Mike, grants are something that could be looked at. Money must be a little easy to get down your way. Mc Cormick trust already have several projects they support here in the states. I have written grants before and would be glad to help here. There are several places to look. I was looking into that for some films that have been donated to the club. So far costs have been minimal, but if they are in good enough condition and cold be a sellable item to support the club. It will cost in the range of $ 2,000 to get project going. I guess the costs so far have been paid out of my pockets. I have been looking for some grants for this. But not till we know if these will reprint to DVD ok. UW Madison has provided me with a couple of places to try. But there is no sense trying if I cannot get a good copy of what is on these.
Terry

Most private Companies only have a Board of 7 Directors maximum, and friends of mine who are on these Boards as Chairmen or Directors of companies with say 4,000 or 5,000 full time employees tell me 7 Directors is generally too many to get anything done is a timely manner, and that 5 Directors is actually the ideal number of Directors for an efficient and productive Board, unless the Company is in financial distress, then my friends tell me you need a Board of just 3 Directors who can move fast and act in everyone's best interests to save the Company without delay, because it takes too long to get 7 people to agree on an appropriate course of action.

I've often wondered how long it takes for all our ACMOC Directors just to say good morning to each other during a phone Board Meeting, before they even start discussing Agenda items, and is this the time to start looking more closely at the size of our Board and the inertia that possibly results with consulting with so many people before a decision can be reached. I think we need a President appointed for 2 year terms with the option of renewal subject to vote by Financial members, who can act more like a private company CEO and cut through the polite talk of our Board and all our Committees and make good decisions in a timely fashion. I like what I'm seeing and hearing right now from Peter Bloom with his regular and polite discussion here on the forum, he is obviously able to have feet in all the ACMOC camps, yet balance that responsibility with his business and family obligations. As they say, "When you need something done in a hurry ask a busy person", and I think Pete exemplifies that saying nicely. Thanks Pete for going the extra yard.
Regards
Mike

As others have suggested Caterpillar could provide far more financial contribution to the club. The Caterpillar Foundation gives out untold amounts of money to different causes every year. Our plant even has a community chest that gives money to local organizations. ACMOC is a huge ambassador of good will for Caterpillar, ACMOC is the face of Cat at many functions where they would otherwise go un-represented. The budget they have for advertising would no doubt be astounding, it stands to reason they could afford to help the club. It would appear Cat has a lot of control on the operations of the club, it also appears that they benefit from things the club is doing. Maybe it is time they loosen the purse strings and help out, or ease up on some of the restrictions so the club can help support itself.

I just want to say that I have read every post on here and there have been some excellent suggestions. I would like to make a few comments. First I have been a paying member for a while, since 2000 I think, but have not attended any ACMOC local functions until the last couple of years because I did not have a finished tractor to show. I just felt it was needed no body said I had to have a tractor. With that being said I went to my first show and joined the local chapter that was closest to me even thou we do not have one representing my state. I attended my first national event this year and have met and spoken with a few of the directors and I truly believe that they have the best interest of the club at heart, their just needs to a better line of communication. Remember they are volunteers and travel on their own dime. Maybe this is the forum where discussions take place, but decisions need to be made and you are not going to please everyone. Second I would be shocked if Cat ever gave us a discount on parts. What could be done and would not cost the club much money instead of mailing cards and doing all of these things why cant ACMOC have a section here where I log in. At that time you will know I am a dues paying member, I order the parts I need, they are shipped to my local dealer or pulled out of stock, I pay the dealer and Cat rebates the club a percentage on a monthly basis. That way it will help maintain the club and the website and hopefully the future archive library. Basically I am donating the would be discount to the club and it would more than likely be receptive to Cat. This gives the club a piece of the pie when I buy parts instead of Cat and the dealer making it all and gives me access to the information when I need it. Maybe it is a crazy idea let me know what you think. Last I do agree that if you are not a paying member then you can have access to the forum here but not the archive information or the technical library when it is created. Thank you. Jim

"steamdrum1" wrote:

As others have suggested Caterpillar could provide far more financial contribution to the club. The Caterpillar Foundation gives out untold amounts of money to different causes every year. Our plant even has a community chest that gives money to local organizations. ACMOC is a huge ambassador of good will for Caterpillar, ACMOC is the face of Cat at many functions where they would otherwise go un-represented. The budget they have for advertising would no doubt be astounding, it stands to reason they could afford to help the club. It would appear Cat has a lot of control on the operations of the club, it also appears that they benefit from things the club is doing. Maybe it is time they loosen the purse strings and help out, or ease up on some of the restrictions so the club can help support itself.

Hear hear, I suspect ACMOC could be run for 2 years on what Cat Inc USA spend on just one Dealer Golf Day, and I'm amazed at the enormous influence they exercise over a volunteer, Not for Profit organisation like us. It seems some of us enjoy the plant tours and photo opportunities with the President, but has anyone actually asked them for a check to help support their most cost effective Marketing Division worldwide, ACMOC?
Regards
Mike

Hi, Folks.
While I do have a little insight into some of the 'goings-on' within the club, I do not claim to have encyclopaedic knowledge of everything about ACMOC. How-wevver, it occurs to me that some of the people who have posted on this thread seem to be laying the blame for the club's current situation entirely with the current BoD.

