[Closed] 'On your bikes,' Hub pair told by forestry landlord

wgas

I recommend that they speak to ian at the drop off though.

Ian is leaving the Drop Off (at least at the Glyncorrwyg centre) as apparently he's fed up of the current landlord (who isn't the FC). If you're suggesting that Emma and Tracey could run their business out of a bus, I'm not entirely convinced.

I'm not suggesting they run their business from a bus. A big boat would be nicer.
But Ian has done well to last this long, and will be very aware of the issues of tenancy and rights etc as he has had some success with it so I understand.

He seem to remember that he got an extension on the tenancy against the landlord's wishes, but I think he has had enough. I'm sure Emma and Tracey will have taken legal advice and know their rights anyway.

all this talk of competition is silly

as someone else pointed out go skiing and try and find a reasonable priced anything on the slopes, no matter how many cafes are up the mountain

the hub may not be aldi cheap but the foods good enough and tracy and emma have put loads back into the sport,
taking those wee nippers up the freeride course should surely impress anyone whos passionate about mtbing
i use the hub knowing full well that i could have saved money by taking my own sarnies but im happy to pay them because i can see the good theyve done for GT and mtbing

I'm sure Emma and Tracey will have taken legal advice and know their rights anyway.

I'm sure you're right. I was only trying to help!

You should know better than that. 😉

hora:
If mcds was involved I wouldn't ride there as my son might learn to associate burgers with exercise ..........................yep I know about their involvement with football.

Cheers for the [s]morning[/s] afternoon chuckle Hora.

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today. They sent the benchmark for everywhere else. The thought of losing thier input, knowledge and experience to many of us is devastating. By bikers for Bikers. No-one wants to loose that.

[url= http://www.wellbeing-solutions.co.uk/mountain-biking/glentress-emma-tracey-vs-forestry-commission ]Emma & Tracey Vs Forestry Commission[/url]

kennwallacehpc

Thats bit OTT. Their input at Glentress has been good for sure and it is a shame they have not got the tender. However it is time to move on. Cold damp portacabins with not enough seating just don't cut it any more. The new centre is aimed at more than the hard core of MTBers. Glentress is an internationally renowned centre for MTBing - it needs a new centre and cafe.

Tehre is a lot more to MTBing that trail centres you know - some would say that real mtbing is not hap0pening at Glentress - that is the sanitised variety.

This off your link is just stupid and ruins your credibility

Our world of the rough and rugged outdoors is now likely to be slowly sanitised and wrapped in cotton wool as the bureaucrats run riot in the name of Health & Safety and Profit, ultimately unweaving the very fabric of why such a place exists.

Kimbers - its what the market will bear that to some extent drives prices on ski slopes. Welcome to the market economy. Its a place where there is no room for sentimentality and it's we the consumers that set the demand and the price we are willing to pay not the businesses. If they charge too much they go out of business. Its why competition is important as it provides consumers with alternative services and goods at a different price point. Profits fuel further developments to increase revenues to the point where market saturation is reached and growth becomes static until new services, innovation or goods can be brought to the market. The ending of one lease and the tendering process is part of this process to stimulate new growth and services for consumers.

I'll get my coat and get back to my financial exam revision 😯

Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today

Sorry?

Nothing to do with Karl Bartlett, Pete Laing and the rest of the Seven Stanes crew, the millions of pounds of European and UK government money spent on building [u]trails[/u] - without which, lets be honest, there would be no reason for mountainbikers to use the cafe?

Given the amount of money pumped in by the taxpayer, its right and proper that the FC should seek to maximise the financial returns from the lease for any facilities at these trail centres, and when someone is going to make a profit from, essentially, a licensed monopoly business at the publicly owned trailhead, then making sure the taxpayer gets his share is the least that the FC can do!

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today

😆

Priceless

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today

I have never been to the place (GT that is, not Scotland) but even i chuckled at that, what a load of old toss !

What confuses me about all this is the role of the FC. What is the FC actually [b]for[/b] nowadays? Clearly selling cheap timber doesn't pay the wages, so are they primarily a leisure outfit?

And whilst everyone is hand-wringing about the people responsible for the world-class Glentress facility, let's remember the proper hard work done by Andy Wardman (FC employee) and and the Trailfairies (not employees!).

