Re: Do we really want or need a new club?

[Bernie Strub <bstrub@olympic.net>]

>-----snip-----<
I think I have something valuable to add here.  I, too have thought a lot
about the problems facing QCUSA.  I am a member of the "renegade" NW Region,
and assist wherever I can.  I am also a QCUSA member (#1765), and several
other, non-related non profit motorsports groups.

>1) There is a tremendous amount of work involved in starting a new club -- a
>LOT more than most people realize -- and successfully pulling this off isn't
>going to be easy without a dedicated group of like-minded people at the core
>of the effort.  Assembling this group of people (and telling them apart from
>those who simply talk a good story but wander off halfway through) will be a
>VERY difficult task for anyone who chooses to undertake it.

This is quite true.  Even keeping existing groups going often calls for
efforts beyond the intentions of those in them.  This fosters resentment,
burnout, etc.  New groups have a slight advantage in that they are usually
made up of those who haven't been through the cycle of resentment, burnout,
etc., so they are willing to do more. 

>2) In addition to the amount of work involved, there is also a little matter
>of money.  Until the club has grown to the point where its income will cover
>its expenses, arrangements will have to be made to finance the shortfall.  I
>suspect that finding people willing to front the club money will be AT LEAST
>as difficult as finding people willing to donate their time to getting it up
>and running.

Also sadly true.  Most groups run in the red for years before they either
fold or find a way to recoup their expenses.  Startup costs can be
devastating, and few groups _start_ with any sort of sponsorship, either
private or corporate.  It seems the group in question is having growing
pains involving the shift in financial sources from external (AoA) to
internal (fees).  

>3) Assuming you do find a group of dedicated people who are not only willing
>to invest the time and money involved in starting a new club but actually do
>so, how do we prevent the present situation from occuring all over again?  I
>would hate to see all this effort go to waste if all we get from it is a new
>cast of characters playing the same old games.  The "Golden Rule" being what
>it is, this possiblilty is quite real and shouldn't be discounted...

I have dealt with this problem to a really tiring level of late.  The only
answer is to have a clearly defined structure, with some well thought out
bylaws, that really are used.  Within these bylaws should be included a club
purpose, so that anyone can point to it and verify the direction of the
group.  Without these key ingredients, or even with them but not taking them
seriously, any group is adrift to the whims of popularity and personality
conflicts.  I will NEVER be party to any group operating in this manner
again.  The stock in trade in these circumstances seems to be character
defamation, with a side order of ignoring real contributions.  A firm, well
thought out structure allows everyone to play well with others, and gives
those who feel wronged a way to express their dissatisfaction, or correct
the situation.  

>4) Other than a new group of nuts at the wheel, what will the new club offer
>that the old club didn't?  

Excellent point.  Currently, the only thing a new group would give us is an
atmosphere of communication, and following that, trust.  If we can fix these
things, we would REALLY have a group that could go places.

>Since only a small fraction of the members attend
>any track events -- and these seem to be the same people who aren't happy at
>the moment -- what is it the rest of the members want and/or expect from the
>club and how do we keep them happily sending in their dues each year?  There
>has to be someone looking after their interests as well (personally, I don't
>want anything to do with organizing concours events or car shows, etc., even
>though a lot of car-club members traditionally enjoy this type of activity).

I feel one of the benefits is the QQ.  A LOT of people enjoy this
newsletter, (self included), and I consider it a primary benefit of my
membership.  I have done quite a few newsletters and know how much work it
takes to put one out.  The QQ is _outstanding_ from several angles, and with
some more participation from our loquacious members, could be even better.
BTW, the recent issue with Dave Lawson's article was probably their best so
far.  Thanks, Dave, I hope to read more!

Also, people seem to want to get together in person, show off their car,
talk shop, and generally socialize.  Picnics, tours, meets, and even
concours seem to fulfill this need.  These are the things (in addition to
the track days for us speed addicted) that I feel such a club should provide.

>In case you haven't gotten my drift from the above comments, I personally am
>NOT in favor of starting a new club at this time.  While I believe QCUSA has
>its share of problems, I think we should try to fix them before jumping ship
>and starting another club.  Elections are coming up and with a bit of effort
>on our part, there is no reason why we can't "stack" the Board in our favor,
>which will allow us to alter the club's direction as we see fit.  In view of
>the usual apathy members exhibit toward club elections (in other clubs, I've
>seen less than 20% of the members even bother to cast a vote!), it shouldn't
>be too difficult for us Q-listers to put together our own list of candidates
>and get them voted them into office to do our bidding.  Remember the "Trojan
>Horse" and how well it worked way-back-when?

I agree with this.  The existing structure, in terms of mailing lists,
library of information, contacts, insurance, copyright issues (logos, etc),
is far to valuable to trash without serious provocation.  The easiest, most
effective way to get the club to run the way you want it to is to let your
voice be heard.  You don't have to run for president, or anything that
drastic.  However, if you let the powers that be know that the group is not
fulfilling your needs and you will vote with your feet, chances are the
group will take notice.  Agreed, some groups are too far gone into their own
little world to heed this, but they are doomed anyway.  It is my hope that
this one is able to be molded to the desires of the members.  

As I told Karen in my email to her, I really wish that all the differences
could be resolved, because I feel we are all stronger together than spatting
with each other.  And if we need to get some of "our" people on the Board or
whatever, that's doable.

>As a practical matter, it is often cheaper to rebuild something than replace
>it.  If I had the money, I'd buy myself an S4 or even one of those remaining
>new S6s.  But I don't, so I'm driving an '89 200q instead and trying to make
>it better suit my needs by tinkering with it here-and-there.  Why should the
>Quattro Club USA be treated any differently?

Well put, Jeff.  And by customizing, you can suit your own needs better anyhow.
>>>>>Bernie