Forum Replies Created
[QUOTE=Visian »]And that’s what I think sets the RA apart: our community is chock full of serious BMW riders offering a premium level of knowledge, skill and accomplishment..[QUOTE]
Ah someone finally came up with an example of something that sets the RA apart from the MOA but I would guess that some MOA members would disagree. Anyway assuming the RA community indeed has these qualities how does someone just joining the RA access all this knowledge etc.?
Visian – I have to say the presently I think both clubs are primarily in the magazine business. That said I agree that the magazine is not where the future lies though. Look where print media is now and the problems they have staying relevant. The interent groups you mention are free and have new things to chew on every day on their respective websites. I also think they tend to attract a more active rider or owner (take your pick). People that need their motorcycle info fix more frequently than monthly. So I guess the big question may not be what sets the RA apart from the MOA but why join either club at all when there is so much free content on the net? What do the MOA and the RA offer other than their magazines that the internet groups do not?
I don’t care about the hows and whys of the split but I still like being able to chose. I believe if the two clubs did become one there would be little RA in there and of the two clubs I prefer the RA. I think the answer for the “one club” believers is to begin by creating a third club dedicated their cause. You will get so many members you will crush the two existing clubs and they capitulate to your wishes – one club. 🙂
[QUOTE=darrylri »]Actually, I suspect that a huge number of RA members are also MOA members. I am; Visian is one; until her membership runs out in the RA, Sue Rihn-Manke is one. [/QUOTE]
For a time I was a member of both clubs also. I note that the post on the MOA website by Ms. Rihn-Menke has not generated any comment in subsequent posts in that thread. I’m sure it is an issue with some over there but so far in that thread not so much, folks appear to be looking forward to the RA rally. It may be being discussed in other threads but a friend that is still a member there says there has not been any other mention that he is aware of. I find it unfortuante that she is ending her membership but I don’t think you can keep everyone happy all the time.
[QUOTE=Visian »]Darryl did’t say anything about upsetting the MOA, either.[/QUOTE]
I would disagree from what I read he was speaking about upsetting at least some MOA members. I take his post as saying that by “dissing” the MOA with the slogan the RA runs the risk of not attracting those people to the RA.
Darryl thanks for your thoughts. I agree with you about the sport bike crowd and neither club will see the fruits of their efforts for at least a while particularly in this ecconomy. Unfortunate about people leaving but if the RA is to survive they need to be somehow different from the MOA. No one in this thread so far has been able or willing to express what the difference may be but the board must have a plan. The differences will need to be articualted (marketed) and when they are some members of the “other” club will be offended, already are evidently. Over the past few years I have noted that some folks are directors or officers of both clubs. I am not sure that in the long run that has been good for the RA. Some of the overlap may be due to the fact that there is not enough talent or motivatred directors to go around but I also think that directors tend to recruit people they know and have delt with somewhere else previuously. If the RA can recruit new people, its own people, for the board and volunteer positions it may be better off. I’m not sure all the people who are directors of both clubs will have the best interests of the RA in mind.
[QUOTE=brewmeister »] I think it’s about BMW”S dummy! [/QUOTE]
So I’m a dummy because I asked if you meant one club or two? :dunno A question you did not answer by the way.
[QUOTE=Visian »]feel free to top it. :biggrin[/QUOTE]
Again no offense. For me a better slogan is already on the cover of the OTL. The only change I would make would be to replace the letters OTL with RA. There is precious little mention of the “RA” or its activities in the OTL. The logo did make a one issue reappearance this fall but I note that it is gone again.
[QUOTE=darrylri »] So, the question is, what will help the RA grow? Differentiating itself from the MOA is good, we have to have a reason for people to join. But choosing to cut off what might be a significant number of potential members by dissing an organization that they already belong to, and probably like, doesn’t seem like the best move (even if the actual wording is cute). Just as negative campaigning serves to turn away middle of the road voters, so do negative messages in other arenas. Those are people we need to attract.[/QUOTE]
Visian – I was addressing Darryl comment above not your original post. In your post you state “there are so many better things about the RA to promote” What are the better things about the RA that differentiate the RA from the MOA would you promote?
