What a stupid and unfortunate chain of events to this cluster "fudge."
Let's see if I get this right:
The race is ran - organized and orchestrated - by one organization.
They place a supporting organization front and center as a co-sponsor.
The supporting organization has no authority over the organization and orchestration of the event; they only provide support, and object to being identified as having more to do with it than they actually have.
This is known as responsibility without authority, and is a really bad place to be in.
The actual responsible organization then objects to sole responsibility and says they will cancel the whole event if the supporting one doesn't accept an untentable position.
They cancel the event.
The organization that supported them through volunteers and PR is blamed for the cancellation.
Uh, what?
This is no different than if Coke or Sporty's or any other company provided goods or services either gratis or at a reduced rate and found that they had gotten top billing as being responsible for the event. They'd probably do more than send an email - they'd send a cease and desist letter via registered mail or courier.
If the race organizers had put the EAA as a supporting organization along with all the other vendors there would probably not be an issue. Calling it the AirVenture Cup and featuring the EAA front and center puts the EAA firmly on the blame line for anything that goes wrong. Personally I think letting any event where the EAA isn't directly in charge be called an AirVenture anything is dangerous territory, as it's a trademarked brand for the organization.
Reply With Quote