Warbird Information Exchange

yah the areas around lackland are like a depressed border town

Here we go...the Odessa American has a story of some of the retributions that could occur should the vote go to move headquarters. See: http://www.oaoa.com/news/business/artic ... like%22%7D

It was interesting to see Mr. Brown try to explain the costs of this proposal as a form of "everyday" debt to the membership in one of his last mailings.

I'm sorry, I don't buy it. None of the debt that would be associated with this move would ever be "incurred" if there wasn't a push to move the CAF out of Midland. There's also the "intangible" losses to the CAF's credibility. How do we put a value on that?

I'm telling you all, I'm watching a movie that is just "gone bad" on this subject. Are we never going to learn that you just can't go back on your promises to the "mouth that feeds the hand?" I can only imagine what this controversy is going to cost the CAF in terms of attendance at Airsho. The public doesn't like controversy. They come to Airsho to see the airplanes. I would not be surprised if they avoided Airsho this year to avoid the controversy. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if local sponsors pulled out of Airsho.

Get out the folks. The movie is just starting.

I see no reason for the drama here.

The basic fact is in order to keep these planes flying, you need a metric a$$ton of money. You get that by exposing these planes to as many people as possible who may be interested in donating. There's more people, and more money (and likely more volunteer or cheaper expertise) in the DFW area.

The CAF has been in Midland for 20+ years now. Nothing lasts forever and that's a pretty good stretch of time. If it isn't working (or would work better somewhere else), then more power to them.

Volunteer based organizations have to adapt to the times or die. The CAF looking into a move that would benefit it in the long term seems like a reasonable thing to me.

Hmmmm...this gets even more interesting.

So far, I've heard of at least two CAF wing leaders/detachment leaders that are just saying "no" to a move.

Besides the obvious contractual obligations the CAF has to the cities of Midland/Odessa, I'm also now curious to what the current debt load is on the CAF for the buildings located at MAF. Aren't we still paying on these facilities?

I'm really beginning to question the real motives behind this proposal. There's a whole lot more to this story (if you ask me). My reporter's instinct tells me that we need to be digging a little deeper into this story.

Stang Stung, I too am all for progress for an organization. Don't get me wrong. I do agree a larger venue would be of benefit to the CAF.

But my question would be "why now?" And more specifically, I'd ask just "how" would I fund a move?

First off, if I didn't have money banked for a move, I sure wouldn't be charging into something like this to "buy a bigger house."

Second off, I'd make sure that my current debts and obligations were fulfilled first. I'm not sure we've done this.

Third, I'd make sure the membership was strong enough to go through another major move like this. Not convinced here either.

Finally, if the nation's economy wasn't so far in the dump and we were more "prosperous" with donations it wouldn't be so difficult. I just don't think the CAF has in hand enough donation $$$$$$$ in hand right now to pursue this.

The answer to your first question "why now?" is easy - if it's been decided to move, there's no time like the present.

How to fund - that's much more difficult to discern. I have no idea what the current contractual obligations are vis-a-vis Midland and the CAF, what debts would have to be taken on to move, what the current debt structure or cash flow look like. So everything you may say in that respect may be true, is certainly relevant, and I certainly don't know anything about!

Ummm... I originally thought I understood what was proposed with regards to the "Superbase" thing, but now I'm pretty sure I don't actually understand. Is the entire CAF operation leaving Midland? From some things I've read, it seems like the museum would be staying there and the staff offices would be moving somewhere. Where are the airplanes going? What would actually happen at this "Superbase"? Where would "Airsho" take place? I'm obviously missing something here.

So... As Ricky Ricardo said (with these exact words, and only one time over the entire run of the "I Love Lucy" TV series)... "Lucy! 'Splain."

_________________
Dean Hemphill, K5DH
Port Charlotte, Florida

Good luck getting understandable "splaining" coming out of the Desert!

Just my opinion but it seems to me that the CO and some of the staff would rather be "somebodies" in the big city of Dallas/ Ft. Worth rather than being stuck in a backwater like Midland.
Dallas/Ft. Worth is where the action is and where the money's at. Can't say that I blame them.

