IAHA/AHRA

Cooperative Efforts Discussions 1988-2001 

In 1988 and 1989, IAHA asked the Registry to participate in planning meetings for IAHA’s new computer system.  Participants in these meetings were Bill Hamilton, EVP, Jim Case, Treasurer, Craig Minnow, MIS Manager, and Barbara Burck, Controller, from IAHA; Ralph Clark, Resident Officer, and Ron Ballantine, IS Director from AHRA; and Steve McCarthy, Independent Consultant.  The recommendations of the consultant included integration of data as follows:  “Integration here also means that we should use the computer data of the Arabian Horse Registry directly, and not try to duplicate and maintain that data as well.”  This integration never occurred mostly due to the fact that the technology did not exist at the time that would allow the two systems to interact and also due to the concern of the Registry over maintaining data integrity.

 In November 1991, representatives from IAHA and the Registry met to discuss promotional ideas that would be used to create a renewed interest in breeding.  It was announced at the November Board meeting that there would be a meeting in January, 1992, to discuss many ideas including better ways to serve the memberships and to save funds.  These meetings brought about the Arabian Amateur Bonanza Program which started in 1993 and ended in 1997 when the Registry declined to fund any further.

 In January,1993, a joint meeting between IAHA and the Registry executive committees occurred to discuss the general issue of inter-organizational support or cross-contracting as described in a letter from Ralph Clark to June Smith on January 11, 1993.  The letter goes on to say that “the initial focus of the meeting was to push forward with such an effort on the Bonanza program alone.  After further discussion, it was agreed that the staff would explore the goal of inter-organizational cooperation and identify all areas where this might be possible”.  A list of issues was provided for discussion purposes which included:

“…Control and Ownership – not important now and will limit creative climate.  We should possibly put ourselves in the mood by remembering that the average Arabian enthusiast wants good service, swift service, reliable information and doesn’t really care whose computer, terminal or department gives it….

…Goal(s) – operational systems that will result in better service to Arabian horse owners at less cost with duplicity eliminated where possible…

…Database Schemes – do they currently support or hinder any cooperative effort?  How can they be altered to make for more compatibility?…”

 In February, 1993, members of the IAHA Executive Committee and staff met with members of the Registry’s Executive Board and staff in Scottsdale.  It was decided that the Registry would take over all recordkeeping for the Bonanza program.  Also decided was to create a task force “..to develop a recommendation for cooperative efforts on administrative tasks between IAHA and the Registry that will accomplish either or both of the following: (1) Increase service, and (2) Decrease Cost.  Such task force was directed to deliver an interim report in 60 days (report due April 19, 1993).  Individuals assigned to the task force are:  Jim Case, M. June Smith, Barbara Burck and Charles Criss from IAHA and Ralph Clark, Jim Garrison and Ron Ballantine from the Registry.”  In addition, it was discussed that the IAHA/AJC contract was up for renewal and the Registry asked that the IAHA membership requirement be dropped from the contract.  IAHA dropped the requirement.

 In March, 1993, members of the IAHA task force issued a study of joint efforts prepared by IAHA staff that provided an analysis of the Arabian horse organizations and areas of duplication.  A preliminary recommendation was made that the most efficient and cost effective method of joint effort between the IAHA and the Registry would be a merger of the two organizations.  A different study written by IAHA staff entitled, Report on Computer and Information Systems Issues, reported the Registry’s concern for data integrity and that both organization’s IS Directors believed there should be only one set of data.  IAHA’s IS Director recommended one database and one data center.  IAHA maintained a purebred database that it had developed off of registration certificates provided by owners entering IAHA programs and events.  The Registry provided a tape in 1992 to assist IAHA updating its purebred database.  If one data center could not be established other options included establishing a real-time link to the Registry’s purebred database or establishing an automated procedure to keep data in the IAHA database current with the Registry’s database.  At the time it was determined that there were no dynamic automated solutions provided by the vendors of either database to establish a real-time link.  Over the next couple of years, the Registry provided one additional tape to IAHA to update IAHA’s purebred database.  It should also be noted here that the issue of system incompatibility was identified in 1989 when IAHA was designing its new system on Oracle software.  The Registry announced to IAHA in January, 1993, that it was converting from Prime to PI/Open (PICK) software which was still not compatible with IAHA’s system.

