Has Airstream Put the "Nail In The Coffin" for WBCCI? - or NOT

[jcanavera]

It's an interesting topic since I just got an email from a member of our local unit who is concerned and owns a motorhome.

Here is what she said to me.

Since Airstream is curtailing production of motorhomes, this is not the time to limit the WBCCI to Airstreams. It may be that in the near future the club will have to consider other brands to accommodate those of us who prefer mh's.

I find this very interesting because this person made a statement at a local unit rally last April that the new BaseCamp shouldn't be allowed into WBCCI because it wasn't like the other Airstreams.

My response to her email basicly stated that there has been speculation about the potential need to open up WBCCI to other Thor built vehicles as a measure to insure survival of the organization.

I do predict that if the International attempted to bring in a non-Airstream built vehicle into WBCCI, especially if it looked as if it was stilted towards keeping current leadership intact, a very divisive and potentially membership threating rift would occur. It would not surprise me to see a new club emerge from such a fight.

Jack

[Forrest]

"And why not?" Well, there is this movement right now to change the name of the WBCCI to "Airstream Owners Asso. Int'l." Why change the name to Airstream if we will eventually be allowing Thor built RV's into the Club? Hasn't this already happened with the "Airstream" B class Westfalia? What part of the Westfalia is manufactured by the Jackson Center plant? Is it even assembled there?

[2airishuman]

Originally Posted by Forrest

? Hasn't this already happened with the "Airstream" B class Westfalia? What part of the Westfalia is manufactured by the Jackson Center plant? Is it even assembled there?

hi forrest...

i wonder how many wb members own a newer sprinter based models...?

and they now call these 'touring coaches'......not to be confused with class b...

anyway, the westfalia is mostly ...by my guess 95%+ a german/euro build...

the interstate and the newer model...called a parkway......

are also build on/inside the sprinter chassis but the coach finish work is at jc....
so maybe 40-60%, depending on how ya keep score, done in j/c......

and the differences are obvious.....the westie is sooooo much nicer....

cheers
2air'

[cosmotini]

I seem to recall reading that the original Mexican caravan (before the WBCCI was formed) was open to all trailer brands. It was later limited to a certain number and Airstreams only because the first caravan was too big and unruly.

Maybe for the WBCCI to survive, they will have to accept other brands into the membership.



Dennis

[InsideOut]

Originally Posted by cosmotini

t was later limited to a certain number and Airstreams only because the first caravan was too big and unruly.

A couple of other reasons:

1) Airstreams held up better than the other brands with the rigorous terrain and demanding use.

2) the trailers (including Airstreams) often broke down and had "issues" during the caravans and the mechanics (that the caravan included) couldn't support all the parts & pieces of all the different brands.

3) the "old time" caravans became a marketing tool for the sale of Airstreams

Shari

[safarinight]

This is an interesting thread in many ways because it touches the fundamental issue of who governs WBCCI. Do the members of WBCCI who choose to affiliate with local units govern through elected officials, or does the manufacture govern by default.

Thor exercised it right to stop production of the class “A” Motor Home (MH) based on a business decision that it may, or may not share with WBCCI. Thor is also within it rights to re-label any product it manufactures as an Airstream, and since current WBBCI rules except any “Airstream” MH it would seem Thor has the keys to admission into WBCCI.

Does this mean WBCCI should abandon the new proposed AOAI name and open its doors to any THOR product? Can WBCCI tell the owner of a Thor MH that is identical to an Airstream MH with the exception of the AS badge that they cannot join because the AS MH is better?

It seems to me that WBCCI has a lot of challenges to face and its members need to resolve the heated debate over its identity and direction. We love our Airstream and enjoy camping with friends and family more the debating issues “at large” members have no control over. We do however wonder from time to time who’s driving?

[SilverToy]

Safari -

Touche!

Who IS driving??? That truely is THE question. WHO is at the wheel of this adventure?

WBCCI seems to be batting things about a LOT, THOR is sitting very quietly in a corner and watching things play out.... They seemingly have quite a bit at stake in how things in WBCCI shake out.... AND they can still raise a huge stink IF things don't turn out in what they deem to be a favorable way...

Need to have the parlimentarians and attorneys weigh in here....

Who IS driving???

Thanks for that reminder safari!

