AHRMA Dissolution?

Well, you know of course that lawsuits just don't 'end' on their own. Although it resembles a crapshoot, someone generally wins and someone generally loses. But lawsuits just don't go away all on their own...you mention certain
individuals as trustees. What is their plan to bring the lawsuits to a just
conclusion? What is their plan to secure new legal counsel and legal fees?
What is their plan to review the progress of litigation to determine the next
course of action and have they read the filings already? What is their idea regarding the "reorganization plan" required in the Chapter 11? Surely, there have to be some thoughts and the willingness to share those thoughts.

In the absence of light, there is darkness.

 

Correct, lawsuits just don't end. One side will win and the other will lose. Or in this case neither side will win. Did the trustees at some point and time screw over TO? Yes, I really don't know. But from what I have heard, I think they did. Did TO keep suing to run AHRMA into the ground? Probadly, from what I have heard or seen posted. So the pissing contest wound hurting the people that are AHRMA. Somebody please enligthen me, but what has TO done to promote this sport in the past few years?

 

im voting for carl. dedicated racer with good head on his shoulders and wants ahrma moving foward.:up:

 

You'd really have to say that both parties have promoted vintage/classic
racing in their own way; TO is known around the world (and the bikes)...
but, bax504, it isn't about who promoted what, is it? What the current posture is has been adequately spelled out: litigation in ED NY, continuing, and a Chapter 11 in TN, continuing. We all know, basically, what is at stake.
It certainly won't help vintage racing any if AHRMA folds its tent. In order to move forward, AHRMA needs some changes made, especially in the area of
accountability, transparency, and a fresh approach regarding the litigation.
This suggests new people in positions of management and member input.
Agree or disagree?

 

To Charles and Bax504:

To clarify, lawsuits often "just end". Both sides can agree that a suit should be over without any settlement by either side. A stipulation of discontinuance with prejudice is signed and filed and mutual releases are exchaged. . . the suit is dead and the parties walk away. . . sometimes to do business together.

I hope to do that very same thing on Thursday in a very nasty case.

 

:up:

 

What AHRMA needs is long-term Leadership, and the ability to transcend short term personal interests. Which it currently doesn't have. How AHRMA get's that remains to been seen, but I think electing officals my not be the way to go as far as leadership. Look at the mess it's in right now, and they're elected or appointed officlas.

I'm pretty sure that with AHRMA's charter, you need elections. Maybe the best thing is to have a Vintage Org run like WERA, where this is the owner of the body that dicates the rules. That way theres no bickering about this, that or electing someone with a personal agenda.

Just a thought. Regardless if I was an AHRMA member (which I have been but not currently), I would think that anyone with any interest in racing could chime in on this thread. Sure we might be clueless, but solvinh this mess might take some ideas from people less associated or familiar with the issue.

My 2 cents. Carry on...

 

Charles and Mongo. Good points both of you. I would love to see TO, Barber's, and other involve. But the lawsuit is not helping. I wish that it would get settled. you see, I will be racing a 98 RS125 next year, so i have alot of options. For the good of the sports, we don't dictator's running a organization, and we don't need people suing everybody too. Back in the 90's, i remember a guy suing CCS becaused he wreck at Moroso. There is alot of crap out. I don't agree STU alot, but he has made sense to me a few times. Remember this nobody involved is innocent, they all share the guilt. But that does mean there are good people involved. Cheers.

 

..."if you come across Buddha on the road, kill him."

Just proves the old adage: familiarity breeds contempt.

 

I heard of that, but always thought it was wishful thinking...in this case,
Rodger, do you think that could transpire, given the circumstances and
apparent intransigence of the parties, not to mention recovery of legal fees and damages pending?

 

It would be very helpful for the future to include a clause in a new member agreement that provides for independant mediation of any AHRMA-Member conflicts.

It should mandate binding mediation by an outside independent mediator in a conflict such as the AHRMA-Rob I/TO conflict. It should be looser pays. Most conflicts would cost a fraction of a percentage spent on the current litigation, the presence of such a clause would cause both sides of a conflict to act in a more logical and fair manner... :up:

 

Sure. New Board members at AHMRA. TO recognizing that under bankruptcy AHMRA may have no assets that TO could recover even if successful. Of course in this case they should both agree to let by gones be by gones so TO should be allowed to compete again.

Put another way: if the bankruptcy filings by AHMRA are successful, it would appear that TO could make no $ recovery so it has every reason to declare victory and get back to racing. And I would think the AHMRA would rather have TO compete, all things being equal.

 

I think what you'd like to have would be a required arbitration clause. Arbitration ends all controversey w/o resort to formal litigation. Mediation merely implies that the parties retain a mediators in order to reach a consensus or settlement, and that there is no binding or conclusive effect.
Mediation, by definition, is not binding, IMHO.

 

What's your opinion on that one, Mongo?

 

But there is a difference here. AHRMA nonprofit. WERA profit. But if you ask the racers, all they want is a place and time.

 

Page #24 in the best page yet. More PLEASE.:up:

 

Page #24 is the best page yet. More PLEASE.:up: