ULSU AGM 2012/13 (Thursday 11th October @ 3pm in the Concert Hall)

wnolan1992

Date: Thursday 11th October (This Thursday)
Time: 3pm
Location: University Concert Hall, Foundation Building




IMO, the lack of publicity around this is a joke, given the difficulty in making quorum last year.

Jester252

They don't what people to be there so they make the SU stop wasting money

wnolan1992

^I'm inclined to agree with you Jester. There hasn't been a single All Student email about the AGM, not even one calling for motion submissions that I can remember.

I said it last year, and I'll say it again, getting rid of the Communications Officer when there was already such a disconnect between the SU and students was a mistake IMO.

The only way they'll even come close to making quorum is if there's a lot of passing traffic in the Foundation Building at that time that they can lure in.

Polar Ice

What do people think of cutting An Focal?

I'm about 80% in favour. Given the SU and it's current financial position I'm shocked that they haven't taken cost cutting action such as reducing the print run or reverting the paper back to black and white to save money. There are always hundreds of wasted copies of An Focal - why print so many?

Given their inability to cut costs by themselves I agree with scrapping the physical publication in order to reduce cost.

With an focal online, the new ULFM (which I don't support) and Thomond Student times, all new within the last year or two, there is even less of a need now for a printed version of the paper.

wnolan1992

I'd be more in favour of reducing the print run and reverting to b/w as opposed to scrapping the entire thing. I think there's a lot to be said for a physical publication. If An Focal did what I thought they were going to do, which was focus more on the online site (which I thought was a great development last year) then they could even reduce the number of editions per semester. But it seems as if the website is always in the backseat, as opposed to being the main outlet for news, with the printed edition being dedicated to more in depth analysis, reviews, opinion pieces, creative writing and the like a few times a semester.

I'd hate to see it permanently scrapped, but I would find it hard to argue against it tbh.



Anyone have the wording for the motions to hand? Intrigued by the "Proposal to Establish a New Company" one...

highlydebased

wnolan1992 wrote: »

But it seems as if the website is always in the backseat, as opposed to being the main outlet for news, with the printed edition being dedicated to more in depth analysis, reviews, opinion pieces, creative writing and the like a few times a semester.
.

I agree entirely. Website needs much more fresh content, it's almost embarrassing at this stage

Polar Ice

wnolan1992 wrote: »

I'd hate to see it permanently scrapped, but I would find it hard to argue against it tbh.

That's the problem. They aren't actively using the website and they are still printing the paper in excess (in colour) when the SU is asking for large sums of money from Clubs and Societies.

When I said I'm 80% in favour of cutting it, if they were able to manage their finances better then there might be less of a need for the motion (you don't need a colour paper when there is a shortage of funding & we can all see the wasted copies). Unfortunately if the Union can't manage its own funds then I'm a strong supporter of members of the Union imposing cuts upon those running the union.

shabouwcaw

jeez, that's a truly awful bit of graphic design for the poster. hope they didnt stay up all night knocking that together.

anywho, my 2c fwiw.

I think it's an atrocious idea to scrap An Focal, it's a valuable way of reaching people who won't ever take the positive step of liking the facebook page, listening to the radio or going onto the website. We can sit in our ivory towers and chat about how well we know what's going on in the SU, but the reality is that the majority of people in UL only know what little they do by picking up a copy in the Red Raisins, leafing through looking at the pictures and maybe reading something if it catches their eye. That might sound minor, but in terms of disseminating information it is invaluable and irreplaceable. Yes, we should print less, maybe it should revert to being in black and white and maybe there should be fewer editions, but those decisions should be made first. Scrapping it would make it a gargantuan task to restart it, and i think it would be a massive mistake. Act in haste, repent at leisure.

Let it also be known that until the Communications Officer was scrapped, the publication made a profit, with the excess it made from selling advertising subsidising other SU ventures. I'm not sure if that is still the case, due to the short sighted decision to remove the position of Communications Officer, without any firm proposal or alternative planned, but joined up thinking does not seem to run in the SU's playbook.

I'm also very disappointed that there doesn't seem to be any motions from the C&S, motions of censure for the u-turn on the financial agreement reached at the end of last year or a motion of re-assurance that the SU will sort itself out before continuing to attempt to turn the C&S into a piggy bank. I predicted that the removal of the shop wouldn't solve any financial issues at the end of last year, and all I got for it was personal abuse as a "failed presidential candidate". I also predicted that the independence of our on campus papers would be massively threatened in the absence of adequate safeguards. We now see one of the most independent editors of recent times having his position made untenable by people attempting to cut down the paper.

