Dues increase coming? 1 million spent on government relations.....
#326
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
60% plus seems improbable, then again who knows, but I would tend to doubt anything close to 60, even 50. Not an accountant by any means but I think the way the question can be asked would might result in different answers, all with different numbers. 2013 financial report shows round numbers of 8.6 million in income versus 3.3 in salary/bennys, but I could have read that wrong. For profit health care services run over 50% (50-54), educational services about the same, construction about 25%, and retail services about 20-30%.
#327
Moderator
60-70% going toward salaries sounds about right for a mid size non-profit. You'd be surprised at how much of any charitable donation you make goes to paying the people who work for that organization. Not that it's a waste, because usually those who work for the organization do a lot. But I imagine most of what we send to Muncie goes to pay for insurance, then the salaries of the employees, and not more than 10-15% is left to assist clubs, acquire flying sites, etc.
#328
My Feedback: (11)
Well, think of this, Tony's salary for example goes directly towards assisting clubs finding and retaining flying sites....
Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
#330
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Well, think of this, Tony's salary for example goes directly towards assisting clubs finding and retaining flying sites....
Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
#331
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
60-70% going toward salaries sounds about right for a mid size non-profit. You'd be surprised at how much of any charitable donation you make goes to paying the people who work for that organization. Not that it's a waste, because usually those who work for the organization do a lot. But I imagine most of what we send to Muncie goes to pay for insurance, then the salaries of the employees, and not more than 10-15% is left to assist clubs, acquire flying sites, etc.
#332
My Feedback: (3)
I know there is a difference between a charity and a non-profit, and perhaps I'm thinking of a what a charity is graded by as compared to what they spend on overhead versus what they give, but I'm still having a hard time seeing 60-70% of a non-profits income going to salaries. I'm not an well versed in that piece of compensation etc, I just can't get my head around those figures. I think 20-to herhaps a high of 40 might be reasonable, and even lower for a "charity", whose goal one would hope is 10-20%.
Charities collect funds to disperse them to targeted individuals while non-profits frequently collect funds to achieve a common goal and frequently get their status through education. So charities are graded on keeping overhead down while non-profits are graded (by those donating) - are they reaching their goals?
We have been fighting the checkbook modeler who does not care about JQ Public for decades. It is only recently the impact of those checkbooks is being seen in various local government attempts to outlaw the drones because someone used them improperly (Trappy?). The unfortunate thing is only the bad get the press and they have been getting a lot of it of late because they are so uneducated in the hobby. The bottom line there is that the approach AMA has been using helps, needs to be supported, and costs money we did not expect to spend.
No, I do not like the dues increase but I do like the privilege of flying my models and as far as I can see the AMA has contributed directly to that more than anyone else.
#333
Our dues are really a small sacrifice for what we get in return from the AMA. Every time I talk with someone in Muncie, they are always cheerful and helpful. They are truly a great bunch of folks.
Frank Cox
Frank Cox
#334
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The amount of the increase in dues is not an issue for many, but I can understand that it it may be a problem for some.
However, the amount voted by AMA to spend on the multirotor/fpv/drone (and what ever else it it can be called) community is a misdirected use of the funds we, the aeromodelers, have paid in.
If you don't think that drones are that much of a problem, take a look here: www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/faa-drone-report-incidents-mishaps
This shows a list of 194 incidents involving drones, reported to FAA in 2014 alone! This does not includes un-reported incidents, law suits regarding privacy issues for pictures taken, insurance claims. etc....
Most r/c modelers have no issue with multirotors flown in line of site at the local club: these are hardly any more than a heli with more than one rotor.
But once you add FPV/GPS/self guidance systems, the aircraft (multirotor, heli or fixed wing) has become a drone. Most I have seen are flown with no spotter, not in direct line of sight, or in accordance with the AMA rules, and they likely never will. You can google "drone for sale" and find countless outlets selling these that are not affiliated with, or recommending AMA membership.
It is increasingly clear that drone flying is not model aviation: in fact, the military drones, even only equipped with observation cameras, are certainly not model aviation....
To the drone community, the flying object is only a platform, a transportation system, for the electronic and camera equipment it carries, making it very different from model aviation which has always focused on the joy of flying, whether it be scale, aerobatics, racing, etc. Drones are simply not model aviation, and pose challenges and problems that a model aviation CBO is ill equipped to address. And if the AMA did focus on addressing all these issues, it would have to loose what should be its sole focus, the reason why we elected our representatives in the first place: represent and develop model aviation.
Like minded people sharing a common passion are best equipped to gather and form an association that cater specifically to their needs; the drone community needs to form their own association if they do not have one yet, and the AMA need to rededicate itself to what it was created for, and what we have been supporting it for: Model Aviation. Drones are not Models, they are Drones. The AMA has done a fabulous job at representing and protecting model aviation for decades, and I hope it continues.