No reports or studies were presented to IAHA from the Registry on cooperative efforts.  The Registry was not interested in discussing the recommendation of merger but there were continued efforts over the next couple of years to find software that would provide a link between the computer systems.  None was ever identified.

 Also, there is a memo in IAHA’s file from Charles Criss, IAHA IS Director to June Smith and Barbara Burck dated May 20, 1993 expressing frustration and providing information that was not included in the computer report:

  “…Mr. Ballantine’s primary concern was that IAHA should be using the latest purebred data from the AHRA database.  I told him that I agree.  From a data integrity point of view, the best scenario is to have one set of data!  Two of my highest concerns are that of data integrity and data accuracy.  There are some issues that will need to be addressed, for example:  some horse owners will update horse information with IAHA, but not AHRA.  We need to analyze and resolve these kinds of issues.  The best solution would be to have one data center.  That, of course, would be a major step, and would require careful planning and analysis.  We discussed possible methods of IAHA accessing data on the AHRA computer system.  Essentially the methods fell into three categories, 1) using “off the shelf” software from V-Mark, 2) IAHA writing a program to interface with AHRA, and 3) an automated procedure to reconciliate the data kept on IAHA’s database, based on AHRA’s tracking changes which had been made.  We agreed that because of the concern for data integrity, and because of AHRA wishing to minimize the effort required on their part, the third category was not desirable….At the March 25 meeting of the joint committee Mr. Ballantine had no written report.  Regardless of my conversations with Mr. Ballantine, his verbal report was essentially that IAHA did not want to cooperate with AHRA to use their purebred data, and that IAHA was not concerned with data integrity.  No action has been taken, pending the outcome of discussions between AHRA and IAHA”.

 On May 7, 1993, only a little over a month after meetings to discuss co-operative efforts, Garvin Tankersley Jr., AHRA President sent a letter to James O’Neal, IAHA President in which he states:

 “…Our board has agreed to offer database services to other Arabian registries through WAHO.  Several registries have expressed interest in a trial period using the database information at this time.  As these registries become customers, we have concluded that we want them to use the database but we will not sell or give away existing database information to be fair to all.  This has some bearing on the traditional IAHA-Registry relationship since our prior practice has been to furnish copies of the purebred database without ever charging any fees.

 Our board has an expectation that should we use any of IAHA’s services we should pay for that service.  Further we don’t think it is too much to expect that this be reciprocated.  The cooperative discussions could lead to some other arrangement, but if they do no, then we would expect IAHA to be a database customer as well….”

A license agreement charging IAHA $100/month for access to their horse inquiry system was subsequently negotiated and signed by IAHA in December, 1993,

 In May, 1993, Barbara Burck met with Jim Garrison to start the transfer of Bonanza processing to the Registry.  After the meeting, the Registry declined to take on the recordkeeping for the Bonanza program because of the functions involved in the processing.  IAHA administered the Bonanza program during its entire existence.

In August, 1993, the IAHA Executive Committee issued their Recommendation for Five Year Plan which was primarily written by staff and approved by the Executive Committee.  The first recommendation stated:

 “Combine equine organizations associated with the Arabian breeds.  The Arabian horse owner, depending on their level of participation, potentially deals with five Arabian organizations in addition to AHSA and/or CEF causing them to pay higher than average fees and membership dues to own and show their horses.  The higher costs can be mostly attributed to paying for the overhead and duplication of effort of the numerous organizations.  By combining the organizations, it is estimated that significant savings can be achieved which can be passed on directly to the Arabian community.  Examples in cost savings include senior management payroll, audit and tax fees, insurance policy costs, equipment maintenance policies, newsletter/magazines, director’s expenses and the establishment of a centralized data center.  In addition, other positive results include being able to offer more to potential corporate sponsors as well as providing focus to promote the Arabian breeds.  Areas that would benefit from this focus would be combined promotional material, advertising and marketing, public relations and fund solicitation efforts….”

