Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-27-2013, 07:07 PM   #1
2 Rivet Member
 
2007 30' Classic
2006 16' Safari
Minden , Nevada
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 23
WBCCI MOHO Issue - 2013

Well, here we go again!
I just finished reading Amendment #1 for the 2013 Delegate meeting that will be held at the Int'l in Huron SD. Looks like another proposal to push thru Thor Motorhomes into the club. This time they want to allow Life members and members over 10 yrs of membership to purchase a Thor product. If this passes, anybody with over 10 years in the club or just decides to become a Life member could go out and purchase an SOB Motorhome.
__________________

A/S Squared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 07:19 PM   #2
Moderator
 
eubank's Avatar

 
1967 30' Sovereign
1999 31' Land Yacht
Bosque Farms , New Mexico
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,730
Yes, I think it's fairly widely known that the matter was going to come before the delegates again.

Lynn
__________________

__________________
WBCCI 21043
eubank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 07:31 PM   #3
VAC President
 
Buttercup's Avatar
 
1977 27' Overlander
1954 25' Cruiser
1990 34.5' Airstream 345
VC Highlands , Nevada
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,149
Send a message via Skype™ to Buttercup
I haven't read it yet, but the "10 years in the club" part is news to me. I'll be reading it this evening. Needless to say I do not support any sort of SOB motorhome issue in any form.
__________________
Buttercup's Web Site. WBCCI #17330, 11281 & 7830. VAC Past President, TAC NV-2 & NV-3
Buttercup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 07:54 PM   #4
Site Team
 
Janet H's Avatar

 
1964 26' Overlander
1964 19' Globetrotter
OlyPen , Washington
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,257
Images: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by A/S Squared View Post
..... Looks like another proposal to push thru Thor Motorhomes into the club. This time they want to allow Life members and members over 10 yrs of membership to purchase a Thor product. If this passes, anybody with over 10 years in the club or just decides to become a Life member could go out and purchase an SOB Motorhome.

Sigh..... Haven't we already done this?

Just like last time, this just seems counter intuitive. I wonder how many folks would have joined the WBCCI if it wasn't a brand specific club?
__________________
1964 Overlander | 2020 Mercedes GLE
Current Project: 1964 Globetrotter



AirForums Custom Search
Janet H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 07:57 PM   #5
Figment of My Imagination
 
Protagonist's Avatar
 
2012 Interstate Coach
From All Over , More Than Anywhere Else
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,873
Maybe WBCCI needs a "three strikes" rule, so that if a motion is defeated three times it's dead forever, and can't be resurrected anymore? Otherwise this will just keep coming up every single year.
__________________
I thought getting old would take longer!
Protagonist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 08:40 PM   #6
Rivet Master
 
drag'nwagon's Avatar
 
1974 31' Sovereign
1970 23' Safari
1956 26' Cruiser Overlander
Lambertville , Michigan
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,174
Anybody know who wrote this one? Did it come from Region 4 again?
__________________
Dave
TAC# MI-1
Operation "Save Rudy" Strike Team (charter member)

Yes, I am still working on it.
drag'nwagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 08:43 PM   #7
Rivet Master
 
c_lewis77's Avatar
 
1982 34' Limited
Brunswick , Georgia
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,084
Images: 22
This regurgitation of the MOHO issue every year seems like quite a waste of effort and resources that could be used for a more constructive application. Resources that could grow the club or improve upon rallies/caravans and such.
__________________
1982 34' Limited
2000 Excursion V10 4x4
WBCCI #3321
TAC #GA-24
c_lewis77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 08:52 PM   #8
Rivet Master
 
rideair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,420


Enjoy,
__________________
Paul Waddell
rideair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 09:19 PM   #9
VAC President
 
Buttercup's Avatar
 
1977 27' Overlander
1954 25' Cruiser
1990 34.5' Airstream 345
VC Highlands , Nevada
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,149
Send a message via Skype™ to Buttercup
The latest version was presented at the 2012 Delegates meeting by June Ryan. I may have this wrong but I do believe she is a very strong proponent to this happening. She made the presentatuin in 2011 as well - http://www.airforums.com/forums/f286...ml#post1015521

