WBCCI MOHO Issue - 2013

[az-streamer]

it looks like you are trying to combine 2 issues.

issue 1: AS no longer offers a class a moho. this is a business decision fully up to AS; regardless if it was profit-based or otherwise.

issue 2: should the wbcci [recognized as an AS club] allow non-AS moho's.
this is really an member-driven option which would only benefit a very small minority of members.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by az-streamer

it looks like you are trying to combine 2 issues.

issue 1: AS no longer offers a class a moho. this is a business decision fully up to AS; regardless if it was profit-based or otherwise.

issue 2: should the wbcci [recognized as an AS club] allow non-AS moho's.
this is really an member-driven option which would only benefit a very small minority of members.

The people who support the MoHo amendment are doing the same, by saying:
1 - Because Airstream made a business decision to quit making class A's,
2 - WBCCI owes to to them to let them own a non-Airstream class A without quitting the club.

Airstream and WBCCI are not joined at the hip legally, and a decision by one entity does not obligate the other in any way.

If Airstream went out of business tomorrow, and quit making ANYTHING, sooner or later WBCCI would become a Vintage-only club, when all remaining Airstreams were old enough to be vintage. Would WBCCI then pass an amendment allowing every member to own a non-Airstream? That would be awfully unfair to those who lovingly restore old Airstreams and keep the iconic image alive.

So it is with the class A's. As long as there is a single Airstream class A on the road, WBCCI is being unfair to those owners to even suggest that a non-Airstream class A provides the same qualifications for WBCCI membership as does an Airstream class A.

[az-streamer]

Airstream and WBCCI are not joined at the hip legally, and a decision by one entity does not obligate the other in any way.

....

As long as there is a single Airstream class A on the road, WBCCI is being unfair to those owners to even suggest that a non-Airstream class A provides the same qualifications for WBCCI membership as does an Airstream class A.

sounds like we are on the same side of this.
i.e. AS-only

sorry if i mis-read your intent.

[Nuvite-F]

[QUOTE=Protagonist;1308724]I am aware that it has been done in the past, though it was before my time. [QUOTE]


It was before your time, but not much before your time. Thanks to the wonders of the internet, you can read all about those thrilling days of yesteryear at the click of a mouse.

If you would like, you can start here,

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f286...ted-61430.html

and here,

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f286...ibt-44657.html

[mbmbstreamer]

Airstream NEVER really had a Class A assembly line. The Class A Motorhomes were simply a sideline that clogged the factory floor and moved slowly through that line.

The Class A was not uniquely Airstream and was a headache for their dealer network. There are no plans to resume because it does not fit their market demographic. There is virtually no future in conventional Class A production. The factory they were planning to build for new aluminum skinned Class A production had no real payback, given the price point they needed.

Want an Airstream Motorhome? Buy an Interstate.

[AWCHIEF]

I am sure they could sell few class A's each year. There are always people that their lives revolve around conspicuous consumption. The “money is no object buyer”. The more expensive and rare something is the more they want it and the more they are willing to pay. If nothing else to say “look what I have and you don’t”.

[markdoane]

But those conspicuous consumers aren't gonna buy an Airstream Class A, which is just a fancy body on a bread truck chassis. They'll buy a Newell or a proper Class A.

[lewster]

Originally Posted by markdoane

But those conspicuous consumers aren't gonna buy an Airstream Class A, which is just a fancy body on a bread truck chassis. They'll buy a Newell or a proper Class A.

I have lots of these folks as clients and believe me when I say the absolutely ZERO PERCENT of this demographic would ever look at an Airstream as either a status symbol or as their ultimate coach!

Newell and custom Prevost............absolutely!

Any mere coach with a fiberglass shell (commonly referred to as a 'plastic' coach).......NO WAY!

[switz]

As a new Airstream owner, I joined the Airstream Club. I recently purchased a Life membership to infuse a few dollars into the club treasury. I did not join the SOB club. I have been is several different brands of motorcycle clubs where the birds of a feather hung out together.

The senior beagles are aways the same, like politicians, power grabbers and skew the elections so they stay in office.

It seems to always take a revolution from below to vote out the misfits and start over.

[Aviator]

Just a random observation and question.....

I think we can agree that the MoHo issue is divisive in the extreme for our WBCCI membership and a source of disharmony.

The WBCCI Code of Ethics says:

To be ever mindful of what we say or print with respect to its effect on others so as to avoid disharmony and ill feelings among club members and to dedicate ourselves to the work of cementing together the members of WBCCI in bonds of good fellowship and mutual understanding.

With this in mind, wouldn't the very brining forth of the issue be grounds for an ethics complaint against those proposing the MoHo amendment?

This needs to be put down for good so that we can go back to enjoying the fun and fellowship of the largest AIRSTREAM group also known as the WBCCI.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by Aviator

With this in mind, wouldn't the very brining forth of the issue be grounds for an ethics complaint against those proposing the MoHo amendment?

Having made the same point about the MoHo Amendment being a source of disharmony (post #339, this thread), allow me to say, I don't think an ethics complaint would be appropriate.

The people who proposed the MoHo Amendment were not doing it to be divisive, though that was the end result. They thought they were helping out their friends, without realizing that it would hurt the club as a whole. And in fact they still don't believe it hurts the club as a whole, or they'd have withdrawn the amendment before it got to a vote. They believe it's important that their old friends stay in the club— friends who would otherwise have to quit the club in order to buy a bigger, better, and more expensive MoHo.

I can understand why they want their friends to stick around even after those friends sell their Airstreams. However, I believe they're mistaken about the importance of those specific members to the WBCCI, and about the need to pander to those members' egos by changing the rules to suit those few.