 In November, 1994, the Executive Committee issued another Recommendation for Five Year Plan in which the same recommendation was included but with the added statement:

 “…In 1993, it was recommended to examine a combination of the Arabian organizations.  After further research, it has been determined that such a combination is not feasible at this time.  IAHA will focus on the study to assume AHSA/CEF functions…”

 In the first part of 1995, there was another joint meeting between the executive committees of IAHA and the Registry in Dallas, Texas.  President James O’Neal reports that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss an umbrella organization for the two organizations.  Also discussed was a study of combined computer operations.  The meeting was productive until the second day when the two groups disagreed over the promotion of Half-Arabian horses which caused hard feelings with the IAHA participants.

 On August 1, 1995, Garvin Tankersley, AHRA President, sent a letter to Jon Oostermeyer, IAHA President, in which he states:

 “At our meeting in Dallas, Bart and I agreed with you that a study of combined computer operations should be undertaken.  Our presumption, and I sensed you share a similar view, is that one system serving both entities could result in an operating efficiency and monetary savings…It is our suggestion that the Registry and IAHA jointly employ a consultant(s) to review current computer system operations and provide us with an answer, together with supportive documentation, to the following question:  Can AHRA and IAHA combine computer operations to service the current and anticipated needs of the industry, improve service to Arabian owners and save monies that would otherwise be spent on computer-related operations over the next 10-15 year period?…”

On August 25, 1995, the Registry submitted three names as suggestions for consultants.  IAHA agreed to the list of the consultants but there was never any follow-through on hiring them.  There is a memo in IAHA’s files from Ralph Clark to June Smith somewhat chastising June for the fact that IAHA staff had discussed the computer consultant review with the Registry’s IS Director who apparently had not been told of the Registry’s recommendation for a consultant. 

On August 25, 1995, IAHA announced that it had committed to purchase its new building and move at the Board of Directors meeting.  IAHA moved on April 30, 1996.

On January 25, 1996, Garvin Tanskersley sent a letter to Jon Oostermeyer after they had talked at the 1996 AHSA convention.  Mr Tankersley writes:

 “… I would like to reiterate my comments at dinner that the Registry would be willing to perform out-source processing of information for things like the Sweepstakes, Half-Arabian registry or even show records along the lines of our present race records database program.  I have discussed our conversation with the Registry Board and told them of your initial positive reaction.  Upon confirmation from you that this concept has merit and would be welcome, the Registry would like to offer a proposal…”

 On February 7, 1996, Jon Oostermeyer sent a letter to Garvin Tankersley as a follow-up to Mr. Tankersley’s letter.  He writes:

“…You voiced interest in bidding on show records, sweepstakes and the Half-Arabian Registry.  This was looked at during James O’Neal’s tenure.  It is my understanding that no one from your staff was interested in the Half-Arabian Registry because of the level of revenue it generates for the amount of work.  James O’Neal asked Barbara Burck to give the Bonanza program as a test to Jim Garrison to administer and he declined, stating that is was not the kind of program they wanted to manage.  At that point James indicated to the Executive Committee that he felt it pointless to go any further.

 If this is true, it is important for you to understand that the sweepstakes program is monumentally more difficult than the Bonanza program.  For that reason, I have asked Barbara Burck to put together the attached list of responsibilities that must be done for this program as well as the Half-Arabian Registry and one additional program [Halter Futurity program].  Hopefully that will assist you in your bidding process.  You may want to send someone to discuss with Barbara the magnitude of the tasks as well.  I am anxious to see if your organization can do it more efficiently and cheaply, as you have indicated….

 Incidentally, two months ago Barbara Burck responded to you staff that IAHA was open to having any of the MIS consultants on the list provided to us.  She merely asked for someone to provide a proposal and costs for approval by me.  I am looking forward to your response….” 

No proposal was ever submitted to IAHA from the Registry. 

next page
Back to AHA Merger Documents Index

Lorry Wagner, Copyright 2004