Axel

[SafeHarbor]

In this electronic age, when we have shifted to an information society instead of an industrial one, that is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID that members at large are not allowed to vote on issues that impinge on what we are asked to PAY FOR.

I'm looking at sending my "local" dues to a unit over a hundred miles away from where I live just for the "privilege" of having a vote.

If I missed anyone, this is STUPID.

Lamar

[Mike Lewis]

Quote----I'm looking at sending my "local" dues to a unit over a hundred miles away from where I live just for the "privilege" of having a vote.

I have made a decision concerning dues for next year---With at large dues at $70.00. and diesel at $2.89 , I think I'll spend mine on diesel. That will buy 24.2 gallons.----Pieman

[bryanl]

You know, this conspiracy mongering about Thor controlling WBCCI is rather disturbing.

What with readily available governance processes ongoing that are clear evidence to the contrary; what with no evidence of any sort to support such conspiracy theories; we still have people espousing such theories and even creating support for their ideas out of whole cloth.

Yes I have seen the 'analysis' of the trademarks usage agreement that supposedly reveals such a conspiracy and found that 'analysis' totally bogus and completely ignorant of the agreement it purports to analyse.

If someone chooses a nonvoting membership type they have expressed their vote. For a contrast, consider all the vintage folks who signed up with the WDC unit.

You too can be a part of the conspiracy. Most units and regions are desparate for leaders to step in and step up.

Any conspiracy that puts Thor in a position of influence as suggested above would be illegal. It would involve gross dereliction of legal duties by Directors and Officers. I think those that make such allegations should keep this in mind. It is deeply irresponsible to accuse others of illegal activity without extremely strong evidence to support the allegations.

There are proper ways to address concerns such as these conspiracy theories indicate. Baseless accusations about law breaking are not among those proper ways.

[safarinight]

My earlier post said nothing about conspiracies or illegal activities. Nor did it suggest any wrong doing by anyone. It did however state that Thor is within its rights to label any product it manufactures an Airstream. This is not debatable.

I stand by my assertion that a lot of time and energy is wasted by what appears to be a lack of focus. Not too many years ago WBCCI had a reputation of being the most desirable group in the RV industry. Are we now?

The assertion that “at large” members have already expressed there vote is a shallow argument. Annual dues from “at large” members support WBCCI the same way dues from local units do. We are issued the same big red numbers, and have the same membership badges, we are just denied the right to vote. The reason could be as simple as there are no local units.

I believe the information age is redefining the way we build communities. Yesterdays geographical (local) based units are giving way to Forum units that enable members to select the groups that better fit their needs and life styles. The question is will WBCCI embrace forum based groups (at large members) along with local units or turn its back on a growing phenomenon?

Ok, you’re free to boil me in oil now.

[bryanl]

Originally Posted by safarinight

a lot of time and energy is wasted by what appears to be a lack of focus.

It is interesting how many ways this is visible, too.

The assertion that “at large” members have already expressed there vote is a shallow argument.

I don't think labeling a POV as shallow serves much to enlighten an issue. The fact is that a choice was made. The choice has consequences. Since the impact of that choice is sufficient to cause remourse or complaint, it is obviously not shallow to some.

Denigrating the way people make choices or the choices they make is not as productive as clarifying the consequences of those choices and proposing changes to minimize remourse or complaint.

I believe the information age is redefining the way we build communities. Yesterdays geographical (local) based units are giving way to Forum units that enable members to select the groups that better fit their needs and life styles.

What is interesting is that the structure of WBCCI and its history are both based on the needs of a geographically diverse group with a common interest. And it is just this governance accomodation for a diverse group that seems to be causing some folks heartburn.

It is also interesting that a lack of focus is cited yet diversity is presented as a modern requirement. That focus is the common "needs and life styles" that binds the group together. There will always be a need in a group for each member to choose whether the common focus is sufficiently close to their personal "needs and lifestyles" to make membership worthwhile. This is not an absolute yes or no issue. It is a balance and trade-off consideration by each member.

The organization has to accept that its decision to adhere to what binds it together has consequences, too. These consequences are that some will choose not to join or not be allowed to join.

The organization also faces consequences when it chooses _not_ to adhere to what binds it together - again there will be those who choose not to join.

