Some easy lessons learned: Be nice to PR folk without being sycophantic and they'll typically go out of their way to help you with no strings attached.

Some hard lessons learned: It's not jollies to races and continental glamour 24/7. It quickly became very clear that we produced better race analysis and connected with the audience better if one of us was at home base. Manning the emails and Twitter, watching the races as they played out in full and with a big fibre internet connection to help folk out as and when necessary.

For the last few days Scott and I have really been worrying at one particular issue.

No beating about the bush, here it is.

The one day Classics were all about "the day" and "the atmosphere" as much as race analysis. Listening back to the shows I think it's some of the best stuff we've ever done and the shows found their feet pretty quickly.

Increasingly though we're feeling that Grand Tours are not the same.

Grand Tours are about a developing narrative, Interweaving stories that play out over three weeks and. to be honest, as much about the relationship and understanding that develops between us and you lot over the three weeks. We've done this for three Grand Tours before and each one has left us missing the daily connection when the GT's finished.

So, as we're hitting our stride with the Giro we're wondering whether the plans we made nearly a year ago before starting this learning curve still hold water. To be blunt we're wondering whether Scott or I going to the last week of the Giro "on the ground" will actually provide better content and a better experience for you and us. Without being too wanky the daily discussions have a mind of their own and we're wary of disrupting the shared following of the developing race that we have with you lot. One of us flying to Italy on the second rest day for the final week might provide great interviews and atmosphere but equally it might provide a jarring break on this journey through the Giro that we're all on together, particularly if we struggle with connectivity.

Make no mistake, the trips are budgeted for, the dog/childminding is in place, we're ready to roll. All we give a toss about is providing subscribers with the absolute best content and coverage we can. This isn't proving to be exactly what we imagined it would be though. The best thing about new media? We can change fast to be the best we can be.

So, we need your help. Give us some feedback about what you want either via comments on this post, the contact form on velocast.cc or Twitter. This is our job, but your show.

John

Well, yesterday Scott and I sat down for a final production meeting and we discovered we had independantly arrived at the same conclusion, someone had to stay at home base. There ensued a slightly embarrassing "You go!", "No, you go!" session but in the end I insisted I stayed. I'll explain the reasons at the end of this post.

First though why did one of us have to stay? Two reasons.

1:Account setup and tech support.

There has been the occasional hiccough when folk sign up for a subscription. It's easy to sort but with sketchy mobile internet connections whilst we were on the road we might not be able to make sure folk get what they pay for as soon as possible after they pay for it.

Add to this the fact that the subscriber's stream direct to mobile devices when we did it for the Grand Tours last year resulted in a fair number of tech support requests one of us had to be on hand to deal with those requests in a timely fashion. Again, all about folk getting what they've paid for as soon as possible after they've paid for it.

2: Safety Net.

This is a new adventure for us all and we want to make sure the systems we have in place work. If it all goes south on the remote "on the ground" content submission front? I'll be here with my big fibre connection making sure subscribers get the content they've paid for.

So, why me? Well I could say that it's usually me who does customer support etc. Simple truth though? Scott has never been to the Ronde and I have, from a fan's perspective (and we are both really just fans) it's a new experience for him. If we still feel one of us has to stay at home next race I'd far rather be at Roubaix this year. ;o)

We've got a great team on the ground. Scott's accompanied by Sean Lally, my co-host on Tech 5, and also by our good friend and media savvy charity rider Stuart Potter as Go-fer. I'll be deeply involved via IM, email, Skype and simple phone calls many, many times each day. I'll actually get to watch the race unfold on the TV and add that to the perspective we bring to the premium content. The structured shows will still be Scott and I with additional folk. It's our gig.

Most importantly though this isn't about freebie trips to races for us, it's about making sure we bring you the best content we possibly can and providing good customer service/support.

Shit just got real, we're determined to do our very best for you.

Forza!

John

p.s. Don't feel too sorry for me. I'll be at all the races, just the first one is too important for us not to have a "Plan B" for you.

I do have a serious problem with a subset of his fans and a corresponding subset of the fans of Team Sky. 

