AACA Museum & AACA, What is Going On

[Dynaflash8]

On 12/16/2016 at 9:01 AM, Dynaflash8 said:

AACA members worked, gave, donated for this museum with the understanding that eventually it would be part of AACA.  We did the same thing with the Library many years before, and the independent Library Board consolidated with AACA at a later date when the tax situation made that possible.  Those people were dedicated AACA members and antique automobile enthusiasts.  The Board of the Museum is a horse of a different color.  Evidently they have realized that the Museum, built in large part on the backs of AACA club members, is theirs to keep and control.  There is an old saying, "don't tell me what you did for me yesterday, what are you doing for me today."  Is there still a Regions Room upstairs in the Museum?  I've heard not.  My wife crocheted a large afghan in the old blue & yellow colors which she gave the Museum on indefinite loan.  It on the wall of that Region Room.  It was a massive work effort on her part.  I wrote the new curator and asked it be returned, and never got a reply...complete contempt in my opinion.  But that is a separate subject.  AACA club members made it possible for the land to be bought in the first place, but when AACA wanted a parcel to build a new office and library, there was no sale.  I'm happy that no more of my dues money is going to the Museum.  If they want to be separate, then they should take that AACA emblem off of the cupola on the building.  When it all started, I thought it was to represent the history of AACA, the oldest and largest antique automobile club....an organization which really made the antique automobile hobby what it is today.  But, I guess the Museum Board looks at one another and say in unison, "So What?"

Read this again folks.  By the way, we got our letter today.

[R W Burgess]

13 hours ago, Bhigdog said:

 

Which is exactly why AACA management and board must be totally forthcoming with their promised report on the situation. The member's BS detector will be in a heightened state. Even a whiff of a cover up will be even more  damaging to the fabric of the club..................Bob

 

Bob, you have known me long enough to know that I don't BS about anything. I tell it like it is, just as I have since my first post here in 2002. There is no cover up, since no firm decisions have been made until we realized that the merger was not going to happen. We let everyone know that as soon as possible. I know the letters were late arriving. (My wife and I got ours today) That darn Santa Claus fellow  messing up the mail system. 

 

Speaking of changes and surprises as Padgett mentioned. There WILL be changes, and you might not know about it until the "changes" are complete. That's just the way life works. There will be changes on the AACA Meet field, the AACA Tour circuit, the website scoring, newsletter scoring, clothing available for sale, award plaques, AA Magazine, and on and on, but these changes are for the better. As a matter of fact, I will change. After 3 years as the VP of National Activities there will be a new person in this position for 2017. I have done the best that I could for 3 years, but I'm not perfect, and I know for a fact that the person in this position will have new ideas, ideas I have never thought of. So, that will be a change. And the AACA membership may not know about these changes right away, because we have to do the best that we can, so it might take FOUR years before some of these changes take effect. I will guarantee you one thing. These changes will be the best that the AACA Board and its committee groups can do.

 

So, if you have any more questions, call me. Tom Cox, Steve M, and others have been fielding a bunch of calls. I have not had any. They are having all of the fun. 

 

The lines are now open! Call within the next 15 minutes for "free shipping"!!

 

Wayne

804-313-1983

 

[MCHinson]

I still don't understand the constant use of the word "split" or "splitting" by folks here. You can't split things that have always been separate. Please read the letter again. The AACA Museum and Antique Automobile Club of America (AACA) have always been two separate organizations. A long term attempt to merge the two organzations failed to accomplish a merger and AACA's board is now going to stop financial contributions towards the AACA Museum. Those funds will now be available for the use of AACA. It certainly appears that the need for additional space for the AACA Library (which is part of the AACA organization) impacted the board's decision that it was time to move on from the failed attempt to achieve a merger with the Museum. The fact that many people apparently never paid attention to the fact that the AACA Museum was a separate organization does not change anything... you can't correctly call it a split.

[Steve Moskowitz]

On ‎12‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 0:47 PM, Bhigdog said:

 

Thank you for poking your head up, Steve. I'm very much hoping the coming article is written in a forthright manner. I for one am not interested in assigning blame for past events but would be most interested in what exactly was  the rational for and the amount of funds the club "contributed" to the museum and an outline of what went wrong.

