Save stock outboard - vote no on proposal 6

[blueskyracer]

It's funny but in reality Stock and MOD are combined now..........many many Stock drivers run MOD classes and vice versa. When the race weekend rolls around it is funny how we are all one big happy family but when the National Meeting rolls around it is "us against them", politics in it's purist form. When the decision was made 20 years ago to run joint Stock/MOD National Championships the mold was set in place, and we unofficially merged and this format actually works great on race weekends.

Having a combined Stock/MOD division would add numbers and would truly 'give everyone a place to race'.........food for thought.

Cleaning up our Stock Outboard national class structure certainly is one issue needing addressing but i tend to look at kneel down racers as one group of passionate racers.......come on down to Jesup, Ga in a few weeks and see how well Stocks and MODS mesh.

Matt, I think you nailed it on the head. Us vs them does not work in politics and it does not work in boat racing. If everyone in APBA worked together imagine what could happen. The race promoters are more than happy to take Mod money to pay the bills but they are still the other guys.

[csh2z]

That's what we need, Matt. 24 classes. My question would be, among all this gloom and doom, negative attitudes and opinions based on current circumstances (poor economy etc.) Does anybody but me believe that the future can be as good as the past or even better?
Here's a scenerio to consider; We all decide to combine Stock and Mod. We go through a few of years of arguing and complaining but get nothing done. We've got 24 stinking classes with 40 drivers at an average "series" type race.
But Then! Between Racing Outboards, Bass Bros., Ric Montoya and the Stock/Mod Promotional Committee the advertising begins to pay off and hundreds of people are suddenly interested in racing boats. Eliminations in almost every class. Significant growth. Why can't it happen? All we have to do is hit the right niche.
We need to set ourselves up for growth. We need to streamline our program. We need to have a good positive attitude (especially on the internet) at all times.
If we plan for failure, we will get failure.
If we plan for excellence & success & growth, At least we have a shot!

[forshey99]

Thank you

I voted yes.

Thank you Dean Sutherland and everyone else who volunteered their time at the National Meeting to provide this opportunity to express my desire for the future direction of APBA Stock Outboard Racing.

[Brian10s]

A committee, not a Czar was to be created to tweak all the details between now and 2014. The committee can and should define a process for parity to avoid sudden changes. How we achieve parity within the SO is not defined. The Chairman just chose to do it with a limited committee. The SO Commission could make a motion to create a process as it sees fit.

Dean,
I am sorry if I seemed to be against this plan, your plan, Nic's plan or Bugs Bunny's plan - that is not my intention. Do we need a plan? Yes. I appreciate all of your work (and others) on bring this to the members to vote on. But do we give up our right to a membership driven category for the sake of having a plan? That is my question.

My point is, the process as stated on the ballot, along with the history of how the various other parity committee's have been created in the past, defines the creation of a Parity Czar, namely the Chairman. It is the Chairman that appoints members to the committee and those members serve at the Chairman's pleasure and the Chairman holds a 33% voting block on each committee. And I am not trying to slam Ed - I just think this is way too much power for any individual to have in a member driven organization. Maybe I am in the minority.

Now if the proposal had defined the Parity Committees to where the SORC (our elected representatives) voted on each appointment, any replacements and the length of time the committee served and that the committees recomendations must go through the Commission for implentation and that the Chairman is a nonvoting member of each Committee, then the only question is if this is the right plan for the future.

As the ballot reads, we are voting on both the plan for the future and also how we want the category to be run in 2014.

Then again, maybe we do need a Czar to save us from ourselves. But if that is what we need, then that is what we should be voting on.

[Matt Dagostino]

Just food for thought and sharing ideas.....

That's what we need, Matt. 24 classes. My question would be, among all this gloom and doom, negative attitudes and opinions based on current circumstances (poor economy etc.) Does anybody but me believe that the future can be as good as the past or even better?
Here's a scenerio to consider; We all decide to combine Stock and Mod. We go through a few of years of arguing and complaining but get nothing done. We've got 24 stinking classes with 40 drivers at an average "series" type race.
But Then! Between Racing Outboards, Bass Bros., Ric Montoya and the Stock/Mod Promotional Committee the advertising begins to pay off and hundreds of people are suddenly interested in racing boats. Eliminations in almost every class. Significant growth. Why can't it happen? All we have to do is hit the right niche.
We need to set ourselves up for growth. We need to streamline our program. We need to have a good positive attitude (especially on the internet) at all times.
If we plan for failure, we will get failure.
If we plan for excellence & success & growth, At least we have a shot!

Not being negative just looking at options. While it is nice to imagine the good ole days returning by consolidating a few marginal classes i see 450 registered Stock members and 250 or so Modified members all who run kneel down boats. Wouldn't it be cool to have one strong cataglory with say 16 total classes of all speed ranges for the current and future members to choose from.

I know i am dreaming thinkiing that the politics could ever come together.....heck we (SORC) have enough differences amongst ourselves! You are right on there.

I tooo would love to see the good ole days return but also believe to need to look at what is on the table right now and look at the whole picture.

Happy Saint Patty's Day........