Quote:
Originally Posted by drag'nwagon View Post
Anybody know who wrote this one? Did it come from Region 4 again?
__________________
Buttercup's Web Site. WBCCI #17330, 11281 & 7830. VAC Past President, TAC NV-2 & NV-3
Buttercup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 09:20 PM   #10
4 Rivet Member
 
Howard E's Avatar
 
2007 25' International CCD
Lamy , New Mexico
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by rideair View Post
Unless one goes and Bonos.
__________________
Howard and Carolyn

TAC NM-1
Four Corners Unit Treasurer
WBCCI 5279, AIR #24915
KF5RGU
Howard E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 09:51 PM   #11
Contributing Member
 
Pahaska's Avatar
 
2018 Interstate Grand Tour Ext
Austin (Hays County) , Texas
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,993
Images: 4
In whatever form it passes, it will cost this club far more members than it retains.
__________________
John W. Irwin
2018 Interstate GT, "Sabre-Dog V"
WBCCI #9632
Pahaska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 09:55 PM   #12
Rivet Master
 
Southwestern , Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by drag'nwagon View Post
Anybody know who wrote this one? Did it come from Region 4 again?
This is the same motion that came up at the 2012 Delegates Meeting. There was an attempt to call the question (which I think would have resulted in the motion being voted down) but it did not succeed. Instead the motion was sent to the Constitution and Bylaws Committee to correct technical deficiencies, so here it is again.

I'm hopeful that it will be put to a vote this time, and voted down again.

If it passes, it won't bother me too much, because at that point I'll be through with WBCCI.
.
Nuvite-F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 10:42 PM   #13
4 Rivet Member
 
RUMSHIP's Avatar
 
1988 32' Excella
Bonita , California
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 325
Images: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahaska View Post
In whatever form it passes, it will cost this club far more members than it retains.
Agreed.
__________________
Happiness only real when shared.
Christopher Johnson McCandless
2/12/68 - 8/18/92
RUMSHIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 05:22 AM   #14
Figment of My Imagination
 
Protagonist's Avatar
 
2012 Interstate Coach
From All Over , More Than Anywhere Else
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahaska View Post
In whatever form it passes, it will cost this club far more members than it retains.
Just to put things in context, I have a question…

Exactly how many— or how few— members are directly affected? Meaning, how many life members or 10-year members want to sell their Airstream, but buy a Thor Industries class "A" and stay in the club? Is is one percent of the total membership? A tenth of a percent? Just one or two members?

Since I suspect that it's such a small percentage as to be insignificant. And I suspect that the sole reason the issue was ever brought up, let alone being brought up again and again, is because of WHO the members are that want to sell their Airstreams but stay in the club.

In other words, I believe it's nothing more than blatant favoritism, cronyism, or toadyism (take your pick). That is not how a proper non-profit organization should be run. When a motion is designed to benefit specific members rather than the membership as a whole, it should not survive long enough to even reach the voting stage. It should be reviewed by the Ethics and Grievance Standing Committee, and struck down like the farce that it is.

Personally, I think that anyone who bought a life membership understood the constitution and bylaws, that if they sold their Airstream after buying a life membership, they would automatically become former life members. Those folks ought to count their blessings, by virtue of the fact that they can become former life members without having to be formerly alive!
__________________
I thought getting old would take longer!
Protagonist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 07:22 AM   #15
Rivet Master
 
wkerfoot's Avatar
 
1979 23' Safari
1954 29' Liner
Orange , California
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,781
Number of members has not been disclosed, but several number have been bounced around. Neither has a survey of motorhome members been started, asking them what they want.

Bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protagonist View Post
Just to put things in context, I have a question…

Exactly how many— or how few— members are directly affected? Meaning, how many life members or 10-year members want to sell their Airstream, but buy a Thor Industries class "A" and stay in the club? Is is one percent of the total membership? A tenth of a percent? Just one or two members?