I'm guessing, at this point, the membership expects, and deserves, a factual post mortem rather than an amorphous  general info type article.

I've often been a critic of the club's seeming opaqueness. Prove me wrong..............Bob Beck

 

Bob, I think I have tried to prove you wrong many times over the years!   Not sure I won any of those battles but without airing dirty laundry or personal opinions I am hopeful that the board can outline things further.  Now, I am going home to sit down in my office and finish a project of cataloging my literature.  Tomorrow I need therapy in the garage and get my fingers dirty and maybe even bloody!!  Oops, I wrote this Friday and never hit the Submit button apparently.

 

Bob, I will be out for the next two days but call me Thursday or Friday and I will tell you or explain in detail whatever you want as I have many other people who called!  There is no cover up (what's to cover up?) as I explained earlier that there will be another article in our magazine and Hemmings has been digging into this and probably tomorrow will have more of the details.  We have responded to them fully and OCW has done a story too.  None of this helps the museum or the club.  I am sure we are far less "opaque" then many other clubs or institutions...certainly from my experience we are. 

 

Again, 2 years or so of trying to build a facility on the museum property was a non-story.  There was no reason to bring this up just as there would be no reason to bring up us trying to buy other property in town and getting turned down. Not discussing the museum issue when we were still at the negotiating table was the right thing to do...there was no answer and for most of the time we felt that we would in fact find a solution. Bringing all the discussions to light could have only made matters worse. 

 

The issue that both parties are at "fault" if that is the right word is that when everything was put together in the early years no one had the foresight to ask what will happen in the future and plan for it....that was done almost 20 years ago so I cannot really comment on it but as we sit here today their should have been provisions made for the possibility that the club would get its 501 C 3.

 

Time to leave the office and this time hit submit!

 

   

[Scooter Guy]

Ok, you've taken major exception to my use of the word "splitting." You could substitute "discontinuing our relationship and financial support" (to use your words) for my choice of word: "splitting." By "splitting" I meant that the two entities are going their separate ways and that the relationship, whatever it was, has been discontinued. I understand that the club and museum were always separate entities legally and in operation, but when a "relationship" and "financial support" is discontinued after a period of years, that can move can be construed as "splitting" which is what I said. I don't really think it's a stretch to get "splitting" out of what's going on, but clearly we disagree on that point.  

 

If you go back and re-read what I posted, you'll see that I was not critical of the decision itself, of the AACA board, the AACA Museum board, or of the club at a whole. I made no comment on any of those topics. My post was to point out that I think having the AACA name attached to a non-affiliated, separate entity (meaning the museum) is misleading NOW considering the turn of events. Further I suggested that a name change for the museum would clarify the difference between the two, the museum and the club. I personally DO think it is misleading for the museum to be the AACA Museum if there is no connection, financial or otherwise, to the AACA club. That is just my opinion. I understand the origin of the name; that wasn't the point of my posting at all. Do I really think it will change? No, I don't. 

 

I understand the need and desire to expand AACA's facility and library. That's fine, too. I also made no comment on that whatsoever. I get that the funds previously directed to the museum can be redirected to that project. Makes sense. Again, my posting was only addressing "AACA" being used within the museum's name when it is clearly the acronym of the club. 

 

I guess that all of this is to say that I stand by my original statement and I don't really think that the dressing down I got here was warranted at all. 

 

I had not logged in here since September. Like you said, nothing changes. I clearly haven't missed much. 

[R W Burgess]

Sorry to pick on you Scooter, but I had seen enough of the blame game going on here. Changes nothing. The background on the name AACA has been explained. I guess someone needs to call the Museum for more information.

[MCHinson]

Scooterguy,

 

You may want to closely read all of the previous 160+ posts in this discussion. That post was not directed at any one individual. There have been many people who have complained that the club and the museum had "split". Despite multiple attempts to explain that the two have always been two distinct organizations, the complaints have continued to be repeated. 

[Bhigdog]

46 minutes ago, Steve Moskowitz said:

Bob, I will be out for the next two days but call me Thursday or Friday and I will tell you or explain in detail whatever you want as I have many other people who called!  There is no cover up (what's to cover up?) as I explained earlier that there will be another article in our magazine and Hemmings has been digging into this and probably tomorrow will have more of the details.  We have responded to them fully and OCW has done a story too.  None of this helps the museum or the club.  I am sure we are far less "opaque" then many other clubs or institutions...certainly from my experience we are. 

