CMCA board results

[GoinBush]

[Dot]

Oh Oh!!!
Ask Dot about Li batteries? She's still getting over it! They go for ever..........

All I can say is for the love of who ever, DO NOT put lith batteries in the bunny. you have been warned.

[native pepper]

Are you starting your campaign of "NP for VP" of the new LLLSC (Lithium Leisure Lifestyle Club) On line voting and a reduction in yrly fees for being an active member and recording a vote on every occasion a vote was required, that might improve voter turn out eh

Do you get a double reduction in fees for voting twice

[Jatz]

I am trying to work out the reason that if you aren't a member of the CMCA why you are so concerned about what is happening with it.

I use "you" as collective/all inclusive (not an individual).

[native pepper]

It was once a really good club for Motor homes and camper vans as they are mostly independent, with a great ideal and everyone had the chance to have a say. Now it's the opposite and yet we do need an Aus wide travellers club which actually represents the members and gives them not only input, but control over their club. CMCA in my opinion no longer does that in any way.

The magazines were great and informative, reflecting members views, now the sole remaining mag, is an advertorial and not really orientated to the original concept, but control and profit growth of the associated industries.

[T1 Terry]

It was once a really good club for Motor homes and camper vans as they are mostly independent, with a great ideal and everyone had the chance to have a say. Now it's the opposite and yet we do need an Aus wide travellers club which actually represents the members and gives them not only input, but control over their club. CMCA in my opinion no longer does that in any way.

The magazines were great and informative, reflecting members views, now the sole remaining mag, is an advertorial and not really orientated to the original concept, but control and profit growth of the associated industries.

I'll second that view and the reason I'm still bothering to make comments regarding the CMCA is in the desperate hope it could be dragged back from the grip of those that have dragged it off course and back to its original path where it was an organisation that put the members as its no.1, 2 and 3 priority and anything after that had to be seen with the best interests of the membership as the guiding light.
Rather than continuing with this I'll just put an example up and then leave it at that. Ken Tames put his insurance business up for sale, it was the very insurance scheme originated by the CMCA founders and designed/tailored to the needs of the members. The board decided in its wisdom not to buy the insurance agency but rather pass the control over to another insurance company that Ken Tames then became an employee of that insurance company. Using the membership interests as the no. 1, 2 and 3 priority, would that decision to not buy but rather allow to be sold the CMCA's tailor designed insurance and the link between the 2, Ken Tames, to be employed by the new owners of the insurance scheme? Do you really believe such a decision was in the members best interest or in the best interest if profit were now the bottom line?

T1 Terry

[Dot]

And the cmca still get a cut of the pie..

[dapope]

I personally have not noticed any difference. Been with KT since 2009

[T1 Terry]

I personally have not noticed any difference. Been with KT since 2009

That isn't really an answer to the question eh

[mikeg]

I personally have not noticed any difference. Been with KT since 2009

Been with KT since 1999 and never a claim until this year, all good and no worries they really looked after me, the club still gets a slice of the action which is OK by me and good for the club. So why would EX members be complaining that the club did not buy out Ken Tame and take on extra work and risk when the current system after the takeover by another insurer was seamless and at no extra cost to the club or it's members and works well for all concerned?