Cheers, al.

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today

I think the last ice age might have had something to do with it.

I want to see Neeps and tatties on the new menu!

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today.

Wow, sense of proportion fail, classy move tagging this thread with your company identity as well.

Gotta be unpaid advertising/spam.

Well, I've been to GT a few times. I remember the first time we went down. I was so looking forward to seeing what all the fuss was about and I was sooo very disappointed!
I never had my rose-tinted riding glasses on so found the facilities to be lacking to say the least. The food in the café was 'alright' at best and well, I just didn't get what all the excitement was about.
I for one was delighted to see the new stuff getting built and think it will be good for the centre.
People fear change, Christ there were a few on here that just about had a heart attack when the forum layout changed! Can you imagine how they'll react to the change of personnel at a trail centre! 😯
I look forward to seeing how things develop at GT.
The change might do it good, as it certainly needed something to help. It may be considered 'unfair' but it's business after all.

Oh, and:

think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today.

That really has to be the quote of the day/week/month/year

Brilliant! 😆

think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today.

If all that is known of mountain biking in Scotland is Spooky Wood and the Glentress car park...too many people have never gone beyond Glentress and dont seem to realise that the rest of Scotland is full of riding that is just as good and doesnt need an overpriced bike shop and overwhelmed cafe to enjoy.

i actually think they have done much for mtbing in scotland

surely gt is the most ridden trails north of the border

{irridium tints on}i remember fondly our 1st club trip up there about '98ish?

we were so excited - tracy picked us up at edinburgh airport in the van and drove us to teh hotel by the hub and was very interested to know what wed make of the trails as compared to the recently opened cyb that wed done a few trips to already

the trails there made gt great
the black route at the time seemed epic, the ewok village, spooky wood id never ridden anything like it
but we would never have gone there if there wasnt a cafe and bike shop being pushed in the mags and on the interwebs

but we would never have gone there if there wasnt a cafe and bike shop being pushed in the mags

🙄 Yeah, because that's how we all decide where to ride.....not....

kimbers - Member
i actually think they have done much for mtbing in scotland...

I think the point the others were trying to make is that trail parks are a very small part of mountain biking in Scotland.

Still, sympathy is due to people who have built up a business over 10 years and then lose it like this. There is always the suspicion that bean counters fail to take in the whole picture, and the tender has simply been awarded to the group that will pay the most rent without regard to their viability.

too many people have never gone beyond Glentress and dont seem to realise that the rest of Scotland is full of riding that is just as good

The forestry certainly seem to be missing this, given their predicted massive increase in user numbers.

tragically69

sorry im not a real mtber who has ridden every bridleway within a 100km radius of my house, has the personal number of my ROW officer and a complete set of landrangers covering the brittish isles and navigate most of my rides using a quality sextant and an extensive knowledge of the stars

for lots of (most?)riders, especially beginners trail centres are the where its at and glentress was the 1st in scotland

Let's not get carried away, with sentimentality!

If we look at this logically we can see that after the great job the government and their talented and able representatives have done to manage the roads and the NHS, the forrest are in capable hands 😯 .

Then we have the vision that enabled them to see the need for a tram system in Edinburgh, a system I might add, that is almost complete 😯

How can we doubt the ability of the people who gave us the scottish parliament building, a work of tremendous architectural wonder, 😯

I do not know if this will be a good thing or not, but I doubt it!

kimbers - Member
...for lots of (most?)riders, especially beginners trail centres are the where its at and glentress was the 1st in scotland

But in Scotland there's lots more, hordes even?, who don't go to trail parks because of the availability of extensive networks of trails near every town and village. We have the right to use them and don't need permission and that includes the trails through the large private estates.

sorry im not a real mtber who has ridden every bridleway within a 100km radius of my house, has the personal number of my ROW officer and a complete set of landrangers covering the brittish isles and navigate most of my rides using a quality sextant and an extensive knowledge of the stars

for lots of (most?)riders, especially beginners trail centres are the where its at and glentress was the 1st in scotland

Sorry I have no idea what on earth are you talking about....

You'd have thought the trails were made of bacon butties....

You'd have thought the trails were made of bacon butties....

Let's not get carried away, with sentimentality!

