I have been an AMA member for many years (approx 20 total and continually for the last 14 or so). I have seem AMA do many great things regarding regulation of motorcycles and where we can ride them.

I have also seen first hand how AMA can mess up a GOOD thing.

In the late 80s & early 90s I was a AMA-CCS amateur road racer. I really enjoyed racing and working with AMA doing it. Then the split and AMA-CCS pretty much dried up for a few years. The races were still held but not as well organized or funded nor did they attract contingency sponsors. It made racing much more difficult for me.

Not only did the racing events suffer, all AMA members suffered when AMA settled with Mr. Edmondson for approx $3 mil.

Fast forward to today, AMA is trying to toss a KNOWN GOOD RACING SERIES in exchange for a start-up race series without any sure participation of:
Major manufacturers
Major sponsors
Major teams/talent
Etc.

What is more, you are trying to do this with the “assistance” of an UNPROVEN race promotor that lacks the resources (radio, TV, experience,
infrastructure, international links, etc) of the promotor you are replacing (CCE).

This seems mis-guided, not very smart and generally naive.

AMA should focus on what it is best at: Sanctioning races, not promoting them, and working with legislators and in Courts to preserve our rights to ride.

George B. Leavell, Esq.
Patent Attorney
Gilroy, CA
AMA#489167



I’ll keep this brief.

I thought that the AMA’s mission was to advance motorcycling? Not to profit from it but to advance it by promoting sporting events and influencing the government for the benefit of motorcyclists.

Given this I cannot understand the AMA’s choice to splinter its most successful and visible racing series, AMA Supercross, by splitting with PACE/SFX/Clear Channel. This is a partnership that has just plain worked over the years to the benefit of everyone. The sport is more popular and profitable than ever which draws more people into the sport of motorcycling.

I’ve read the press releases and the only thing that I can understand is that the AMA is doing this out of greed. They want a bigger piece of the pie from the series promoter. In the process they are going down the CART/IRL path and will wind up killing the goose that lays the golden egg. How can you possibly allow Scott Hollingsworth to pitch this proposal as if it is a good thing?!

Please rethink the path you are going down. The only people that seem to see it as a good thing are at JAM and inside the AMA/Paradama offices.

Allan M. Carter



I doubt much will come of this letter, from one lowly member to the president of a massive organization, but I am compelled to write in the
hope that my small voice, if combined with others, may be heard. I have been riding motorcycles more than half my life and have worked in the motorcycle industry for the past 10 years. Only in the past couple years did I realize how important it is that I join and support the AMA to help my passion and My Industry, Motorcycling, preserve its freedoms and stay alive.

It was after I joined the AMA that I also started paying attention to the underhanded dealings the AMA is involved with. My friends and customers all believed that the AMA was a right and proper organization and that the Edmondson affair was a unique occurance. We thought that the coverups and lies were isolated to a couple people, not the AMA’s actual ethics and core values. With the latest news of the Supercross dealings and now the appearance of fighting the newly elected Directors, our trust in the AMA’s leadership is faltering. With another 30 or 40 years of riding (and potentially paying dues) to go in my life, all of our hopes lie in an honest and openly run AMA. The members want altruism and member oriented service, not government style bureaucracy revolving around keeping one’s self in office.

Let’s hope for a bright two wheeled future in America.

Respectfully,
Chris Kelley
#433870



In regards to the 2003 supercross fiasco, try as might I cannot understand why the AMA is insisting on continuing to do a deal with Jamsports. As a ten year member of the AMA I have been witness to the Edmondson debacle and very nearly cancelled my membership over it.

In light of the overwhelming crowds seen at the first three meetings this year it defies logic that you at the AMA want to start all over again with what to mind is an unknown quantity. Perhaps you have been offered a larger slice of the cake and wish to offset the cost of the Edmondson case.

When I joined the AMA I was told that it was run as a non-profit organization for the members by the members. Since joining I have found that nothing can be further from the truth. I feel that this matter should be taken to the members and ask them to vote on this issue. This must be the democratic way. From what I have read there seems to be a great deal of money at stake here and before the directors and race directors go throwing this around their needs to be some accountability by the people making these decisions.