Since I suspect that it's such a small percentage as to be insignificant. And I suspect that the sole reason the issue was ever brought up, let alone being brought up again and again, is because of WHO the members are that want to sell their Airstreams but stay in the club.

In other words, I believe it's nothing more than blatant favoritism, cronyism, or toadyism (take your pick). That is not how a proper non-profit organization should be run. When a motion is designed to benefit specific members rather than the membership as a whole, it should not survive long enough to even reach the voting stage. It should be reviewed by the Ethics and Grievance Standing Committee, and struck down like the farce that it is.

Personally, I think that anyone who bought a life membership understood the constitution and bylaws, that if they sold their Airstream after buying a life membership, they would automatically become former life members. Those folks ought to count their blessings, by virtue of the fact that they can become former life members without having to be formerly alive!
__________________
Bill Kerfoot, WBCCI/VAC/CAC/El Camino Real Unit #5223
Just my personal opinion
1973 Dodge W200 PowerWagon, 1977 Lincoln Continental, 2014 Dodge Durango
1979 23' Safari, and 1954 29' Double Door Liner Orange, CA

https://billbethsblog.blogspot.com/
wkerfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 07:39 AM   #16
Rivet Master
 
Southwestern , Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protagonist View Post
Personally, I think that anyone who bought a life membership understood the constitution and bylaws, that if they sold their Airstream after buying a life membership, they would automatically become former life members.
Yes, but at the time many of the life members became life members, Airstream produced a full line of recreational vehicles, including Class A motor homes. Don't forget this schism was precipitated by Airstream's decision to stop producing Class A's.
.
Nuvite-F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 08:37 AM   #17
Figment of My Imagination
 
Protagonist's Avatar
 
2012 Interstate Coach
From All Over , More Than Anywhere Else
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuvite-F View Post
Yes, but at the time many of the life members became life members, Airstream produced a full line of recreational vehicles, including Class A motor homes. Don't forget this schism was precipitated by Airstream's decision to stop producing Class A's.
.
It's still favoritism, no matter what the reason. Sine the motion hasn't passed, yet, the only people who can propose the motion are people who still own an Airstream. They're basically saying, "My good friend here wants to sell his Airstream, but I don't want him to leave the club, so let's change the rules so he can stay." How can that be anything but favoritism, which has no place in a properly-run NPO?

Is it a schism? Maybe. I've heard lots of folks say, "I'll quit if it passes" but near as I can tell the only people who'll quit if it fails are the ones who'll have to quit because without an Airstream they'll no longer qualify for membership anyway.

And how can I forget what I never knew? The MOHO issue was already an issue by the time I joined WBCCI early in 2012. The last Airstream Class A rolled off the assembly line in 2002, according to the Airstream website. The MOHO issue didn't become an issue until about 2011, according to an earlier post on this thread. If any WBCCI members felt that Airstream deprived them of their right to own a Class "A" then why didn't this become an issue way back in 2003? Or did it become an issue back then, and it's been hanging fire for a whole decade and I just never knew?

Are all the people who will benefit from this motion present owners of Airstream class A motorhomes? Or are they presently trailer owners? Since it's already been said that we don't know how many will benefit, we can't know their demographic with regard to present ownership without knowing who they are.

And doesn't the whole Thor Motorhome issue serve as an insult to the good people who own and lovingly restore and maintain 2002 and earlier Airstream Class A's? Heck, some of the Airstream class As still on the road aren't even old enough for their owners to qualify for members in the Vintage Airstream Club!

