WBCCI MOHO issue - 2010 to 2012

[Nuvite-F]

Hi, KMP,

Originally Posted by kmpro

AS elected to stop making MOHOs in 2006 and I don't think the current economic climate will encourage them to start making motorized units again. Don't think the issue is something AS is considering seriously because of cost to manufacture and price point to market a unit.

I agree with you, but I'm wondering if you read the first page of this thread.

Originally Posted by wkerfoot

Based on comments attributed to Larry Huttle at a recent WBCCI special event rally, they are trying to determine the demand for an Airstream motorhome. If they determine that there is sufficient demand, then, I believe, that they will take a bare Thor Motor Coach (new Thor division) unit, finish it in Jackson Center, assign it an Airstream VIN and present this new motorhome to the public and WBCCI.

The reason for renewed discussion of this topic is that the president of Airstream is widely quoted as having said at the Swiss Festival Rally that Airstream would offer an Airstream Class A motor home again if they could get an advance commitment from enough customers who want them. They would be built on some-other-Thor-brand chassis and shells, finished at Jackson Center, and badged, VIN’ed, warranted, sold, and serviced by Airstream. (As several have pointed out, there was no mention of how many commitments would be necessary for Airstream to start the process.)

That approach would require considerably less up-front investment than building a new motor home from scratch. As far as the “morality”, or “social acceptability” or whatever you want to call it, of doing that, here are two observations, just my personal opinion.

As far as I am concerned these new units would be perfectly acceptable as Airstreams. They are certainly no less Airstream products than B-vans, Interstates, and most of all Argosies, which were made at another plant (and initially not accepted into the WBCCI). Most of the labor content of an RV is in the interior joinerwork, plumbing, electrical, electronics, upholstery, etc., etc., and these would all be done in Jackson Center on the same line as the sliver bullets.

Secondly, the really high end Prevost and MCI-based motor homes are all built in "somebody else’s" shell and nobody seems to mind. To me, they all look like Greyhound buses, because, well, that’s what they are.

(Now there's a thought! Suppose Airstream offered to build new Airstream Class A’s in Prevost shells. Seriously interested buyers please remit a non-refundable deposit of $100 grand, balance of a million bucks payable on delivery. Wonder how many would show up on Gold Row?)
.

[Aviator]

I notice that the reply above this one is #61 in this thread. I strongly encourage all of you to take a moment and contact your unit and region presidents to let them know how you feel on this issue. Often that will take less time than composing a post to this thread.

It is good to make our opinion known here, and to debate the issue, but if we don't let the immediate leadership in our units and regions know how we feel we may be wasting electrons. For those of you who's representatives aren't on-line, please telephone them.

That way none can say, "I didn't know" or "I wasn't aware" of how their membership felt on the issue when the IBT rolls around.

[newroswell]

Originally Posted by Nuvite-F

Most of the labor content of an RV is in the interior joinerwork, plumbing, electrical, electronics, upholstery, etc., etc., and these would all be done in Jackson Center on the same line as the sliver bullets.

Why would they take a Class A going down another THOR plant assembly line, about to get plumbing, electrical, upholstery, BUT yank it off the line, ship it (across town, or the state?) to the Airstream assembly line to be finished? I'll bet it pops out the back end of the Astoria or Tuscany plant and gets an Airstream badge. If they only make 18, probably won't get a unique full body paint scheme.

The Airstream plant wouldn't even have some of the appliances that would go in these coaches. Why bother having a dozen, 4 door Norcold fridges, King Dome auto tracking satellite dishes, 32" LCD's delivered somewhere else, when you already have a huge inventory of these where the body & chassis are.

I've heard stories of the early days when the GMC and Chevy trucks moved to the same platform, assembly line, and a few made it to dealers with a GMC logo on the hood and a Chevy logo on the back...

[xrvr]

I worked at a Buick dealership and a new stationwagon came in as a Buick on one side and an Oldsmobile on the other. Wheel covers, trim, emblems all correct for each side . The interior was also messed up. Owner of the dealership wanted to keep it but GM took it back. zz

[mbmbstreamer]

I'm afraid I missed the Rally at Sugar Creek, so I don't know what Larry Huttle said there. I did take careful notes in Gilette when he discussed this topic. I understood it to be limited to Badging. He used the same disclaimer that it would require a sufficient up front commitment from club members. At that time, it sounded like he was offering it after repeated pleas from WBCCI "VIPs".

I have taken Aviator's advice and contacted my Region President. I recommend you all do the same.

[dwightdi]

Larry's comments to the public, and privately to me, at Gillette were far less encouraging than the statements made at Surgarcreek. At Gillette he said there might be another Divison of Thor who might be willing to make an WBCCI or Airstream badged edition (limited volume model) but it would not be sold by or serviced by Airstream Dealers and would not be considered an Airstream. The repeated plea from a couple of PIP's caused him to change the Corporate mind and his statement at SugarCreek said they would finish off some Thor shells at the Jackson Center Airstream factory and they would be sold and serviced by Airstream dealers, if he could get enough commitments.

At the same time, he announced his forthcoming retirement from the Airstream factory but said he would continue to be involved with Airstream in Arizona. He was not specific as to his role as a possible dealer.

[pyanke]

I also sent a note to the President and VPs of my Region stating my position on the MOHO issue. I would recommend that you all do the same. It only takes a minute.

Pete Yanke

[Tarheel]

Pete that is a wonderful idea and I can assure you that your officers would appreciate the effort. I would encourage you to take it one step furter. Bring it up at your unit business meeting, vote on your postion and send the results to your Region. This way instead of being the voice of one member the Region understands that it is the voice of a unit or units. Help us help you and the club by letting us know your feelings, that is why I took office, to do the will of the region.