Yours Sincerely,
Neville Hall-Reace



Why split from Clear Channel just when the series is gaining such popularity. any split will be almost necessarily divisive, confusing, and damaging to the sport’s credibility. This will affect fans, racers, and manufacturers, as well as the AMA. Please reconsider before you permanently damage the sport of motorcycle
racing in the U.S.

Thanks,
Pete McAndrews




I would like to take this opportunity to strongly urge you to abandon your consideration of the wholly unproved Jam Sports over CCE for
Supercross sanction.

While there are many reasons I feel the Jam Sports alliance would be a bad move (far too many to list here), the one overriding concern I have
is the impact on the riders and the unnecessary damage a split like this would do to the sport.

By making teams choose between the two series you will not only dilute the fields entered in each event, but also lower the level of competition in these events. This hurts not only the riders but the fans, the sponsors and everyone else involved.

Please remember that the AMA exists to promote and support the sport, not to divide and harm the sport. We look to you to do the right thing for the sport, and above all, decide based on the wants and needs of the membership.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Flack
AMA Member



I want to take this opportunity to express my concern regarding the stance the AMA has taken with the Supercross series and its alienation of Clear Channel.

Rather than go into long details, I will simply state that I believe that it is EXTREMELY poor judgment to jettison Clear Channel as a partner when Supercross is on the verge of becoming a well-exposed sport within this country.

The AMA has a very functional purpose in this country. It protects both the rights of riders and sanctioning rules for competition. Let’s keep it that way.

The AMA has wasted enough of its members’ money as it is, never mind the disservice it has committed through its extremely poor promotion of Road Racing and other activities.

Clear Channel is poised to devastate the AMA if you continue on this course and ensure that the AMA and Clear Channel can only exist as competitors.

The history of AMA handling promotion is littered with lawsuits and accusations as well as lost money. Clear Channel’s history speaks for
itself.

I like many others have recently joined the AMA. John Ulrich, Kevin Schwantz, and Jeff Nash represent what will continue to happen if you do not take the best interest of ALL motorcyclists seriously.

We are on the eve of seeing motorcycling become as serious as a sport here in the US as it is in Europe.

When I talk to shop owners, they are pleasantly surprised how apparel (leather jackets, gloves, helmets, etc.) and accessories are actually selling. They are getting in customers that are more conscious to safety and products.

My experience in being a manager (1989-1992) in a shop was that you could stock the premium apparel and accessories, but you were wasting “floor money” because the general motorcyclist was seasonal, impulsive, and not very knowledgeable within the sport.

So I believe we have a precedent here to grow on which is; motorcycling in this country is taking the “next step”. The consumer rather than the industry is driving this next step. Now it is time for the industry to react appropriately.

I do not think it is in the best interest for the AMA to:

1) Promote races or have significant say in the function of promoting. Having lobbyists in Washington or in regional government is one thing, but government is not a competitive industry. Leave promotion to those that are successful at what they do AND have successful history within the requested area of promotion expertise. As I mentioned, we are on the eve of a “motorcycle evolution” in this country. Let’s not blow it.

2) If the AMA will simply concentrate on regulation, safety, and sanctioning-type issues I believe the general motorcycle community will be better served in the long run.

Lastly, The AMA has a significant amount of resources that have been provided by the members of the AMA. I hope you do not take likely the responsibility you have. If you ever have to answer a strategy question with, “I think” or “I believe” then you better have one hell of a track record of success within the proposed sector. I recommend that if you cannot answer a question with “I know”, then give that responsibility to someone that can. Misjudgment on the AMA’s part is a waste of members’ funds.

Thank you for your time.
Marcus McBain



There are a number of things that concern me regarding the current AMA strategy and management, especially in the area of AMA-sanctioned motorcycle racing. In my opinion a major change in AMA direction is sorely needed. Some of my concerns are:

1. I don’t want Supercross split up into two competing series as the result of a pissing match between Hollingsworth and SFX/CCE. Unfortunately, AMA seems to have set itself upon a course that, unless turned around quickly, will inevitably lead to another IRL/CART disaster.

