AMA EC July 2016 minutes
08-22-2016, 04:52 AM
#101
08-22-2016, 04:54 AM
#102
Yes the ama made some money and enrolled some new members via bb but how do they plan to retain them ? I agree that many of these new members will not renew after the novelty of the quad wears off. What is going to keep them as members? What is the ama's plan?
We all should know membership is fluid; new members join ,then for various reasons(personal, club related,etc...) soon leave with a small percentage returning again.
It's great to go out spend some money and recruit new members but what are you going to do to keep them?
We all should know membership is fluid; new members join ,then for various reasons(personal, club related,etc...) soon leave with a small percentage returning again.
It's great to go out spend some money and recruit new members but what are you going to do to keep them?
08-22-2016, 06:08 AM
#104
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Yes the ama made some money and enrolled some new members via bb but how do they plan to retain them ? I agree that many of these new members will not renew after the novelty of the quad wears off. What is going to keep them as members? What is the ama's plan?
We all should know membership is fluid; new members join ,then for various reasons(personal, club related,etc...) soon leave with a small percentage returning again.
It's great to go out spend some money and recruit new members but what are you going to do to keep them?
We all should know membership is fluid; new members join ,then for various reasons(personal, club related,etc...) soon leave with a small percentage returning again.
It's great to go out spend some money and recruit new members but what are you going to do to keep them?
I would ask....What are we doing to keep them?
I would have to say their plans to retain new members for MR are going to be same for any other discipline. Promote the hobby as a whole, show members the benefits of belonging to the AMA, and keep them posted via e-mail, websites, and videos, just like they do now. I doubt they will have a specific targeted plane for them that's any different from what they have now for anyone else. Whether the renewal rate is many, few, or none, I'd have to say nothing ventured, nothing gained. At least the AMA did something to appeal to them. I'm not aware of any other program that targeted new membership that had these results (other than the Google leads which have already been criticized as pandering to new members, over 10,000 of which joined)
Just as important as the AMA, local clubs and members have an equal ability to help attract and retain membership, If anything, how it goes at the club level will be more of a determining factor if someone might stay in the hobby or not. Is the new member welcomed with their ______ (quad, drone,foamy,heli). Does the club even look for new members? Is the club "exclusive, invite only"? Have they closed membership? Do they exclude "drones" and even helis. Any training programs for noobs, or kids? Anyone willing to help after the first crash? Any community programs, etc etc etc. Only so much a national organization can do to get people to join up, this should really be a club initiative as well.
**Forgot to mention the comment about what happens after the novelty of the quads wear off. I agree that's going to happen, but again that might happen with heli or fixed wing too. But it has happened already at our club over the past year. The funny thing is when they got over the initial interest (and like the rest of us, many went all in with new quads) then slowly migrated to fixed wing. Most went the standard route of foamy trainers, Bixlers, Apprentice etc, and some have even gotten into larger scale 3D planes and even some 70-90 mm ducted fan jets. It's been a great opportunity for a few of us at the club who are always buying and selling.
Although we allowed helis in the club there was some apprehension about the MR guys joining and "taking over the club", but that of course did not happen. Probably 85% of the membership is fixed wing, 10% helis, and 5% MR only. We'll get those 5 over to fixed wing eventually, lol.
Last edited by porcia83; 08-22-2016 at 06:15 AM.
08-22-2016, 06:21 AM
#105
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Absolutely, 100%. Didn't look like the new member retention issue was ever a concern to this degree in the past but because this program has targeted the MR/Drown crowd suddenly we are worried about how many will stick with the AMA afterwards? That metric may be hard to quantify if any of these folks migrate over the fixed wing or heli as well. I noted earlier, a better analysis (assuming these BB members stay strictly with MR) would be to take those new members and look at the drop/retention rate as "new members". Then we would need to see all the other news membership numbers and at the end of the year look at those retention/drop rates. Now we have two more accurate sets of numbers to review and compare. I would say the numbers would be similar.
08-22-2016, 06:53 AM
#106
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
08-22-2016, 07:19 AM
#109
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
As for what they are doing to retain all members, I'm not concerned. They have many many programs already in place that helps with retention of all members, and youths as well. They present us with the programs, it's up to us to utilize them. The value proposition is there, are we all utilizing them as effectively as we can?
