• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Insurance fiasco

Zoran you gettin' your drama fix on? :teeth Does wera shoot itself in the foot like this, I haven't been cruisin' their racer forum yet.
 
Zooran, Economic conditions combined with a smaller percentage of rain outs caused a lower than anticipated demand. We've read over and over, the racers not making Bwillow for various reasons, plenty of them economic.
 
got proof economy was big part of it? did not look that way week before race.
 
<<You can be 100% sure Andy, I, along with the 9 other members of the board, are 100% correct on this issue, for the AFM to race in 2009. What would that make Alex and yourself and no AFM racing in 2009? >>

uh, two hypotheticals ?

You can't keep blaming yourself. Just blame yourself once, and move on.
 
Holeshot said:
The difference between Alex and myself (imo of course), is that I care more about how the AFM is percieved VS how myself is percieved
Click to expand...

So Berto, how do you think the AFM and specifically AFM BOD is currently perceived by the majority of its members? If the answer isn't "great", what do you think the BOD can/should do to improve that perception?

For the record, I'm not sponsored by anybody and have just as much problem getting my Vesrahs from Alex as everyone else seems to. :teeth
 
Just because the club does not have a ton of money doesn't mean it would never get sued. All it would take is one horrible lawsuit to potentially bring the AFM (as well as other racing clubs for that matter) to its knees. Then potentially there wouldn't be a club to race in at all.

The requirements to do business in the US (especially California) means covering your ass at every and all possible levels you can think of. Obviously, some people take a personal approach to this subject, and cannot deviate away from their personality conflicts to analyze the situation subjectively, without opinion.

Loopholes, undisclosed, unknown, and/or gaps exist in business, laws, politics, you name it. If there was a discovered risk, which appears to be the case, then it needed to be addressed. While hard on many people, it needed to be addressed. California is raising their sales tax, right? To address a financial risk? Maybe that will put someone out of business too.

Here's a thought. Come up with a viable solution that is less money and meets the requirements. Present it to the board. Has that been done yet?
 
Holeshot said:
The difference between Alex and myself (imo of course), is that I care more about how the AFM is percieved VS how myself is percieved AND when I make a mistatement or mistake, I own up to that mistake. If you're going to hang your hat that because I missed the change in photof requirements, that I have nothing else correct; we won't find any middle ground.

If you want to see Alex being correct, you only need go so far back as the 7/8 race thread and the views presented on race participation this season. To date, it's much lower than last season, as expected. If you wish so much for the truth, you should join the board AC. That's the only place where nothing is left to the immagination. Despite your comments against me, I've said I would and I have voted for your efforts in the past. It's never been about liking the man, but rather about trusting his experience and instincts.
Click to expand...

Can you do me a favor and keep me out of your argument? If you want to hang your hat on the Buttonwillow number of racers (which had 80% rain forecast and club even took more entry cancellations Sunday morning) then I hope that somehow vindicates you for putting up a poll for the racers and then voting completely opposite of the poll results... :rolleyes

Then again, I'd think it good sense to not go against ones tires supplier as well. Hopefully, that has no value in this argument, but with such a glowing report on Alex, I can't help but ask the question.
Click to expand...

Unbelievable... If I have a chance I will try to bring you a photocopy of Andy's credit card receipt (card # blacked out) so you know I'm not "buying" his opinion. What a $hitty, pathetic low blow... I could punch back like a muthf#@ker and point out a few things on your end, but I'll take the high road.

You can be 100% sure Andy, I, along with the 9 other members of the board, are 100% correct on this issue, for the AFM to race in 2009. What would that make Alex and yourself and no AFM racing in 2009?
Click to expand...

