cycleschemey things - final value?
Discussion
Session said:
I think this final value aspect may be the death knell for the scheme and as a cycle shop owner I hope it will, in my view most people purchasing bikes on the scheme neither need nor deserve a tax break on a bike they are nearly always purley using for leisure and not commuting.
You are morally opposed to the massive increase in people purchasing ~£1000 bikes who otherwise would not have done so?As a cycle shop owner?
Staggering.
Justayellowbadge said:
Session said:
I think this final value aspect may be the death knell for the scheme and as a cycle shop owner I hope it will, in my view most people purchasing bikes on the scheme neither need nor deserve a tax break on a bike they are nearly always purley using for leisure and not commuting.
You are morally opposed to the massive increase in people purchasing ~£1000 bikes who otherwise would not have done so?As a cycle shop owner?
Staggering.
Another local bike shop actually had prices with and without cyclescheme at one point.
illmonkey said:
What the feck?
When I took this out, it was discretionary, and upto the employer. I've been told they'll take £10 next month (this is my last month), just to write it off the books.
How can they change the process of it like this?
I believe that some employers may handle the 'sale' of the cycle directly, mine sign ownership over to CycleScheme so CycleSchemes rules may not apply across the board... But in either case they will have to comply with HMRC regarding benefits in kind etc etcWhen I took this out, it was discretionary, and upto the employer. I've been told they'll take £10 next month (this is my last month), just to write it off the books.
How can they change the process of it like this?
Jimboka said:
illmonkey said:
What the feck?
When I took this out, it was discretionary, and upto the employer. I've been told they'll take £10 next month (this is my last month), just to write it off the books.
How can they change the process of it like this?
I believe that some employers may handle the 'sale' of the cycle directly, mine sign ownership over to CycleScheme so CycleSchemes rules may not apply across the board... But in either case they will have to comply with HMRC regarding benefits in kind etc etcWhen I took this out, it was discretionary, and upto the employer. I've been told they'll take £10 next month (this is my last month), just to write it off the books.
How can they change the process of it like this?
My TCs said:
At the end of the Hire Period, you will need to discuss with your Employer what is to happen to the Equipment.
New TCs from the site said:
At the end of the hire period employees may be given the opportunity to buy the bike for a full market value, however this cannot be an automatic entitlement. The cost of full market value cannot be stated before or during the hire period as this could be considered a benefit in kind and therefore not be eligible for tax benefits. Many employers opt for Cyclescheme to take ownership of the bikes at the end of the hire term, in which case any offer sale to the employee will come directly from Cyclescheme.
Edited by illmonkey on Wednesday 7th July 12:36
How does the scheme know what you bought? I just got a voucher from mine and an agreement to pay back x per month.
Who is going to asses the bikes? What will anyone do with these bikes after the year is up if you say you don't want to pay potentially 100's of pounds for the bike? It's not in anyones interests to have anyone but the bike 'renter' (us) to pay a nominal sum for the bike in the end?
It all sounds a bit difficult to do anything but keep the scheme as it is or stop the scheme altogether.
Who is going to asses the bikes? What will anyone do with these bikes after the year is up if you say you don't want to pay potentially 100's of pounds for the bike? It's not in anyones interests to have anyone but the bike 'renter' (us) to pay a nominal sum for the bike in the end?
It all sounds a bit difficult to do anything but keep the scheme as it is or stop the scheme altogether.
Edited by el stovey on Wednesday 7th July 12:48
As a cycle shop owner I don't like giving 10% margin away but it's more from a principle point of view I oppose the scheme. The scheme is an incentive to get more people commuting via bike but the vast majority of people are not buying bikes for this and have no intention of using it for this. Secondly those who could benefit most from such a scheme can't access it...those on low pay. Therefore as a taxpayer when times are tight I am subsidising peoples hobbies.
From a business point of view a huge amount of cycle to work bikes are only £4-600, after a 10% cut to a scheme administrator there is no profit in it merely a contribution to overheads. We've had surgeons on excess of £120k salary getting a racing bike on the scheme, chartered accountants in central london getting £350 comfort bikes for the weekend on the scheme, headmasters getting an MTB for the occasional weekend etc etc This is not the purpose or intention of the scheme.
When cycle retailers average 2% net profit margin and the best being around 6-8% net profit margin a 10% discount on a lot of sales and my tax subsidisng it is poor form. As a cycle retailer I am all for encouraging more usage of bikes, particularly in redcuing traffic congestion. Personally I feel the scheme should strictly be for commuting usage and only applicable to those on below average income who need the tax break.
From a business point of view a huge amount of cycle to work bikes are only £4-600, after a 10% cut to a scheme administrator there is no profit in it merely a contribution to overheads. We've had surgeons on excess of £120k salary getting a racing bike on the scheme, chartered accountants in central london getting £350 comfort bikes for the weekend on the scheme, headmasters getting an MTB for the occasional weekend etc etc This is not the purpose or intention of the scheme.