Day Camp: information available to club and educators to use, are we using that to our best abilities?
UAS4STEM: Wildly successful this year, so much so they had to open up registration for next year early, it's already open.
STEM: another program targeting youth and schools program for science and technology. Has your club used this program? How many have each year, would it be safe to say more could?
AMA Flight School: http://www.amaflightschool.org/campama
CampAMA: sold out this year
Youth Ambassadors: http://amaflightschool.org/youth-ambassador
Scholarships: Over a million dollars paid to date
Emails/Website: Targeted to youth members with content geared towards them.
Could they put more programs in place? Sure. Would it cost more money? Sure.
Have any of the candidates addressed youth membership, and come up with a specif plan to attract and retain youth, above what the AMA has already done? Nope.
08-22-2016, 07:24 AM
#110
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Amen. We had a youth member recently drift away from the hobby (still a member though) after getting more involved in fishing...and it just so happened his new girlfriend enjoyed that as well. When does that ever happen? LOL. His brother is still a member thankfully, and probably one of the best pilots I've ever seen fly.
08-22-2016, 07:38 AM
#111
They have been doing youth membership for a very long time so the metrics are there if you are concerned. Not always free I recall it used to cost a buck or maybe three bucks, but the metrics should be the same.
08-22-2016, 07:40 AM
#112
Amen. We had a youth member recently drift away from the hobby (still a member though) after getting more involved in fishing...and it just so happened his new girlfriend enjoyed that as well. When does that ever happen? LOL. His brother is still a member thankfully, and probably one of the best pilots I've ever seen fly.
Actually it was hot rod parts.
08-22-2016, 11:44 AM
#114
ya know, i been thinking i had read that the best buy program did have some costs associated with it, and there it was, right there in the minutes:
"6. Executive Director’s Report
Best Buy – Revenue continues to trickle in; to date we have received $70,376 as a result of the program. The cost to implement the program was $23,000 so we have realized significant revenue. AMA realizes about $72.33 per member that joins AMA as a result of the Best Buy program. AMA also realized about 1,000 new members as a result of the program."
never hurts to re read things a week or so later.
"6. Executive Director’s Report
Best Buy – Revenue continues to trickle in; to date we have received $70,376 as a result of the program. The cost to implement the program was $23,000 so we have realized significant revenue. AMA realizes about $72.33 per member that joins AMA as a result of the Best Buy program. AMA also realized about 1,000 new members as a result of the program."
never hurts to re read things a week or so later.
I heard the memberships got US$50 from Best Buy for each new member, but maybe I heard wrong. I must say that number was not easy to get.
To me the absolute membership numbers are not the issue. What was the goal for conversion rate? Would 900 new members gained from a free Best Buy membership program be considered a success from the outset of the program?? With hundreds of thousands of coupons offered?
Another interesting number, the number of Park Pilot memberships....does anyone really think that if you went back in time and told the EC that after years of effort and untold treasure we would have less than 2500 Park Pilot members that they would support the program? Remember the rationale for all of this chasing of the droners is very very similar to the arguments made to establish the Park Pilot program. "We just have to have them"..."we will die without them" Apparently Park Pilots do not value what the AMA is offering much either.
I think the important cost for these program is less to do with $$ and more the opportunity cost......what is the AMA not doing while they are chasing these ghosts (Drones and Park Pilot)? Could they do more with STEM programs? Isn’t that what our 501c3 is about, education? Do more with STEM outreach and stop all of this mind share being wasted on Park Pilot and Drone chasing. That keeps the IRS happy and does a lot for youth membership.
I know many HATE to hear it (I mean like nails on a chalkboard) but most of the members, I would guess 90%, value the AMA most for one thing, the insurance program (needed to secure the land for a fixed field).
Of course if you don’t need the landowner insurance for a fixed field, then you place little to no value on AMA membership. And we only spend 14% of our revenue on the program that is most important to most members, is that right? Valued by most traditional modeling members, the ones that enjoy the flying and need a flying field to do it.
Last edited by mr_matt; 08-22-2016 at 12:10 PM. Reason: mangeled cutting and pasting with Windows 10...ugh
08-22-2016, 12:01 PM
#116
OK this is your third and final warning re: "fact and logic".
I heard the memberships got US$50 from Best Buy for each new member, but maybe I heard wrong from the AMA. I must say that number was not easy to get from them.
