Visit our Popular Forums

Smartstream · 07-20-2010, 08:00 PM

If Thor was behind this, I wonder what kind of incentives might be offered to IBT members to push such a rule change through?

Cheers, Dan

dwightdi · 07-20-2010, 09:19 PM

Per Larry Huttle, Chairman of the Airstream Division, they do not want to have anything to do with a real rebranding, which would mean these units would be sold and serviced by the Airstream dealer network. He clearly stated to me, in a personal conversation, and repeated at the presentation to the membership that, if the IBT gets these units approved for membership they will NOT be an AIRSTREAM but rather an Airstream or WBCCI model of the original Thor producing division. It is true that having a Thor "approved" model would mean additional sales for Thor vs having them possibly purchasing a competitor's product.

Coloradobus · 07-21-2010, 07:38 AM

OK, Dwightdi Larry Huttle did say a possibility would be to create a WBCCI Edition Class A, but how many RV dealerships sell and service other THOR product? Our local Airstream deailer is also a Four Winds dealer. Is this a conincidence?.

Gene · 07-21-2010, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwightdi

they will NOT be an AIRSTREAM but rather an Airstream or WBCCI model of the original Thor producing division.

I'm unclear what that means. How can it be an "Airstream … model" and not an Airstream so far as the general public's perception?

When you have a distinctive brand, messing with it can be a marketing disaster. One can argue that the previously made Airstream motorhomes were pushing the Airstream identity. On the other extreme, Basecamp.

Gene

dwightdi · 07-21-2010, 08:41 AM

The way I heard it was they would consider having one of the divisions offer one model with the Airstream or WBCCI label. Thor has Damon and Four Winds that make Class A. Damon offers 6 models and Four Winds offers 5 models. The most expensive is the Montecito. We do not know what the boys want to buy. If we want to make the club into another SOB club (and appeal to the most people including young families) we should accept all of them. If we just want to continue the tradition of just being an Airstream club, we should accept none of them. Businesswise,I do not see why Thor would object to sticking a sticker on any of their models, if it would mean more sales.

Gene · 07-21-2010, 08:47 AM

So that would be like a car or truck company taking a regular model, adding a paint stripe, making a few accessories standard and calling it a "Colorado" or some other sexy name, charging a lot more for it, and selling it.

Gene

DanB · 07-21-2010, 08:51 AM

So, like a Shelby or Roush Mustang, we can have a Airstream Montecito?

dwightdi · 07-21-2010, 09:04 AM

Larry did not indicate what the upcharge would be. In my view, Airstream is pulling away from offering the models for the old folks in our club because we are a dieing bred and instead are targeting their products to the younger affluent crowd. Thor is out to keep any business they can, as long as it does not cost them much to do it. IBTand PIP's just wants to keep their prestige, but want to buy a new trouble free A+ motorhome. There are some members that would like to keep the club exclusively Airstream and another group would like to make the club into another Good Sam Club. Some goals are mutually exclusive. For $10 on "Constant Contact" we could hold a poll to see how many people want what. "Majority rules" is not what the IBT has historically wanted. "Animal Farm" analogy

lewster · 07-21-2010, 09:23 AM

'snip'.......... IBTand PIP's just wants to keep their prestige, but want to buy a new trouble free A+ motorhome. ............'snip'

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TROUBLE FREE MOTORHOME!!!!

Ask any of my customers. That's why I'm in business.............

Coloradobus · 07-21-2010, 09:25 AM

ThOR and Airstream are doing a great job targeting sales to the market their studies show is the buyer.
Unfortunately, this group is not into the pomp the WBCCI provides. But Gillette was better. The revised Flag Ceremony at the Opening Ceremonies in Gillette was a very welcomed change.
The International Picnic was also a good idea, and the "Block Parties" were a great way for sections of the BoxEleder Campground to get to know their neighbours. All this, I see as creating a positive experience.
Hopefully some of this news will filter out, and attract new members.

hampstead38 · 07-21-2010, 01:38 PM

Quote:

So that would be like a car or truck company taking a regular model, adding a paint stripe, making a few accessories standard and calling it a "Colorado" or some other sexy name, charging a lot more for it, and selling it.

You mean like "Limited," "Super Sport," "Custom," or "GT"? The car industry is infamous for taking a standard platform, adding a few bells, giving it a catchy name and then upcharging for it. Hey, Gene, I have the Dodge D200 "Camper Special."

Hold me back!

It's only natural for Thor to look at ways to sell the Airstream brand. While they dominate the travel trailer market, they are fourth or fifth for Class A motorhomes. Rebadging is cheap. Add some bells and whistles, call it an "Airstream" and hope you can cash in on the nostalgia factor. The appeal for Thor is that the margins on $300k to $500k Class As are much more favorable than the margins on travel trailers (where the competition is much more fierce). Thor could use the label to do a semi-custom Class A and, I imagine, make a tidy profit.

As for the WBCCI, I can't imagine Thor having any interest in a demographically old, declining membership social club... particularly one that is internally divided and potentially facing an internecine lawsuit. In fact, the longer the squabbling continues, the less influence the WBCCI or any club will have over Thor/Airstream issues. So it goes.

wheel interested · 07-21-2010, 02:06 PM

Bob, Howie, how about an update on the lawsuit? I too thought the idea of collecting enough funds was to have the suit filed by the time of the International Rally. I know many supporters including myself are wondering what has happened to delay the action that we were supporting? What's the hold-up? There is more than enough in evidence and money. How will we know what is going on? Will there be documents available to substantiate the proceedings?

Silvertwinkie · 07-21-2010, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Bob, Howie, how about an update on the lawsuit? I too thought the idea of collecting enough funds was to have the suit filed by the time of the International Rally. I know many supporters including myself are wondering what has happened to delay the action that we were supporting? What's the hold-up?