This is the decision that WBCCI has been struggling with for near fifteen years now since Airstream decided to dillute their trademark by putting the brand on motorhomes and things other than its iconic trailers. Is WBCCI a travel trailer group or a general RV owners group? Is WBCCI an Airstream owners group or should it include RVs from others that meet some criteria? What does caravan mean to and for WBCCI? Is it a weekend outings group or a long term outings group? Is it a RV resort group or a boondocking group? Hardsided or tents? Full facilities or not? Why does WBCCI exist? What purpose does it serve for its members?

I think there needs to be less tearing and shredding and more constructive discussion of alternatives and possibilities.

As far as conspiracy theories, check the title of this thread. That is where those comments come from.

[safarinight]

I don't think labeling a POV as shallow serves much to enlighten an issue. The fact is that a choice was made. The choice has consequences. Since the impact of that choice is sufficient to cause remorse or complaint, it is obviously not shallow to some.

It’s interesting how hard you assert that all “at large” members have made a choice, and that choice has consequences. I am currently a member of a local unit but I identify very strongly with the “at large” community because I believe they’re getting a raw deal. If they are members of WBCCI they should be able to vote on WBCCI issues. If they are members of a local unit then they should be able to vote on both local issues, and national issues. Asking “at large” members to BUY their right to vote by supporting a unit somewhere even if it’s several states away seems wrong.

It is also interesting that a lack of focus is cited yet diversity is presented as a modern requirement. That focus is the common "needs and life styles" that binds the group together. There will always be a need in a group for each member to choose whether the common focus is sufficiently close to their personal "needs and lifestyles" to make membership worthwhile. This is not an absolute yes or no issue. It is a balance and trade-off consideration by each member.


The organization has to accept that its decision to adhere to what binds it together has consequences, too. These consequences are that some will choose not to join or not be allowed to join.

The organization also faces consequences when it chooses _not_ to adhere to what binds it together - again there will be those who choose not to join.

I agree with 99 % of this.

This is the decision that WBCCI has been struggling with for near fifteen years now since Airstream decided to dilute their trademark by putting the brand on motor homes and things other than its iconic trailers.

Leipper – this is the very point 87MH was trying to make when he created this thread. 87MH was simply questioning Thor’s ability to destabilize WBCCI through a business decision. Since you are saying here that one of Thor's decisions did in fact cause a problem how can we label 87MH's concern a conspiracy theory?

Is WBCCI a travel trailer group or a general RV owners group? Is WBCCI an Airstream owners group or should it include RVs from others that meet some criteria? What does caravan mean to and for WBCCI? Is it a weekend outings group or a long term outings group? Is it a RV resort group or a boon docking group? Hard sided or tents? Full facilities or not? Why does WBCCI exist? What purpose does it serve for its members

Good questions. I love to camp and could care less if the person next to me has a flag with stars and a 30+'Airstream, or one of those cool new Airstream Base Camps. I believe the focus should be to accommodate Airstream owners anyway possible, and to stop finding ways to exclude them.

The issue of allowing non Airstream units into WBCCI is something this month’s issue of the Blue Beret questions. If 15 to 20% of members own motor homes what will they do now that Airstream no longer makes them? Change the rules or kiss a lot of members good-by?

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Leipper

Any conspiracy that puts Thor in a position of influence as suggested above would be illegal. It would involve gross dereliction of legal duties by Directors and Officers. I think those that make such allegations should keep this in mind. It is deeply irresponsible to accuse others of illegal activity without extremely strong evidence to support the allegations.

What makes you think that influencing the members of the Executive Board by THOR is illegal? It would not be. Airstream's executive officer has a position as Trustee on the WBCCI Executive Board. It is written into the WBCCI Constitution. Is it okay and legal for THOR, vis-à-vis Airstream, to have influence as a member of that board? Of course it is. Do you not think that position was aware of the motion to change the name long before the rest of the Club knew? It would be highly unlikely that they did not know since such proposals must go there first.