2. I don’t want the current Board to rush through a bunch of crazy stuff before the newly elected Directors are inducted.

3. I don’t want my right to vote for qualified candidates for Director/Trustee taken away by 23 Corporate members who already control 6 of 12 Board seats.

Thank you for taking the time to hear my concerns.

Sincerely,
Ron Kunzelman
AMA #469474



As a member of your association I feel compelled to comment on two proposed actions being taken by the AMA. The first is the feuding with CCE and the second is the proposal to limit future elections for the AMA.

On the first, although access to hard numbers with AMA business dealings are hard to come by it is rapidly becoming apparenty that the AMA is willing to cut off its nose to spite CCE. Forgoing FIM affiliation is fraught with danger in an attempt to hold a couple of dirtbike races which will, apparently, be largely overshadowed by the offering from CCE. The latest lawsuit from OMS clearly illustrates that much of the dealings on this issue are being ruled by personality and not sound business judgment. With FIM affiliation I would be more nervous about CCE starting a membership motorcycle rights organization than the loss of phantom opportunity profits from an JamSports Supercross series.

The second, I have a long abiding affinity for democracy. Democracy is only as powerful as the integrity of the process. Elections which are only honored if an oligarchy approves the results are not free elections, they are a mockery.

Sincerely,
Sam Fleming
Washington DC
AMA member 506120



I do not want to see want Supercross split up into two competing series as the result of a pissing match between Hollingsworth and SFX/CCE, I don’t want the current Board to rush through a bunch of crazy stuff before the newly elected Directors are inducted, and I don’t want my right to vote for qualified candidates for Director (Trustee) taken away by 23 Corporate members who already control 6 of 12 Board seats.

At the very least, You should take another shot at getting back together with CCE for 2003 and beyond, with negotiations handled by somebody other than the two guys who have handled it so far.

Brandon Heidepriem



I wanted to add my voice to the other members’ who are against the pending AMA split with CCE. There doesn’t appear to be any evidence that this will be anything other than a bad thing for the AMA and Supercross. I strongly urge you to reconsider this move.

Further, the recent attempt to thwart the election of three new AMA Directors can only be seen as a slap in the face to members. I, and many, many others, voted to elect a qualified candidate to represent me. I take a dim view of my vote being ignored in this fashion. Let’s keep the election process clean and professional, the members are watching.

Jeff Hunter
AMA Member #693145



I am becoming more and more disturbed by what I am hearing and seeing happening in the AMA hierarchy. Is this still an organization of the members, for the members? The latest is the news that Northwest Trustee Dal Smilie has proposed changes to the Trustee election process that would virtually eliminate anyone that the current officeholders (those still in office prior to the newly elected trustees taking their places) don’t want, even after seeing the results of the latest election. These results should be telling them something. The membership is NOT happy with what’s happening. Why do we have to hear what is going on from outside sources? Is the current regime afraid we might react badly? I think it’s too late to prevent that.

As an example let’s look at the handling of the Supercross situation. Why split with Clear Channel, when they obviously have the best connections to the venues, have done a fantastic job of developing/promoting the series, and the AMA has been making huge amounts of money in the deal? As it stands now, the AMA is out in the cold at almost all the venues for 2003 and has lost a fabulous source of revenue. Why has the AMA done this? Is it personal on Mr. Hollingsworth’s part? If so, take it outside the AMA. That’s my money you’re wasting! It would be far better spent working on government issues, improving racer safety and developing the sport, than trying to settle petty personal squables. If you people can’t be professional and clear headed in handling the association’s business dealings, then resign and let the MEMBERSHIP elect people who will. It’s time for a new AMA Pro Racing CEO. Mr. Hollingsworth should step down before he bankrupts the AMA.

At this point, the only reason I am still an AMA member is that I want the discounts it affords me, and I still believe in the basic aims of the association. If things continue as they are, I doubt I’ll be the only member who looks for other ways to protect himself and support the sport we love.

Peter Martin
AMA# 390651 (16 yrs)