2010 new Navistar

[Robin_M]

Good points, MM. You said it much more succinctly than I. I was, in my usual verbose way, simply trying to make a point that, in my opinion. Navistar has acted responsibly with regard to their stock holders. And that is who they should answer to. I think that this conversation is extremely interesting, and I hope that we can continue it, while keeping our emotions in check.

Saving a slot here...

Giving what you said is legally correct, then we should feel that it is OK with the way that Navistar took over its partners assets without any of the obligations as they try to create that old warm and family thing that Monaco once had. I believe that if you compare the difference in chapter 11 sell offs of Monaco and Fleetwood you can see the difference between taking low verses high road in such matters. They took the low road while acting like they took the high road by promising to take care of the things like outstanding warranties.

Mike,

You make a good point about Navistar and MCC being partners in the chassis company (Custom Chassis Products, LLC). I think that company was formed about a year before the chapter 11 filing. I don't recall if Roadmaster chassis was part of that company or not. Do you know for sure? Legally, however, it's moot because about the same time as Monaco's Chapter 11 filing, Custom Chassis Products filed Chapter 7 to liquidate it's assets. That would have been expected, since half the parnership was defunct.

As for Fleetwood, that is a little different situation, IMO. The assets of their RV division was purchased, not by an established manufacturer, but by an industrial investment fund, whom I understand did agree to honor existing warranties. I'm guessing that their decision was probably driven by a strong desire to turn the company over in the near future for a profit. I'm not sure if that qualifies for "the high road" or not.

Regarding Navistar, I do not recall their ever agreeing to honor MCC warranties. At least I never read anything of that nature, or heard it from any dealers I've spoken with. Am I wrong about that?

[Jim Stewart]

I guess I smoked from the Monaco Momma Pipe this morning.

I am not angry because I got burnt, i did not.

We purchased a 3 year old coach and I replaced the trailing arms prior to failure, personal decision.

We like our Safari and are happy with it.

I am glad that Monaco LLC is in operation and that I can get parts if needed, maybe!

Would I buy another coach from Monaco LLC, absolutely not!

Honoring existing warranties would have cost Monaco LLC several million dollars. The recall for the trailing arms along would have cost Monaco LLC at a minimum of $10 million. The now surfacing problem of underrated and over advertised axle ratings could have cost Monaco LLC significantly more than $100 million.

Did Navistar make a good business decision not to honor warranties, etc, probably, yes!

Now the smoke has worn off!

Did the current management of Monaco LLC know about these problems while it was still just Monaco and continue to ship product and mislead people, yes.

It that moral or acceptable by most honest people, no!

Will I buy from sleazy people, no! Are they sleazy people, yes!

Now back to some more smoking, thanks Momma!

[Robin_M]

Jim,

You raise an interesting point about the trailing arm issue. Wasn't that a recall in 2005? Has the issue resurfaced recently?

[Jim Stewart]

Yes, not only has it resurfaced, it never really went away. Monaco's replacment part is also failing and they continued to use it. They are failing almost daily on old and newer Coaches with the RR4R Chassis all of which have the defective trailing arms. It probably is over 5000 Coaches total. At 3 grand a whack, that's a big number.

[cb5300]

Originally Posted by Robin_M

Charles,

It's not a matter of feeling "warm and fuzzy". It's simply a matter of practicality, with a bit of "water under the bridge" thrown in perhaps. Regarding the service centers, MCC closed those. We all miss the service centers and feel for the people who were employed there. But, remember that Navistar did NOT buy MCC, they simply bought their assets (including the name). Navistar had absolutely no obligation, moral or otherwise, to follow in MCC's footsteps and reopen the service centers.

As for the warranties, Navistar would have been hugely negligent on behalf of their stockholders to have honored warranty claims from the defunct MCC. You probably know the approximate number of coaches subject to warranty failures, but it comes down to only the sales that were made, in the down market, within 9 months or so prior to the filing of the bankruptcy. Everyone buying a coach prior to that got the lion's share of their warranty items taken care of. Everyone buying a coach after that, knew that they were buying without a warranty and received appropriate discounts. We aren't talking about all that many coaches in the grand scheme of Monaco history. The BIG problem with Navistar assuming warranties of the defunct MCC, was that, not only did they have no moral obligation to do so (because they didn't by the company, only the assets), but to have done so would have potentially opened them to a huge liability for the whole line of Monaco coaches that are still on the road - hundreds of thousands of them. In todays litigious society, with no effective tort restraints, they would have been extremely ill-advised to have opened themselves up to that much liability. (That is the main reason one buys the assets of a company, and not the company itself.) No reasonable business owner, or board of directors, would have exposed their company and stock holders to that liability.