To me the absolute membership numbers are not the issue. What was the goal for take rate? Would 900 new members gained from a free Best Buy membership program be considered a success from the outset of the program?? With hundreds of thousands of coupons offered?
Another interesting number, the number of Park Pilot memberships....does anyone really think that if you went back in time and told the EC that after years of effort and untold treasure we would have less than 2500 Park Pilot members that they would support the program? Remember the rationale for all of this chasing of the droners is very very similar to the arguments made to establish the Park Pilot program. "We just have to have them"..."we will die without them" Apparently Park Pilots do not value what the AMA is offering much either.
I think the important cost for these program is less to do with $$ and more the opportunity cost......what is the AMA not doing while they are chasing these ghosts (Drones and Park Pilot)? Could they do more with STEM programs? Isn’t that what our 501c3 is about, education? Do more with STEM outreach and stop all of this mind share being wasted on Park Pilot and Drone chasing.
.
I know many HATE to hear it (I mean like nails on a chalkboard) but most of the members, I would guess 90% value the AMA for one thing, the insurance program (needed to secure the land for a fixed field).
Of course if you don’t need the landowner insurance for a fixed field, then you place little to no value on the AMA. And we only spend 14% of our revenue on the program that is most important to most members? Most traditional modeling members, the ones that enjoy the flying and need a flying field to do it?
I heard the memberships got US$50 from Best Buy for each new member, but maybe I heard wrong from the AMA. I must say that number was not easy to get from them.
To me the absolute membership numbers are not the issue. What was the goal for take rate? Would 900 new members gained from a free Best Buy membership program be considered a success from the outset of the program?? With hundreds of thousands of coupons offered?
Another interesting number, the number of Park Pilot memberships....does anyone really think that if you went back in time and told the EC that after years of effort and untold treasure we would have less than 2500 Park Pilot members that they would support the program? Remember the rationale for all of this chasing of the droners is very very similar to the arguments made to establish the Park Pilot program. "We just have to have them"..."we will die without them" Apparently Park Pilots do not value what the AMA is offering much either.
I think the important cost for these program is less to do with $$ and more the opportunity cost......what is the AMA not doing while they are chasing these ghosts (Drones and Park Pilot)? Could they do more with STEM programs? Isn’t that what our 501c3 is about, education? Do more with STEM outreach and stop all of this mind share being wasted on Park Pilot and Drone chasing.
.
I know many HATE to hear it (I mean like nails on a chalkboard) but most of the members, I would guess 90% value the AMA for one thing, the insurance program (needed to secure the land for a fixed field).
Of course if you don’t need the landowner insurance for a fixed field, then you place little to no value on the AMA. And we only spend 14% of our revenue on the program that is most important to most members? Most traditional modeling members, the ones that enjoy the flying and need a flying field to do it?
08-22-2016, 12:14 PM
#119
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
OK this is your third and final warning re: "fact and logic".
I heard the memberships got US$50 from Best Buy for each new member, but maybe I heard wrong from the AMA. I must say that number was not easy to get from them. I think I see why it was hard for them to release that number, it doesn't look right. Who is your source for this? The number given to us right in the meeting notes was $72.33, right there in black and white. How does that equal $50.00?
To me the absolute membership numbers are not the issue. What was the goal for take rate? Would 900 new members gained from a free Best Buy membership program be considered a success from the outset of the program?? With hundreds of thousands of coupons offered? Does your source or anyone here for that matter know for certain that hundreds of thousands of coupons were offered via the BB program specifically, as this was the only program of it's kind? Nobody has stopped to think that some of the units purchased might have been purchased by folks already part of the AMA, so they wouldn't need to redeem the coupon. We probably need the total number handed out, not a wild guess, in order to gauge the success of the program. Meanwhile, the AMA said it was a success, and by the new membership numbers, and income, it appears to be the case. What metric would be used to say it wasn't successful?
