GGC2005 - Pre-Vote Announcement!!!

My son has a Deli to which is attatched every bell, every whistle one
can imagine'
What I do think is neat that when the machine gets silent and is not
turned off
the words - I Love You - keeps rolling on the screen

SUNNY...........Now, thats clever put there by a clever lady

S'nd I
XXX

Charles
It was a tongue in cheek post as I know yours was one too:-)

SUNNY........Perhaps one day we will cruise on the same ship - ya know
- one curmudgen to another-

S'nd I
XXX

"Mike Cordelli" wrote in message
...
I guarantee you if I was committee chariman I wouldn't change the rules
mid
stream without telling anybody.


But then I didn't see you vounteer.

In fact, it seems nobody did, and Lloyd was ultimately asked and then said
yes.

Lloyd and I have teased each other over the years, but I will give him full
credit for what he's doing.

He inherited a concept that was spiriling into problems. It had gotten to
the point where few TA were even interested. Most likely because the
committees in the past were made up of people who were very astute to TA
pricing and practices. They probably made it difficult for a TA to make any
money on the group.

Add to that the bickering that has gone on over the years for "various"
reasons.

Lloyd is taking a different stab at it. He's letting the people vote. He's
not forcing anyone to pick a TA that they're not comfortable with. Nor is
he forcing anyone to go.

I give Lloyd an "Atta Boy" for trying.

Hell... I may even think about going this time.

--Tom



Please indicate when you as the committee posted the change in the rules
after the February post when you said you were not changing them? If I'm
wrong and it was posted, I will be the first to apologize for my remarks.
You posted at least a hundred times you were accepting bids and the rest,
funny how the change in the rules never made it.

Maybe, just maybe, if you did things up front and on the up and up, there
wouldn't be so much fingerpointing and bitching and the rest.

By the way, HTML has no place in newsgroups.

I love the way the committee is now circling the wagons to protect their
own.




"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
Mike, next year you can be committee chairman. I nominate you as of now.
Then you can listen to all the bitching and whining and finger-pointing.
I
don't care what anybody thinks, we on the committee know what went on. If
any of you, and I mean any, had volunteered for this committee, you would
be
able to see we did not do anything underhanded, we didn't hide anything
from
anyone. We chose to change the RFB to allow more people to bid and sadly
not many did.

I know, in your own mind you see it differently.


Judy----Waiting to see how Mike Cordelli does next year as committee
chairman

Mike Cordelli wrote:

You guys are totally cracking me up.

Lets take a step back to, Oh, I don't know, February 2.

The following was posted he

-----start
The current requirements for bidding are :

1. Be a participating member in RTC
2. Be a full-time travel agent
3. Be owner, principal or can get permission to commit the agency to a
contract.

I do not think those will change as the committee seems to be in agreement
on those items.
-----end

See that last line? The part about "I do not think these will change as
the
committee seems to be in agreement on those items? Now the committee
comes
back to the group and says it's the fault of the people they didn't ask
for
the "new" terms after they (the committee) stated they would not change?

Give it a rest, you used the rules to control the number of people who
would
be eligible. Then you changed the rules to get people who wouldn't have
been eligible under the old rules be allowed to bid, but kept it a secret
to
control the bidding process.

All you guys had to do was post the new rules when you changed them, after
saying they wouldn't change. You kept it a secret so people who couldn't
bid under the rules would be able to bid. Plain and simple.

It's been quite entertaining to watch all the back and forth, just come
out
and say you were controlling who would and wouldn't be allowed to bid by
having over restrictive rules up front, thus limiting the number of people
who thought they would qualify, then changing it without telling anybody
because "We Tulsans are proud of Tulsa and are protective of each other!"

It's no huge deal, just admit you changed the rules to allow a bid that
wouldn't have been allowed in, you just forgot to tell anybody. The rules
were of course silly to start with, but that's another issue.




"SC posner" wrote in message
m...

If anyone was really interested they could have asked for a copy of the
"new" RFB. I would have gladly sent them a copy.