As I understand it, this is NOT correct. A LOT of the club's current woes are the results of decisions made by past BoD members and the current BoD members are trying to address correcting the issues arising from these earlier decisions. F'rinstance, FOUR of the models that Garlic Pete listed in his response to my request about the model inventory and which ones had sold best were from 2008 or earlier, with one from 2006 when I suspect that NONE of the current BoD members were on the BoD.

If I recollect rightly, the models did seem to sell better before the 'crunch' in 2008.

With this in mind, may I suggest that we be a little more kind toward those who are giving so freely of their time to try to extract the club from its current situation.

I also note that the view is not exactly totally blocked out by hands raised to offer help serving on committees, etc..

Just my 0.02.

"Deas wrote:

Hi, Folks.
While I do have a little insight into some of the 'goings-on' within the club, I do not claim to have encyclopaedic knowledge of everything about ACMOC. How-wevver, it occurs to me that some of the people who have posted on this thread seem to be laying the blame for the club's current situation entirely with the current BoD.

As I understand it, this is NOT correct. A LOT of the club's current woes are the results of decisions made by past BoD members and the current BoD members are trying to address correcting the issues arising from these earlier decisions. F'rinstance, FOUR of the models that Garlic Pete listed in his response to my request about the model inventory and which ones had sold best were from 2008 or earlier, with one from 2006 when I suspect that NONE of the current BoD members were on the BoD.

If I recollect rightly, the models did seem to sell better before the 'crunch' in 2008.

With this in mind, may I suggest that we be a little more kind toward those who are giving so freely of their time to try to extract the club from its current situation.

I also note that the view is not exactly totally blocked out by hands raised to offer help serving on committees, etc..

Just my 0.02.

Hi Deas, they say the camel was a horse designed by a committee, and as ACMOC is going broke I think it is time for some money to be laid on the table to save the Club, I've already guaranteed $100 towards the Forum Upgrade, and I spoke to another Aussie ACMOC member today who was talking about throwing $1,000 towards that project after seeing Old Magnet and I throwing ideas around, the Club needs money right now, not waving hands or more committees, I'll bounce my donation to $500 if you match me, that will make $2,000 donated from Australian ACMOC Members, lets now see how much the Yanks and English are prepared to donate to improve our Club because I see 14,000 Forum Members doing nothing, as they say, money talks. See you in Corryong on Saturday.

Deas-thanks for your perception of the posts. I will say that I posted and do not blame the BoD, to the contrary. So to all, I regret not being clear. Deas you have a tact unequaled...in a good way. Your reflection grounds the discussion I think and was necessary-

I continue to believe that a Executive Director or Business Manager type position may be in order. I am not big on overhead but sometimes a little investment plugs a leaky damn...it does not have to be full time. Fancy names for a single person to take the reins.

Best scenario would be for one of 'us' who has retired and has a passion for the Club Mission Statement and experience in business matters to take that on. Paid position with a base salary and bonuses based on performance. The model and marketing $$$$ can be a winner and the answers Peter provided regarding revenue / expense streams with magazine, board, etc. make it clear, I think, that marketing is important for the health of the Club. It might also provide a steady relationship building opportunity with CAT and show them there is some consistency within the Club they can rely on.

I suggest tread with caution banking on CAT is a corporation and the fluff will be the first to go if things get tough. Dependency on them could unravel the Forum / Club quickly if they pull support. Accept what they can 'give' but resist depending on it. The BoD positions will remain necessary, but should be trimmed down in numbers as donkeyhead suggested. Can't have your manager taking direction from too many.

There are a lot of talents here. Good old fashioned back to basics abilities-as my Dad used to say to my Mom when things got tight, " We need to sit down at the kitchen table with a short pencil...". They both grew up in the depression...WWII like many of you. You have admirable traits and unmatched abilities. I know that for a fact.

Members are screaming to help-but having a sense of some having never met, they don't want to waste time and effort.

Best,
Bernie

Mike Meyer - Grants are clearly an option. Tw and I talked about that after your suggestion. One difficulty with grants is that they are generally time consuming to apply for and generally provide a one time lump of funds. Our current issue is ongoing operations and the need to balance cash going out with cash coming in. I usually recommend that not for profits avoid seeking grants to solve cash flow problems. It would be easy for us to get out of the model business and become a grant writing club, like many others I've worked with. Grants make much more sense for discrete projects, such as the bulletin board upgrade, or, ideally, something that could satisfy our purpose, such as a grant to facilitate setting us up in the manual printing and marketing business. Tw and I can investigate that alternative for a project such as the manuals business.