Last night, after a few glasses of wine (a treat since I now have 5 days off work) I made a throwaway comment about it being too early to give Brad a Knighthood. In virtually the same Twitter breath I said I felt the same about Sir Chris Hoy and that I wasn't questioning Brad's achievments. My personal opinion, even without beverage in hand, is that a Knighthood should be an honour to bookend a career.

I'm not going to try to defend the farcical and often corrupt honours system. It's anachronistic and ripe for, at the very least, reform.

Here's the thing though.

The response to my simply questioning if Brad's knighthood was too early in his career, even whilst explicitly saying I wasn't calling into question the fact that his achievments made him worthy of said honour, was instant and knee jerk. Within a couple of "generations" of tweets it was clear that folk hadn't really bothered to read my original tweets, it was simply that the fact I had dared raise any question about Wiggins or Sky had registered on their timelines and action MUST be taken.

Burn the Witch!

I had folk asking, nay SHOUTING questions at me I had answered in tweets seconds before. Even "Sir" Jimmy Saville was mentioned!

Go and read the timeline if you want.

Which brings me to the problem.

There's a fanatical "if you're not with us you're against us" culture which is building within a certain segment of the cycling fanbase around Wiggins and Sky. Dare to question anything, anything, about Sir Bradley or the team? You're the enemy........

....and we've been down that particular road before, haven't we?

J

p.s. and before the inevitable jumping to conclusions starts? No, that doesn't mean I think they're doping like USPS. Kinda sad I even felt this particular post script was necessary. *sigh*

It's a great broadcast medium.

It's great for hanging out with "virtual" chums.

It's excellent for delivering a pithy bon mot.

It is however SHIT as a forum for debate.

The 140 character limit means that comments lack nuance. The terse nature of the discourse lends an antagonistic air to even fairly mild disagreements. Almost inevitably the discussion descends to the playground level within the first few exchanges. So, if you want to engage me in debate I'm more than happy to play my part but it'll be via a form of media that is better suited to it (ideally face to face whilst supping a suitable beverage).I love me a good chinwag.

So, I'll be tweeting as much as normal but I'll be limiting myself to the kind of interactions that are actually suited to the service.

I'll see you there. You want to argue with me though? Don't waste your, or my, time. It's simply the wrong tool for the job.

J

The response via tweets, DM's and email has been amazing and I thought I'd write a quick post to thank folk en masse. Your encouragement and positivity only helps convince me that it's the right course of action.

The truth is though that there was no other choice that made any sense to me.

As many of you know he first run of The Velocast ended after 18 months when the time demands became so great that my, then 14 year old, daughter said to her mum "I never see dad anymore, he's always Velocasting." Scott and I, who had started as firm friends, were arguing and neither of us was having much fun.

We stopped.

In retrospect this was the right choice. We were early on the podcast curve and our ideas were always bigger than our ability to execute them with the available technology. As for the thought of charging listeners for premium content? It occured to us but it seemed ludicrous.

So, I cut the cord. 

I really missed the sense of community though so after a while started a hobby 'cast. The original Sofaboy Chronicles. I chatted to listeners and released the results as wee shows. No promise of schedule or length. No pretentions, just plain fun.

However one of theose chats, with Derek Troy, was so much fun that the idea of a show rose again. Something just clicked and so The Flammecast was born. Far rougher and more conversational than The Velocast it quickly grew in popularity and involved guests such as the notorious Mr Vaughters and the rather wonderful Gerard Vroomen. Many listeners to The Velocast hated it but many new folk loved it. Once again it became a balancing act between time spent on the show vs time spent with family and once again I backed off. Derek worked like a Trojan but I just couldn't make the balance work. I loved that show, as I had the original Velocast. I just loved time with my wife and kids (and dogs) more.

Now, I've gotten a lot of flack for both of these shows stopping so let me give you a glimpse of the average Galloway day at The Postface.

I work a split shift. from 7:30 'til 13:00 in the morning and then again from 15:45 til 18:45. My two collies need at least a two hour walk in the middle and I need to spend some time with my 82 year old mum. It's often a 6 day week. Now, this isn't some kind of plea for sympathy, I just want to illustrate that time is a finite resource so I have to be harsh about my priorities. My family will win every time however much I love the shows. 

Meanwhile, through Derek's agency Scott and I started talking again. After a while though Derek made the mad decision to actually have a life and ride his bike. I envy his resolve. He seems happier now than I remember him being. Great bloke, I'm proud of what we did together.

So, to cut a long story short. In September 2011 The Velocast returned with the frankly bonkers Velocast Race Radio and you all know the rest. We took a risk charging for the daily Tour shows and then The Vuelta and it worked out OK.

We're once again at that tipping point. So give up again? Not a chance.

This time Scott and I are older and wiser. We're firm friends again and learned a lot of lessons from the first show's demise. The landscape around podcasts and media in general has changed and we believe there's a living to be made. I'm not walking away from this community again.

Which is why stopping being a Postie seems the sensible choice. I need to be part of Velocast Productions Ltd. I need to spend time with my family. The weak link this time is The Royal Mail. It's those harsh priorities again. ;o) Scott is already working full time on our stuff and I'm jealous. I'm missing the chance to be more involved because I can't get the time off. Both of us devoted full time to the shows will raise the content quality bar considerably and family time will actually be enhanced.

So, what can you expect from us next year?

First and foremost we're working hard to ensure that there will be free to listen weekly shows, including "This Week in Cycling History". I'm 99.999% certain that we've now achieved a means of doing that.

Then there will be premium shows.

The Spring Classics

Starting with The Tour of Flanders we'll be at each of the Northern Classics "on the ground" to bring you the best content we've ever produced in a variety of media with full social media interaction. We will be your eyes and ears on race weekend.

All of these shows will be included in our "Northern Classics" Package. Cost? £15

The Giro d'Italia

During the first two weeks we'll provide daily shows as we did for Le Tour this year. During the final week we'll be at the Giro with all of the enhanced content that you can only get "on the scene". Cost? £15

Le Tour de France

From the Team Presentation to the Champs Elysee. Every day. At the race. We'll change how the race is covered. Podcasts as premium content not a tacked on afterthought. Multi media. Listener meetups. The full Bhuna. ;o) Cost £20

La Vuelta

Same deal as the Giro, same price.

So, you can pick and choose what suits you best or you can listen to everything. From the start we wanted to make the pricing comperable to existing media so we've aimed firmly at magazine subscription territory. For every premium show detailed here? £50 for everything.

Yep £50. One Rapha umbrella or £28 cheaper than eight issues of the admittedly beautiful Rouleur magazine. £99.47 less than the RRP of a year's subscription to Cycling Weekly.

Please consider supporting us with your hard earned cash. The subscription page is here. It's your show as well as ours.

This time I'm not walking away.

Forza!

J

Most of the mail is complimentary and I'm really touched by the good wishes and declarations of support for our plans for 2013.

Some are from folk who disagree with our opinions. Really enjoying these since, as you'll all realise by now, I do enjoy a good discusiion. ;)

To everybody who took the trouble to get in touch I say "Thanks". 

I would say though that if you're an ardent fanboy of one team or rider? Don't waste my time or yours. Blind faith is a contributory factor to the mess the sport is in at the moment,

That's an aside.

A few of the emails and conversations have made me sit up and reconsider my opinions and a couple have simply made me smile and say "Chapeau".

The following is a list of questions sent to me by a listener to be asked of the UCI during an independant enquiry or, even better, under the strictures of oath in a court of law. I asked permission to post them and credit the author but the offer of credit was modestly refused. They said there were many more questions to be asked.

Very true, but these are a hell of a starting point covering a crucial slice of time.

Here they are:

•Who made a pledge on behalf of Mr. Lance Armstrong in 2005?

•When exactly was the pledge made?

•What was the amount of the pledge?

•Was the pledge made verbally or in writing?

•Who, on behalf of the UCI, accepted the pledge?

•What were the terms of the pledge, e.g., was it earmarked for a specific purpose? 

•When was the pledge to be paid?

•Was the pledge thereafter confirmed in writing, and if so, where are the documents evidencing this confirmation?

•Was one or more written request for payment of the pledge sent to Mr. Armstrong or his agents or affiliates?

•How was the pledge accounted for by the UCI? Was the pledge accounted for as a receivablele? Where are the accounting entries evidencing the pledge, and the payment of the pledge?

•What is the chronology of efforts by the UCI to collect the pledge?

•Who on behalf of the UCI attempted to collect the pledge, and with whom in Mr. Armstrong's organization did they communicate? What was said during these communications?