I have lots more to say, but trying to stay out of this fight this year for the good of my mental health, and regrettably, I won't be at the AGM, but if I were, I would really relish the ability to make a speech with nothing but the words "I told you so."

David.

garv123

shabouwcaw wrote: »

jeez, that's a truly awful bit of graphic design for the poster. hope they didnt stay up all night knocking that together.

The wolves and SU logo looks like a 5year old copied and pasted it from the internet. Isn't there logo's available without the white background for these purposes?

reunion

motions can be found here: http://ulsu.ie/news/agm2012

Spread the word, getting 200 people will probably be a hard task...

Jester252

An Focal needs to get it together.
I only saw quarter page ad that I can say was paid for. There is too much white space and some huge ass pictures.
A lot of it is very opinion pieces and slightly miss leading (The cartoon on the latest issue). The website is not updated much. Are they trying to keep exclusive content for the paper? At least they are cutting down on the ads for An Focal in An Focal. Could they not sell ad space on the website?
I don't see An Focal making money this year and its kinda sad seen as it is an award winning paper
TST does a much better job

reunion

Jester252 wrote: »

An Focal needs to get it together.
I only saw quarter page ad that I can say was paid for. There is too much white space and some huge ass pictures.
A lot of it is very opinion pieces and slightly miss leading (The cartoon on the latest issue). The website is not updated much. Are they trying to keep exclusive content for the paper? At least they are cutting down on the ads for An Focal in An Focal. Could they not sell ad space on the website?
I don't see An Focal making money this year and its kinda sad seen as it is an award winning paper
TST does a much better job

For figures I have seen, an focal has not been profitable in the last 2 years. it has spent nearly twice what it raised. It has also thrown out over 600 copies of the first edition of this years an focal.

There have been ~56,000 views of the online paper edition since summer 2009. No idea what the view count is for the website or what tst gets. Would be interesting to know if tst would like to share...

Gael23

Who has come up with the idea of scrapping An Focal? The SU or someone from the student body?
This would be a disastrous thng to do for so many reasons, having said that it could be scaled back slightly and reduce production costs.
I cant attend the meeting but like nearly SU meeting i've attended in the last 3 years, it wont make quoroum

Jester252

ryanf1 wrote: »

Who has come up with the idea of scrapping An Focal? The SU or someone from the student body?
This would be a disastrous thng to do for so many reasons, having said that it could be scaled back slightly and reduce production costs.
I cant attend the meeting but like nearly SU meeting i've attended in the last 3 years, it wont make quoroum

Its not to scrap An focal its to stop the print edition and have it exist on-line like TST. Just look at the figure Reunion said its hard to fight for the print when its a large cost and their strapped for cash

Stuxnet

The college could cut back on toilet paper expenditure,
and we use the excess an focal's scattered around the place instead :pac:

Fishooks12

Won't mention names but I see some of last years sabbats have already delved into personal abuse in their quest to save An Focal

reunion

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Won't mention names but I see some of last years sabbats have already delved into personal abuse in their quest to save An Focal

And the SU wonders why people don't engage with them....

Maybe it might create some drama that might get people in the door.

freyners

first i heard of this was this morning and i would be fairly good with keeping up with this side of things,

wnolan1992

reunion wrote: »

And the SU wonders why people don't engage with them....

Maybe it might create some drama that might get people in the door.

Well given the current SU team don't seem too keen on publicising it I guess every little helps. :P

No agenda, motions, or even notice that the meeting is happening distributed via an All Student email yet, and there's less than 24 hours to go. :rolleyes:


On An Focal, seen a figure of 1000 left over copies for issue #1 this semester, and also that the current print run is 2500 copies per issue.
By my (rather uninformed) calculations, cutting the print run by 1000 to 1500, and reverting to B/W could save around €6k a year. (obviously that doesn't take into account that if you reduce the number of printed copies, you'd have to reduce the price charged for ads).

MiamiMortimer

wnolan1992 wrote: »

On An Focal, seen a figure of 1000 left over copies for issue #1 this semester, and also that the current print run is 2500 copies per issue.
By my (rather uninformed) calculations, cutting the print run by 1000 to 1500, and reverting to B/W could save around €6k a year. (obviously that doesn't take into account that if you reduce the number of printed copies, you'd have to reduce the price charged for ads).

