Apology to Ralph Gilles

Bobpantax

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
6,957
Reaction score
2
Location
Miami
I do not disagree with the motivational affect of the Chrysler letter and if you review my posts you will see that I have consistently stated same. Have you asked the current Board for answers? Based on their posts over the past week, I think that if they have an answer, they will answer any reasonable question;and, if they do not have an answer, they will do some research and get back to you. Some of the issues you state below have already been addressed in posts by the new Board. You seem to be a bit behind the informational curve. ( Lee is gone; the Bylaws are going to be overhauled and quite a bit of detail regarding that overhaul has already been released; VCA operations are going to be assumed by a new unrelated third party once one is located; and Dan is undoubtedly trying to cut expenses wherever possible to do so. With regard to VPA, note the part of the Bylaw announcement pertaining to VPA. I would also guess that Dan probably has VPA on a close watch or will shortly. VPA is a for profit business that certainly is entitled to protect any data that could be used by competitors to gain an advantage. So while data certainly should be provided to the VCA as its 100% shareholder, that does not mean that all data should be released to the public since that could result in hurting the VCA not helping it. As for SRT and Chrysler, I do not think the verdict is in. I believe they are both standing back to see how all of this sorts itself out and whether, during that sorting process, the two issues set forth in the Chrysler letter are addressed. Regarding your statement concerning the IRS, by your own admission, the data has not even been seen and analyzed by a person who has the expertise to make such a statement. The VCA is a small non profit. VPA is a small for profit. If an examination of the VCA or VPA does occur, which I seriously doubt will happen, I would be happy to handle it on a pro bono basis ( for free) as a favor to the club and its members. So I ask again that all reasonable people join in and help the new Board to move the VCA forward.
Again Bob, you fail to even discuss the obvious issues that are not being answered. If you insist on continuing this obvious "amnesia", that is your right, but you are insulting the intelligence of past and present paying members. If the Chrysler letter never surfaced, none of this "change" would even be considered....you are so off the chart on this I really have to wonder what your intentions are at this point.....honestly Bob, I'm not alone in that thinking. The VCA will "survive" but it will not be supported by SRT or Chrysler, what does this tell you? To many people, surviving while being hooked up to life support for the rest of your life is not living and thriving....there is a difference that you do not appear to accept.

I brought up specific wrong doings on a specific line of the financials that were finally printed in 2010. I tried to help explain some alternatives to save money. Swept under the rug. We've been asking for specific information (financials, VPA information, wages we are paying, etc) for 3 years.......nothing.....just a gracious FU from Lee in the members area. The manipulation of the Bylaws are a travesty. Again, this has been going one for at least 3 years....didn't it matter to you then?

If you consider the VCA ship sound, I'd hate to see what you consider a few minor "leaks".

The club has put out an apology. This is a great start. But, if you are apologizing, then you are admitting to wrong doing. There should be consequences for these wrong doings. For example, one of the letters written about Ralph was from Tim Wolleson. Here we have a very serious conflict of interest. We're paying him $5000.00 a month (from what I've researched, at least double the going rate for the size and type of warehouse the VPA is renting from him) and he has no right to forward such a letter to Ralph's bosses because of his position with the VPA and his financial ties with the club. This is a conflict of interest and he should be punished. He has hurt the relationship between the VCA and SRT, possible for more financial and personal gain. The VPA should immediately stop monthly payments, break the lease and move out and find a new warehouse. Now that would show the membership a realistic change that will matter to the clubs future.

There appear to me many issues with Chris Marshall and his positions in running the VPA and VCA at the same time, conflict of interest, lack of transparency, etc. A normal course of action for wrong doings would be to remove him from the VPA and the club....is this being discussed? Until real actions are discussed, voted on and taken, the VCA will be a sinking ship. You do remember the poll from a couple of weeks ago??....the membership is what matters, not the VCA or VPA's agenda.

Consequences Bob, as you know the IRS will never accept an "apology" for a mistake or wrong doing. The IRS will accept fines, penalties and jail time, but just an apology, no. For this "ship" to be repaired, the membership needs to see real actions.....not just "shotgun wedding" promises.

Cheers,
George
 

Coloviper

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Posts
1,883
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado
In the interest of full disclosure, if there was another version of the apology letter sent to Ralph, it would be appropriate to let the members see it. Isn't keeping this stuff from the members how a lot of this got started?
 