 

Thanks for the invite to call you, Steve, But I have the feeling you are pretty busy and I had a very nice conversation with Marty Roth a couple of days ago.

As I said in earlier posts I believed the club directors were doing the best they could to further both the clubs and the "hobbies" interests. I still do believe that. I also would not be surprised to learn that some of the decisions made were ill advised and/or did not work out as hoped. That happens.

The main thrust of my posts has been to urge AACA management to trust the membership to be understanding of any decisions made in good faith even if they turned sour.

I also never suggested there was a cover up, nor do I now, I was only counciling against giving even the appearance of one.

Again, my only concern at this point is a full and frank accounting of the chronology, decisions made , and monies disbursed. I'm of the opinion that will eliminate the drip, drip, drip of the sometimes divisive and uninformed opinions and comments.

Then we can all move on.............Robert Beck 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2016 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

10 hours ago, Scooter Guy said:

Ok, you've taken major exception to my use of the word "splitting." You could substitute "discontinuing our relationship and financial support" (to use your words) for my choice of word: "splitting." By "splitting" I meant that the two entities are going their separate ways and that the relationship, whatever it was, has been discontinued. I understand that the club and museum were always separate entities legally and in operation, but when a "relationship" and "financial support" is discontinued after a period of years, that can move can be construed as "splitting" which is what I said. I don't really think it's a stretch to get "splitting" out of what's going on, but clearly we disagree on that point.  

 

If you go back and re-read what I posted, you'll see that I was not critical of the decision itself, of the AACA board, the AACA Museum board, or of the club at a whole. I made no comment on any of those topics. My post was to point out that I think having the AACA name attached to a non-affiliated, separate entity (meaning the museum) is misleading NOW considering the turn of events. Further I suggested that a name change for the museum would clarify the difference between the two, the museum and the club. I personally DO think it is misleading for the museum to be the AACA Museum if there is no connection, financial or otherwise, to the AACA club. That is just my opinion. I understand the origin of the name; that wasn't the point of my posting at all. Do I really think it will change? No, I don't. 

 

I understand the need and desire to expand AACA's facility and library. That's fine, too. I also made no comment on that whatsoever. I get that the funds previously directed to the museum can be redirected to that project. Makes sense. Again, my posting was only addressing "AACA" being used within the museum's name when it is clearly the acronym of the club. 

 

I guess that all of this is to say that I stand by my original statement and I don't really think that the dressing down I got here was warranted at all. 

 

I had not logged in here since September. Like you said, nothing changes. I clearly haven't missed much. 

I can't remember if there was an official MOU ("Memorandum of Understanding") with the museum when they were allowed to use the letters "AACA" back in 2002.  I was VP Regions at the time.  I'm sure there probably was.  If not, there should have been.  That said, the people who had the largest hand in getting this museum off of the ground were in unpaid, volunteer positions with the Club, and some have since passed away.  All of those who worked on the museum project, beginning about 1994, saw this as exactly the same way to solve the tax situation as did those who started the AACA Library years before.  Some of these people were the same people who actually built, contracted for and/or had a large part in paying for the Library addition onto the headquarters building on W. Governor Road.  Many regular members joined them by selling bricks and buying bricks to raise additional money to pay for the addition .  Some of these same people who helped get the museum project off of the ground, donated very large sums of money to the museum project.  Others of us coaxed Region clubs into donating money.  We circulated at National Meet banquets selling raffle tickets.  We donated to the auction at the Philadelphia meeting and bought bricks and so on.  AACA club leaders dating back into the 90's found the land and facilitated the purchase of that land.  I can remember, years ago, discussion whereby the building had been designed in such a manner so that an addition could be built to house the library and headquarters sometime after the museum was paid for. Nobody ever conceived of or expected the organization we thought they were creating and feeding back in the beginning, would some day turn and bite the hand that fed them.  Obviously none of those people or other old-timers like me ever even conceived of the notion that people would someday take over the museum and decide their needs were greater than the organization that fathered them.  As a result it now comes to this.  I'm long off of the Board after proudly serving without any compensation for 15 years, so I don't know all of the in's and out's of the current situation.  However, the current Board, I assume, came to a point where they all said, "enough is enough", and there was no more time left to negotiate for property they thought was at least partly theirs already, since for the most part they thought the club had already bought and paid for.  So now the club starts all over to acquire a property and build, or revamp an available building to house headquarters and the library.  I also understand there are one or more large literature collections waiting for the library to have room to accept them as donations.  I also understand the headquarters building, which is very old, is also quickly becoming severally outdated.  Perhaps there will be a sudden turnaround, and I hope so, but barring that let's move on.  The Club is now a 501(c3) tax exempt organization as approved by the IRS.  So, if there has to be this next move, the Club  must take all legal steps to make sure there will be no more assumptions of good will,