AFM "insurance policy" (whether purchased from agent or directly from racetrack) is not "insurance" in the true sense, it's simply part of the track rental fee. What do I mean by that? The track will not allow us to come out and race at their facility unless we show them a policy for millions of dollars. Normally people buy insurance to cover their assets, not assets they don't have. Stating that the AFM was "underinsured" is completely idiotic - when have you EVER met an individual who buys a multi-million dollar liability policy if he is only worth a couple of hundred grand?? Even people I have known who have tens or hundreds of millions of dollars don't buy more than maybe $5 million in liability policies. So the AFM's policy is not so much to protect assets as it is to gain entry at a facility. If anything, the AFM is waaaaay over-insured just to satisfy the tracks requirements.

We could drag this on forever but it really serves no purpose at this point. The AFM bought the policy, many of the vendors already paid for more insurance & certificates ( some vendors pulled it off and others are out). It's too late to change much for the 2009 season. I'm in no mood to listen to any more lame excuses. The truth somehow always finds its way out.
 
Last edited:
PantyBuncher said:
like it or not, Alex has an _excellent_ track record on being available, informative, correct, and even discreet when necessary. other BOD members, less so. your posts on the afm forum indicate that you directly misunderstood at least one of the aspects of the insurance, so stop saying you know everything. you obviously don't.

anyway, past performance is not proof of future performance, but it's usually a good indicator. just something to think about. for example, we know what happened every time we raced each other in the past, and the same results will probably happen in the future too. pretty likely. i'm pretty sure Alex is mostly correct on his reporting of the facts, his knowledge of the landscape, and his position as to what should have been done. most likely, if you are disagreeing with him, you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Rumors are started all the time in the AFM... sometimes over complete BS. What has been refreshing is that Alex has always come to this forum to squash and explain, sometimes in direct opposition of the other BOD members, he realizes he does not volunteer his time for the board but for the membership.

In this last round of shit throwing I noticed once again Alex going against the grain and his explanation was damn near dead on with the explanation given by others outside of this forum, track officials included. I dont know who is right or who is wrong and really the point is moot because the "damage" has already been done. There would be even more damage at this point to go back. I am truly sad for the vendors that are unable to continue for whatever reason... hard times have hit this country and it sucks to not have the ability to pay back some of our brethren at the track.

One thing I will say that impressed the hell out of me about Alex was his attitude toward his tire competitor and friend... he allowed, displayed and brokered the sale of brand X tires and even mounted them because his competitor was unable to respond so quickly to the last minute need for liability insurance. Had he not done this Bridgestone tires would have not been available for the first round. You can talk all the BS you want, you can drive down to some restaurant and pretend you care about your club but when the "rubber meets the road" (pun intended) Alex stepped up in a huge way. That took a big heart and even bigger balls knowing the flack he could get from corporate for selling brand X. He saw the problem and for at least one round saw a solution.

The video guy is another guy whom has stepped up with a solution offering an umbrella deal for smaller vendors.

Alex I have said it before and I will say it again... you are the man! But I am still going to run the stones.. sorry, me likey better. :laughing

Now where are my brake pads... J/K Sorry but I use brand X... clearly I am not endearing myself to you because I dont use any of your products...:rofl For shame...
 
Last edited:
afmotorsports said:
AFM "insurance policy" (whether purchased from agent or directly from racetrack) is not "insurance" in the true sense, it's simply part of the track rental fee. What do I mean by that? The track will not allow us to come out and race at their facility unless we show them a policy for millions of dollars. Normally people buy insurance to cover their assets, not assets they don't have. Stating that the AFM was "underinsured" is completely idiotic
Click to expand...
isn't that what just happened?
track told you to get your insurance.
 
Is it all tracks on afm schedule, Cali thing? If it is just sears maybe we should look for more races at other tracks.

any excuse for less races at sears and more at bw or vegas or t-hill. :teeth


Fontana?
 
afmotorsports said:
AFM "insurance policy" (whether purchased from agent or directly from racetrack) is not "insurance" in the true sense, it's simply part of the track rental fee. What do I mean by that? The track will not allow us to come out and race at their facility unless we show them a policy for millions of dollars....So the AFM's policy is not so much to protect assets as it is to gain entry at a facility. If anything, the AFM is waaaaay over-insured just to satisfy the tracks requirements.