Gotta agree on that one. It is a shame to waste paper and funds like that, but reducing the print run makes much more sense than completely cutting UL's only (print) newspaper.

Another thing worth considering with reference to the paper - it's under new management this year. It isn't handled by a sabbat any more, but by a student, and there's only been two editions printed so far this semester. Both have, in my opinion, published pretty balanced articles which by no means show evidence of being SU-censored or controlled. So, it isn't fair to judge it based on last year's sabbat-controlled edition any more. Whatever your opinions of last year's sabbats are, positive or negative, they shouldn't be affecting your opinion of the new, student-led editions of An Focal.

KellingtonDawg

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Won't mention names but I see some of last years sabbats have already delved into personal abuse in their quest to save An Focal

Lol, if you're referring to me, then the situation is as follows:

I called KF 'a joke' in a comment directed at him on facebook today. Why? Because I think he's a joke, simple as.

Can you explain to me why I'm not allowed to freely express my opinion Fishooks?

KellingtonDawg

MiamiMortimer wrote: »

Gotta agree on that one. It is a shame to waste paper and funds like that, but reducing the print run makes much more sense than completely cutting UL's only (print) newspaper.

This is exactly why I think the proposal is a very extreme measure. I think the above makes a lot of sense.

MiamiMortimer wrote: »

there's only been two editions printed so far this semester. Both have, in my opinion, published pretty balanced articles which by no means show evidence of being SU-censored or controlled. So, it isn't fair to judge it based on last year's sabbat-controlled edition any more. Whatever your opinions of last year's sabbats are, positive or negative, they shouldn't be affecting your opinion of the new, student-led editions of An Focal.

Again, I agree with this entirely

reunion

wnolan1992 wrote: »

Well given the current SU team don't seem too keen on publicising it I guess every little helps. :P

No agenda, motions, or even notice that the meeting is happening distributed via an All Student email yet, and there's less than 24 hours to go. :rolleyes:


On An Focal, seen a figure of 1000 left over copies for issue #1 this semester, and also that the current print run is 2500 copies per issue.
By my (rather uninformed) calculations, cutting the print run by 1000 to 1500, and reverting to B/W could save around €6k a year. (obviously that doesn't take into account that if you reduce the number of printed copies, you'd have to reduce the price charged for ads).

It's poor form from the SU team to leave it this late.

There are 1000+ copies of an focal still in the SU (of the second edition), 600+ copies were binned of the first edition. They cost ~€0.92 per paper (thats €920 for that issue alone being over printed). There were 2,500 papers printed for the second issue or 2/5ths of the overall papers still remain.

Here is a link to the document of income and expenditure of an focal


The paper has not turned a profit in the last 2 years, it has cost the SU ~€31.5k in those 2 years. €16,678 last year and €14,892.52 the year before.

It raised €15,421.56 in 2010/11 and had to pay €8,473 in bad debts and then €21,841.08 for print/design/layout/distribution costs.

In 2011/2012, €18,843.60 was income and expenditure of €250 for bad debts and €35,280.78 for print/design/layout/distribution costs.

Income:
2010/2011: €15,421.56 2011/2012: €18,843.60
Expenditure:
2010/2011: €30,314.08 2011/2012: €35,530.78
Difference:
2010/2011: €14,892.52 2011/2012: €16,687.18

As I understand it, half the yearly budget (the budget was €10,000) has been spent already on 2 editions. Though this budget was rejected last night at C&S council and as such an focal has no offical budget now.

The online version in the mean time has had 56,000+ views on issuu.com which works out at roughly 11,000 views per semester of the paper online. I don't have any figures from before the 2010/2011 academic year and all the money figures come from the general manager in the SU.

MajesticDonkey

reunion wrote: »

The online version in the mean time has had 56,000+ views on issuu.com which works out at roughly 11,000 views per semester of the paper online. I don't have any figures from before the 2010/2011 academic year and all the money figures come from the general manager in the SU.

Just an FYI, anfocal.ie is currently serving 6000-7000 unique visitors every month.

wnolan1992

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Just an FYI, anfocal.ie is currently serving 6000-7000 unique visitors every month.

Which would be fantastic if the bloody thing was actually regularly updated.