Edited December 20, 2016 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[Bhigdog]

Just a quick question(s): Are the initials "AACA" as used as a logo or affiliation identifier copyrightable*? If so have they been copyrighted*? If they have been copyrighted* is the museum using them under license?  Is a royalty being paid for that use?  .................Bob

* Copyright as used is incorrect. It should read registered trademark. The questions remain as asked........Bob

Edited December 20, 2016 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[padgett]

Wondered that myself. Turns out there are quite a few.

 

Need to go to http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:goj807.1.1 and enter AACA in the search term box.

 

Current Search:

(AACA )[COMB]

docs: 16 occ: 39

---

	Serial Number	Reg. Number	Word Mark	Check Status	Live/Dead
1	87145483		AACA	TSDR	LIVE
2	85763568	4360680	AACA MUSEUM A WORLD CLASS AUTOMOTIVE EXPERIENCE CARS BUSES MOTORCYCLES & MORE AND DESIGN	TSDR	LIVE
3	85763500	4360676	AACA MUSEUM A WORLD CLASS AUTOMOTIVE EXPERIENCE CARS BUSES MOTORCYCLES & MORE AND DESIGN	TSDR	LIVE
4	85365392		AACA SENTIMENTAL TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
5	85365386		AACA DIVISIONAL TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
6	85365377		AACA VINTAGE TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
7	85365312		AACA FOUNDERS TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
8	85365297		AACA RELIABILITY TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
9	85283819		AACA	TSDR	DEAD
10	76405961		AACA CAMPUS	TSDR	DEAD
11	76171234	2506511	AACA MUSEUM, INC.	TSDR	DEAD
12	76106301		AFRICIAN AMERICAN COLLEGE ALLIANCE	TSDR	DEAD
13	76106300		AACA	TSDR	DEAD
14	75434983		AACA	TSDR	DEAD
15	73473747	1355852	AACA LIBRARY & RESEARCH CENTER ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF AMERICA HERSHEY, PENNSYLVANIA U.S.A. FOUNDED 1981 DURYEA	TSDR	LIVE
16	73666351	1475497	AACA	TSDR	DEAD

 

None of which are the club itself. OTOH if you give it ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF AMERICA   you get:

 

Current Search:

(ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF AMERICA )[COMB]

docs: 6 occ: 50

---

	Serial Number	Reg. Number	Word Mark	Check Status	Live/Dead
1	85365392		AACA SENTIMENTAL TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
2	85365386		AACA DIVISIONAL TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
3	85365377		AACA VINTAGE TOUR	TSDR	DEAD
4	76171234	2506511	AACA MUSEUM, INC.	TSDR	DEAD
5	73473747	1355852	AACA LIBRARY & RESEARCH CENTER ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF AMERICA HERSHEY, PENNSYLVANIA U.S.A. FOUNDED 1981 DURYEA	TSDR	LIVE
6	73301641	1204096	ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF AMERICA FOUNDED NOV. 1935 DURYEA	TSDR	LIVE

 

So AACA the club has never registered AACA, only the full name while I guess the museum can afford better lawyers.

 

Interesting thing is that AACA the club was the original registrant of AACA the Museum but allowed that to be cancelled in 2009.

Edited December 20, 2016 by padgett (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

The "AACA" part was added at the Board Meeting that approved the "Sentimental Tour".  I was there.

[Bhigdog]

Thanks Padgett. I'll edit my previous post for clarity..............Bob

[Bhigdog]

So from the above Word Mark listing it appears the museum owns the trade mark "AACA Museum". Say it isn't so...............Bob

[Dynaflash8]

BigDog:  I am not sure your assumption is correct.  I leave that to the legal beagles.  I'm just a high school graduate.