If I remember correctly, very few copies were asked for. All that asked
received a copy. Not all the TA's that asked for the RFB submitted bids.
But we were fortunate that 4 TA's saw the RFB and took the time to bid.

Chip

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message
...
In article , sheree
wrote:

i would have posted the itineraries, amenities etc to be voted on
without
the names of the TA's. that way the best itinerary would be chosen with
or
without regard to the TA

That was discussed and we decided to ID the TA's.

The reasoning being that if the vote went to a TA that was unpopular,
then those that voted wouldn't book when the time came. Whether that
is totally right or wrong doesn't matter, it was the overall feeling of
the committee that it was certainly a possibility.

Lloyd

That make sense.

--Tom

In article , Tom &
Linda wrote:

"Mike Cordelli" wrote in message
...
I guarantee you if I was committee chariman I wouldn't change the rules
mid
stream without telling anybody.


But then I didn't see you vounteer.

In fact, it seems nobody did, and Lloyd was ultimately asked and then said
yes.

Lloyd and I have teased each other over the years, but I will give him full
credit for what he's doing.

He inherited a concept that was spiriling into problems. It had gotten to
the point where few TA were even interested. Most likely because the
committees in the past were made up of people who were very astute to TA
pricing and practices. They probably made it difficult for a TA to make any
money on the group.

Add to that the bickering that has gone on over the years for "various"
reasons.

Lloyd is taking a different stab at it. He's letting the people vote. He's
not forcing anyone to pick a TA that they're not comfortable with. Nor is
he forcing anyone to go.

I give Lloyd an "Atta Boy" for trying.

Hell... I may even think about going this time.

--Tom

Damn! Either I'm doing something right, or I'm dreaming. Tom on a
GGC, DAMN! G

Thanks for the kind words, ain't been many of them today.

Lloyd

"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , Judy O'Connor
wrote:

So I take it you are accepting the chairmanship?

Judy ---In Mike's own mind he's right

What Mike has posted on this seems on the mark to me. I think he is
right and probably many others think Mike is right.


Whether he's right or wrong... he didn't step up to the plate when it
mattered. No one volunteered. They asked Lloyd. He said yes. Now it's
Lloyds show.

At least Lloyd is letting everyone vote.

I don't see any downside. It's not like Lloyd picked one option and
everyone has to live with it, or not go.

--Tom

Tom & Linda wrote:


But then I didn't see you vounteer.

In fact, it seems nobody did, and Lloyd was ultimately asked and then said
yes.

Lloyd and I have teased each other over the years, but I will give him full
credit for what he's doing.

He inherited a concept that was spiriling into problems. It had gotten to
the point where few TA were even interested. Most likely because the
committees in the past were made up of people who were very astute to TA
pricing and practices. They probably made it difficult for a TA to make any
money on the group.

Add to that the bickering that has gone on over the years for "various"
reasons.

Lloyd is taking a different stab at it. He's letting the people vote. He's
not forcing anyone to pick a TA that they're not comfortable with. Nor is
he forcing anyone to go.

I give Lloyd an "Atta Boy" for trying.

Hell... I may even think about going this time.

--Tom

Good for you, Tom. I give a lot of credit to Lloyd for stepping
up to the plate. He is an honest and sensible person, and has a
fine group of people on his committee.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if all those who are totally uninterested
in the GGC concept would just keep their fingers
from running away on the keyboards? If they're not interested, why
even bother to make waves?

I'm ready to vote now! Heck, maybe I'm even ready to book!
Hope to see you on the next GGC.

Ermalee ---hates all the ****in' 'n moanin'........oops! did I say
that? :-)



Please indicate when you as the committee posted the change in the rules
after the February post when you said you were not changing them? If I'm
wrong and it was posted, I will be the first to apologize for my remarks.
You posted at least a hundred times you were accepting bids and the rest,
funny how the change in the rules never made it.

Maybe, just maybe, if you did things up front and on the up and up, there
wouldn't be so much fingerpointing and bitching and the rest.