Likewise it would not be illegal even for Airstream to give all the officers of the Executive Board big discounts on their RV's or to provide other financial incentives such as memberships at country clubs, free passes to social events, etc. There is nothing in the Constitution, Bylaws, or Code of Ethics that prohibits Airstream lobbying our IBT for favorable legislation in any manner they might chose to do so. This is the way Big Business and Corporations operate, all the time. They do it with the US Congress. They do not see anything wrong, illegal or unethical about it. It is just how business is done. What makes you think they don't operate in the same fashion with the Executive Board and the IBT? The only way the members of this organization would ever know for sure about financial influence is if the officers of the Executive Board and IBT had to provide financial statements for audit. And that will never happen.

[Over59]

Game plan....

1) Get the name changed to Airstream Owners Association

2) Rebadge all Thor products "Airstream"

3) Count the money.....

[bryanl]

t’s interesting how hard you assert that all “at large” members have made a choice, and that choice has consequences.

You mean it is not a choice? That joining as an at large member just happens somehow with no willful choice on the part of the enrolling member? That this choice has no consequences in terms of voting privileges in the club and its components?

It is one thing to not be pleased with the choices available. It is another to pretend a choice is not made.

What makes you think that influencing the members of the Executive Board by THOR is illegal?

This seems to be playing games with the meaning of the word influence.

What I suggest you do is to look up the statutes for the state of Ohio regarding the duties of directors of nonprofit associations. Two of the common duties are those of dilligence and loyalty. The AG here in Nevada adds a duty of obedience as well (see Guide to Non-Profit Board Directors and Officers).

It is one thing to "lobby" and to voice an opinion. It is another entirely to have influence such as Over59 seems to be implying where money is traded for effect.

Likewise it would not be illegal even for Airstream to give all the officers of the Executive Board big discounts on their RV's or to provide other financial incentives such as memberships at country clubs, free passes to social events, etc.

I will disagree that this is just "is just how business is done" as there is a California Congressman recently convicted and a WDC lobbyist defending against an indictment for doing things this way.

There are significant tax implications of these sorts of behaviors that apply directly to nonprofits, corporations, and to individuals as well.

Because of the kind of cynicism that it "is just how business is done" is why public corporations are burdened with the Sarbanes Oxley regulations and why nonprofits are facing similar regulation. It is also, in part, why nonprofits are undergoing ever increasing IRS scrutiny. Gifting, as suggested, is considered inherently suspicious and nonprofits have to be very clear about what comes in, the strings tied to it if any, and how it is spent and used.

These issues aren't even close. A choice is made. The laws are written. But putting them on the table is still contested. That is what is interesting.

[Chuck]

Originally Posted by Over59

"

3) Count the money.....

"de MoNAY!! de MoNAY!!"



Ok, here's something to think about:

perhaps its not such a bad thing that "at large" members can't vote. I'm sure it was designed that way for a reason. And maybe its NOT such a good idea to make voting an "easy" thing to do, even among unit members. It creates a built-in mechanism for keeping the disinterested out of the process. The way its set up now, only people who are genuinely interested in the process can vote. As it is, we have members in our local unit who I would call "voting members". They only show up at the business meetings. they NEVER participate in any rallies (or caravans, or any other activity). They don't even camp at the business meetings; They drive to the site of the meeting, make alot of noise so everyone knows they're there, and then we don't see them for 6 more months. Well, this is the exception and not the rule...but it does happen. the requirement that we at least "show up" keeps it to a minimum.

Just as with our local government "town meetings"...most of what goes on there is of little interest to me. I'm happy to let those that are interested take care of those things. the really important stuff (like anything that involves appropriation of new funds) goes on the ballot on election day. Perhaps this name change issue is one for "election day"...but we don't have one of those in wbcci...yet.

anyway...my point is only that it isn't an entirely bad thing that voting is limited.

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by 87MH

[COLOR=black]Another observation, that I am unable to prove, is that more and more of the WBCCI officers have chosen a Class “A” Airstream as the AS model of choice. Perhaps this is because this particular socio-economic group of leaders prefers Motor-Homing to being a trailerite. This infers that, without the availability of new Class “A’s” from Airstream, upcoming WBCCI leadership may be lured by the dark fiberglass sides and shiny mirrors to alternative marquees, hastening the demise of the WBCCI as we know it today.

All good comments, but Airstreams can last several lifetimes, so if these folks have MOHOs currently, they'll probobly be burried in them.

There was some conversations, how brief I don't recall about adding non Airstreams to "the club".