[padgett]

Gets better:

Word Mark	AACA
Goods and Services	IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: Belts; Coats; Headwear; Jackets; Pants; Shirts; Shoes; Skirts. FIRST USE: 20090801. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20090801
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code	(4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number	87145483
Filing Date	August 21, 2016
Current Basis	1A
Original Filing Basis	1A
Published for Opposition	January 10, 2017
Owner	(APPLICANT) CORRINE AND SUDIE HOLDINGS, LLC LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY DELAWARE 51 TRENTON AVENUE WHITE PLAINS NEW YORK 10606
Attorney of Record	Kimra Major-Morris,
Prior Registrations	3715650
Type of Mark	TRADEMARK
Register	PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator	LIVE

[Bhigdog]

May we expect a cease and desist letter or demand for a licensing fee from CORRINE and SUDIE HOLDING LLC?.......... Oy Vey..............Bob

[Restorer32]

There is also another AACA...the Antique Arrowhead Collectors Assoc. 

[padgett]

IANAL but that "Published for Opposition  January 10, 2017  " sounds like an opportunity.

[MCHinson]

43 minutes ago, padgett said:

Gets better:

Word Mark	AACA
Goods and Services	IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: Belts; Coats; Headwear; Jackets; Pants; Shirts; Shoes; Skirts. FIRST USE: 20090801. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20090801
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code	(4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number	87145483
Filing Date	August 21, 2016
Current Basis	1A
Original Filing Basis	1A
Published for Opposition	January 10, 2017
Owner	(APPLICANT) CORRINE AND SUDIE HOLDINGS, LLC LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY DELAWARE 51 TRENTON AVENUE WHITE PLAINS NEW YORK 10606
Attorney of Record	Kimra Major-Morris,
Prior Registrations	3715650
Type of Mark	TRADEMARK
Register	PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator	LIVE

 

If you look a bit closer on the trademark site you will see that this applicant is associated with ATLANTIC APPAREL CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION, INC. 

There is also the AFRICIAN AMERICAN COLLEGE ALLIANCE. I am sure there are other organizations with the initials AACA as well.

 

I don't think that any of us are experts on trademark law. I really don't think that the club has too much to worry about losing the use of the club's name from what I have seen in existing data from the trademark site. 

 

 

[Bhigdog]

27 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

I don't think that any of us are experts on trademark law

 

I'm certainly not, and I suppose the club's attorneys are, but it might be prudent to register AACA as the club's property. I'm guessing that's already been explored. I hope so anyway..............Bob

[R W Burgess]

Ok everyone, I needed to take John Saylor's post down until these documents linked to our Web Site can be verified by the AACA Committee concerned with this merger.

 

Steve Moskowitz is out today and should be able to add more later.

 

Thanks for your patience with this issue!

 

Wayne 

[oldford]

I have been, up til now, somewhat quiet on the issue.  Someone on the first page asked if the cause was egos or money... Since the above links only show one side of the story, my guess is egos...

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but the info I read from the Museum sounded reasonable.

 

Frank

[oldford]

I guess I read them just in time. Obfuscation anyone???

[Grimy]

From the Museum's horse's mouth....

http://www.aacamuseum.org/aaca_aaca_museum_merger_situation/

 

More heat than light in the cover document.  Doc#1 is full of agreement on both sides.  What's missing from these documents is how the situation went south.

[Dave Gray]

22 minutes ago, R W Burgess said:

Ok everyone, I needed to take John Saylor's post down until these documents linked to our Web Site can be verified by the AACA Committee concerned with this merger.

 

Steve Moskowitz is out today and should be able to add more later.

 

Thanks for your patience with this issue!

 

Wayne 

Why not just call the Museum and verify the accuracy of their comments.

Dave

[MCHinson]

Reading the multiple documents I find it confusing that one document describes something as free and another museum document then shows that their definition of free is apparently 1.4 million dollars. I look forward to all of the facts coming out in a future Antique Automobile Magazine. 

[Bhigdog]

17 minutes ago, R W Burgess said:

Ok everyone, I needed to take John Saylor's post down until these documents linked to our Web Site can be verified by the AACA Committee concerned with this merger.