I remember when you just drove all the way to the small parking area at the top and made up a random route with the existing trails, then hacked back up to the car park and rally droved (good word) home.

[url= http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/anger-as-hub-owners-lose-lease-to-run-glentress-cafe-28601 ]Bike Radar have published the story[/url] with lots of comments from Emma.

"I fear that it's people sitting behind desks who wouldn't know a pedal from a brake lever that are making the decisions," she said.

I'd have thought that all you guys who were ranting and raving about how public expenditure needed to feel the bitter wind of commercialism would be completely happy with this. Surely all you rabid free market IT guys must see that best value tenders are the way forwards. After all that's what you were baying for over the summer....?

Inded AP - there is a faint whiff of hypocrisy over all this. Loads of moaning but no willingness to actually do anything. Free markets rule until a fave get shafted by them

Does going mountain biking require a cafe?Playing devils advocate here but surely it's about enjoying the wilderness without the townie stuff like cafes etc?

and a complete set of landrangers covering the brittish isles

I have them all!!

Some people say there's no place for sentiment in business. But I bet most of those people probably never started their own business from scratch.

It's sad that Emma and Tracey didn't win the new Glentress contract.

I hope they find somewhere new to set up shop/cafe and go on to even greater success.

Does anyone know what Sian and Dafydd Roberts did after losing a similar gig at Coed Y Brenin?

It's interesting how the tone and balance of opinion in this thread differs to that of the other thread about this.

What is the FC actually for nowadays?

I believe they have 3 main goals:

1) Use their forests to produce wood.
2) Use their forests as an environmental resource.
3) Use their forests to improve public health. This is the one that MTBing gets in under.

As (1) has become less profitable, (2) and (3) have become more important.

Yes, don't forget that it is a managed timber plantation, and the whole thing could be raped for it's wood, destroying the trails and the 'vibe', if timber prices rise or the wood becomes harvestable.

More specifically:

"Scottish Ministers set out their vision for forestry in Scotland in the Scottish Forestry Strategy,published in 2006. The vision is that by the second half of this century, people are benefiting widely from Scotland’s trees, woodlands and forests, actively engaging with and looking after them for the use and enjoyment of generations to come. The forestry resource has become a central part of our culture, economy and environment. The Strategy is seeking to achieve three
outcomes from forestry:

• improved health and well-being of people and their communities
• competitive and innovative businesses contributing to the growth of the Scottish economy
• high quality, robust and adaptable environment and identified seven themes to deliver these:
• Climate Change
• Timber
• Business Development
• Community Development
• Access and Health
• Environmental Quality
• Biodiversity"

This thread gets more hilarious each time I read it.

Kenny Wallace, the 'former Para', has my vote for thread contributor of the week. The great big wussy aerobics instructor that he is.

Tootall, someone should also tell him that myers briggs is absolute *swearword*

Quote from Kenny Wallace -

I think what has upset most people is that Emma & Tracey are fundamentally responsible for Mountain biking in Scotland as its is known today.

I could not stop laughing, +1 for thread contributor of the week or idiot of the week... 😀

Hah, I missed the Kenny Wallace comment first time round, thanks guys!

1) Use their forests to produce wood.
2) Use their forests as an environmental resource.
3) Use their forests to improve public health. This is the one that MTBing gets in under.

As (1) has become less profitable, (2) and (3) have become more important.

The reality is that FC are very inefficient at 1. They get approximately 50% less than the private sector achieves. They have been very chameleon like in pinning their hat to whatever political peg is available at the time to justify their existance. It is very easy to show the cost to the taxpayer of every tonne of timber that leaves the forest, but contributing to the wider public health agenda is something more open to smoke & mirrors accounting.

Going back to the original thread:
For a private company dealing with FC tendering is a very unsatisfactory process. There is no loyalty and they have no understanding of either the costs or hassle of running a business. They put out framework tenders, time consuming to complete, for which no work materialises for the majority of "successful" tenderers. Importantly for the Hub, it is much harder for a new organisation to win the tender than the encumbent one, as they can promise the earth in the tender.
We are very selective about what FC work we would consider now - we have the scars to show for it!

I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that much as the old cafe at CYB was great, I think that may well be looking through rose tinted specs.