Another interesting number, the number of Park Pilot memberships....does anyone really think that if you went back in time and told the EC that after years of effort and untold treasure we would have less than 2500 Park Pilot members that they would support the program? Remember the rationale for all of this chasing of the droners is very very similar to the arguments made to establish the Park Pilot program. "We just have to have them"..."we will die without them" Apparently Park Pilots do not value what the AMA is offering much either. I'd have to guess that the folks who purchased and kept their Park Pilot membership feel that it ads value to them. This was another attempt to gain membership and while it might not have been the most successful, what was the alternative? Do nothing? Hope those folks showed up at clubs on their own? I would say perhaps the AMA should have advertised more but based on recent comments on their marketing campaigns, that would have been a mistake too. What was the alternative then, and what is the alternative for now? Has anyone put a specific plan up that goes above or beyond what the AMA is doing now? None of the candidates have given specifics.
I think the important cost for these program is less to do with $$ and more the opportunity cost......what is the AMA not doing while they are chasing these ghosts (Drones and Park Pilot)? Could they do more with STEM programs? Isn’t that what our 501c3 is about, education? Do more with STEM outreach and stop all of this mind share being wasted on Park Pilot and Drone chasing. That's a great idea, but keep in mind that is already going on. In fact, the AMA added a UasSTEM program that was so successful this year it sold out, and the registration for 2017 is already open. I've noted above all of the different programs they have to attract youth, but I also noted the AMA can only do so much. It really ends with the clubs, local leaders, and local members. And let's not forget they really need to target all potential new members, not just giant scale guys/turbine and/or one discipline over another. I would have to guess that the majority of new folks coming into this hobby are not into the big, scratch built expensive stuff. Right now, that's probably park scale stuff, quads, arfs, and the dreaded foamy planes, even the larger ones. HH, Tower, and Motion catalogs can attest to that. The companies aren't turning their back on that tech (MR specifically) since it sells, why would the AMA?
.
I know many HATE to hear it (I mean like nails on a chalkboard) but most of the members, I would guess 90% value the AMA for one thing, the insurance program (needed to secure the land for a fixed field).
Of course if you don’t need the landowner insurance for a fixed field, then you place little to no value on the AMA. And we only spend 14% of our revenue on the program that is most important to most members? Most traditional modeling members, the ones that enjoy the flying and need a flying field to do it? It's not that this information is hated, it's just that it appears to be a generalization that's not supported by fact. I absolutely agree many folks have the AMA because they have to, but nobody is forced to join. I don't think the AMA survives and grows on 10% of the membership. The proposition value of the membership is different for everyone. And I've always said I would guess there are at least the same if not more folks who enjoy the hobby that don't have AMA or even fly at fixed fields.
I heard the memberships got US$50 from Best Buy for each new member, but maybe I heard wrong from the AMA. I must say that number was not easy to get from them. I think I see why it was hard for them to release that number, it doesn't look right. Who is your source for this? The number given to us right in the meeting notes was $72.33, right there in black and white. How does that equal $50.00?
To me the absolute membership numbers are not the issue. What was the goal for take rate? Would 900 new members gained from a free Best Buy membership program be considered a success from the outset of the program?? With hundreds of thousands of coupons offered? Does your source or anyone here for that matter know for certain that hundreds of thousands of coupons were offered via the BB program specifically, as this was the only program of it's kind? Nobody has stopped to think that some of the units purchased might have been purchased by folks already part of the AMA, so they wouldn't need to redeem the coupon. We probably need the total number handed out, not a wild guess, in order to gauge the success of the program. Meanwhile, the AMA said it was a success, and by the new membership numbers, and income, it appears to be the case. What metric would be used to say it wasn't successful?
Another interesting number, the number of Park Pilot memberships....does anyone really think that if you went back in time and told the EC that after years of effort and untold treasure we would have less than 2500 Park Pilot members that they would support the program? Remember the rationale for all of this chasing of the droners is very very similar to the arguments made to establish the Park Pilot program. "We just have to have them"..."we will die without them" Apparently Park Pilots do not value what the AMA is offering much either. I'd have to guess that the folks who purchased and kept their Park Pilot membership feel that it ads value to them. This was another attempt to gain membership and while it might not have been the most successful, what was the alternative? Do nothing? Hope those folks showed up at clubs on their own? I would say perhaps the AMA should have advertised more but based on recent comments on their marketing campaigns, that would have been a mistake too. What was the alternative then, and what is the alternative for now? Has anyone put a specific plan up that goes above or beyond what the AMA is doing now? None of the candidates have given specifics.