 

Steve Moskowitz is out today and should be able to add more later.

 

Thanks for your patience with this issue!

 

Wayne

 

Bad move, Wayne. This is the "whiff" I spoke of. It would have been far far better to have noted the documents were unverified and left them stand to be refuted, if necessary.  We're intelligent people here and deserve full transparency................Robert Beck

[R W Burgess]

Just now, Bhigdog said:

 

Bad move, Wayne. This is the "whiff" I spoke of. It would have been far far better to have noted the documents were unverified and left them stand to be refuted, if necessary.  We're intelligent people here and deserve full transparency................Robert Beck

 

Bob, there are other web sites to read that material! 

[Bhigdog]

So then the only result of your preemptive deletion was to make the club look like they are covering something up. Bad move..............Bob

[edinmass]

As a long time director of the Pierce Arrow Foundation Museum, a separate entity and separate orginazation of the "Pierce Arrow Society" , I was well aware that most clubs museums are at arms length to entirely separate entities. Both of our orginazations have always been close, sharing annual meetings and locations, working together in harmony moving forward together to create two things that are better than one. That was what was planned, and what has transpired. However things evolved between the two AACA orginazations, over time it is not uncommon for two orginazations to diverge and go in different directions. I don't know the history, purpose, back room deals, conflicts of interest, problems with personalitys, or any other issues currently causing the problems between the two AACA entities. What I can tell you, and I am certain of, is it is in both of their interest to find middle ground, and draw an outline of future understanding, working together in one location, with one overall vision, or both will suffer and be less than the possible sum of the two. Everyone who has helped build the brick and mortar of both AACA's will be worse off of if they go separate ways. Now the question is can people put the interest of the hobby and a vision of two as one in front of their own personal ideals and objectives. We shall see........sooner or later.........I sincerely hope it is sooner, and with a positive outcome for both.

 

On a personnel note, I first attended the fall meet in 1971, at five years old. It changed my life.......more than I could have imagined. I have been to most of the Fall Meets since then, missing a few due to family or work, but overall it's fair to say I am a regular attendee, and it's my only blocked off date on my calendar for the past thirty years. I never joined the AACA until about five years ago, only because as figured I had a debt of honor that was due, for the enjoyment and benefits that this forum has provided to me. I have enjoyed a lifetime spent in this hobby, traveling the world making friends, fixing cars, earning a living, the returns the old car world has given me are much more than I could have asked for........or expected. While never very involved with the AACA except at the fall meet and this forum, I have seen both the club and museum become much better organized, and professional than in the "old days" when the entire operation was a much smaller and more of a family affair. It would be a shame if the two can't come to together  and find common ground, for the hundreds of thousands of people's lives that have been enriched by this crazy thing we call our hobby..... time will tell........... Ed Minnie, Ludlow Mass

Edited December 20, 2016 by edinmass (see edit history)

[R W Burgess]

Bob, I am not personally on that committee, but we do not allow posts until they can be verified and proven true. For all I  know some of those documents could have had changes (not saying that they do), so they need to be verified. 

[Bhigdog]

Gives the appearance of circling the wagons, Wayne. That really should be avoided. Once that appearance is set in peoples minds getting them to believe anything you say is an uphill battle. Bad move.....................Bob

[trimacar]

So, I read the documents, and as mentioned, the first document, the Letter of Intent, is an interesting read.

 

 

http://www.aacamuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/DOC-1_Final-signed-Letter-of-Intent-11-23-2015.pdf

I will attempt to summarize:

 

-the Club and Museum would become one entity, with combined membership

-there would be multiple boards, I'm not even going to go into any detail on that, maybe that was the holdup (egos?)

-the Club would pay off 1.4 million dollars of Museum debt, and for that be granted one-half ownership in Museum assets

-the Museum would give land to the Club, as part of the new entity, helping to raise money for a 45,000 square foot addition, 30,000 square feet for Club and Library, 15,000 square feet for additional Museum display area

-if any moneys were raised in that drive above and beyond cost of addition, those monies would go to enhance Museum exhibits

 

Wow.  I sure don't see the big ugly ogre in this agreement that I expected to see.  Looks like a sweet deal for all involved, particularly the Club, and the millions of dollars of Museum assets are now lost to the Club if this isn't done.

 

Monetarily, I think the Club loses big time by not pursuing this deal.  I first stated it was about the money, now I think I'm leaning toward some egos on the Club side.  Was the Board arrangement not to the Club Board's liking?

 

Someone tell me how I'm wrong, that the Letter of Intent is a bad deal...

Edited December 20, 2016 by trimacar (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

Removing the documents from this thread just blew a big tank of nitrous into this discussion, which was starting to run out of gas. Ooops.

 

Perusing the documents as presented, I tend to agree with David Coco; there doesn't seem to be a deal-breaker in there. Still, we're only getting one side (the museum has put their cards on the table, the club hasn't but has been calling and staying in the game). Removing the museum's documents from this discussion, even though they are available elsewhere, will only serve to fuel further speculation and unrest. Better still, keeping those documents here means that they can't later be amended to reflect a different point of view when it's convenient--a permanent record might have been useful. Now the only documents available are those provided by the source's website, which can be changed at will. Another mistake.

 

Again, I don't think members are unhappy that the two entities aren't merged or won't be merging. I think that most folks are upset about backroom deals and potential graft at members' expense, whether real or imagined. Club members have emotional and financial investment in the museum, and regardless of their legal status or members' ability to visit the museum for free, this wedge has been driven between the two and it's only getting pounded farther in rather than worked out.

 

This is a PR disaster for both sides. It's fine to say that all will be well (which it probably will) and that the museum and club will continue to operate as in the past, but people who feel as though they've been cheated or deceived tend to hold on to that impression, regardless of the actual injury the cheat or deception causes...

Edited December 20, 2016 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[MCHinson]

David,

 

The letter of intent was the original document that the club and the Museum both agreed to. If you look at other documents, (which are clearly only documents from one side of the discussion) you will find that the original idea went through some changes before the club decided that the merger was not going to happen. Hopefully we can all be patient and see all of the documents from both organizations and see how the proposed merger fell apart. Hopefully either the future will find both organizations able to execute a mutually beneficial merger, or else both organizations find a way to continue to be supportive of each other's efforts for the benefit of the hobby at large.

 

 

[trimacar]

But the Letter of Intent, a seemingly good deal for the Club, was REJECTED in big red letters (on the document, as seen in the Museum documents posted).  The "original idea" was a Letter of Intent from November of 2015.  I stand by my statement, this was a good deal for the Club from what I read and understand, and yet "later" the Club decided no, it wasn't....that's the very confusing part....and from what I read, can only be explained that the Club wanted control of everything, which isn't reasonable...the Letter of Intent clearly spells out that each entity, the Club and the Museum, operate independently, but "together" as a family.

 

If the Club board went in wanting to take control of everything, I can see how it fell apart, as that's not good business for the Museum.

 

OUR OLD CAR HOBBY SHOULD NOT BE POLITICAL BS, and that's what I'm now reading....I thought the Museum board was being unreasonable, but after reading the documents, not so much...and they even state that they're willing to continue negotiations.

 

I find it interesting in a statement of policy that the Museum went so far as to call the AACA Board a "dictatorship".....interesting....

[John_S_in_Penna]

I support both parties, and their getting together sooner or later.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I'll treat them both equally well

and appreciate what both have to offer.    

Myself, I don't feel alienated a bit.

[Grimy]

I'm a little unhappy that my post of an hour or two ago was deleted--the first post deletion in 16 years as a member of the Forum.  I committed essentially the same grave sin as John_S (whose post has now been restored) by posting a link to the Museum's webpage (under "News") which provides links to five documents many of us have reviewed.  As to "verification" previously cited as a reason for deleting John_S's post, that's nonsense.  I'd appreciate a PM justifying that deletion.

 

On a lighter note, I see that I attended my fist Hershey the year Ed Minnie was born (1966), if my math is correct.

 

George Teebay

50+ year AACA member

Director Emeritus (Past President), Pierce-Arrow Society

Trustee, Pierce-Arrow Foundation

[MCHinson]

David,

I think we have to be patient to see ALL of the documents from both organizations. Reading some of the documents provided by one side of a disagreement can clearly create a confusing view of the total situation. I look forward to learning all of the details instead of just some of the details. Hopefully it won't take too long to get this information.