There are those who say, "Yes but what about customer loyalty?" We must remember however that all of us are NOT, at this point, Navistar customers. We are customers of MCC, an entity that simply no longer exists. Navistar has no obligation, moral or otherwise, to help any MCC customer with a warranty claim (though I understand that they have helped some on a case-by-case basis).

Lastly, Ron is correct. Aside from your unresolved warranty issue, you have one of the nicest coaches that the old MCC ever made. When and if you go to sell it, or trade it in, you will realize far greater value for it because Navistar stepped up and salvaged the Monaco name.

All this said, Charles, I'm not "preaching" to you here. I realize that you are one of the recent buyers (in that 9-month period) who feels "hosed" (to use your word). I sympathize with that, and furthermore, I have to admit to you, that in your shoes, I may also feel bitter. I cannot, and do not, blame you for that. But even that does not change the facts when it comes down to business and survival. The acrid truth of the matter is simply that Navistar had no other reasonable choices available to them. Again, I wish them success and hope that we'll see new coaches on the road with the name "Monaco" or "HR" for years to come.

This is where we have a difference of opinions, I look at what Fleetwood did when they filed, and they made sure that their customers were taken care of, Monaco didn't do that, and THAT is what separates a good company from a GREAT one...Also Navistar got Monaco for a "song", and it was a very short song at that...As I posted before, I left the hearings smelling a "rat."

As far as trade in value goes, don't even go down that road, I try to trade for a new coach in July and what I was offered for trade on my Signature was insulting. I guess now that I've got a new roof (better built than when it was new I might add) and I've gotten most of the "bugs" worked out, I'll keep this unit for a while...at least until I can work out a deal on on a new Marathon..

[Robin_M]

Originally Posted by cb5300

This is where we have a difference of opinions, I look at what Fleetwood did when they filed, and they made sure that their customers were taken care of, Monaco didn't do that, and THAT is what separates a good company from a GREAT one.

Charles,

I'm not sure that one can fairly compare the sale of the assets of Monaco and Fleetwood when one was purchased by a transportation manufacturing company who plans to continue the model line indefinately, and the other was purchased by an industrial investment fund who most likely hopes to turn the company over. Obvously there were seperate motives driving those deals. I think the tort liability potential would have been much greater for Navistar, if they had "opened the door" to any degree of responsibilty for past products.

Also Navistar got Monaco for a "song", and it was a very short song at that...As I posted before, I left the hearings smelling a "rat."

You may have something there. Hard to say for sure. You are absolutely correct about the "song", and I'm beginning to wonder a little if what you smelled was indeed a rat, now that you bring it up. While it would be improper to speculate on the connection, there was definitely an unusual closeness between the two companies; not only with respect to the shared chassis company, but also when you consider that Dan Ustian, Chairman and CEO of Navistar, was on the Monaco Board of Directors. Obvously there was an unusual degree of close contact between the uppermost management of the two companies. Again, however, without a lot more information, too much speculation in that direction may not be warranted.

[cb5300]

Robin, Just keep this in mind... When Fleetwood filed Chapter 11 they filed in such a way that warranty work could continue and their dealer network would continue to get paid for work performed...Monaco didn't, they just left their warranty work go to the "dogs." Might be legal, but it sure wasn't right.

MM, as far as the "peace pipe" goes, sorry... I don't smoke!

[DocUSAF]