•Is there documentation of communications between the UCI and Armstrong or his agents concerning the pledge (either the 2002 pledge or the 2005 pledge)?

•Where are the cancelled checks, accounting entries reflecting receipt of the checks, and bank records reflecting deposit of the checks?

•What internal documentation exists at UCI concerning the purchase and use in 2005 of a Sysmex machine by the lab in Lausanne?

•Was the lab in Lausanne informed, or did they understand, that the Sysmex machine was paid for by a donation from Mr. Armstrong? 

•What communications occurred with the lab in Lausanne concerning purchase of the Sysmex machine?

•When was the Sysmex machine ordered?

•Was Mr. Armstrong or his agents informed that the Sysmex machine had been ordered?

•Was Mr. Armstrong or his company thanked in writing for either of his pledges or payments? Was he provided a receipt for his own tax records? 

•Mr. Bill Stapleton referred during his September 1, 2005 deposition in the SCA arbitration to a "letter" containing reference to a pledge. Where is this letter?

•Are there other letters or communications between Mr. Armstrong or his agents that refer to the pledges?

•When the UCI retained Emile Vrijman in October 2005 to investigate allegations that Mr. Armstrong had used epo during the 1999 Tour de France, did the UCI communicate with Mr. Armstrong about this?

•While Emile Vrijman was preparing his report, were Mr. Armstrong or his agents aware of the need to pay the outstanding pledge for $100,000?

•Who, on behalf of the UCI, authorized the retention of Emile Vrijman in 2005? Are there board minutes or other documentation that memorialize this decision?

•Assuming that Mr. Vrijman was initially retained verbally (because he launched his investigation without written authorization), what was verbally communicated to Mr. Vrijman concerning the scope of investigation or the terms of reference?

•Where is Mr. Vrijman's written terms of reference?

•Produce all communications between the UCI and Mr. Vrijman concerning his investigation and the preparation of his report.

•How much was budgeted by the UCI to pay Mr. Vrijman for preparation of his report?

•What did UCI management understand would be the source of funds used to pay Mr. Vrijman for the preparation of his report?

•Where are Mr. Vrijman’s invoices for his services rendered in preparation of his report? 

•What communications transpired between the UCI and Mr. Vrijman concerning payment of Mr. Vrijman?

•When was Mr. Vrijman paid?  Are there UCI accounting records that evidence the payment? 

•When did Mr. Armstrong pay his 2005 pledge?  Are there UCI accounting records that evidence Mr. Armstrong’s payment? 

•Were there communications between the UCI and Sysmex Corporation concerning the purchase of a Sysmex machine in 2005?

•What did the UCI communicate to Sysmex Corporation concerning the purchase of a Sysmex Machine in 2005?

•Where is the invoice for the Sysmex machine?

•Was the Sismex Machine paid for by the UCI, and if so, where is the evidence of payment?

•When did the UCI pay for the Sismex Machine?

I respectfully refer you to the title of this post.

J

Folk will have noticed my frustration with Twitter over recent months. I could analyse it ad naus (a nice wee classicism I use frequently in relation to Twitter "conversations") but I'm going to be direct and to the point.

"The Twitterverse According to Sofaboy"

Reasons I LOVE Twitter

1. I get to interact with folk I wouldn't otherwise encounter.
2. It's a great, if occasionally unreliable, source of breaking news.
3. It's a  genuine vehicle of change by enabling opinion/outrage/information to coalesce.
4. I have made proper, honest to goodness, friends there.
5. It's funny as f***!

Reasons I HATE Twitter

1. Arseholes annoy me and 140 characters isn't adequate to inform them of the error of their ways.
2. The coalescence that is so powerful on the plus side of the argument leads to petty tribalism and polarisation.
3. It EATS my time.

Anyhoo, the postives outweigh the negatives and folk who's opinion I value have asked me to re-engage, so I'm back. This time though? Like Arnie it's personal. No soft soap because I'm thinking of the brand image of The Velocast, no suffering fools. Just straight forward JG.

I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face, I miss the friends I interact with via Twitter. Equally though I'm not going to self edit because I think it might damage The Velocast. @Sofaboy is my personal account with all that implies.

JG