...and that Carol is the million dollar question that has been asked for months as we now approach the 5 month mark since the grandiose announcement of this much hyped lawsuit back at the beginning of March. I am fairly certain a number of folks are wondering the same thing as you and I and also note the lack of any actual real answers to this specific question.

LI Pets · 07-21-2010, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Bob, Howie, how about an update on the lawsuit? I too thought the idea of collecting enough funds was to have the suit filed by the time of the International Rally. I know many supporters including myself are wondering what has happened to delay the action that we were supporting? What's the hold-up? There is more than enough in evidence and money. How will we know what is going on? Will there be documents available to substantiate the proceedings?

Carol you of all people know Defend Wally's inner circle is not going to answer that question in a forum.

To do so would telegraph our plan.

I can only say that the lawsuit is progressing and not stalled or on anyone's back burner.

I'm in regular contact with the legal team, once yesterday, twice today.

Please be patient, it must be done correctly not quickly, there is a ton of case law that has been reviewed, this is a Federal Court, not judge Judy......big difference.

.

wheel interested · 07-21-2010, 03:16 PM

Me of all people is asking...inquiring minds and supporters want to know.

I wouldn't think a secret plan was necessary. The facts speak volumes and loud enough on their own. I do know you can't get a hit you never swing at. The issues are a matter of past record, I don't understand the ongoing phase you are dealing with daily. Perhaps the choice of legal team should be changed to a lawyer that will file quickly all the evidence that has already been amassed and documented for presentation. The legal fund was established by supporters to help get Leo reinstated and get the club on the track by holding leadership accountable for a variety of self serving and unethical actions. As Nike would say just do it! The course of inaction is guaranteed to fail.

RickDavis · 07-21-2010, 03:36 PM

I watched the current situation develop for 30 years. I can patiently wait a while longer for a proper response

LI Pets · 07-21-2010, 03:45 PM

Carol your comments are unfounded.

As Rick points out, there is no time of essence.

Gene · 07-21-2010, 03:46 PM

In the almost 5 months since this was announced, many hours of legal work must have been expended. Walk into a NYC lawyer's office and you'll find out that many hundreds of dollars per hour are standard fees—I think they are approaching $300 in Denver, so double that. Talking to lawyers regularly and sorting through tons of case law mean a few things may be possible:

1. All or some of the potential claims are not easy ones and will be challenged vigorously by opposing counsel. That will cost even more money.

2. If it takes this long to prepare a case, either the lawyers are inexperienced in this area of law, the law is bad for the claim and a "ton" of case law need be researched hoping to find something, or the lawyers are so busy they have little time (or interest?) for this case.

3. A large law firm with expertise in several areas of law will have files of legal analysis on many questions. A law suit can be filed very quickly with those resources unless it is based on entirely new and complicated statutes.

4. If free or low cost lawyers have been found, that raises some other questions—perhaps there a nonprofit legal organization which takes on cases like this one. These nonprofits usually don't have the resources to act fast. Or, somebody's friend/lawyer is willing to take it on as a personal favor, but it's not as important as clients who pay the full price. Either can slow down the process.

5. Lawyers for the WBCCI and the claimants are negotiating behind the scenes because everyone really wants to avoid expensive litigation and the threat (bluff?) of serving papers keeps negotiations going on.

I am confused. Nonprofit corporation law is just not all that complicated. There may be trust and fiduciary law involved, but that isn't that difficult either. Maybe a touch of Sarbanes/Oxley? From what I can gather, the WBCCI bylaws and other organic documents are not all that unusual even if applied unfairly (that's not unusual either). It does not have to take this long to prepare a case, but there are always exceptions. If it does, it seems the original ask of $7,500 would be long gone. There would have been several hours or more of initial consultations with lawyers just to determine the wisdom of going public with an ask. There have been almost 20 weeks since the announcement—$7,500 @ $400/hour means 18.75 hours of work. This doesn't compute. There have to be 50 to 150 hours by now doing a "ton" of research, interviewing clients, drafting legal analysis, reviewing WBCCI documents, letters, transcripts of WBCCI meetings, interviewing potential witnesses, drafting a complaint. Or maybe not—maybe little has been done. At $400/hour (wild guess, probably much too low for a big time corporate firm)—that's $20,000 to $60,000 so far at the wild guess of 50-150 hours.

So it sure looks strange to me. A ton of research and frequent phone calls indicate a difficult case. That's expensive, much more than $7,500 just to get started in most cases.

I don't expect an answer to all this because disclosing legal strategy and issues around it are dumb.

But try to understand how as time expands it begins to look strange to we observers. You can announce a potential lawsuit, but after a while there is a logical expectation something will actually happen. Otherwise it looks like a bluff or that the potential suit is not all that credible.

I think there are some good issues worthy of litigation and they aren't all that unusual. Shareholder suits against for profit corporations on far more complicated financial grounds are put together in a few weeks all the time. The time this is taking inevitably becomes an issue.

Gene

LI Pets · 07-21-2010, 04:04 PM

No comment

Silvertwinkie · 07-21-2010, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LI Pets

No comment

Not true Bob, you had something to say to me:

Quote:

Originally Posted by LI Pets
Did U join yet?
Go to your forum and moderate
__________________
Bob

'77 [COLOR=blue

Sovereign[/COLOR] Intl 31' CB
'07 GMC 4x4 2500HD EC 8.1 Allision six | Bedrug | Softopper

Expected and telling about the cause your leading. Best of luck with it.

I thought I was on your ignore list? Seems there may be some discrepancies in your public statements.

Rather than sending a bunch of nothing, how about some fact for once? I think after 5 months of reading your posts, everyone here deserves some meat at long last...or are folks right that this is a smoke and mirrors type show for you?