My head hurts after reading all that!

As much as I have stayed out of this fiasco (and lets not mince words, we are dealing with a fiasco), I dont particularily trust on-line stores or sellers as a ground rule. Making purchases that are sight unseen is disconcerting to me. Its imperative that the seller of these goods displays particular traits in order to establish a reputation so that trust and blind faith can be established in an online store.

This was not happening with regards to this matter. Flagrant mood swings are a personality trait that we as outsiders cannot control. What we can control however is how a seller will do their business via this website. As BonnevilleClub staff, our primary concern is the 3000+ members that have come and gone or who will join us as we grow. We will not recommend any online business unless we collectively feel that it will be a benefit to the 3000+ members. In this case, we COLLECTIVELY felt that PPF was not the right choice for our members.

Alan Ralston may say that this an "administration vendetta" against him and PPF, when in fact, its a case of "you reap what you sow".

I stand by our decisions in this matter.

Thank you for giving us this insight into this continuing saga. Clearly the Administrators and Moderators have endeavoured to deal with this fairly over the course of time, posting this info ads to the transparency of the sound decisions made as result.

On this basis, I can see no reason why BC would in any way want to endorse such a vendor and appreciate the oversight the staff has given this issue.

Cheers,

Personally, I have had no dealings with him even before this happened because of his obvious hot-headedness. Such moodiness and business do not mix. Here'* a classic example of a business owner who is hot-headed, and how the general public (over 100,000 people now) view it:

http://forum.1320stangs.com/index.php?showtopic=5555

Now, here, his hot-headedness caused him to do something that Al has not yet done. But, and this is my point, hot-headed people are unpredictable, and I do not give my money to unpredictable people.

If that makes me a sheep, then....baaaaaaaa.......

Good point!

Interesting...

I'm of two minds here.

First, it'* my belief that Alan, just as anyone here, should be allowed to put specific things up for sale in the parts for sale area. I also think he should be allowed to post and when answering questions or have a related item for sale that may fix a problem he should be able to post that.

Secondly, I do not think that as a revoked vendor he should be allowed to use the forum to promote his online store in anyway (sig, posts, links). I know our vendor lists is limited and that all care should be taken to try and help those that help us but at some point you have to draw the line. When a vendor stops responding to emails, pms, phone calls, knocks on the door, and rocks with messages attached thrown through windows then they need to be re-evaluated. This includes Ty at DP.

Vendor status is a great thing and vendors can make a lot of money if they have good product and treat us fair. It should not be used to hold things over on BC or its members and it should not be used to fleece us. I think BC is coming into an age where a lot of its members are going to be more performance oriented and will be looking to spend money with a vendor. In order to protect us, and to help the vendors I think our whole vendor idea should be revamped. I think vendors should have a Vendor Screenname where they can use it to post products, links, ideas, specials etc... and a user screenname where they can discuss topics as normal. I alos think Vendors should be held to higher standard and should be evaluated every 6 months or whatever timeframe is agreed upon.

You may love him, you may hate him, you may not know him, but you cannot deny the business savy, customer support, custome relations, and work ethic of Scott Cook and INTENSE. I think many of our vendors can take a page from his book.

Well said, Todd.

We do have some issues to work out in the future. Your comments all ring true. BC is much bigger now, and carries a certain amount of credibility. We've hesitated to create a vendor rank in the past, as it appears we condone or 'bless' their actions. We are considering changes to this now, and it may have to include an accepted contract with each vendor. Everything on the table at once.

I agree fully, that Scott Cook and Intense are great examples of what we're looking for. Not necessarily in the products they sell, but more specifically in the way they do business as a whole.

The PPF issue is officially over. Administrative action has been taken, and we'll take what we've learned from this experience, and make the best of it for the future of BC. This topic will remain open for others to share what'* on their minds on this issue.

My hats off to the admins for taking care of this situation behind the scenes, protecting the members, and looking out for the best intersets of everyone here.

The decision should only be made by the admins...thats what they are for. I applaud the decision to release parts of the conversations however, so we the members can see what really happened, and how it was handled.

Thanks admins, guess Im a sheep too. "Baaaaa"!

He said that not a single member from BC has purchased and item from his store. I have been to his site, and although there a alot of things I would like to have off that site, I found that his prices were to high... Also, I have a hot head to sometimes, like we all do, but Most of us are not business owners. It is kinda hard to trust a vendor who has a hothead, and when they get mad they take something that they said the would give ( 5% discount). Thats wrong... I respect the staffs desicion to revoke Al'* vendor liscence... and as for him saying he won't be back... thats his decision... He knows that he is still allowed to post, but he chooses not to be a part of this forum, thats his choice, and if he wants to be like that, good for him....

Just my opinion!

Bear in mind the information and dialogue that Bill posted was archived information dating back over a few months.

This information is only posted after serious discretion, most offline commentary remains that way...offline, unless it impacts the membership negatively. That happened in this situation.