[26V]

Lets not forget

Lets not forget that no matter what the outcome is on proposal 6, that we are making changes and moving ahead! New motors are a change in the right direction. Other then the D tohatsu we have been running 20 to 40 year old motors. We now have 3 new viable motors for stock outboards. And IMHO this is a very good thing!

OOPS did not mean to give the Yamatos the cold shoulder! Please read the second sentence as Other then the tohatsu and yamato 302 we have been running 20 to 40 year old motors.

[ram95]

Poor choice of words perhaps. I'm referring to the "Ballot" with this proposal on it.

Not everyone is as familiar with all the in's and out's of the various classes. And telling them they can always find a place to race "in Mod" is not something they think is okay. To a good number of them, there's no way but the highway for them. And down the road they'll go.

Another point I was trying to make in (post #54) about the SO/MO membership was that laying out all the options on the table which we kneelers & sleepers (err ahh laydown types) do have, the idea of moving over to Mod might not be such a traumatic experience after all. In fact, I have found the Mod bunch to be fairly friendly... even if they are a rather stubborn bunch at times.

I want to see all these things that different ones are claiming are killing our sport laid out on the table in some orderly fashion. We badly need to separate the wheat from the chaff, and there's an abundance of both.

[dholt]

Funny how there never seems to be a good time for change.

We can't make a change now because numbers are too low to lose even 1 member.

If this type of proposal was introduced 15 years ago when membership was much higher, the argument would have been..."Why change, everything is great right now."

So I ask...when is the right time for change?

This is not a commentary on the merits Prop 6 ballot item at all. Just a questioning when the right time for change is. Because from what I'm gathering from the masses is..."there isn't."

[G Stillwill]

Gene with the new plan you have two new motors the 15H sidwinder gets kicked to the curb. Its ashame as with the last changes Eddie made to the motor its real close to the old Hotrod. I loaned them a couple props at Jesup last fall and it was fast testing as I saw the GPS speeds but the had the wrong gas in it and burned a piston. I really would have liked to run against it in the race as I think it would have been very competitive.

[26V]

George, yes the 15h is running close to what it needs to run. and even if proposal 6 passes you will get to run against it for a few years in the current BSH. I can't make Jessup dang it, but I'm sure I'll see you some where this year. Looking forward to racing against you again!

[Racerkyle20]

I'm voting yes

Here's a senerio. Look at our leadership in APBA or even Stock outboard. What is there age? Who within the sport has stepped up to a leadership position before the age of 30 years? Very few...

Now think of who is under 30 years and at a leadership position? Not many...

Our sport leadership is not young in age by any means. There are exceptions in our actual membership (young drivers are our key to growth)...But the leadership that is representing all of us are guys that have been doing this for quite awhile. The status quo has been set and change is huge to them. Somewhat scary. From the APBA board to the SORC.

I'm not bashing anyones age or anyone who is not a leader yet. BUT change needs to be made. Membership dwindling for 20 years in not acceptable if any of the under 30 membership wish to have children in the future race.

I ran for the SORC this year because i wish to change and shape the sport to where it is going in the future. Not to keep the status quo.

I voted yes in Detroit, I'll vote yes on the ballot.

KB- Region 10 Stock commissioner

[sam]

Membership dwindling for 20 years in not acceptable

Membership has been dwindling for 50 years, its not a recent development

[daveracerdsh]

membership

Not trying to steal the thread.....but I feel that in the future (at the commission meetings) we need to forget about talking about the small stuff, which we could discuss via conference calls, and instead spend at LEAST 75% of our time working on ways to increase membership, sponsorship, etc etc etc. Yes most of the stuff we discussed at Detroit is important, but the real issues we are facing in the future are not taking front and center stage like I feel they should. This is certainly not a slam against anybody.....we are somewhat confined by the way things are currently set up....but for us to survive as a sport we need to change the way we do things. Just some food for thought from the soon to be glowing West Coast. David

[RandY Aveline]

we have way too many 3 to 6 boat classes in my opinion 16 classes is too many as well

we would have better races and better shows if we could hold down the number of classes and increase the number of boats in each class !
in the old N>O>A> days they had full fields in every class and some always had elims with only 10 classes now we may not make it back to only 10 classes but with effort i am sure we could combine or eliminate down to 14 and if done properly increase the number of boats in each class

just food for thought

regards to all
Randy 23-H

[chicagopaul]

In Detroit I stated many, many times that my concern was that what ever changes are made to classes there should be no way to undo them for 4 years. The constant "flip flop" of changes causes huge instability in the category. I'm too light for CSH and with all the "flip flops" of past proposed changes I cannot even imagine spending $4500 on a motor and a $2000 on a boat to run 20 SSH / BSH without a guarantee that this proposal cannot be immediately overturned next time there is an opportunity. So my question, is if this passes and folks next year want to "undo it" What would be needed? Could the SORC or Parity committee undo it or would it take a full membership vote again? I would feel better if the proposal stated that the plan is in place on 2014, no parity committees just safety changes for 4 years. Then at least you know what you have and can deal with it.

So the question is, If prop 6 passes how can I be guaranteed that proposal 6 won’t be undone or modified next year.

Thanks,

CP