W_Higgins

Thank for the rehash. It is clear that you have spent three decades working for the government.

That's not quite accurate. It's an unincorporated area within the township. It exists on its own enough to have its own zip code and you address mail in those areas to "Hershey". There are other unincorporated areas within that same township. It is that way all over PA what with their township system having now created micro governments all over creation.

It seems there is a very generous helping of "benefit of the doubt" being given to the Club when surely there are multiple sides to a story that evolved over a period of years. The irony to the benefit being given is that the same people saying they were "misled" are now basing their colorful opinions on statements provided by the people they say misled them.

I find the reaction to this whole thing rather fascinating. I have never seen on this forum such interest in the Museum until everyone found out the home office didn’t own it. Before all of this, there certainly wasn’t enough interest on the part of most of the people posting here to know they were separate entities, which was no secret. When it was posted here a few months ago that the executive director abruptly departed it didn’t even generate a half-dozen posts. So, when they existed as two separate entities and everybody thought they were one, and they had their own separate directors and related staff as overhead, and $80K from the club annually, and members didn’t have to pay $12 admission, that was okay. Now it comes out they are two separate entities with their own separate directors and related staff, the club isn’t going to pay $80K per year, and AACA members still get free admission, that is completely unacceptable. I can only imagine if the tables were turned and the Museum supported the Club and then picked up all their toys and stomped home when they couldn’t take over the Club and Library for a 5% stake. Everybody here would be cool with that, right? In other words -- all this shedding of tears is worthless without numbers....

David, the discussion is the result of a story that was published online at Hemmings today. What I cannot understand is this upset that, " the press put this story out without talking to the appropriate person." when the only two people mentioned in the article were the executive director of the club and the executive director of the museum and both read as though they are speaking to the author with respect to issue at hand.

Reads to me like the AACA home office wanted to gobble up a tremendously valuable piece of Hershey real estate for pennies on the dollar. I see no problem here. The fact they are separate entities has never been a secret. Another way to look at it is it secures the interests of both organizations. In saying that AACA members are getting screwed, that takes nothing into account for those who have donated generously to the Museum knowing it is a separate entity. The Museum took the high road in continuing to honor AACA club member's memberships. Read the last sentence and tell me what club members have lost.

Furniture and cars both took a hit when the market crashed. Neither have totally recovered but furniture took the worst of it. When you have people funding their hobbies with their home equity loans and borrowing against artificially inflated net worth, the result is going to be ugly when the market decides to correct itself. I think a lot of what helped the car hobby is there is international competition for American cars. People gripe about all the cars that still go to Europe. If trade were strictly limited to the Continental U.S., then we would probably see lower prices and everybody would be griping about that. There are always winners and losers depending on how people position themselves. We benefited by buying a house after the market crash for about 65% of what it sold for before the crash. For our property taxes the county still wants to calculate our assessed value using pre-crash market data as their standard. How convenient. What hasn't changed is everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too!

More on the same: https://news.classiccars.com/aaca-museum-loses-yet-another-executive-director

All of this has morphed from a single topic to reveal the bigger one of: What we have here is a customer service problem.

Well, if they hadn't sold his email address....

English hard. From Steve Moskowitz's post on the first page: Oh looky, there's that "semantics" word again. I didn't even see that the first time. That last part of the last sentence is particularly important since by dictating what Nationwide can do with the addresses indicates that they have them. Hell, the first sentence is important too because it spells out that they have the database. There it is spelled out two ways. He's had time for a handful of trivial posts since this started. To me this suggests this topic is yet more trivial than the others.

Yesterday I visited our local historical society to do some research. It was my first time there. Rather than be a piker and pay the $5 per day research fee I paid the whopping $35 for a membership. They don't have the revenue stream the AACA has and they were beyond appreciative for what seemed like not enough to pay their electric bill for opening up that day. What blew me away is that as I was filling out their simple membership form, the guy stopped me to explain (in a very serious tone) that they don't sell email addresses, phone numbers, or anything else and that if anyone did call there asking to contact me, that they would call me and ask if they could pass out my information rather than just doing it on their own. I couldn't believe it. All of this unprompted. I could have sworn they were reading this thread. Twenty minutes later the groups secretary came down from upstairs with a packet of welcome stuff and launched into the same routine. Apparently it's quite an issue for them.... and they actually have a position on it. So, when is the AACA going to come out with an official policy or statement so we know the score going forward? Are you going to keep selling our information or give us the option to opt-out? The opportunity has been here for days. It's kind of laughable that the officials with their heads buried in the sand have "leadership" listed on their Linkedin profiles.