By the way, HTML has no place in newsgroups.

I love the way the committee is now circling the wagons to protect their
own.




"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
Mike, next year you can be committee chairman. I nominate you as of now.
Then you can listen to all the bitching and whining and finger-pointing.
I
don't care what anybody thinks, we on the committee know what went on. If
any of you, and I mean any, had volunteered for this committee, you would
be
able to see we did not do anything underhanded, we didn't hide anything
from
anyone. We chose to change the RFB to allow more people to bid and sadly
not many did.

I know, in your own mind you see it differently.


Judy----Waiting to see how Mike Cordelli does next year as committee
chairman

Mike Cordelli wrote:

You guys are totally cracking me up.

Lets take a step back to, Oh, I don't know, February 2.

The following was posted he

-----start
The current requirements for bidding are :

1. Be a participating member in RTC
2. Be a full-time travel agent
3. Be owner, principal or can get permission to commit the agency to a
contract.

I do not think those will change as the committee seems to be in agreement
on those items.
-----end

See that last line? The part about "I do not think these will change as
the
committee seems to be in agreement on those items? Now the committee
comes
back to the group and says it's the fault of the people they didn't ask
for
the "new" terms after they (the committee) stated they would not change?

Give it a rest, you used the rules to control the number of people who
would
be eligible. Then you changed the rules to get people who wouldn't have
been eligible under the old rules be allowed to bid, but kept it a secret
to
control the bidding process.

All you guys had to do was post the new rules when you changed them, after
saying they wouldn't change. You kept it a secret so people who couldn't
bid under the rules would be able to bid. Plain and simple.

It's been quite entertaining to watch all the back and forth, just come
out
and say you were controlling who would and wouldn't be allowed to bid by
having over restrictive rules up front, thus limiting the number of people
who thought they would qualify, then changing it without telling anybody
because "We Tulsans are proud of Tulsa and are protective of each other!"

It's no huge deal, just admit you changed the rules to allow a bid that
wouldn't have been allowed in, you just forgot to tell anybody. The rules
were of course silly to start with, but that's another issue.




"SC posner" wrote in message
m...

If anyone was really interested they could have asked for a copy of the
"new" RFB. I would have gladly sent them a copy.

If I remember correctly, very few copies were asked for. All that asked
received a copy. Not all the TA's that asked for the RFB submitted bids.
But we were fortunate that 4 TA's saw the RFB and took the time to bid.

Chip

Hi Erm,

Hoping to cruise with you again on this GGC. We sure had a GREAT table in
2004, didn't we ?

I too wish all the "p & m" would just go away.

We (the committee) are currently working out the process and rules for the
voting and the bids should be accessible for viewing on the website within
the next few days. We still had some minor wording to correct and need to
assemble the different bids so as to make them easier to compare, before
voting.

Tom, I also hope you decide to come !

Tobieon an Island in the Pacific

"Ermalee" "ermalee wrote in message Hell... I may even
think about going this time.

--Tom

Good for you, Tom. I give a lot of credit to Lloyd for stepping
up to the plate. He is an honest and sensible person, and has a
fine group of people on his committee.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if all those who are totally uninterested
in the GGC concept would just keep their fingers
from running away on the keyboards? If they're not interested, why
even bother to make waves?

I'm ready to vote now! Heck, maybe I'm even ready to book!
Hope to see you on the next GGC.

Ermalee ---hates all the ****in' 'n moanin'........oops! did I say
that? :-)

In article , Tom &
Linda wrote:

I don't see any downside. It's not like Lloyd picked one option and
everyone has to live with it, or not go.

I wonder why he didn't post the change in rules? he made plenty of
other posts soliciting bids. There might have been more options if the
change had been posted here.

No doubt you are pleased that your travel agent, John S. is one of the
options. No way in the world I would ever book with him.

--
Charles

What Mike has posted on this seems on the mark to me. I think he is
right and probably many others think Mike is right.

Maybe for the first time (in at least 4 years), but I have to agree in this
case...