The old cafe had that great bohemian atmosphere, but lets face it at busy times I'd imagine it struggled to cope. The new facility, sadly, seems to be much more 'neutral' and appealing to a wider diversity of users. In my limited experience the service wasn't bad too.

The facilities at CYB are better from an objective POV than they were before. Last time I went to Gentress the Cafe was looking rather dillapidated and the toilets were pretty grim, calling them changing facilities is excessive.

Looking at the number of flash vans, estate cars and bikes at these trail centre car parks there's certainly plenty of money to be made. Not that making money makes it right, but sadly in these times of austrerity ther big subsidies aren't around any more, maybe they need to turn a bigger profit to help trail maintenance? Also if they need to run a 200 seat cafe what's their relevant experience?

kitebikeski - Member
> 1) Use their forests to produce wood.
> 2) Use their forests as an environmental resource.
> 3) Use their forests to improve public health. This is the one that MTBing gets in under.
> As (1) has become less profitable, (2) and (3) have become more important.

The reality is that FC are very inefficient at 1. They get approximately 50% less than the private sector achieves.

You'd opt for privatisation then? That normally has the STW hordes tearing their hair out.

We are very selective about what FC work we would consider now - we have the scars to show for it!

If you are in the "contract" or "tendering" business there does not seem to be the "loyalty" everyone on here would appear to think should be applied. Those days are long gone ❗

I have been riding at/in/around the GT area since way before the Hub pitched up. When it opened it was good. We were on 1st name terms with T&E. I do think however they have taken their eye off the ball/trail and allowed thing to deteriorate.
I have only been at GT once this year. The young staff seemed more interested in the music(loud)than serving people, rarely lifting their nodding heads to acknowledge an order.

Not that making money makes it right, but sadly in these times of austrerity ther big subsidies aren't around any more, maybe they need to turn a bigger profit to help trail maintenance?

There is no loyalty and they have no understanding of either the costs or hassle of running a business.

They are not allowed loyalty - they must tender on a level playing field - that is a legal requirement and they can't get around that - tell me you are just being provocative on that point. They don't have to understand your costs or your hassle - they contract for a requirement. What do you think they have to do - subsidise your overheads? I do feel for smaller businesses tendering with government departments, but don't complain because the rules force them to deal with an even hand.

Privatisation? Operating in a similar way to a commercial business would be a step in the right direction. We do not have the luxury of being able to tell our clients that they get less per tonne of timber but it's OK because they provide public benefit. You can have both.

Loyalty - probably not in reality - but with short term tendering it is difficult for a business to justify investment for the long term.

Understand the hassle? They should have an understanding when they want another rabbit pulled out of the hat, at no additional cost.

Subsidise overheads? - Yes they should pay for them- the rate for the job needs to include the overheads. FC seem to think that overheads = profit, when in reality the margin is very tight. Low/no margin - thats why we don't do much work with them now!

They are not allowed loyalty - they must tender on a level playing field - that is a legal requirement and they can't get around that - tell me you are just being provocative on that point. They don't have to understand your costs or your hassle - they contract for a requirement. What do you think they have to do - subsidise your overheads? I do feel for smaller businesses tendering with government departments, but don't complain because the rules force them to deal with an even hand.

I think this is key to why they didnt win the tender process - from comments elsewhere it appears their bid was based on their experience and what they believe is possible.

Other bidders are going on the FC forecast numbers of 500,000 visitors a year by 2014 or something. If T&E have worked on a lower forecast as they dont believe it to be possible then its very likely other parties will have looked much better on paper.

The FC have to work on best value - had they accepted a bid that offered less or cost more there would likely be an upheld appeal and it wouldnt go through anyway.

Cant blame the FC for following the rules they are forced to live by.

It makes me chuckle a little bit some of the absolute faith, black and white, cut straight and dry type comments about procurement and tendering. Having been involved on both sides (procurer and contractor) for both private and public sector I feel confident to say that it can be as honest or as bent as the people involved want to make it.

I know contractors who employ people (several often, though not quite departments) who go through tenders and contracts identifying where the gaps and claims are going to be. They make a bid based on the final outturn price they expect from those gaps being realised (i.e. increasing the price they will charge the client). They'll follow tenders and contracts to the letter such that if it doesn't state the blindingly obvious then the client doesn't get it for the tender price. I've known claims go in on as soon as the appointment letter has been recieved before anyone has even mobilised to site.