I can't see the "old guard" changing anytime soon, but I do like the way you think!

[LuminumTraila]

Originally Posted by chuck

"de MoNAY!! de MoNAY!!"



Ok, here's something to think about:

perhaps its not such a bad thing that "at large" members can't vote. I'm sure it was designed that way for a reason. And maybe its NOT such a good idea to make voting an "easy" thing to do, even among unit members. It creates a built-in mechanism for keeping the disinterested out of the process. The way its set up now, only people who are genuinely interested in the process can vote. As it is, we have members in our local unit who I would call "voting members". They only show up at the business meetings. they NEVER participate in any rallies (or caravans, or any other activity). They don't even camp at the business meetings; They drive to the site of the meeting, make alot of noise so everyone knows they're there, and then we don't see them for 6 more months. Well, this is the exception and not the rule...but it does happen. the requirement that we at least "show up" keeps it to a minimum.

Just as with our local government "town meetings"...most of what goes on there is of little interest to me. I'm happy to let those that are interested take care of those things. the really important stuff (like anything that involves appropriation of new funds) goes on the ballot on election day. Perhaps this name change issue is one for "election day"...but we don't have one of those in wbcci...yet.

anyway...my point is only that it isn't an entirely bad thing that voting is limited.

Sorry, Chuck, but I heartily disagree with you on this one. There will be as many variations on levels of involvement as there are members in the WBCCI. Life is different today than it was 50 years ago. We have many obligations and commitments that we need to spread our time between. Many of us live limited free time to use for travel. As a travel trailer/RV club and many of us will be out traveling when some of the rallies take place. I, for one, would love to be able to attend every rally but it's just not gonna happen with our activity schedule (job, school, kids, limited vacation time, and distant family to make time for). I am very interested in the business of the club and very interested in its future and the vote on the name change, but as it stands now I won't be able to attend and vote at the business meeting, not because I am not "genuinely interested", but because I'll be attending a family wedding the same weekend as our unit's vote, 1000 miles away. There may be members-at-large who spend the full year on the road, attending rallies where/when they can, or maybe only attending the International. They might also be very involved in the club via internet and mail. But, by what you're saying, if they cannot commit to being at a set place at a set time each year, maybe we don't really want them making decisions about the club's direction.

And what you describe about what goes on with the voting procedure in your unit now doesn't sound very desireable either. Those who are active and attend when they can may not be able to vote because they can't get to one meeting. Those who are not actively involved with the unit, can still be a part of controlling what goes on in the club as long as they show up for a few hours once a year, with or without the trailer. That's a good thing?!?

If our unit decides that the members it most desires are those who can make the rallies and business meeting the #1 priority in their life, then I'm thinking I'll be looking for a new unit. Life is bigger than WBCCI. While it's true that I have a choice on where I will donate my WBCCI volunteer time, pay my dues, and attend rallies, the units have some choices to make on how they will attract and retain new members. Hopefully they'll figure out the connection.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Leipper

This seems to be playing games with the meaning of the word influence.

I will disagree that this is just "is just how business is done" as there is a California Congressman recently convicted and a WDC lobbyist defending against an indictment for doing things this way.

I'm not playing games with the word influence. I mean it for exactly what it means. But comparing our Club with Congressmen and WDC lobbyists is comparing apples to oranges. Congress has written code of ethics and there are laws in place that define what is acceptable and what is not. Even then, in the most egregious examples, it is difficult to obtain convictions. The WBCCI has no rules or stated ethical guidelines so there is nothing to be violated. But all of that is beside the point. No one has said that the WBCCI Executive Board or IBT has done anything even remotely egregious or criminal. That YOU would imply so is extraordinary and misguided.

But this is not to suggest that there are not "perks," or that there are not "justifiable" business deals and/or promotions. The question then is simply if there has been undo influence? Again, the influence by Airstream on the WBCCI is apparent. Why would anyone argue about that? It has always been there and is historic fact. Fer cryin' out loud! The Club is named after the original owner of the company! The ties between the company and the Club are written into the Constitution. How many other ways can "influence" be spelled out or defined?

The question of undo influence in our Club is one of degree, not kind and certainly not criminality! And the question the membership is faced with because of the Name Change is how much control do we want THOR to have over our organization.