By blurring the lines between these two separate activities, the AMA is exposing us to all the issues that drones have and will increasingly generate in the eyes of the public, the media, and the law makers. This is a disservice to the vast majority of us who are aeromodelers who have always supported the AMA, but have any interest in drones.
We are not subjects of the AMA, we are members. As such we should be consulted on such matter as dedicating a quarter of a million dollars for the multirotor program, as it was voted last year. The vote was 6 against 6, and the tie was broken by the current president (see here:http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...ecminutes.aspx)
I realize some (but not most) AMA members may fly some form of drone: I am sure many also shoot guns, and ride motorcycles; it does not mean the AMA should manage these other two activities too.
The drones have attracted more negative press in the few short years of their existence than has model aviation in 78 years of safe flying under the AMA's umbrella. I see not good coming to model aviation if we accept all the liabilities coming from an activity most of us do not practice.
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it. But these major decisions, especially when they involve such a large budget, cannot be taken but the VP's without our knowledge or consent.
However, the amount voted by AMA to spend on the multirotor/fpv/drone (and what ever else it it can be called) community is a misdirected use of the funds we, the aeromodelers, have paid in.
If you don't think that drones are that much of a problem, take a look here: www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/faa-drone-report-incidents-mishaps
This shows a list of 194 incidents involving drones, reported to FAA in 2014 alone! This does not includes un-reported incidents, law suits regarding privacy issues for pictures taken, insurance claims. etc....
Most r/c modelers have no issue with multirotors flown in line of site at the local club: these are hardly any more than a heli with more than one rotor.
But once you add FPV/GPS/self guidance systems, the aircraft (multirotor, heli or fixed wing) has become a drone. Most I have seen are flown with no spotter, not in direct line of sight, or in accordance with the AMA rules, and they likely never will. You can google "drone for sale" and find countless outlets selling these that are not affiliated with, or recommending AMA membership.
It is increasingly clear that drone flying is not model aviation: in fact, the military drones, even only equipped with observation cameras, are certainly not model aviation....
To the drone community, the flying object is only a platform, a transportation system, for the electronic and camera equipment it carries, making it very different from model aviation which has always focused on the joy of flying, whether it be scale, aerobatics, racing, etc. Drones are simply not model aviation, and pose challenges and problems that a model aviation CBO is ill equipped to address. And if the AMA did focus on addressing all these issues, it would have to loose what should be its sole focus, the reason why we elected our representatives in the first place: represent and develop model aviation.
Like minded people sharing a common passion are best equipped to gather and form an association that cater specifically to their needs; the drone community needs to form their own association if they do not have one yet, and the AMA need to rededicate itself to what it was created for, and what we have been supporting it for: Model Aviation. Drones are not Models, they are Drones. The AMA has done a fabulous job at representing and protecting model aviation for decades, and I hope it continues.
By blurring the lines between these two separate activities, the AMA is exposing us to all the issues that drones have and will increasingly generate in the eyes of the public, the media, and the law makers. This is a disservice to the vast majority of us who are aeromodelers who have always supported the AMA, but have any interest in drones.
We are not subjects of the AMA, we are members. As such we should be consulted on such matter as dedicating a quarter of a million dollars for the multirotor program, as it was voted last year. The vote was 6 against 6, and the tie was broken by the current president (see here:http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...ecminutes.aspx)
I realize some (but not most) AMA members may fly some form of drone: I am sure many also shoot guns, and ride motorcycles; it does not mean the AMA should manage these other two activities too.
The drones have attracted more negative press in the few short years of their existence than has model aviation in 78 years of safe flying under the AMA's umbrella. I see not good coming to model aviation if we accept all the liabilities coming from an activity most of us do not practice.
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it. But these major decisions, especially when they involve such a large budget, cannot be taken but the VP's without our knowledge or consent.
Last edited by islandflyer; 06-28-2015 at 01:42 AM.
#335
#336
#337
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like minded people sharing a common passion are best equipped to gather and form an association that cater specifically to their needs; the drone community needs to form their own association if they do not have one yet, and the AMA need to rededicate itself to what it was created for, and what we have been supporting it for: Model Aviation.
#338
Please forgive the snippet... I couldn't agree more! I too believe there should be another association for non traditional recreational sUAS community. Although I would hope the new association would also allow the traditional "modeling" sUAS guys to join them as well, as it is those guys that helped develop the new recreational sUASs such as quads and FPV.
Mike
#339
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
#340
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've got a real good point. The horse has left the barn...That play has now been pretty much been short circuited. I think I'll just get me a fist full of AMA stickers and logos, put them on all of my models to show my allegiance.