Then again I've received utterly crap tender invitations with unrealistic timescales, scopes of work, refusal to divulge information etc etc from plenty of clients. Neither is better than the other. I've also come across instances when the tender has been a necessary process for appearances sake but the contractor was pre-determined. On multi-million pound schemes as well.

It's all a big game (with some high stakes). As for the Hub, mleh, it's a kick in the ass for T&E but it is the sort of thing that happens, I suspect they've seent he writing on the wall for some time. Having seen Tracey at the IMBA conference and sat in her workshop it seemed clear she didn't have much love for FC and I've heard many people that do work for or are involved with them say the same. She particularly picked up on the point I've heard others make about £9M spend on a centre when what is really needed (in some people's opinions and that I agree) is a fair chunk of that scale of cash going into trails.

Hey ho, life's rich tapestry and all that.

It's called an Edifice Complex.

Head of a big company, public authority etc when he/she retires can sit back and point at the building and say "I made that".

Can't do that with improvements to infrastructure and services. The bigger the ego the bigger the edifice.

I would have thought that the changes are mostly to do with the FC getting some European money based on a new visitor centre / cafe / whatever. Much like happened at CyB which has a vaguely sustainable (hah!) vistor centre, a cafe with staff who quite obviously couldn't care less about customers or service or food or work (or being there to be honest) and a bike shop.
Certainly if as numerous people seem to suggest T&E have been publicly wandering around bad mouthing FC and letting their standards drop then obviously the writing's going to be on the wall.
cheeky monkey - procurement? yes been there done that.

xraymtb - Member

I think this is key to why they didnt win the tender process - from comments elsewhere it appears their bid was based on their experience and what they believe is possible.

Other bidders are going on the FC forecast numbers of 500,000 visitors a year by 2014 or something. If T&E have worked on a lower forecast as they dont believe it to be possible then its very likely other parties will have looked much better on paper.

I do wonder if this is what has happened

druidh - Member

G - Member

I think you will find that running at a loss has the same ultimate outcome whereever it happens, especially when Sugar Daddy is out of candy.

In English for the hard of thinking?

Sorry Druid, I missed it...you must have been at your wits end wondering what I meant. 😉

The forests in the UK have been subsidised by the state either in the shape of the FC or the EU for a long time: Sugar Daddy
Public money : Candy

i.e. the money has run out, so unless they now run at break even or better they will be in schtum and for that reason regardless of who runs them they will be looking to maximise revenues and minimise costs. In short take you and me for as much as they can whilst providing as little as they can get away with.

both private and public sector I feel confident to say that it can be as honest or as bent as the people involved want to make it.

Correct. Given the current drive towards transparency and the FC knowing this would get a lot of publicity, do you think those involved wanted to get this one right? Or do you think they gaffed it off and rode the ragged edge?

Given the current drive towards transparency and the FC knowing this would get a lot of publicity, do you think those involved wanted to get this one right?

Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if it has been gaffed. I think your faith in "transparency" as a driver for their performance is optimistic / misplaced.

IMO, it's the people operating the process and their insight into what's required that is the key thing. Good people do a good job whether they've got a spotlight on them or not. Average / bad / not experienced in what they're trying to procure people will do an average job irrespective of the potential level of scrutiny. From my involvement with FC over the years I would say that, often not maliciously, that they fall into the latter group, especially when they have a go at something commercial / real world / not their core business.

Heck, as others have said, I don't think they make that much cash at their core business of growing trees.

Never seen so many people attend meetings, in all their corporate gear and with umpteen branded vehicles.

Saying all that I'm not all that anti-FC, just troubled by some aspects.

And in case anybody doesn't get it; FC manage the nations forests (i.e. our land), they do so with money out of the public purse which they then try and offset through revenue (but usually end up being subsidised by central Govt (one reason why their sale is likely by the Con-Dems). All the money to build trails has almost exclusively been from European or public grant schemes. Effectively it's ours and we've already paid for it all, including some £9m (£9-chuffing-m???) glorified tea-shop / cafe.

Hey ho 😎

Well said Cheeky Monkey!