MajesticDonkey

wnolan1992 wrote: »

Which would be fantastic if the bloody thing was actually regularly updated.

I know :mad:

KellingtonDawg

wnolan1992 wrote: »

Which would be fantastic if the bloody thing was actually regularly updated.

The AF team ARE working on this though - they know the site has a lot of visitors and are actively working on updating it more regularly.

In fact, they have just posted a very good article about last nights meeting - http://www.anfocal.ie/uncategorized/5670/cs-reject-proposed-change-to-capitation-split

To be honest, what really annoys me about the proposal, is that it's so extreme. The proposer has refused to give any constructive criticism to the AF team, and has instead called, very drastically, for the paper to be cut.

Last year, the paper was run by a sabbat, a sabbat who had their hands tied to some extend with what they could and couldnt print. Now that it's being student-led, there's a lot more freedom there. This is a great opportunity in my opinion, one that students should be embracing.

If people arnt happy with how An Focal is going, go into the office and let them know. They're current students, they're doing this for no monetary gain whatsoever, and they are trying to make the transition to being entirely student led.

For what its worth, I think they're doing a very good job handling the pressure. With a few adjustments - more activity on the online site, more b & w pages, more ad sales and less print run - they'll solve all of the issues that have been raised here.

And I can tell you now, all the above suggestions have been made to them, and from what I can tell they are being put into motion as we type.

For current students doing this job off their own backs, its very disappointing to see them having to deal with a proposal to cut the paper they're working on so hard. Its also very upsetting to see them being the subject of so much scrutiny on boards/facebook etc etc when they've done nothing but try and improve themselves, their work, and the paper in question. :(:(

MiamiMortimer

wnolan1992 wrote: »

Which would be fantastic if the bloody thing was actually regularly updated.

It's under new management. Just give them a chance to get to it!

reunion

KellingtonDawg wrote: »

The proposer has refused to give any constructive criticism to the AF team.

Actually that's incorrect, the proposer said no such thing, in fact he said he was approached by other students to bring this issue forward, maybe because of ramifications of such a motion from former sabbats and other SU staff? For anyone who missed the sabbats abuse (before she deleted it):

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2Juc4x4hXMCcGhLMVV0UWpsM1E

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2Juc4x4hXMCZ3lTTENLVzdyWUE

Apparently the former communications officer confirms figures given to Philip Mudge about an focal are wrong! Serious issues highlighted there.

Jester252

Well they do get a lot of scrutiny because its our money that paying for the paper at a cost of reduced services when with An Focal there is a lot of money could be saved for removing the print.
IMO all it adds to is an increased mess around the college.

On a side note good to see a little information about the AGM less than 24hr before it takes place

Cablecar

There's a lot of giving out about the quality of An Focal here which, I believe, would want to be more balanced.

Last year the paid position (Communications) of An Focal editor was deemed unfit to continue due to budget constraints.

This was done without provision for what would happen to ULSU media production for the foreseeable future. Many students seemed to be unhappy with a notion that An Focal be disbanded and it indeed would be a terrible thing if it were. But, again, no provision was made for its continuance at this meeting; apart from suggestions that it would be run voluntarily. The post was indeed taken up by a forth year student, a person whom I believe would make one of An Focal's best editors- had provisions and support been available to him from the word go. This has, unfortunately, not been the case. From my standpoint I've seen and heard instances of incessant, attempted censorship of the publication by other members of the SU staff who are currently engaged in very strong superiority complexes. Complexes which have urged them to quell, and to encourage their friends to quell, any open or negative discussion about their political positions and their institution. This has involved censoring facebook posts, an attempted retraction of an An Focal online article and the attempted censoring of this online forum. What adds insult to injury is that the SU staff have made an attempt to create an image which supports open discussion and debate, one such example being the very poster which advertises the upcoming AGM which, and let me make this clear, no one will attend. This very badly designed piece is enshrined by stereotypes of what typical students say in a 'lets make this lighthearted so young people can relate' kind of a way, which personally I find quite offensive.

The point here is that a small group of hard working, volunteer students are running one of the few concrete services coming out of the SU at the moment. I have found both publications to be lacking in certain aspects but their virtues far out way their faults. They seem somewhat refreshed and slightly less pro SU biased than in the past and this, for myself and many friends, reflects our attitudes towards this dying institution. I would like to congratulate the An Focal staff for their hard work and hope that they can gather some more well deserved support as they move away from the tight grip of ULSU