TrackAire

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Posts
1,523
Reaction score
0
Location
Vacaville, California
I do not disagree with the motivational affect of the Chrysler letter and if you review my posts you will see that I have consistently stated same. Have you asked the current Board for answers? Based on their posts over the past week, I think that if they have an answer, they will answer any reasonable question;and, if they do not have an answer, they will do some research and get back to you. Some of the issues you state below have already been addressed in posts by the new Board. You seem to be a bit behind the informational curve. ( Lee is gone; the Bylaws are going to be overhauled and quite a bit of detail regarding that overhaul has already been released; VCA operations are going to be assumed by a new unrelated third party once one is located; and Dan is undoubtedly trying to cut expenses wherever possible to do so. With regard to VPA, note the part of the Bylaw announcement pertaining to VPA. I would also guess that Dan probably has VPA on a close watch or will shortly. VPA is a for profit business that certainly is entitled to protect any data that could be used by competitors to gain an advantage. So while data certainly should be provided to the VCA as its 100% shareholder, that does not mean that all data should be released to the public since that could result in hurting the VCA not helping it. As for SRT and Chrysler, I do not think the verdict is in. I believe they are both standing back to see how all of this sorts itself out and whether, during that sorting process, the two issues set forth in the Chrysler letter are addressed. Regarding your statement concerning the IRS, by your own admission, the data has not even been seen and analyzed by a person who has the expertise to make such a statement. The VCA is a small non profit. VPA is a small for profit. If an examination of the VCA or VPA does occur, which I seriously doubt will happen, I would be happy to handle it on a pro bono basis ( for free) as a favor to the club and its members. So I ask again that all reasonable people join in and help the new Board to move the VCA forward.

My IRS example had nothing to due with the VPA/VCA getting audited (do you know something we don't?)....just an example of financial consequences for making mistakes. Apologies are great but usually there is some financial cost for wrong doings. I want to know what is being done to make up for the issues that have hurt our club. I've listed two very real concerns, one regarding Tim Wolleson and one with Chris Marshall/VPA. Just because you or the VCA does not want to address those concerns (not just my concerns, but many members concerns....you do remember the poll, right?) does not mean they will not continue to exist and create a source of doubt in the true intentions of the club. Simple business math, stop paying Tim Wolleson rent and relieve Chris Marshall of his duties.

Again, you keep bringing up the fact that things are getting fixed now....but the past leaders (many with financial stakes in the club) are still in the loop and are getting away without any consequences. No matter what the *** and club leaders do from here on out, if there is a past element that got us to his situation still involved with the club, nothing has really changed, is going to change or bring back the VCA memberships faith in its leaders.

Here are some simple questions:

-Bob, do you think that Tim should still be our landlord after he tried to sabotage our relationship with Ralph/SRT?

-Bob, do you think Chris Marshall should still be employed by the VPA after not fulfilling his duties in regards to financials, answering salary questions, etc?

Can't make it any more clear than that. Since both of these parties are financially related to the club, normal business practices and procedures should apply.

It is very commendable that you are willing to do pro bono work for the club.

Cheers,
George
 

Bobpantax

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
6,957
Reaction score
2
Location
Miami
Fair questions to ask the Board. My personal opinion does not matter. But, what the heck, here is what I would do. If I was making the decisions, they would be based on dollars and cents only. So with respect to your first question, I would determine whether comparable space could be rented for an amount which is sufficiently less than what is being paid to justify incurring the cost of moving the contents to the new location. I do not know many people that have affection for their landlord so the like or dislike issue does not mean much to me. If it is determined that the smartest financial thing to do is stay, I would stay.

As for the VPA, I would do two things. First, I would do the same type of financial analysis regarding the current payroll. VPA recently posted their payroll and it seemed pretty low to me. I also do not know what the cost would be to replace Chris who almost single handedly put VPA together; got the Mopar dealership and knows the most about the business. I also have not read any complaints about VPA service that have not been immediately addressed and have seen many favorable posts about VPA on the Forum. But, I do not know the warehoused parts business well and maybe payroll could be lower and Chris could be replaced without the VPA and the VCA being financially, or otherwise, inconvenienced. ( Keep in mind that Herb Helbig receives a $30K consulting fee. I hope that you are not saying that Herb is overpaid. That would be the same as insulting Ralph.) The second thing I would do regarding VPA, assuming it is lawful under the applicable local law, and that it has not already been done by Dan, is strictly muzzle, under penalty of immediate termination of employment, all VPA employees regarding exhibiting any adverse behavior toward Chrysler, SRT, or any of their employees and regarding any VCA policies. VPA is a wholly owned for profit subsidiary of the VCA and, as such, the VCA completely controls VPA. It is not the place of VPA employees to comment on VCA policy matters. So if after the above analysis is done, if it turns out that the smartest financial thing to do is keep Chris on and that he clearly understands that he has to zip it or be immediately terminated from employment, I would keep him on.