I'm not sure reducing the size of the Board is the most constructive direction. My recommendations to going concerns with paid staff are generally along the lines you pointed out. Five Board members are usually sufficient, as long as they are all active and contribute. Three is best for stressed situations requiring decisive action. Those figures work well when the Board are simply the governance function and a paid staff actually do all the leg work of making things happen. In our case, we do have a full time Club Manager (nod to Bernie) and a part time membership coordinator. They do the day to day work of answering the phones, receiving, recording and tracking membership renewals and applications, coordinating the Caterpillar relationship, and much of the legwork of event planning. Everything else is done by the nine Board members and the about dozen other volunteer members involved in management and operations.

Our problem isn't too many Board members, it is not enough participants in operations. A recurring theme in this discussion has been the perception that things are done behind closed doors by a bunch of good ole boys. If that is a concern now, it would be worse if we had five or three Board members doing everything. We don't have enough time or enough contributors of ideas as it is to help us turn things around. We need more help, not less.

tractor-doctor - Thank you for your comments, and your membership. They are good suggestions. I appreciate your recognition that we can't please everyone and that we do have many hardworking people contributing lots of time and money to making things better.

gauntjoh - I am glad that you are participating in this discussion. You bring a good background and helpful input to the overall discussion.

You commented that the Club functioned quite well without the models program. I'd encourage those of us who were around before the models program was started to think back to what the Club looked like at that time. The models program began in 2002, with the first significant sales in 2003. We had produce models before that date, but not in the manner and magnitude that we do now.

In 2002, total revenues were $168,000 with $64,000 of that from dues. We had $30,000 in shows revenue, $21,000 in model sales, $37,000 in technical services revenue (this is from assistance given to other Caterpillar licensees) and about $16,000 in sales of apparel, publications and other merchandise. We spent $57,000 of that money on models, merchandise and show production costs, and $46,000 on magazine production, printing and postage for total cost of goods sold of $103,000 and spent $38,000 on general and administrative costs for a net profit of $27,000. We also had cash reserves of $80,000, representing pretty much our only asset.

We had about 2,000 members, the magazine was a pretty thin, newsletter type publication issued four times per year. From my reading of it, editing was not a high priority. The website and bulletin board mostly worked, but had frequent, sometimes extended outage periods, lost data and discussions and was generally pretty frustrating.

The Club was profitable, but it was not creating as much value for the members as it does today. I believe that the added value because of the contributions of the models program are what cause our membership to grow by 50% between 2002 and 2013. I would contend that the Club did work without the model program, but I think, even during the period of economic correction, it works better with it than without it.

I think your point 1. is solidly worth considering, but to implement that, we've got to have a well defined plan to either reduce services and associated costs, and/or find another source of revenues to replace the models revenue before we can seriously consider that course. The relationship with Caterpillar is definitely a double edged sword, and we need to be always mindful of that.

I disagree with your point 2. If we were successful at extracting more money or resources from Caterpillar, Inc. to support the bulletin board or any other of our activities, that support would come with the expectation of additional influence and control by them. We already have too much of that involvement. The last thing I want is Caterpillar corporate trademarks and licensing people reviewing, editing and censoring everything that happens here. Some would be happy, because any off topic discussion would be promptly deleted, as I saw when I tried to include a John Deere tractor in one of our advertisements. I think no strings attached contributions and support from them is great, and I think we earn much more than we receive. Unfortunately, there are not many Caterpillar dollars that don't have those strings attached.

To point 3. we seek competitive bids for each magazine contract, which generally run for a year or eighteen months. B4D2 has been successful at receiving significant reductions in printing and production cost in each of the last three contract renewals, two of which were done prior to 2008 when costs were generally escalating pretty strongly. We also seek competitive bids for each unique printing and production project. We always have at least three qualified bidders for the significant projects. I'm pretty confident that we're getting value for the services received in the printing area, but we're always looking for help and other options in that area.

To point 4., we have, are and will be seeking any volunteers to edit the magazine. B4D2 has management responsibility for that relationship and he and his committee invest quite a bit of time editing, reviewing and generally quality checking the magazine. We have several members who have experience publishing and assembling products like our magazine, but so far, discussions with them have not led to an offer to take over our project. We would welcome anything that any member could do to help share the load and reduce operating costs.

Point 5. about considering the value of paid advertising is a good point. We raise about $600.00 per issue from advertising. All of the classified ads are free to members. We felt that the classified section is an important service to our members. We also look at the paid advertising as pretty much the same. We didn't want to charge nothing for all advertising, because the four color ads submitted incur more layout and publishing time than the simple classified ads. We didn't want to prohibit advertising other than the classifieds, because we felt that the color ads throughout the magazine are generally helpful and interesting to our members. I think if we eliminated all the paid ads, we might save somewhere between two and three pages of the magazine. That would either provide for more content, but the same cost, or let us reduce the magazine, only creating a small marginal reduction in our costs. Overall, we felt that we struck the right balance between rates, costs and benefits to the members at our current structure.