Matt I don’t know why, especially since the last vote we had on the issue failed by such a large percentage, but one of the regions brought up the issue. They asked if the IBT would support studying the Motorhome issue. I stated in the meeting my feelings that the way I understood my region was that if it were an Airstream there was no issue but if it were anything else we were not if favor. The motion passed to see what if anything could be done to resolve the issue. It was not an endorsement to bring in a non-Airstream product, in fact it was not an endorsement of anything other than our willingness to agree that there was still an unresolved issue and to see if there was a reasonable way of addressing the issue. I will not vote in favor of any product that is not wearing the Airstream company name. I have no issue with the Base camp, the Mercedes van, or the new Chevy B van. These are all sold and serviced by Airstream. I personally would take my Interstate or B van back to its respective dealer for PM rather than back to Airstream, but I feel the same about my dodge pickup, dodge can do all the routine stuff but if I have an engine issue it will go back to Cummings. I hope this sheds more light on the subject. There is a limit as to how much I am willing to say on the Forums, some in part because I do not follow it that closely and the other is that many there only want an argument and I am for going forward not miring down in the mud.
Members can certainly get out of the club and go it alone. My closest friend in the club did that and has regretted selling his Airstream ever since. We have many benefits that too many of us don’t use. You cannot beat the deal on any of our caravans, special event rallies or unit activities, but if they don’t enjoy these things and the fellowship of the club then maybe it’s not for them. I hate to lose members but club membership isn’t for everyone. It’s a personal decision and for me I love the institutional knowledge that abounds in the club as well as the fellowship. I don’t think I would have the same experience if I did it alone. I should probably post this on the Airforums but I really don’t think most care. Rick

[DFDureiko]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. The "MH" vote was to allow a non Airstream Class A into WBCCI, that being a Mandalay,,and I think a four winds gas model. If Airstream has shells sent to the factory for finishing, and VIN'd as Airstream. There will be no voting on the topic. they would be Airstreams just as the B Vans are right?.....We can't "outlaw" that class A without doing the same thing to the Fords, Chevy's and Benz's right?
Dan

[dwightdi]

The "if" has not been decided by Airstream. There has to be a "significant" number of people (members) that want them, before Airstream will consider starting the project. If it goes, no voting will be necessary. If it does not go, people can take the Jerry Collins route, if they wish to stay associated with the club.

[DFDureiko]

question.....if SAAB can sell and service a 92x, built by Subaru in Japan. As well as the 97x, built by GM on the Trailblazer line.....both 92x and 97x VINS identify them as SAAB's
Why doesn't Thor take that route? having the a/s MH come right off another makes line, just changing a few trip pieces?
I'm not saying I agree with it, but if GM can do it without warranty issues, why can't Thor?

[wkerfoot]

Dan,

Because, as I understand it, Thor operates each subsidiary independently and in competition with each other. Also, to be WBCCI eligible, the RV must be manufactured by Airstream not Thor.

Bill

Originally Posted by DFDureiko

question.....if SAAB can sell and service a 92x, built by Subaru in Japan. As well as the 97x, built by GM on the Trailblazer line.....both 92x and 97x VINS identify them as SAAB's
Why doesn't Thor take that route? having the a/s MH come right off another makes line, just changing a few trip pieces?
I'm not saying I agree with it, but if GM can do it without warranty issues, why can't Thor?

[Tarheel]

Dan, The position that I think Region 3 wants me to take is that if its sold as an Airstream product then we will welcome the product with open arms. If it is sold as some other product as a way to incorporate new motorhomes into WBCCI then I should vote no. Unless directed otherwise by my units and board this is what I understand my mandate to be.

[Bill M.]

Far as I am concerned, it it has Airstream on it and is sold by Airstram as an Airstream, then it is fine. I do not care if they build it at the Airstream plant or just drive it through for a sitcker and the paperwork. I hope Airstream does do a special run of MH. Would solve the issue for WBCCI in my mind.

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by Bill M.

Far as I am concerned, it it has Airstream on it and is sold by Airstram as an Airstream, then it is fine. I do not care if they build it at the Airstream plant or just drive it through for a sitcker and the paperwork. I hope Airstream does do a special run of MH. Would solve the issue for WBCCI in my mind.

Now that is what make for horse racing, a difference of opinion.

I think the solution to the MH issue is to remove the availability of membership from anything not manufactured by Airstream and serviced by an Airstream Dealer. No shell games or renames.

[Pahaska]

Originally Posted by HowieE

Now that is what make for horse racing, a difference of opinion.

I think the solution to the MH issue is to remove the availability of membership from anything not manufactured by Airstream and serviced by an Airstream Dealer. No shell games or renames.

I concur. The build contribution of the Airstream factory should be significant and Airstream dealers should handle servicing and warranty. None of this "sticker" stuff.

Less than that is just a shell game.

[xrvr]

Just curious, are the two class Bs sold by AS totally built at the factory except the basic van units--drivetrain and body? I owned an Interstate and on the inside one could easily tell it was an AS. What about the possibly new class As, will they be immediately ID as AS on the inside? To me the interior of an AS is as much of sign of the AS culture as the aluminum exterior is. Should AS decide to build class As I think the interior of the unit might be as important as the exterior badging would be to the acceptance of these units into the AS community. wadutink...zz

[dwightdi]

Acceptance of anything sold as an Airstream by Airstream dealers is guaranteed by the WBCCI Constitution. No questions asked. VW based Bvans never saw the inside of Jackson Center but were admitted to membership. They were a nice unit but, in my mind, a little overpriced.

[xrvr]

When did the VW Bvans come into the market? zz

[dwightdi]

Not a VW but Airstream sold 250 Westfalias made by Vauxhall in 2005 and the only thing changed from the European model was they replaced the cartridge toilet with a black holding tank.