When cycle retailers average 2% net profit margin and the best being around 6-8% net profit margin a 10% discount on a lot of sales and my tax subsidisng it is poor form. As a cycle retailer I am all for encouraging more usage of bikes, particularly in redcuing traffic congestion. Personally I feel the scheme should strictly be for commuting usage and only applicable to those on below average income who need the tax break.
Crikey, and people who know me think I'm right wing!
Don't see the hypocrisy at all I'm afraid. I know people who are single, working hard on a low income, don't qualify for any benefits and they can't access the scheme, yet I see high earners getting a tax break and to me it doesn't seem right.
Nothing I can do as an indivual or as a business will correct the position. The way my industry works is less than ideal but I'm a small part of it at the end of the chain so my ability to influence it is minimal, doesn't mean I should get out of the industry just because I beleive it should be done differently and it's the same thing with the cycle to work scheme. I don't like the way my tax is spent but I don't stop paying it. I may not like the way the country is run but I'm not going to emigrate because of it.
Many people using the scheme would have purchased a bike from us anyway so by refusing to be a part of it my sales would drop below what they otherwise would be, it's not simply an extra sale we wouldn't otherwise have had. Should I lose money in this way because I simply don't agree with how taxpayers money is being used? Not a sensible business decision. A system has been created that is beyond my control, in business my job is to adapt and work within it as best as possible, I don't have to morally agree with it.
If you feel so hard done by and that this scheme helps even things up between yo uand those on welfare good luck to you.
If the scheme had a real positive effect on traffic levels and getting peopele cyclign to work rather than driving then it's great but I just can't see it yet.
Don't see the hypocrisy at all I'm afraid. I know people who are single, working hard on a low income, don't qualify for any benefits and they can't access the scheme, yet I see high earners getting a tax break and to me it doesn't seem right.
Nothing I can do as an indivual or as a business will correct the position. The way my industry works is less than ideal but I'm a small part of it at the end of the chain so my ability to influence it is minimal, doesn't mean I should get out of the industry just because I beleive it should be done differently and it's the same thing with the cycle to work scheme. I don't like the way my tax is spent but I don't stop paying it. I may not like the way the country is run but I'm not going to emigrate because of it.
Many people using the scheme would have purchased a bike from us anyway so by refusing to be a part of it my sales would drop below what they otherwise would be, it's not simply an extra sale we wouldn't otherwise have had. Should I lose money in this way because I simply don't agree with how taxpayers money is being used? Not a sensible business decision. A system has been created that is beyond my control, in business my job is to adapt and work within it as best as possible, I don't have to morally agree with it.
If you feel so hard done by and that this scheme helps even things up between yo uand those on welfare good luck to you.
If the scheme had a real positive effect on traffic levels and getting peopele cyclign to work rather than driving then it's great but I just can't see it yet.
Well working in a shop every day I know better than most whether the purchasers are only buying because it's cheaper or whether they would have got one anyway and I can say with confidence the vast majority of them would have bought a bike anyway. Many are existing customers getting another new bike whcih they do every year or two, this time they save through their work scheme.
I accept what I can't change and work with it, doesn't mean I like it.
I never said I am 'happy' to accept them, it's done reluctantly. I am opposed to the way the scheme is run. People are buying bikes mainly for leisure not commuting. Only a small proportion of these sales are sales I wouldn't have got if the scheme wasn't running. If I rejected the business on the gorunds of my personal principles the customers would simply use them elsewhere so it would have no effect on the scheme and as i explained these are not on the whole additional sales I would not have otherwise got so turning the scheme away on principle would not just eliminate new business but would reduce existing business therefore putting me in a position of a decline in business over previous years.
I do not accept vouchers from Halfords as they insist on a 15% commission which does put me into a zero profit and increased workload scenario whereas the 10% from other schemes simply mean no real terms profit. I guess you could say there is a commercial comfort zone and anything over 10% goes beyond it.
In summary if you feel that if i disagree with somehting morally and principally I should have nothing whatsoever to do with it even when it means a reduction in my income and ability to pay my staff and rent (these are existing customers and sales remember not additional ones) then this isn't how business works. As a good business person I am prepared to make difficult decisions even if it goes against a personally held principle.
I suggest you check the exact definition of the word 'hypocrisy' before bandying it aorund so much it is not simply an inconsistency between what is praised or admired and what is done. If i was to purchase a bike on the scheme or set it up for my staff then you may certainly and fairly accuse me of being a hypocrite.
I accept what I can't change and work with it, doesn't mean I like it.