"Here are some simple questions:

-Bob, do you think that Tim should still be our landlord after he tried to sabotage our relationship with Ralph/SRT?

-Bob, do you think Chris Marshall should still be employed by the VPA after not fulfilling his duties in regards to financials, answering salary questions, etc?

Can't make it any more clear than that. Since both of these parties are financially related to the club, normal business practices and procedures should apply.

It is very commendable that you are willing to do pro bono work for the club.

Cheers,
George
 
OP
OP
Viper X

Viper X

Former VCA National President
VCA Officer
Joined
May 1, 2004
Posts
3,471
Reaction score
1
Dan, as one of many who were "moderated" for the last 5 days I think I can speak for more than myself. I was put on moderated status with no communication, no warning, no reason given to me. My posts were not reviewed, my emails went unanswered. As a paying member I was furious. I know of several members who are now disputing annual membership dues with their CC company to the VCA because of this.

I have been replying to posts over the past 5 days, probably 40+ to get some sort of reply, some sort of comment from anyone who was in the power to moderate. Nothing. I received personal emails from members because they were trying to PM me were telling me they couldn't, the messages would not go through.

Tonight while replying I was shocked that my posts showed up. I got so used to seeing the "moderated" message pop up I wasn't expecting anything else. Whoever went on a "moderation" spree without cause or proper notification to the members should be moderated themselves IMO.

And I understand how much work it is to be a moderator, as I am one on another forum. I can relate to what you are dealing with.

Tony's reply hit the nail on the head. The whole thing. And the following is pretty much exactly how we run/moderate another site I am on. It's what good looks like.

ACRucrazy,

Sorry I did not notify you that I "un-moderated" you last night after reading your posts. You were the first one I "un-moderated" and I wasn't sure of the procedure. We are a bit short handed right now.

On the moderation thing, I was moderated a short time ago after a small group of our previous *** guys (mostly in the splinter group right now) decided to hold a secret meeting, without proper notice and without inviting all of the current *** members, then held an improper vote and without even getting enough votes, took an improper action that was later reversed. That action included suspending Lee and moderating myself and a few others.

Funny thing is that being "moderated" for no reason, without any communication really upset (on another site I'd use another word) me, actually more than the other stuff as I enjoy posting here, am a track guy, not politically motivated and stick around for the car. Someone said in an earlier post that it's the car that holds us together and I agree.

There's a bunch more to this story, but will avoid that right now unless I get questions.

As previously stated, have a couple guys working on sorting this out right now, so we should be back to normal in a relatively short time. Could use some help with a couple of new fair minded moderators......
icon6.png


Dan
 

TrackAire

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Posts
1,523
Reaction score
0
Location
Vacaville, California
Bob,

Thanks you for answering the questions, your answers do make perfect business sense. I would hope the *** and those in power (honestly, I think 99% of the membership needs a flowchart to show who is who and what their exact roles in the VCA are....it is very confusing at this point) would look at your suggestions. There is no arguing the business side of the question.

It would also make business sense to look at the players (VPA, Chris, the ***, landlords, etc) and investigate if any of them have caused the club financial harm or damage to the clubs reputation. Even if it makes sense to stay with somebody because it might cost more to switch, the switch must be made even though there are costs involved.

A perfect example would the VPA landlord position. That letter may have cost the club thousands of dollars in future support from SRT not to mention a lost business relationship. There is also the ethical question of conflict of interest as to why he would accept rent monies from the VPA yet write letters to Chrysler with no authorization from the VCA and what his final motive from that was (I am going on the assumption that the *** did not authorize the letter to be sent to Chrysler). So for that reason, the landlord needs to be removed from the equation because he cannot be trusted and has hurt the club financially and reputation-wise......regardless if his price per square foot is competitive or not.