Punishing the amendment proponents for loyalty to their friends, for having good intentions but a bad plan, is not appropriate. I'd rather just hold the vote, and call the results final no matter the result, to avoid further divisiveness.

For the record, I voted against.

[xrvr]

Again, most club members either do not know about the forums or know and do not participate in them. There are not enough members to have the few on the forums opposed to the amendment create enough disharmony to affect the powers that be. We, on the forums, are the minority in the club. Jim

[2005 ford]

Originally Posted by HowieE

While I have not been expelled from the Club yet I do have my "Cease and Desist" letter from the Club's Lawyers framed and hanging on my bathroom wall for inspiration when I really need it.

That letter probably cost the Club $500.00. They spent close to $25,000 to expel one member. Not sure what the other expulsion may have cost them.

But be fore warned they wil not hesitate to spend your dues in pursuit of the retention of their benefits and the advancement of their agenda.

Any idea of the cost to date for the MOHO issue

OK, I just have to ask, why would anyone want to belong to a club that sends the law dogs after you if you disagree with any policy put forth by the leadership? I wonder if there is another side of the story?

Bill

[AWCHIEF]

Bill, From world domination level down to an insignificant little club like the WBCCI politics is the same at any level. Power corrupts and the leaders never have enough.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by 2005 ford

OK, I just have to ask, why would anyone want to belong to a club that sends the law dogs after you if you disagree with any policy put forth by the leadership? I wonder if there is another side of the story?

Bill

There's always another side to any story. And they don't always send in the lawyers if you disagree with them.

Most people who join WBCCI do it for the fun, fellowship, and adventure, not for the politics. As for the people who actually enjoy the politics— instead of seeing the politics as a necessary evil of running a non-profit organization— they are to be pitied. But not humored or pandered to by allowing them to play by different rules.

I'm sure even the upper echelons of WBCCI were once like us, before they attained high office and were seduced by the dark side. Unfortunately, Yoda was right, once you give in to the dark side, forever will it control your destiny.

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by 2005 ford

OK, I just have to ask, why would anyone want to belong to a club that sends the law dogs after you if you disagree with any policy put forth by the leadership? I wonder if there is another side of the story?

Bill

At that time there were several groups , all dissatisfied with the leadership, that wanted to change the Club from the downward spiral it had taken.

Some of the efforts of those resulted in expulsions from the Club, threats of legal action from both sides, and significant non renewals of membership. To date those efforts have not benn successful and thus some are still fighting the battle. Currently that battle focuses on the MOHO issue.

I for one still see that the Club could have value to Airstream owner if the direction of the Club was redirected towards the membership rather than the personnel benefit of the Leadership.

[Lily&Me]

Originally Posted by Aviator

Just a random observation and question.....

I think we can agree that the MoHo issue is divisive in the extreme for our WBCCI membership and a source of disharmony.

With this in mind, wouldn't the very brining forth of the issue be grounds for an ethics complaint against those proposing the MoHo amendment?

Who would bring this ethics complaint, and who then would rule on it and impose sanctions???

As I recall, part of the problem with WBCCI is that those who make the rules also interpret and enforce them. There are no impartial checks and balances.

As with any other powerful bureaucracy/entity, an absence of adequate and effective oversight invites selective application of rules/doctrines/laws, etc., and just general running amok.

They do what they do because they can.


Maggie

[Air Apparent]

Originally Posted by Protagonist

I'm sure even the upper echelons of WBCCI were once like us, before they attained high office and were seduced by the dark side. Unfortunately, Yoda was right, once you give in to the dark side, forever will it control your destiny.

I don't agree with the above qoute. I believe that it is more complex than that. In my opinion, it is a generational issue. The club has been run primarily by the WWII generation by people whose careers were in the military or education; very structured.

Since the start of my career in the late seventies I have seen the working world go from wearing coats and ties to wearing business casual. The working world adapted to the younger generation.

The WBCCI leadership hasn't been willing to adapt to the changing times. The structure of the IBT almost insures that there will be little change. I believe that the older generation in the WBCCI would rather let it die than make significant and meaningful changes to attract the younger generation and infuse new life blood. In life the only constant is change; if you aren't in a process of changing then you are in a process of dying.

The question is - "Can the WBCCI survive until the younger generation is running the IBT?"

I don't know the answer to this question.

[wkerfoot]

I have to disagree with part of this synopsis. I don't know what your definition of younger generation is. The WWII generation is currently in their mid 80's and up. The current leaders are in their mid 60's to late 70's. Just before at the beginning of the baby boom generation. I believe that they are from the military, police, fire and large business world' as those are the work histories which have pensions to permit early (prior to 65) retirement. This does support your position that they are from structured work histories.

Change is difficult for everyone and, I think, more difficult for those from these areas of work history.

Bill

Originally Posted by Air Apparent

I don't agree with the above qoute. I believe that it is more complex than that. In my opinion, it is a generational issue. The club has been run primarily by the WWII generation by people whose careers were in the military or education; very structured.

Since the start of my career in the late seventies I have seen the working world go from wearing coats and ties to wearing business casual. The working world adapted to the younger generation.

The WBCCI leadership hasn't been willing to adapt to the changing times. The structure of the IBT almost insures that there will be little change. I believe that the older generation in the WBCCI would rather let it die than make significant and meaningful changes to attract the younger generation and infuse new life blood. In life the only constant is change; if you aren't in a process of changing then you are in a process of dying.

The question is - "Can the WBCCI survive until the younger generation is running the IBT?"

I don't know the answer to this question.

[HowieE]

If the MOHO issue passes how long before we have to get one of these for the President?

Marchi Mobile -- 1 | Arab Sheikhs Are Going Crazy for This $3 Million Motor Home - Yahoo! Finance