We could drag this on forever but it really serves no purpose at this point. The AFM bought the policy, many of the vendors already paid for more insurance & certificates ( some vendors pulled it off and others are out). It's too late to change much for the 2009 season....
Click to expand...

DIING! DING! DING! DING! DING! And we have a winner here folks at the carnival! At least to some extent. Depends on which water gun you picked with which balloon in the clown's mouth. Like I posted some time ago:

Wile E. Coyote said:
It really doesn’t matter what is going on at “X” location or at “X” event. It really matters what is being demanded at our location(s) and our events. Do any of you have $5 million to front the club to cover any potential losses-real or imagined in an insurance undewriter's office? If not, reconsider the playing field and stop pressing on the brakes and lighting up the freeway creating congestion. No more to see here folks, keep the freeway moving.
Click to expand...
 
Oh, and BTW totally off the subject and a complete hijack but I'm glad to see PB alive & kickin' entertaining us once again. I was going to start a new thread just after BW reminiscing on how nice it was to see you and Siggy back in th paddock again but never got around to it. It's that familiarity thing. I take comfort in knowing you guys are around at the track or to chime in here for the good or the bad.

It's not a suck-up PB. I just have always found you to be friggin' hilarious and smart about it no matter what stance you take.
 
afmotorsports said:
Nope. I always had insurance. I just had to buy more insurance that I didn't need.
Click to expand...

Damn! Here we thought we might get to know you better in that biz 101 class but you went ahead and got the required coverages. Man, you are smarter than you let on! I guess we'll have to settle with socializing with the other dumb vendors that work for free.
 
TWF said:
that is not what I asked. here, more clear.
did track tell afm to get insurance on its own?
Click to expand...


Yes, Thill told the AFM to get insurance on their own since they were unwilling to cover anyone under 16 (USGPRU, Elena Myers, etc). In the past, the AFM bought insurance for Thill races from Thill itself.

The AFM's previous insurer wouldn't cover the higher GL limits that Thill required so the AFM ended up going with K&K which now required the vendors to have an "additional insured policy" naming the AFM.

Shawn explained it all here: http://www.afmracing.org/webforums/viewtopic.php?p=15244#15244
 
synfinatic said:
Yes, Thill told the AFM to get insurance on their own since they were unwilling to cover anyone under 16 (USGPRU, Elena Myers, etc). In the past, the AFM bought insurance for Thill races from Thill itself.

The AFM's previous insurer wouldn't cover the higher GL limits that Thill required so the AFM ended up going with K&K which now required the vendors to have an "additional insured policy" naming the AFM.
Click to expand...
if that is case than afm had no choice but to get insurance.
what some imply is that there is insurance scam going on between Shawn and insurance agent. with no proof whatsoever.
before I would attack somebody with that claim I would call around and see what other insurance companies say and offer. or get some proof.
otherwise it looks like another conflict of interest, some asking afm to close eye about vendors insurance for their own interests, like not paying insurance. or asking afm to lie to insurance if somebody is vendor or not.
so far we have two sides both with conflict of interest, lets keep going :)
 
afmotorsports said:
The track will not allow us to come out and race at their facility unless we show them a policy for millions of dollars. Stating that the AFM was "underinsured" is completely idiotic If anything, the AFM is waaaaay over-insured just to satisfy the tracks requirements.

The truth somehow always finds its way out.
Click to expand...

It was 5 million needed, required by the tracks Alex. I'd get your facts together.

If the truth does come out, you've got some of these online personalities boonswaggled, but not any of the board nor many of the vendors. If the complete account of this event was known, I'd be embarrassed to be one of your supporters here, and I'd feel horribly betrayed. I know many on the AFM board feel that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top