I never said I am 'happy' to accept them, it's done reluctantly. I am opposed to the way the scheme is run. People are buying bikes mainly for leisure not commuting. Only a small proportion of these sales are sales I wouldn't have got if the scheme wasn't running. If I rejected the business on the gorunds of my personal principles the customers would simply use them elsewhere so it would have no effect on the scheme and as i explained these are not on the whole additional sales I would not have otherwise got so turning the scheme away on principle would not just eliminate new business but would reduce existing business therefore putting me in a position of a decline in business over previous years.
I do not accept vouchers from Halfords as they insist on a 15% commission which does put me into a zero profit and increased workload scenario whereas the 10% from other schemes simply mean no real terms profit. I guess you could say there is a commercial comfort zone and anything over 10% goes beyond it.
In summary if you feel that if i disagree with somehting morally and principally I should have nothing whatsoever to do with it even when it means a reduction in my income and ability to pay my staff and rent (these are existing customers and sales remember not additional ones) then this isn't how business works. As a good business person I am prepared to make difficult decisions even if it goes against a personally held principle.
I suggest you check the exact definition of the word 'hypocrisy' before bandying it aorund so much it is not simply an inconsistency between what is praised or admired and what is done. If i was to purchase a bike on the scheme or set it up for my staff then you may certainly and fairly accuse me of being a hypocrite.
swerni said:
Session said:
I oppose the scheme. The scheme is an incentive to get more people commuting via bike but the vast majority of people are not buying bikes for this and have no intention of using it for this. Secondly those who could benefit most from such a scheme can't access it...those on low pay. Therefore as a taxpayer when times are tight I am subsidising peoples hobbies.
From a business point of view a huge amount of cycle to work bikes are only £4-600, after a 10% cut to a scheme administrator there is no profit in it merely a contribution to overheads. We've had surgeons on excess of £120k salary getting a racing bike on the scheme, chartered accountants in central london getting £350 comfort bikes for the weekend on the scheme, headmasters getting an MTB for the occasional weekend etc etc This is not the purpose or intention of the scheme.
When cycle retailers average 2% net profit margin and the best being around 6-8% net profit margin a 10% discount on a lot of sales and my tax subsiding it is poor form. As a cycle retailer I am all for encouraging more usage of bikes, particularly in reducing traffic congestion. Personally I feel the scheme should strictly be for commuting usage and only applicable to those on below average income who need the tax break.
From a business point of view a huge amount of cycle to work bikes are only £4-600, after a 10% cut to a scheme administrator there is no profit in it merely a contribution to overheads. We've had surgeons on excess of £120k salary getting a racing bike on the scheme, chartered accountants in central london getting £350 comfort bikes for the weekend on the scheme, headmasters getting an MTB for the occasional weekend etc etc This is not the purpose or intention of the scheme.
When cycle retailers average 2% net profit margin and the best being around 6-8% net profit margin a 10% discount on a lot of sales and my tax subsiding it is poor form. As a cycle retailer I am all for encouraging more usage of bikes, particularly in reducing traffic congestion. Personally I feel the scheme should strictly be for commuting usage and only applicable to those on below average income who need the tax break.
Session said:
I suggest you check the exact definition of the word 'hypocrisy' before bandying it around so much
I did.Hypocrisy is the act of professing beliefs, that are inconsistent with one's actions.
If I had a bike shop I would welcome the scheme.
You can't say that it hasn't massively increased the sale of bikes over the past few years.
Or is the increase just a coincidence?
Unless you dont see those same customers coming in to get their bike serviced or buying further accessories past the £1000
If you're worried about the small print, then the bike should be used for at least (or more than, to be precise) 50% commuting purposes. I take this to be mileage-based.
If you live quite far away from work, then consider driving part of the way and cycling in the last few miles - increasing the cycling part of the commute as your fitness increases.
The beauty of the scheme is that I used to get home, have a bite to eat and then go out in the evening, if I could be bothered. Now I'm normally done by 7:30 in the evening, and can relax and have a beer when I get in. Have a great off-road route back as well!
If you live quite far away from work, then consider driving part of the way and cycling in the last few miles - increasing the cycling part of the commute as your fitness increases.
The beauty of the scheme is that I used to get home, have a bite to eat and then go out in the evening, if I could be bothered. Now I'm normally done by 7:30 in the evening, and can relax and have a beer when I get in. Have a great off-road route back as well!
Edited by Funkateer on Friday 9th July 15:43
Life's to short for all this, suffice to say you have a simplistic understanding of 'hypocrisy' a point made by Samuel Johnson was in effect that... "The hypocrite thinks that what he or she usually professes does not somehow apply to him or her. It is not simply an inconsistency between what is praised or admired and what is done"
I am confident in my expert knowledge of the industry in which I have worked for 15 years very successfuly.
I am confident in my expert knowledge of the industry in which I have worked for 15 years very successfuly.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff