Hostile Takeover

[jww]

Have been thru judging 3 times at Davenport and 2 times at Eustis with the last time being approx. 2005. I was required to prove the motors would run before being allowed enter judging each time.
Was I the only one this was asked of ? It is being presented as if this is a new rule. Do you mean to tell me that I had a "Kicking Contest" on a Harley 165ST at Davenport in 1999 and I am the only one who was required to do so ? (Dang 2-Strokes !!!)
Johnny Whitsett
#8626

[Greg H]

Just to clarify,
Edd`s year correct but non matching numbers Indian could reach winners circle status?

[Sargehere]

Chris, I took Fred's meaning to be that Harleys have identifiable year and date codes on their top motor mounts since the '50s, and since he's talking about matching frame and engine years, that's all you need.

[Chris Haynes]

Hi Ed,
There is nothing new about our criteria being based on how the came from the "factory", this has always been the basis.
Since Harleys don't have frame #s until the '50s,

Fred,
H-D didn't number frames untill 1970.
I have a question about the leadership in judging. It seems that all the leaders are indian folks. In general they know nothing about H-D, just as most H-D folks know nothing about Indians. When you call upon them to make a judging decision about a H-D they are "In the dark". You need to have someone from the national level at meets that know both. If this takes two members then so be it.

[Lonnie]

The '46 on Ebay is interesting in that a club brother in another state had a '46 that he bought a couple of years ago from a supposedly reputable seller in the Northeast. Bike looked good, a few incorrect items but very minimal aftermarket. Well, he went to register it only to find that a bike with identical VIN was registered in another state, not his state nor the one the bike came from. He went several rounds with the state guys trying to have them verify, with the other state, the validity of the other bike's VIN. Well, one day they called him, asked him to bring it to the licensing division for one last look, whereupon they seized the bike after calling for a flatbed rollback to transfer the bike from his truck to the ground (no ramp with him). And he had to pay for the rollback.

After several more go-rounds, he was allowed to keep the bike since they had no evidence that it was stolen. He was issued a state VIN that was, yes, you guessed it, the number of the VIN with a "1" added to the end. They did not stamp the 1 on the motor but he ended up affixing a VIN plate to the frame. It is interesting in that this Ebay bike may have very well suffered the same fate in it's life.

And how in the world did that bike ever get a Senior!!! It has more chrome than my wife's Sportster, which, trust me, has a ton at her behest!!

Back to Robin's topic, the whole disagreement could have been avoided if Kevin and Robin had been included at the very start. There is no doubt that doing so would have involved additional work to find the common ground and would have perhaps taken longer to complete,but the end result would have been that there would have been much less grief on Robin's part (and Kevin's also I would think).

I am a member of CORSA (Corvair Society of America), which has been around since the late 60's. Totally open books, members submit applications to the board for openings by region such as Northeast, Southeast, etc., all applicants are allowed quite a bit of space to discuss their qualifications and the membership then votes via mailed-in ballot for their choice by their region. If you as a member have a beef, you contact your board rep and he or she gets you an answer. No muss, no fuss, since everyone truly feels well represented. Recent discussion in the club mag (monthly but much smaller than the AMCA's) has revolved around the need to raise the dues and the president, in his column, has asked for ideas on how to avoid an increase. Every single avenue has been addressed and though an increase is coming, I can clearly see that the increase is a necessary evil - I and all members have seen the numbers. The key is openness and communication.

To follow a similar tact in the AMCA would involve a complete mind change on the part of the board members now in place and could only occur if they amend the by-laws accordingly. Personally, I see no reason that it should not occur. It would be simple enough to divide up the membership in a realistic fashion so that all areas of the "globe" feel represented.

I am sure that each board member, and I have the utmost regard for the time they all put in, has the strongest belief that they are doing the best thing for the club in every decision they make. And I am also fairly sure that there are those on the board who would have no problem opening up to elected positions. The fear of the unknown, that the board would fall into disarray and no longer function, is what keeps this from happening. I, and many others, feel that these fears are ungrounded, that the club would be better and stronger as a result.

In parting, I would to state one of the keys in running a successful business, which is that the worst reason to do something is "because you have always done it this way". You must innovate and change as things change around you.

[Sargehere]

I personally believe that there is absolutely no conceivable way to completely rule out bogus machines being passed off as real. It will happen! (As an example, it is believed that there are more apparently legit 1967 L-88 Corvettes in existence than were ever produced!) And now, the AMCA has become complicit in the passing off by stating that, based on the bounty of knowledge resident in the club, they can make that determination at any event for any make and model. And what if it is determined that the VIN is bogus? Remember, legally an individual is complicit in a crime if he is aware of its occurrence, has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. For those unaware, having in your possession a vehicle with an altered VIN is a crime. And ignorance of that being an altered VIN is not a legally acceptable excuse.

Interesting points you make on the bogus VINs. By that way of thinking, the AMCA is complicit if we become aware of the bogus VIN and don't disqualify it. Then we have abetted the crime.
We're not the police, as has been stated, obligated to report every bad VIN we see to authorities, but it's worse to "shine on" what we know to be a fake VIN, telling not even the owner, than to give him the bad news.

Did you see where the '46EL "Senior Award" winner that was disqualified at Eustis was for sale on EBay? Sale expired today:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Harle...Q5fmotorcycles
Made $23,100, but not "reserve," for a bike with illegitimate numbers.
The VIN is 46EL35000-plus. You ever hear of a 46 Harley with numbers in 35-thousands? The number was completely restamped with 'hardware store' numbers, and 6s like Harley used decades later, and upped by a factor of ten over what it probably originally wore, by stamping on a 5th numeral, to insure it wasn't copying a real, registered Harley number, probably. The official company book, "Harley...The Legend Begins" puts Harley production of ALL models in 1946 in the 16,000 range.
Were we supposed to pass on that, and look at the finer points of the bike, and give it the "Winners' Circle of Excellence" it was eligible for?
Like in everything else, the key is detectability. Judges are human, can't touch the bikes we're examining, and so it's all visual. No doubt, number stamps will come along that are undectable, but stupidity always will be.

[Lonnie]

(Quoted from Robin Markey):

"You say it's not the marque knowledge that makes the whole thing work. This you'll have to explain to me. If you take the marque knowledge away how are you going to judge a motorcycle? Or are you doing to adopt the custom car show criteria? You need marque knowledge to be able to judge. You said before Eustis on one of the judging committee emails how you want to have all the information and documentation for every motorcycle ever made, every year, every brand and every model the way they left the factory. You thought this information should be available on the judging field via laptop computers. Which I said is a great idea. Impossible, but what a great idea. How are you going to compile this info without marque experts?"

Truer words have never been spoken...

I read a novel once by Robert Ruark, entitled "Uhuru" (published 1962), centered on the Mau Mau revolt in Kenya, and there is one line in the book that has always stuck with me, where a native chieftain says (I'm paraphrasing), "before you can take something away from the people, you must replace it with something of value". The connection between that and this event is that the "something of value" here that is replacing the old is perceived by many as having no value. These new rules (the ones that are truly new) are in some cases unenforceable - how many Yamaha dirt bike authorities are there our there who can testify as to the veracity of the VIN on such a model? Or all the old Harleys and Indians going to forever remain the models being primarily scrutinized? Of course, the politically correct answer is "No, we will judge them also". My response, "When and using what as backup?"

I personally believe that there is absolutely no conceivable way to completely rule out bogus machines being passed off as real. It will happen! (As an example, it is believed that there are more apparently legit 1967 L-88 Corvettes in existence than were ever produced!) And now, the AMCA has become complicit in the passing off by stating that, based on the bounty of knowledge resident in the club, they can make that determination at any event for any make and model. And what if it is determined that the VIN is bogus? Remember, legally an individual is complicit in a crime if he is aware of its occurrence, has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. For those unaware, having in your possession a vehicle with an altered VIN is a crime. And ignorance of that being an altered VIN is not a legally acceptable excuse.

[indianut]

I am a Casual Observer. Definitely 'out of the Loop', but I do see Mr. Slocomb on this site fairly regularly, giving advise so I know he is reading all of this discussion and I can not help but wonder why he has not spoken up!

[Edd]

Are you getting ready to have one of your baby's judged?
RF.

Fred,
The last time I had a bike judged was 1993 or 1994. That time was a very bad experience as I was told a 53 Indian could not have a solo seat. The team of judges know you could but higher ups did not agree. So I am totally thru with having any of my bikes judged and don't think this new rubarb will change my mind.

I have one bike I call my ZERO point restoration. But really to obtain zero points would be harder than 100 points. Probably should rename it a "50 Pointer" half good, half bad or "HAR" "half assed restoration" might be better. The good part of it is four of the grand kids know how to start it an ride it. (has a side car) One was 11 when he was able to start and ride it. They don't seam to mind what it is..............
Ed

[Robin-M]

Fred,

You're right I don't include my past effort as a destruction of the judging system, the system that I helped build.

As far as the bogus engine numbers that the board voted to disqualify, that is a very complex situation with a lot of variables in all the different brands of motorcycles that we judge in the AMCA judging system, from the beginning years of motorcycling, up to and including 1975 this year. 99% of the information that was given on numbers pertained to Harleys, and a small amount on Indian numbers. None of the other brands were touched. This was a subject that I felt needed a lot more discussion before it was voted on by the judging committee.

I guess you still don't get it on the competition bikes. We have always used separate criteria to judge these machines. They were judged by the governing rules of their racing time period, whether it was FIM or AMA rules, which is how they were allowed to be used in competition. The only thing Kevin and I wanted to do with the competition class was add the word "Competition" to the engraved trophy plaque, which would signify that it was judged under different criteria. Not adding any extra cost to the national for the setup of a new trophy. Many of these racers will stay at home the way the new committee wants to treat them.

I didn't just sit on the sidelines for 35 years and watch the changes take place in our judging system, I helped to make it grow and become more refined to benefit our membership and their motorcycles and the preserving of history.

You say we are now trying to take more of the human opinion element out of it by having the data and info to prove a technical point. Are humans gathering this data and recording it? I am well aware how lately the human element has been trying to be eliminated in our judging system. For an example, all our other past presidents felt that it was beneficial and rewarding to our members (which are humans) to be handed our prestigious awards in person and with a handshake congratulating them. Our present president has never done this, although I know I asked him to. I guess since the new committee is trying to eliminate the human opinion element, as is evident in the large corporate world, maybe they could just not even have an awards ceremony, and just mail the trophies to the recipients. I guess according to you and the new committee, I'm wrong, I always felt that the human element was one of the most important aspects, not only in the judging world, but in everyday life.

Cutting costs, trimming and refining the entire club's functions has had an effect. I was aware this way before Eustis and figured that my expenses that I have been receiving for two years was probably the next to go. It didn't surprise me at all. What surprises me is why the need for all the cutting costs and scrimping on the expenses? In 1994 we had approximately $260,000 in the treasury so where did all the money go?

You keep bringing up about having the motorcycles running. I want everyone to know this was the job of the chapter judge. Some of the meets did it differently than others, but the dot on the headlight has been used at several meets for many years. Quite a few of the other meets, the motorcycles had to be started or proofed running before they were allowed to go into the judging area. This was started because at Wauseon years ago, a person was starting their bike on the judging field, it caught fire, there were no fire extinguishers handy like there was supposed to be and that motorcycle and several other motorcycles were almost burned. This is not a new rule. Those acting like this is a wonderful new rule, must not have attended many meets or didn't pay attention to the machines running or maybe the meet wasn't following proper procedure.

You say it's not the marque knowledge that makes the whole thing work. This you'll have to explain to me. If you take the marque knowledge away how are you going to judge a motorcycle? Or are you doing to adopt the custom car show criteria? You need marque knowledge to be able to judge. You said before Eustis on one of the judging committee emails how you want to have all the information and documentation for every motorcycle ever made, every year, every brand and every model the way they left the factory. You thought this information should be available on the judging field via laptop computers. Which I said is a great idea. Impossible, but what a great idea. How are you going to compile this info without marque experts?

You keep saying positive things about my vast marque knowledge and the all the benefits and improvements that I've brought to the judging system and our members showing motorcycles, saying how wonderful it is. Why shouldn't my knowledge be available to the AMCA membership through the judging? We always tried to get marque experts to use and share their knowledge on the judging field, the more marque experts the better for our judging and for our membership. So instead the new committee is alienating the marque experts.

Fred, you might be fairly new to the board, but don't play dumb with me. You know of one person, the same person that started this judging takeover, is a member of just about every committee, including the AMCA Steering committee, that the board has. So it sounds to me like one person is just about in charge of everything. Just wondering, does he break policies and procedures in every committee he's involved in?

Bottom line - you can have all the rules in the world, but without the knowledge and common sense of qualified judges, you won't be able to properly enforce them. This is why I'm so upset. I've been watching the dumbing down of America for years, now I'm supposed to sit back and watch the dumbing down of the AMCA Judging System I spent so much of my life trying to improve for the preservation of history and benefits to our members.

Robin Markey

[redfred84]

New Judging

With the new judging "as they came from factory" will mean that any Indian that does not have matching numbers for frame and engine will loose six points. Is this correct???

Ed

Hi Ed,
There is nothing new about our criteria being based on how the came from the "factory", this has always been the basis.
Since Harleys don't have frame #s until the '50s, Indians have been allowed to have a same year of manufacture engine, as the frame. An eye for accuracy is kept on early & late versions also. IE: an early '48 Chief frame should have the early style motor, etc...
A lot of European bikes have miss-matched engine/frame numbers from the factory, but they are all usually docuemented. As long as the engine is the same year of manufacture as the frame, it gets the nod.
Are you getting ready to have one of your baby's judged?
RF.

[Edd]

With the new judging "as they came from factory" will mean that any Indian that does not have matching numbers for frame and engine will loose six points. Is this correct???

Ed

[redfred84]

Judging

Robin & All,
I don't view all our past efforts(including yours Robin), as the destruction of the Judging System.
The only recommendation that the AMCA Board refused from the Judging Committee was the issue you were against: bogus engine numbers. The Board voted to DQ them. That, and the Committees recommendation for a separate criteria for the Competition bikes does not ruin our Judging System.
I fully realize that you have been part of this ever-evolving process for 35 years, and have seen it grow, and become more refined. We are now trying to take more of the human opinion element out of it, by having the data and info to prove a technical point. Degrading to some, but necessary for when our experts aren't available.
Cutting costs, trimming, and refining the entire Clubs functions has had an effect. I understand that chopping your travel expenses was a slap in the face. Having guys like myself, with perhaps only half the Marque knowledge be involved is an insult for you also. Especially after all you have done. But it's not necisarily the Marque knowledge that makes the whole thing work; Things like having the bikes run, and function are part of the criteria being discussed. Yes, this was in the Handbook Rules before, but never really adheared to strictly. So far, we have received positive feedback on the enforced running of the bikes, although we are still ironing out the details of this procedure.
As for a so called "power play" by my being on the Committee, and the Board symataniously; hardly. Kevin held the same positions also. I'm a newcomer to the Board, and no one person, or group steers it. I'm sorry you chose to step away after not being permitted to take the Chief Judge position. I had nothing to do with that, the Chief & Assistant Chief positions are appointed by the Prez.
We are still very much dedicated to the betterment of Judging for future reference of our machines, as they came from the factory. That is our sole goal. Some egos may be pushed out of shape along the way, but in the end, it's the machine that we are striving for. They need to live on after us.

[Robin-M]

First of all, let me explain the title of this thread. The term, Hostile Takeover, is referring to what has happened to the judging system.

Fred, you may hear me, but I don't think it's loud or clear enough. You know that you are the other board member I am referring to that used your board position to achieve this hostile takeover. Yes, Kevin made you a National Deputy Judge, one that I was not in favor of, I felt you lacked the experience. You were the best choice we knew of at the time, and we needed somebody for the west coast meet.

You're right, you were not involved in the two old Harleys. Kevin and I also talked with the marque experts, many times, they still can't completely agree whether they're fake or not until they look inside the engine cases.

You're right again, Steve Slocombe from England, the other board member I was referring to, started this whole mess by forming the improper committee instead of contacting and working with Kevin and I. He had his own agenda. I think it's funny, by him forming this new judging committee and breaking the AMCA Policies and Procedures, and one of board committees that Steve is involved with is the Policies and Procedures committee. Hmmm...makes you wonder.

The former judging committee was not defunct, we did not meet that many times because everything was running fairly smoothly. Kevin and I did however, quite often at meets, track down members of the judging committee to ask their advice and opinions. The committee did meet several times when we designed the new judging forms and put them in effect, I guess you weren't there, but most everyone else was. Yes, Rocky, the president, took charge of this new committee instead of shutting it down. I'm the one that said all these new changes and topics and votes could not be done by email, we at least needed face to face meetings for final discussions and voting.

In my opinion, one of the main problems I've noticed is the lack of people skills from Steve Slocombe in face to face meetings. He will basically say nothing or very little face to face, but emails and letters, he'll write a book. At my speech to the board in Eustis, he was the only board member that did not even recognize I was in the room or speaking. He was the only one that did not turn and face me, he didn't look at me. He either stared at his notebook in front of him on the table or at the wall on the other side of the room (90 degrees from where I was standing).

On the competition motocycles, yes, this hit a nerve, not just to myself, but to our members that raced these machines. Everyone that I talked to was upset, because of the pure incompetence and stupidity that you and part of this committee is showing. We have had a separate competition class forever, we also had and were using a different set of rules forever. The only similarity was the same trophies. Not too many of our judges know how to judge this complex catagory. I tried to explain all this to the judging committee, even putting it down in print, explaining how these bikes have been judged for years. So rather than understand or realize and accept what has been working for years as a separate class, the committee developes a new competition class and to use separate trophies, maybe even a first, second or third. In your words, they're nothing more than "mere period modified". However there are no new rules for this so called new class the committee came up with, these still need to be settled. New and different trophies are also going to cost the club more money, money the club doesn't have.

I am taking this destruction of our judging system very personal. I have devoted approximately 35 years to help bring our judging to a high standard, and I can't stand idly by to see all my and others' hard work go down the drain because of a handful of egotistical people whom lack the experience, knowledge and common sense.

Robin Markey

[micmac]

Now is the time to make these necessary changes before it divides our club more.
I'm just an FNG around here, but it looks like it already has Edd. As a new guy, I can tell you it is sad to see the turmoil.