No offense but the “The Ride Attitude” is kind of a snoozer.
[QUOTE=brewmeister »]I enjoy both clubs for various reasons but this is getting some blood flowing for sure. I truely wish both clubs could get back together for the good of ALL! And get over ourself”s. We all love this marque that’s FOR SURE![/QUOTE]
Do you mean a merger? Just one club? Personally I enjoy two clubs as the situation exists today. I like choice and if the clubs merged I don’t think you would see much RA in the resulting organization. I hope the RA can grow and be a stronger presence. I have no real knowledge of why the clubs split back when and have no desire to relive that period. Today the bottom line is years later we have two clubs for whatever reason and I hope the RA can flourish.
I think this is called marketing and after all one club is named the Owners association and the other Riders association.
Perhaps the MO(owners)A should change its name. In regard to first to publish, if the OTL was first I guess that’s that. I don’t have any problem with these issues. Didn’t the MOA used to maket itself as the largest club, was that a slur directed at the RA? I may be wrong but I seem to remember that slogan being used. I don’t have a problem with them marketing themselves as largest.
The RA has changed course to garner more members, the younger set from what I read. The OTL has gone sportbike and I believe this Rider/Owner thing is marketing driven also. Think “AVIS we try harder” or something like that anyway. As to whether or not these changes will accomplish the stated goals in my view remains to be seen. I too have been an on again off again member of the RA and also the MOA. Presently I am a member of this one but think probably not for too long. I understand the former editor of the Owners News has launched a new non club affiliated BMW publication, I would like to give that a look.
If this is a go wouldn’t be nice if it was posted here by the management? Sounds like a nice spot.
Well that is unfortunate I will miss his unigue take on the issues. Loved his articles. Just received my latest issue yesterday and I am not enthralled with all superbike all the time. Perhaps that is just me.March 26, 2010 at 4:42 pm in reply to: March issue – I like what OTL and BMW are doing!!! #61864
[QUOTE=Adam Arcane »] The S1000RR issue was for a purpose.[/QUOTE]
Which issue was the S1000RR issue? Aren’t they all lately.March 26, 2010 at 4:42 pm in reply to: March issue – I like what OTL and BMW are doing!!! #61869
I guess we should be thankful that BMW did not showcase all this tech on a reintroduced cruiser. I think wall to wall OTL coverage of that would be even more boring, not much but some. For me anyway. I am curious as to how many issues can be all S1000RR all the time, unfortunately I think I am going to find out. I guess I am just not opened minded enough. While interested in the tech to some extent and not interested in racing really at all I am not excited to read about it to the exclusion of everything elseMarch 26, 2010 at 4:42 pm in reply to: March issue – I like what OTL and BMW are doing!!! #61872
My mistake on the posting I’m sorry for that.
In regard to David Bromfields article I found it interesting but just more S1000RR from a slightly different angle. The article by Kent Cook was good and situational awareness articles are always informative. I have read many over the years as they are a staple of bike magazines. Aside from Cook’s article and the jeans review the issue was all sportbike. Hopefully you are correct in your assumption that in the future there will be content for all tastes, perhaps you are privy to information not available to everyone.
How about the serial #? My ’99 GS has an A after it (as in GSA #####) to designate ABS. or so I am told. A dealer should be able to tell you if that is true.
So if BMW has a similar season next year how long do they keep the race program? Do they stick it out or fold their tent like in F1? Or phrased differently, How good of a season do they need to stay in?
Well my Dec. issue arrived today. Haven’t checked out the entire issue yet but I did read the editorial. I very much enjoyed Bob Higdons article in the previous issue, I would be sorry if articles such as this do not appear in future issues. Maybe instead of taking the edge out of OTL there could be a counter point response from BMWNA in this issue. The editorial raises some questions for me. The point is raised about catching up to the MOA will the OTL become as bland as the ON? At least the OTL has articles about motorcycles. I have noted that in recent issues of OTL many of the articles are about the S1000RR, I find the bike interesting but not quite that interesting. Racing is OK but will the new focus be almost entirely on racing? Is there a focus by the board to turn the the RA into an MOA clone? Lots of questions. I will have to fully check out this Dec. issue and see what the Jan. issue is like.