I currently work in a government department that is fastidious in all transactions and goes to the far end of a fart to jump through all legislative hoops. If the FC is applying 50% of what I see, then the naysayers are just throwing stones.
A tender was bid for, to run a new 200 cover restaurant with a forecast increasing footfall. 2 girls who run a caf in a bus didn't win it. Some people complain. Some people aren't surprised.

I couldn't be less arsed about who runs the cafe, as long as the food and drink served is edible. If it's not, then I won't bother using it.

Then again, I go to GT for the riding, not the eating...

The food is excellent but very over priced and the lack of smiles and unwillingness to help means I won't miss it. For example; asked for a bit of fruit flapjack and got a piece that was at least 1/3 smaller than the rest (not being picky here if you have been you'll know what I mean by size difference)asked if I could have another piece pointing to another batch on a plate but was told I couldn't as they are not allowed to take the clingfilm off one plate til other plate is clear! Totally unwilling to oblige a very simple and easy request.
As for the bike shop - I have personal an second hand experiences that mean I won't be crying when they leave.
Also it may be childish or just my imagination but I just don't like the way the workers look at me when talking to me, not a hint of humility.

+1 for Kenny Wallace roaster of the thread award 🙂

So some Alpine Bike employees should really learn to keep their mouths shut- the tender is not awarded until mid January (supposedly) but somehow they've been told by FCS that they'll have the keys in February. Is that the frosted kind of transparency then? Time will tell...

[i]I couldn't be less arsed about who runs the cafe, as long as the food and drink served is edible. If it's not, then I won't bother using it.

Then again, I go to GT for the riding, not the eating...

[/i]

What a selfish thing to say. This is about the fact Emma and Tracey (and other folk too) have spent 10 years of their lives, and put a lot of hard work, into building up Glentress. Not only do they deserve the chance to run the new place, they also have the most experience. If it wasn’t for the hard work of a lot of folk you wouldn’t be able to come and “just ride the trails”.

Not sure where you work, but I presume with an attitude along those lines you wouldn’t object if your boss were to tell you in January “Sorry, you’re sacked and we’ve brought someone else in to do your job. Now sling your hook”?

kennyp - Member

Not sure where you work, but I presume with an attitude along those lines you wouldn’t object if your boss were to tell you in January “Sorry, you’re sacked and we’ve brought someone else in to do your job.

That's not at all the same though is it? It's more like being a contractor and your fixed-term contract coming to an end.

Is it right that Alpine Bikes have won the tender for the new Hub? If so, that cant be such a bad thing. The cafes that they run within the Tiso shops serve some very good food.

their shops are also pretty good too

If it is them - and i always thought it 'made sense' then i am not suprised.

[i]They are not allowed loyalty - they must tender on a level playing field - that is a legal requirement and they can't get around that - tell me you are just being provocative on that point. They don't have to understand your costs or your hassle - they contract for a requirement. What do you think they have to do - subsidise your overheads? I do feel for smaller businesses tendering with government departments, but don't complain because the rules force them to deal with an even hand. [/i]

Which is usually why big firms win public sector contracts, as they have the staff/expertise to win (the contract...).

So some Alpine Bike employees should really learn to keep their mouths shut- the tender is not awarded until mid January (supposedly) but somehow they've been told by FCS that they'll have the keys in February. Is that the frosted kind of transparency then? Time will tell...

is that not a bit dodgy then have the fcs breached their own rules or somethin?

Or someone with "interest" stoking up a bit of controversy?

not uncommon for successful Tenderer to vet a verbal nod in Public Procurement

Last local rumor I heard was that 3 companies are still in it, might be a different company that runs the bike shop and the cafe ?

From http://www.forestry.gov.uk/glentress

In line with our tender timetable we intend to inform the preferred bidders [b]by[/b] 12 January 2011

That's "by", not "until".

Not only do they deserve the chance to run the new place, they also have the most experience.

They did get the chance to run the new place, they were not successful in the tender application.

If it wasn’t for the hard work of a lot of folk you wouldn’t be able to come and “just ride the trails”.

Can you explain that bit. I dont doubt that the hub wouldnt be there in its current form if it wasnt for them but im sure something pretty similar would be.

I think that the hub and bike shop are ok, they used to be better run when Emma and Tracy used to have more to do with the day to day running of the place, but no doubt they had to spend time not being as hands on to enable them to grow their business.