The founders of this pressure group have no confidence in ‘Fancy That’ being able to produce a quality magazine as the current official GCCF journal. We feel they have no experience in media or publishing and have no proven track record.

Our experience of the people who run ‘Fancy That’ can only be gauged by their website's ‘The Planets’ because as far as we know they have no other qualifications or experience in publishing and media. We find that the results published on Siamese and Oriental Planet are sometimes incorrect and cats' results are omitted completely or the results and spelling of cats names are incorrect. People could view these errors and omissions as at best a very poor representation of their ability to report show results correctly. We are concerned about the impact this could have on the Cat Fancy as a whole.

On the other hand Our Cats are part of a proven publishing company who have been established for many years and have experienced reporters who have proved themselves to be impartial and who have no affiliations to Cat Breeders or other pet related products/web sites that are non magazine related.

With this in mind, we breeders, exhibitors, and pet owners would ask Mr Gordon Butler, Chairman of the GCCF Executive Committee to answer the following questions..................

Q1.

Why were Affiliated Clubs and their members not given the opportunity to vote on this decision that affects all show exhibitors?

Q2.

Why were our letters and emails not been passed on to the Executive committee until we had to insist that they were?

Q3.

Why has the contract been removed from Our Cats, part of an established publishing house, and awarded to an unheard of company with absolutely no publishing experience?

Q4.

Why were tenders not asked for, particularly of Our Cats, prior to awarding the contract?

Q5.

Why was fancythat-cats.co.uk registered approximately 15 days BEFORE the GCCF Executive committee meeting?

Q5.

Was the outcome a foregone conclusion prior to the GCCF meeting taking place?

Q6.

Is this new so called "publishing" firm a registered company?

Q7.

Do the owners of Fancy That have any previously company history that members can verify prior to subscribing to brand new magazine run by an unknown company?

Q8.

Going off previous misrepresentation of cat's names and titles in web sites currently owned by the owners of Fancy That, what guarantees do subscribers have that their cat's results and photographs will be unbiased and impartial?

Q9.

At present, all confidential letters and viewpoints are being sent to a company who do not personally participate in cats shows or breeding matters. Can we be guaranteed of confidentiality as the owners of Fancy That are involved within the Cat Fancy.

Q10.

Fancy That will be holding a list of credit/debit card details by their subscribers, as well as names and addresses. As such, why is there no data protection information published on their web site? How secure is this company?

Q11.

The data protection act has already been broken in the form of an email sent out by a staff member of Fancy That when email addresses were made public knowledge, is this the sort of standards we can expect from this new company?

Q12.

Does Fancy That, as a company, have Public Liability insurance and/or
Indemnity Insurance?

 
Untitled Document
All content provided on this website are the personal views of those who have contributed to this campaign. As such www.wedont-fancythat.co.uk accept no responsibility for any costs arising from the personal opinions expressed on this website. For more detailed information, please read our Disclaimer.