_________________
All I did was press this red button here...

Checkout the latest viewpoint on air museums from Kermie:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/KermitWeeks ... ion=stream

There was a press release about a week ago titled The CAF is NOT "Moving" which can be viewed here:
http://www.airpowermuseum.org/?page=cms/event&eventID=124
In addition, all current CAF members with a valid email address on file at HQ should be getting On the Fly emails every couple of weeks. The most recent one came out yesterday and the lead story is The CAF Remains Committed to Midland. If you are a member, I encourage you to read it.

Randy

Spoken like a true "company man" Randy.

Yes. I am a member. I am a lifetime member and sponsor. So yes, I'm reading Steve Brown's news releases, etc.

It's interesting to see you and Mr. Brown put out notices on how the CAF is "committed to Midland."

However, if you re-read the CAF news release posted here: http://www.commemorativeairforce.org/?p ... ventID=200 in the Q & A section you'll find the following:

"Q: So what does this vote do? Are we the members selecting the next Headquarters location?

A: With this vote For the amendment, you, the membership, empower the General Staff to select the next Headquarters from the list of eight finalists. This is a one-time empowerment, and for only one of the eight locations listed."

If that doesn't imply a "move" of the CAF Headquarters, then I don't know how you could interpret it otherwise.

More and more I'm reading into the emails, posts, etc. from fellow CAF members that aren't too keen on this idea. I keep thinking (which is admittedly dangerous) that there have been valid reasons why the CAF bylaws were written as such to make such big decisions (like moving a HQ) a very difficult process. The vote in Oct. will just allow the General Staff to make such decisions without the majority consensus of the membership. It will narrow the decision process to a mere 9 of the 11 General Staff members. Since most of these General Staff positions are uncontested in elections, it makes it that much easier to put in a "yes team" into the role of General Staff.

Again, I say I'm not keen on that idea.

We have fought wars in the past against tyranny. It just doesn't make sense to me that we limit such decisions to a selected few.

My 2 cents.

The following press release titled "Exhibit Renovation Ahead for CAF Airpower Museum" was released today and can be viewed here: http://www.airpowermuseum.org/?page=cms/event&eventID=125

I have been a dues-paying CAF Colonel since 1984 and Gold Life member #4 of the museum, so yes, I am pretty committed to both.

Randy

AFAIK this has always been about a move of HQ and never been stated as anything else. What the issue is here is whether the move of HQ also means a move of the Museum or a reduction in commitment to the museum and its operations. This is where those who oppose the move are trying to scare up support, by suggesting that moving HQ to the new "Superbase" also means that the museum will move and that all the money Midland invested in the Museum facilities will be "wasted."

This is plain and simple fearmongering. I don't see why the CAF can't establish a new HQ in a location better accessible to the members and a larger potential tourism base with a new attraction and keep the museum in Midland which is already well established and running just fine on its own and which most of the monies for the move were devoted to. The HQ itself is a small part of the whole complex and I still can't comprehend why it's such a big issue to take those people somewhere else when they already do a lot of travelling anyway for the Summer Staff conference and other events during the year and which racks up a lot of extra expenses since they must always fly first to DFW and then on to their destination instead of flying direct from a major airport, which is part of why they want to move to one of those 8 locations - they are all either hubs or mini-hubs with plenty of ability to get non-stop access across the US.

I'm not sure that I agree that asking for clarification or questioning the reasoning behind a move is "fearmongering", and the fact that you can't comprehend that someone may have an opinion that differs from yours doesn't mean those opinions should be dismissed. I have a slightly different take. Seperate and establish HQ geographically away from the museum. Once separated it is much easier to sell the museum as a whole and use that money to repaint all of the aircraft with a large SB on the tail or whatever the next branding is going to be. Does anyone remember the fight to keep the museum under the control of the museum board and what was done to the people who opposed it? Don't you love it when a plan comes together?

Chunks

_________________
Jack McDonnel

T-6/SNJ Hoarder