I think the important cost for these program is less to do with $$ and more the opportunity cost......what is the AMA not doing while they are chasing these ghosts (Drones and Park Pilot)? Could they do more with STEM programs? Isn’t that what our 501c3 is about, education? Do more with STEM outreach and stop all of this mind share being wasted on Park Pilot and Drone chasing. That's a great idea, but keep in mind that is already going on. In fact, the AMA added a UasSTEM program that was so successful this year it sold out, and the registration for 2017 is already open. I've noted above all of the different programs they have to attract youth, but I also noted the AMA can only do so much. It really ends with the clubs, local leaders, and local members. And let's not forget they really need to target all potential new members, not just giant scale guys/turbine and/or one discipline over another. I would have to guess that the majority of new folks coming into this hobby are not into the big, scratch built expensive stuff. Right now, that's probably park scale stuff, quads, arfs, and the dreaded foamy planes, even the larger ones. HH, Tower, and Motion catalogs can attest to that. The companies aren't turning their back on that tech (MR specifically) since it sells, why would the AMA?
.
I know many HATE to hear it (I mean like nails on a chalkboard) but most of the members, I would guess 90% value the AMA for one thing, the insurance program (needed to secure the land for a fixed field).
Of course if you don’t need the landowner insurance for a fixed field, then you place little to no value on the AMA. And we only spend 14% of our revenue on the program that is most important to most members? Most traditional modeling members, the ones that enjoy the flying and need a flying field to do it? It's not that this information is hated, it's just that it appears to be a generalization that's not supported by fact. I absolutely agree many folks have the AMA because they have to, but nobody is forced to join. I don't think the AMA survives and grows on 10% of the membership. The proposition value of the membership is different for everyone. And I've always said I would guess there are at least the same if not more folks who enjoy the hobby that don't have AMA or even fly at fixed fields.
Last edited by porcia83; 08-22-2016 at 12:32 PM.
08-22-2016, 12:18 PM
#120
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
http://www.amaflightschool.org/programs
08-22-2016, 01:39 PM
#121
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those 12 teams paid AMA about $29,940 for the UAS 4 STEM program, about $345/student. Not exactly charity here. The program includes one drone kit per team and some on-line instruction videos. The competitions include performance of a typical drone task, such as a search and rescue mission, IOW it is all about droning. Presumably one lucky student on the average team (greater than 7 students in this nats competition) gets to keep the drone.
08-22-2016, 02:28 PM
#122
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Those 12 teams paid AMA about $29,940 for the UAS 4 STEM program, about $345/student. Not exactly charity here. The program includes one drone kit per team and some on-line instruction videos. The competitions include performance of a typical drone task, such as a search and rescue mission, IOW it is all about droning. Presumably one lucky student on the average team (greater than 7 students in this nats competition) gets to keep the drone.
08-22-2016, 02:32 PM
#123
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Those 12 teams paid AMA about $29,940 for the UAS 4 STEM program, about $345/student. Not exactly charity here. The program includes one drone kit per team and some on-line instruction videos. The competitions include performance of a typical drone task, such as a search and rescue mission, IOW it is all about droning. Presumably one lucky student on the average team (greater than 7 students in this nats competition) gets to keep the drone.
Giant Scale
http://amaflightschool.org/youthamba...r-andrew-jesky
Giant Scale, Pattern. Take a look at what he does for a living now. Interesting.
http://amaflightschool.org/youthamba...r-nick-maxwell
Heli Pilot, big helis too!
08-22-2016, 05:27 PM
#125
ok
70,376 in from bb members minus the 23,000 spent leaves 47,376 in actual revenue.
divided by the almost 1000 members gives us approx 47.00 per.
now where they came up with the 72.33 per member number is anybody's guess. possible did not subtract the 23,000 cost. because i can not see anyone paying AMA more than going rate for memberships to hand out, i do not think that bb paid 70,376 plus 23,000 to be able to give away the memberships.(about 90.00 per member)
70,376 in from bb members minus the 23,000 spent leaves 47,376 in actual revenue.
divided by the almost 1000 members gives us approx 47.00 per.
now where they came up with the 72.33 per member number is anybody's guess. possible did not subtract the 23,000 cost. because i can not see anyone paying AMA more than going rate for memberships to hand out, i do not think that bb paid 70,376 plus 23,000 to be able to give away the memberships.(about 90.00 per member)