I'll go on record by saying I won't quit WBCCI if the MOHO motion passes. However, I will not belong to any unit that allows Thor MOHO members. Since there are probably more Units than there are members who want a Thor motorhome, I'm sure I'll be able to find at least one that has a membership that's all-Airstream.
__________________
I thought getting old would take longer!
Protagonist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 09:56 AM   #18
Rivet Master
 
Lily&Me's Avatar

 
2007 Interstate
Normal , Illinois
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 16,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protagonist View Post
It's still favoritism, no matter what the reason. Sine the motion hasn't passed, yet, the only people who can propose the motion are people who still own an Airstream. They're basically saying, "My good friend here wants to sell his Airstream, but I don't want him to leave the club, so let's change the rules so he can stay." How can that be anything but favoritism, which has no place in a properly-run NPO?
At the last mid-winter IBT meeting we attended, February 2011 as I recall, no sooner was this issue dead in the water--again--but one of the quite elderly IBT members leaned to the man next to him on the dais and said "What do we have to do to get this MO-HO issued passed?!

It was predicted here on the Forums at the time that this issue would promptly and continually resurface. It has always appeared to us to be the wishes of the clear minority using their positions of power to try to impose themselves on the clear majority.

They do not care what the majority want, nor how many members might leave.

It's "Quality over quantity" they want, remember?


Maggie
__________________
🏡 🚐 Cherish and appreciate those you love. This moment could be your last.🌹🐚
Lily&Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 10:59 AM   #19
Rivet Master
 
wkerfoot's Avatar
 
1979 23' Safari
1954 29' Liner
Orange , California
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,781
The motor home motion originally came up for a vote in 2007 in Perry, GA. I believe that it was over 70% against. It has been festering ever since.

Bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protagonist View Post
It's still favoritism, no matter what the reason. Sine the motion hasn't passed, yet, the only people who can propose the motion are people who still own an Airstream. They're basically saying, "My good friend here wants to sell his Airstream, but I don't want him to leave the club, so let's change the rules so he can stay." How can that be anything but favoritism, which has no place in a properly-run NPO?

Is it a schism? Maybe. I've heard lots of folks say, "I'll quit if it passes" but near as I can tell the only people who'll quit if it fails are the ones who'll have to quit because without an Airstream they'll no longer qualify for membership anyway.

And how can I forget what I never knew? The MOHO issue was already an issue by the time I joined WBCCI early in 2012. The last Airstream Class A rolled off the assembly line in 2002, according to the Airstream website. The MOHO issue didn't become an issue until about 2011, according to an earlier post on this thread. If any WBCCI members felt that Airstream deprived them of their right to own a Class "A" then why didn't this become an issue way back in 2003? Or did it become an issue back then, and it's been hanging fire for a whole decade and I just never knew?

Are all the people who will benefit from this motion present owners of Airstream class A motorhomes? Or are they presently trailer owners? Since it's already been said that we don't know how many will benefit, we can't know their demographic with regard to present ownership without knowing who they are.

And doesn't the whole Thor Motorhome issue serve as an insult to the good people who own and lovingly restore and maintain 2002 and earlier Airstream Class A's? Heck, some of the Airstream class As still on the road aren't even old enough for their owners to qualify for members in the Vintage Airstream Club!

I'll go on record by saying I won't quit WBCCI if the MOHO motion passes. However, I will not belong to any unit that allows Thor MOHO members. Since there are probably more Units than there are members who want a Thor motorhome, I'm sure I'll be able to find at least one that has a membership that's all-Airstream.
__________________
Bill Kerfoot, WBCCI/VAC/CAC/El Camino Real Unit #5223
Just my personal opinion
1973 Dodge W200 PowerWagon, 1977 Lincoln Continental, 2014 Dodge Durango
1979 23' Safari, and 1954 29' Double Door Liner Orange, CA

https://billbethsblog.blogspot.com/
wkerfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 11:15 AM   #20
Figment of My Imagination
 
Protagonist's Avatar
 
2012 Interstate Coach
From All Over , More Than Anywhere Else
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by wkerfoot View Post
The motor home motion originally came up for a vote in 2007 in Perry, GA. I believe that it was over 70% against. It has been festering ever since.

Bill
Festering. Good word, that.
__________________

__________________
I thought getting old would take longer!
Protagonist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Airstream, Inc. or any of its affiliates. Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.