Request for dialogue (was: The latest brouhaha...)

["Blake J. Discher" <bdischer@blakedischer.com>]

At 02:23 AM 5/27/2005, Nick Moseley wrote:
> No offence intended, and I'm sure it is a bona fide offer. Great for Blake 
> in getting involved and making change from within. The club must be 
> responsive and adapt to the needs of the majority of its members in order 
> to survive.  Unless and until there is a genuine recognition of the need, 
> and a desire to fill it, on the part of the key decision-makers, there is 
> no sense Michael and Blake try to be mere voices in the wilderness.
Hi Nick...

Thanks for your well thought out email.  I guess I am just more optimistic 
that I can effect change.  And so is Ronnie Babbitt.  The VTR board just 
asked us to participate, they want new ideas, new voices.  Give us a 
chance.  And yes, my offer was bona fide.

> The hierarchy of such an organization should be listening to the opinions 
> of both their current members, and potential members. If they can grant 
> the wishes of their potential members (and sell memberships) without 
> jeopardizing the current members, then they should grant those 
> wishes.  VTR would be well advised to check the membership number of NASS, 
> out of curiosity if nothing else.
I have checked the numbers and have been in contact with a member of their 
board regarding these discussions.  I can assure you, VTR is listening to 
opinions as you suggest.  There is a flurry of email moving amongst the VTR 
board members talking about the issues you and others have brought up on 
these lists.

> One assumes that the possibility of acquiring new NASS members was 
> carefully weighed against the costs in time and resources to support such 
> a chapter, and the costs were deemed too high for the potential number of 
> members.
I'm not sure since I wasn't involved when this decision was 
made.  Apparently you mean that NASS asked to be a chapter of VTR and was 
turned down?  If that's the case, I would have been for making them a 
chapter, it just makes sense on so many levels.  But as you know, the board 
takes a vote and the majority wins.  But like I said, I wasn't there when 
this decision was made, so I cannot speak to it.

> If VTR is seriously concerned about declining membership numbers, they'll 
> listen to complaints and concerns and then react. That time is obviously 
> not nigh. When it is, they'll be soliciting opinions and actively seeking 
> exposure and members. I'm a lister on 4 Spitfire related e-mail lists, and 
> cannot recall a single approach by VTR, or even much mention of it at all.
My motivation for wanting to add value to a VTR membership is not out of 
concern for declining VTR membership.  Membership in a car club devoted to 
a defunct marque will decline regardless of how successfully the club is 
run, the number of cars and potential members is shrinking.  But what does 
concern me is the migration to other clubs.  That means VTR is not serving 
their needs and things need to be re-evaluated.  You speak of never having 
been approached by VTR on the four Spit lists you are on, I not sure what 
you mean by "approach" or what is is you expect.  I have though, encouraged 
all the board members to subscribe to every Triumph list out there (not 
just the ones they own) so they can better "feel the pulse" of each car's 
owners.  I believe this to be essential.

> A move to restrict formerly accessible areas of their site from 
> non-members would not make good business nor marketing sense, in my opinion.
I'll respectfully agree to disagree, since this topic has been discussed so 
much already.

> Personally, I'm a member of my local Triumph club (BCTR), and of NASS, and 
> I send a semi-frequent donation to Mark B for his kind and generous 
> hosting of these autox.team lists. (Yes Mark, that reminds me). I'm not a 
> member of VTR, so what they do is their own business.
True, it is VTR's business, but VTR wants to know what it can do to be more 
inclusive.  There is a perception that VTR is for TR's only.  Another 
lister wrote me offlist that when he investigated VTR in 1989 this was very 
true.  It's been a long time since then, a lot of things have changed with 
regard to VTR, but I know this perception still exists.

You encouraged Michael to NOT get involved, that's disappointing; I wasn't 
at all looking to crush him if he got involved as you suggested.  It sounds 
as if you too are unwilling.  But I'll ask you anyway, (and everyone else 
out there who believes change IS possible as I do), what can VTR do (beyond 
making their Maintenance Handbook open to all as many have suggested) to 
demonstrate its desire to be more inclusive?  Let's put aside all the 
personal attacks, Vern and Darrell are two of the nicest guys I've met; 
sure, they have more money and nicer toys than I do, but that's OK... I 
enjoy looking at their stuff!  Don't you agree that there's room in any 
club for both the wrenchers and the waxers?  Or, as we say in DTSC, the 
drivers and the trailer queens?  :)  Let's refrain from the nasty one line, 
divisive, attacks to each other's posts.  Instead, let's have the 
constructive dialogue you suggest in the second quoted passage 
above.  There's been a lot posted already, no need to rehash those topics, 
but if anyone has more to offer, please do!

The board of VTR is indeed listening... and reading!  If anyone wants to 
send suggestions off list for whatever reason, as many have already, please 
do so; I will reply to those emails privately and copy the board.

Cheers,
Blake Discher, VTR Board Member (VP, Member Services)

PS. I got the PBS reference, I'm nervous how you'll classify this email!
------------------
700 Miles in a British Car to benefit kids: <http://www.abrr.org>
Don't Crash My TR6: <http://www.blakedischer.com/triumph/>

///
///  vtr@autox.team.net mailing list
///  Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  Send list postings to vtr@autox.team.net
///  Edit your replies!  If they include this trailer, they will NOT be sent.
///