#341
Yes sir and IMO no amount of money will get it back in. I'll renew for 2 years next month after that expires I may just walk away if the "blank check" policy toward this continues.
Mike
Mike
Last edited by rcmiket; 06-28-2015 at 06:24 AM.
#342
Moderator
Porcia83- Those numbers are simply not realistic. When a non profit skimps on salaries, they wind up with incompetent people. We pay AMA employees to work to advance the hobby, and that's what they do.
#343
That is because some (not all) of the AMA VP's and executives are behaving like royalties and feel that we should be more like subjects, and not really members.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
Good Luck Herve !
Even trying to get a definition of the word drone established here has been , trying , at best .
In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .
A model aircraft , even if equipped with #550 legal FPV , is flown for the fun of flying only , with no other mission attached to the flight .
Now if your talking about not chasing the commercial operations , I'm 100% with you on that . Our AMA is supposed to be #1 looking out for aircraft modeling and #2 a non profit organization . Once either or both of those is lost , we hobbyists will be swept aside in short order to make room for all the big drone money that'll be rolling in ......
#344
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can agree with that but would not exclude military or any other similar use that is of any nature other than recreational... Guys that call their little toys drones amuse me somehow... sort of like when I call my little model an Extra 300...LOL
#345
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Luck Herve !
Even trying to get a definition of the word drone established here has been , trying , at best .
In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .
A model aircraft , even if equipped with #550 legal FPV , is flown for the fun of flying only , with no other mission attached to the flight .
Now if your talking about not chasing the commercial operations , I'm 100% with you on that . Our AMA is supposed to be #1 looking out for aircraft modeling and #2 a non profit organization . Once either or both of those is lost , we hobbyists will be swept aside in short order to make room for all the big drone money that'll be rolling in ......
Even trying to get a definition of the word drone established here has been , trying , at best .
In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .
A model aircraft , even if equipped with #550 legal FPV , is flown for the fun of flying only , with no other mission attached to the flight .
Now if your talking about not chasing the commercial operations , I'm 100% with you on that . Our AMA is supposed to be #1 looking out for aircraft modeling and #2 a non profit organization . Once either or both of those is lost , we hobbyists will be swept aside in short order to make room for all the big drone money that'll be rolling in ......
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
#346
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
The first problem with your thesis is the use of the word "drone". The definition of this is tricky. But regardless, to say that this is not part of model aviation is incredibly...wrong. On so many levels. Luckily the AMA continues to have the hobby's interest at heart, despite the comments about them acting like "royalities"...LOL a ton on that one. As if they need to run everything they do by the membership. Ya, that would be reasonable and work smooth I'm sure. Last I knew they VOTED as they were supposed to, and the voting results were what they were. It wasn't done by proclamation or decree.
Of course growth is a component of what they do. It doesn't always means a vertical growth (those greedy royals just want more members for the coffers...mwahahaha) , it can also mean growth in the hobby, and what's included in the hobby, and whats related in the hobby. I'm sure the RC heli pilots are thankful someone didn't come along back in the day to proclaim them NOT PART OF MODEL AVIATION.
Check out this guy, an absolute genius.
http://flitetest.com/articles/northr...b-design-build
He has been a guest at our club's events for 3-4 years. His builds are absolutely amazing. One of the first things he brought 4 years ago was a quad, self built and programmed for flight. The crowds were amazed. Almost all the aircraft he built were done by scratch. The X-47 build is just stunning ( and either maidened at our field, or just after maidening). His work is most definitely tied into aeromodeling.
#347
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I agree with you. But because drone flying brings such different issues and concerns as compared to model aviation, it really deserves its own CBO. Only the drone users can fully understand and address their concerns and challenges.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
#348
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Originally Posted by islandflyer
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?
I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?
I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
#349
Originally Posted by islandflyer
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?
I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?
I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
Mike
#350
I agree with you. But because drone flying brings such different issues and concerns as compared to model aviation, it really deserves its own CBO. Only the drone users can fully understand and address their concerns and challenges.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
I can see an AMA SIG for FPV (under #550 rules) as a natural and I'd think it may do ok since the FPV ranks are growing faster than any other areomodeling sub division . Only thing is , it seems not a lot of folks these days seem to care for groups and associations much , I really wonder in the future how many SIGs will exist within what may become a pretty thin organization , unless of course if it ends up being a forced "AMA or no flying period" kind of thing , which is what some seem to want . (And NO , I am NOT one who wants any one organization totally in charge of what flys . I support the AMA , and I support the freedom to chose to be AMA or not . Once membership becomes forced , we loose all airs of benevolence and do goodishy promoting the hobby flying of models , and become just another for profit arm sub contracted arm of the Govt) ...
Last edited by init4fun; 06-28-2015 at 11:20 AM.