OK for all you hawks out there...found this in the Aug '09 edition of FMCA.....
Kay's been busy...Quote: We’re very pleased with the level of progress we’ve made in getting our manufacturing, sales and support operations up and running both in Oregon and Indiana,” said Kay Toolson, president of Monaco RV. “Building the highest quality recreational vehicles at the most competitive prices in accordance with current market demand is a critical focus for our company."
Monaco RV sales teams have been working with potential dealer partners for the last few months. “It was important for us to work diligently to sign dealers that we felt would be a good fit for us and would remain committed long-term,” said Mike Snell, senior vice president of sales and product development. “We are focused on ensuring that our customers have the best buying and servicing experience possible, and we believe the dealers we have signed on so far will do just that.”
One such dealer is Paul Evert’s RV Country in Fresno, Calif., a dealership that had enjoyed a fruitful relationship with the former Monaco Coach Corporation since 1992. “We’ve built a strong clientele of diehard Monaco owners over the years,” said Curt Curtis, partner and vice president of Paul Evert’s RV Country. “We’re comfortable working with the people currently at Monaco RV and we’re a firm believer in the products they build.”
Monaco RV expects to sign additional dealers in the coming months to add to its growing roster......
I'm just wondering if any of these are former Monaco RV dealers..... maybe these are the new buy direct factory guys with no exposure....with huge factory to dealer cash incentives/discounts...Wow, hope monaco will post the new dealership listing on line ASAP....Maybe I can upgrade/trade for a new monaco tag axle with IFS...

[Drifter]

If Monaco thinks that they have a good partner in the likes of Paul Evert’s RV Country, then they are really having trouble with signing dealers. Paul Evert’s RV Country has no idea what service is and they work hard to sell a coach one time to there customers, because believe me you will never ever let your shadow cross there door ever after doing business with them. They are the lowest of low when it comes to shady dealers.

I suppose you may think what could they have done to get this kind of response from a customer. How about if you bought a new coach, took deliver and the motor blew up after 8 miles and twenty minutes down the road and you call them back in a panic and they blow you off. Is that enough for you!

If this is the kind of partners they aline themselves with then I was right all along about them taking the low road and not caring about there customers.

[DocUSAF]

Wow Drifter......really sorry you got hosed....up, down and all over it would appear....Monaco listed "Paul Evert’s RV Country" as a dealership focused on providing customers with "the best customer buying and servicing experience possible"....seems like "birds of a feather do flock together"...didn't know they also left fresh droppings on previous owners shoulders....
Guess if RV LLC ever actually publishes the complete listing of new dealerships nationwide, we'll all know a bit more info....and find more happy owners.
Guess RV LLC sales and public relations department wasn't counting of Hawks like you actually patrolling the Monaco web high-ways for these type of new product dealerships...Evert's web site has several new model RV LLC pusher units.. Wonder how he plans to pitch a factory warranty and service plan to new customers...Maybe new customers will never read these threads!... I'm sure that dog won't hunt!...Let 'er buck!

[loranimal]

From what I heard Demartini will no longer be a Monaco dealer. They are now selling Fleetwoods. Maybe things will change, you never know!

I didn't really care for Paul Evert's attitude when they were at last years rally in Salem.

Carl

[DocUSAF]

Carl, I also heard somewhere that Demartini (who was a really big fish/dealership in Elkhart IN.) got hosed by Monaco ... Hope to see that new RV LLC national dealership roster from Kay,....especially the dealers who were with Monaco before things went bust....maybe it's all factory direct new sales programs.. I still want a crack at getting one of those tag axles with IFS...

[Jim Stewart]

Originally Posted by DocUSAF

Wow Drifter......really sorry you got hosed....up, down and all over it would appear....Monaco listed "Paul Evert’s RV Country" as a dealership focused on providing customers with "the best customer buying and servicing experience possible"....seems like "birds of a feather do flock together"...didn't know they also left fresh droppings on previous owners shoulders....
Guess if RV LLC ever actually publishes the complete listing of new dealerships nationwide, we'll all know a bit more info....and find more happy owners.
Guess RV LLC sales and public relations department wasn't counting of Hawks like you actually patrolling the Monaco web high-ways for these type of new product dealerships...Evert's web site has several new model RV LLC pusher units.. Wonder how he plans to pitch a factory warranty and service plan to new customers...Maybe new customers will never read these threads!... I'm sure that dog won't hunt!...Let 'er buck!

I actually found this website by doing a search on my potential MH purchase. If you do a search on almost any topic that is discussed on this forum you will get a hit. Those hits can be good or bad for Monaco. For instance, if I were to list certain words in strings in this post, it would get hits on a search for those terms.

Monaco LLC, Monaco RV, Monaco Problems, Monaco Recalls, Roadmaster, Roadmaster Problems, Workhorse Recalls, Workhorse Chassis Problems, Monaco and trailing arms problems, Monaco and Navistar and warranty, Safari problems, Beaver Problems, Holiday Rambler problems, Monaco Reviews.

Now here's the test, do a search and see if it shows this post.

Jim

[Drifter]

Mr. Stewart, you most certainly have hidden talents. Thank you