Another consideration here is how non-profits make their money. 501(c)(3)'s can come under intense scrutiny by the government if they are perceived as "branching out" into the private sector. If this is the new way of doing things, the club would do well to take some of this money they've raised and hire an independent third-party firm to perform a compliance audit to ensure the health of the club going forward. If you think long established non-profits are immune, ask the Horseless Carriage Club. The government is also looking for money anywhere they can find it.

Semantics.

That's exactly right because -- what next? Are they going to give out my physical address? Better yet, are they going to give out my phone number? I think it's pretty safe to say everybody here universally objects to all the junk phone calls they receive. The other point in all of this is now Nationwide has it. If this stuff can be sold, do you think they're just going to sit on it? No. They're going to sell their list at some point and try to recoup some of this $25K and distribution of the addresses is going to spread exponentially as future buyers do the same. When the AACA files their next Form 990 they ought out add "Data Mining" to the list of club activities.

That's piss-poor logic. Free or paid for, I don't want the junk mail! So is the Dennis Carpenter thing you mentioned on Page 1. I wasn't asked to check a box to receive offers from Nationwide. Somebody checked that box for me. Someone else mentioned firing the Post Office for junk mail.... I would if I could! Actually, I had this debate with them recently for over-stuffing my PO Box and they said, "It's your mail, we can't not deliver your mail, it's our duty." I plopped down on the counter the shredded pile and told them, "This one says 'Boxholder', this one says, 'Recipient'. My name isn't 'Boxholder' or 'Recipient', it's Walter. Most of it doesn't even have a box number on it." Guess what? No more bulk junk mail.

The problem with this manner of thinking is that you are incorrect. I PAY for my email address and I make the choice to give it only to individuals and organizations that will hold it in confidence. It must be an issue with a large segment of society because many organizations go out of their way to make clear, "We will never sell or share your email address without your permission". My recommendation to everyone dissatisfied with this is to forward the Nationwide email to: aaca1@aaca.org The recipient can simply choose to ignore it.

What it boils down to is people with manners that are acting as a go-between ask the party that has no knowledge of the transaction, "Would it be alright if I share your personal information with ****? I think it would be to your benefit." People without manners.... well.... do this. How about next time you have them buy an ad in the magazine and let us make the decision?

This refrigerant recovery machine only has a little over eight hours on it. Last used about a year ago. I powered it up today to take photos. I just don't do enough A/C work to justify keeping it. I know there are those of you out there that still like running R-12. Here's your chance to hang onto it rather than blow it into the atmosphere whenever you have to do service. Located in 19375. Prefer local pick up. Asking $350. Please email or message me through my profile here. Thanks for looking!:

Hi David, I sent you a p.m. Please check your messages. Thanks!

Just as the title states. Please post here or message me through this forum if you have, or know the whereabouts of, a good replacment. Thanks.

Allow me to make clear that I am not seeking, nor encouraging others, to thwart the system -- I am merely trying to understand the implied guarantee of partial relief by registering.

Okay, than to get clarification on your original comment, let me ask this differently -- To what additional liability is the cart owner exposing himself if he doesn't register the device?

For the cart owners who do register, what portion of the liability is the AACA agreeing to cover?

I submit another scenario in that the owner probably was not misrepresenting anything, as we were also told by him that he did the conversion himself. If he was out to dupe anyone, he was only out to dupe those who didn't ask. If it's a situation where he didn't say and the judges didn't ask, he ought to get a special award for slipping through the cracks. The judging guidelines look like they were written by Congress and he probably didn't read through line-by-line to know he wasn't eligible.