The *** really needs to investigate all the past issues that have been brought up and make sure going forward that any "bad apples" are removed. No matter what changes are done for the future good of the club it will all be for nothing if existing problems are not removed for good.

Cheers,
George


Fair questions to ask the Board. My personal opinion does not matter. But, what the heck, here is what I would do. If I was making the decisions, they would be based on dollars and cents only. So with respect to your first question, I would determine whether comparable space could be rented for an amount which is sufficiently less than what is being paid to justify incurring the cost of moving the contents to the new location. I do not know many people that have affection for their landlord so the like or dislike issue does not mean much to me. If it is determined that the smartest financial thing to do is stay, I would stay.

As for the VPA, I would do two things. First, I would do the same type of financial analysis regarding the current payroll. VPA recently posted their payroll and it seemed pretty low to me. I also do not know what the cost would be to replace Chris who almost single handedly put VPA together; got the Mopar dealership and knows the most about the business. I also have not read any complaints about VPA service that have not been immediately addressed and have seen many favorable posts about VPA on the Forum. But, I do not know the warehoused parts business well and maybe payroll could be lower and Chris could be replaced without the VPA and the VCA being financially, or otherwise, inconvenienced. ( Keep in mind that Herb Helbig receives a $30K consulting fee. I hope that you are not saying that Herb is overpaid. That would be the same as insulting Ralph.) The second thing I would do regarding VPA, assuming it is lawful under the applicable local law, and that it has not already been done by Dan, is strictly muzzle, under penalty of immediate termination of employment, all VPA employees regarding exhibiting any adverse behavior toward Chrysler, SRT, or any of their employees and regarding any VCA policies. VPA is a wholly owned for profit subsidiary of the VCA and, as such, the VCA completely controls VPA. It is not the place of VPA employees to comment on VCA policy matters. So if after the above analysis is done, if it turns out that the smartest financial thing to do is keep Chris on and that he clearly understands that he has to zip it or be immediately terminated from employment, I would keep him on.

"Here are some simple questions:

-Bob, do you think that Tim should still be our landlord after he tried to sabotage our relationship with Ralph/SRT?

-Bob, do you think Chris Marshall should still be employed by the VPA after not fulfilling his duties in regards to financials, answering salary questions, etc?

Can't make it any more clear than that. Since both of these parties are financially related to the club, normal business practices and procedures should apply.

It is very commendable that you are willing to do pro bono work for the club.

Cheers,
George
 
Last edited:
V

VCA Forum Staff

Guest
TowDawg,

Have asked mods to review all members and non-members.

Think you are good to go.

Dan
 

STUGOTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Posts
5,573
Reaction score
0
Location
NY/CT
Thank you Dan for clearing up my"moderated status" after about a week of being moderated I saw what Carlo did in this thread and I also made an "AE" to contact Dan and within hours he took care of it.

Thank you again Dan
 

VRYALT3R3D

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
276
Reaction score
0
Being moderated is worse then being banned.

What is there to review? I know VB pretty well. Anyone who is "moderated" is in a usergroup of un-registered members basically.

Any mod/admin can see this usergroup and restore their status by doing: Forum Permissions > find forum > find usergroup and turn it off.

Whoever did this did it on purpose. It isn't hard to find out which mod did it, and whoever that mod is should be BANNED and explain why he/she did it!

You must be registered for see images attach


You must be registered for see images attach
 
V

VCA Forum Staff

Guest
Being moderated is worse then being banned.

What is there to review? I know VB pretty well. Anyone who is "moderated" is in a usergroup of un-registered members basically.

Any mod/admin can see this usergroup and restore their status by doing: Forum Permissions > find forum > find usergroup and turn it off.

Whoever did this did it on purpose. It isn't hard to find out which mod did it, and whoever that mod is should be BANNED and explain why he/she did it!



They have been.
 

Mike Brunton

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 3, 2000
Posts
3,047
Reaction score
0
Location
N. Andover, MA
They have been.

And why protect them by refusing to disclose who it was? In general, perhaps refusing to disclose the name of a banned administrator might be reasonable, but in this case, it is not. It merely perpetuates the closed doors/mystery/refusal to be honest with members that has caused so many regions to leave the VCA.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
152,315
Posts
1,675,561
Members
16,717
Latest member
RT-10 Speedster
Top