this list.
I don't belong nor will I step foot in there again but It more of a speculation on my part as too why the op could be pissed. However I would still be pissed if there was mention when I signed up that they can remove priveledges that I agreed to when I paid for the membership.
Go read that shlock to a soldier or a fireman or a football player or a bloody barber Theyll all knock your "this" right down your throat while sippin a beer and eating chicken wings.Then wipe their wee fingers on your pretty little pouch"
[QUOTE=CaberTosser;14803337]I’m no fan of that business, but how about keeping criticism to a companies actual legitimate wrongs? If the members who paid full price can’t get in on the busy days because of associate members taking up the bays, do you think those full members are getting reasonable value out of the price they paid? There has to be some differential in benefits between a discount membership and a full blown membership or nobody would pay the full price. Perhaps this change happened in response to complaints from full members who weren’t getting value from their fees when such things would happen.
Business is pay to play, this is a pretty normal business decision so far as I’m concerned[/QUOTE
The issue is not that the people withfull time memberships deserve better access at all. Any business can make changes to how they run their own business at anytime they choose to do such changes. The issue is that no one was notified that the conditions of their membership had changed. It’s how its done and thats why its called ethics and not laws. There would have been lots of people who drove down there to shoot yesterday and today and were turned away. It’s not right, I can see any people who bought their associated memberships after April 6 fer sure and let the others expire under the conditions the memberships they were bought at and upon renewal then I gues the new rules apply and we can make that decision then. Let’s say you hire a company the remove your snow and the deal is they do it once a day every day it snows. Now it snows and they dont come, you call and they say they will now only come once on Mon, Tues, and Friday but you get no rebate from them and your signed contract remains the same. You gunna be happy?
[QUOTE=Jims71duster;14803422]Did you check the box when filling out your membership waiver to receive email updates? Because I know an email went out a few weeks ago warning of the change. I would be pissed too if I bought a membership and then my privileges suddenly change without warning, but there was warning.
Oi. Another TSE bashing thread.
They have made it so that only full members and unlicensed guests with an RO can use the rifle range on the weekends. This is because full members pay $600 for a membership and have come on a weekend where it's all full with morons with their SKS dumping rounds downrange with their bros. I would be pissed off too. I think it's a good idea, keep the loyal full members happy first.
You spend $80 a year for a membership mostly to own Restricted guns, which is a nice option they provide instead of the full $600. What? You want a private reserved bay and bathroom stall too?
I did not purchase an associated membership to satisfy any CFO issues to own a restricted weapon. I shoot less than 12 times a year which is where the limit is to make it then more benificial for me to have a better membership. More than that then its worth it to me to get a different membership type. I am not a moron blasting an SKS down range with their bros and by the way you communicate I can easily determineI would be considerably more respectful than yourself in almost any circumstance, please refer to the bathroom comment. The issue is certainly not that a full membership member deserves more time at all. The issue is how the change was communicated to the people it affected. There was zero regard for them and lots of people drove there to shoot because they always have, this changed with no communication. Once again, not a CFO issue, not a restricted weapons issue and not a full members deserve more than an associated issue. It’s about changing the terms of agreement with no contact, thats all so lets not turn this into something that its not. Right or wrong if he can do it is not the issue at all, its how and thats it.
[QUOTE=1001yards;14803432]Ive been getting emails from them weekly for months, nothing about this, Ive talked with a half dozen others that are affected and same thing.
Posting Permissions
