AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Has anyone else noticed , , ,

Reply

Old 10-25-2018, 12:33 PM
  #26  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
HobbyKing doesn't have it's usual 4 full pages as in months past .

That may have more to do with Hobby Kings current financial status then it does AMA. Last rumor ( take it for what it is worth ) I heard is that HK had over extended themselves the same as Tower/GP/Hobbico did.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2018, 02:20 PM
  #27  
r ward
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 481
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

this is the age of over extension,....isn't it ?........
r ward is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2018, 03:30 PM
  #28  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by r ward View Post
this is the age of over extension,....isn't it ?........
It would appear so. I think there was an expected increase in hobbyists and sales due to the Multi Rotor fad that did not happen as anticipated. Some retailers saw the numbers of people who bought cheap quad copters and thought they would want to " advance " into the hobby. This is one thing that I can actually agree with Frank about and that is the AMA got caught up in the farce as well. I don't think anyone was maliciously planning to screw anyone, just thinking this new tech would end up being a boon for the " hobby " and they were wrong.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2018, 06:23 PM
  #29  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,463
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

The MR boom was just like the Pro Boat Miss Budweiser fad. Everyone had to have one but no one knew what to do with them to make them run respectably. They then started appearing on Fleabay and Craig's Jip by the score. I actually felt that MRs would be the same way and, as we all know, they were around just long enough to become a major nuisance and get the overpaid hypemen(otherwise known as lobbyists and legislators) to panic and go into frenzy mode. Now we see the results, the boom is over and it pretty much went bust
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2018, 06:42 PM
  #30  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I agree in all respects. Especially the Miss Budweiser deal. I'm hoping you go back this far but right out of high school ( 1982 ) I spent the next 8 years working in one of the largest hobby shops in California. We sold a ton of the old MRP electric Miss Budweiser boats. I used to order them 6 at a time and also kept 2 of the Dumas kits in stock as well.

Back to the multi rotor craze, it reminds me of when helicopters peaked in popularity. We were pretty much shunned by the traditional clubs as well so we formed helicopter only clubs even though we could have flown in local school yards and such. Many of these clubs obtained AMA sanctions. We put on our own fly-ins. The most notable were in Merced and Bakersfield. Point is that although at the time the traditional plank modelers had pretty much the same outlook about helicopters that then now do about Multi rotors we remained responsible about where and how we flew. That is the key part that is missing with the multi Rotor crowd. Too bad we all have to pay the price.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 02:43 AM
  #31  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
"It would appear so. I think there was an expected increase in hobbyists and sales due to the Multi Rotor fad that did not happen as anticipated. Some retailers saw the numbers of people who bought cheap quad copters and thought they would want to " advance " into the hobby. This is one thing that I can actually agree with Frank about and that is the AMA got caught up in the farce as well. I don't think anyone was maliciously planning to screw anyone, just thinking this new tech would end up being a boon for the " hobby " and they were wrong (emphasis added)."
Wow. I about spit out my coffee.

If you read the CFO's report, and I assume you did, it's clear the AMA needs to make some hard decisions going forward. I do business consulting for a living, in fact spent better part of the last couple years helping a client respond to dramatically lower prices for the commodity. Trimming around the edges (horizontal cuts) generally doesn't work. Over time, the spending grows again. What's most effective is vertical cuts. Organizations must make the decision to stop doing some functions entirely. AMA is just like most organizations, where staff is one of the larger expenses. It's not until you start making vertical cuts and cutting FTE's that you realize real savings.

I suspect they don't have the stomach for it though. I'll be the first to admit that it's hard to do. But it's absolutely necessary if an organization is to survive.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 04:03 AM
  #32  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Well Frank, if you really think about it I never claimed that any of the information you post was wrong with maybe the exception of the AMA as a whole pushing for forced membership. I'm still not convinced of that. I Veiw that topic the same as President Trump wanting a wall. Hansen may very well want forced membership but he is not able to make that decision alone. There are others within the organization that I beleive oppose that idea. I do however still question your motives. You claim to be here as a hobbyist and I simply can't beleive that. There is no disputing that you have connections with organizations that would be more then happy to see recreational R/C gone. There is no disputing that you place a high value on your time yet spend a lot of time on RCG and RCU, I suspect you spend even more time on other forums as well. The fact that you don't seem to comprehend ( or maybe just don't care ) about the huge handicap that a 400' altitude limit will place on absolutely everyone who flys models larger then 40" span. The fact that 400' altitude limit means that the US would only be able to field world championship teams in pylon, scale and helicopters would be a huge loss. You claim to be a smart business man but the impact this altitude limit would have on the industry would surely put many vendors out of business. I can only see your motives of constantly attacking the AMA as a ploy to reduce the membership in order to weaken our voice with lawmakers so the organizations you truly represent will get what they WANT. On RCG you questioned the fairness of moderation. Perhaps the moderation over there have figured out your motives and are a bit pissed that you use their site as a platform to wage war against the hobby.

Last edited by speedracerntrixie; 10-26-2018 at 04:05 AM.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 04:07 AM
  #33  
r ward
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 481
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

like most fads, they have a habit of fading away as time goes on. s many kids/young adults jumped on the MR train so fast and then discovered there's really nothing you can do with one of those things and they all look like everyone's else's, so they put on the shelf in the basement. the AMA simply took advantage of a good opportunity to "make hay while the sun shines". ....like any other self respecting and self preserving business would (that's the American way).
as for HK ...most online business operate in the "fringe zone" taking full advantage of the isolation and insulation provided by the world wide web. most web dependant companies are started knowing they can bail out with a push of the right button.
r ward is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 04:22 AM
  #34  
fliers1
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Lockport, NY
Posts: 1,114
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

The MR fad was because the learning process was so easy. As they say; nothing worthwhile is easy.
fliers1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 05:10 AM
  #35  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Well Frank, if you really think about it I never claimed that any of the information you post was wrong with maybe the exception of the AMA as a whole pushing for forced membership. I'm still not convinced of that.
Three high ranking officials of AMA:

In response to an inquiry to the FAA’s UAS help line, that concerned whether membership in a CBO is required to follow Section 336, the FAA responded, ‘the FAA does not interpret P.L. 112-95 Section 336 as requiring membership in a CBO, nor the the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO.’ This statement ignores Congress’ requirement to operate within the programming of a nationwide CBO... (emphasis added)” - Rich Hanson, President, Academy of Model Aeronautics, February 2018 Model Aviation Magazine, pg 6.

Currently, if you are not a member of a CBO and following its rules, you are required to fly under Part 107 (emphasis added).” Randy Cameron, Executive Vice President, Academy of Model Aeronautics, February 2018 Model Aviation Magazine, pg 124.

To fly a radio controlled aircraft in the United States, there’s only two ways you can do that right now. You either get a 107 UAS Remote Pilot Certificate … or you follow Section 336 of the Public Law, which outlines a process where you can be part of a community based organization and then follow their guidelines. So basically AMA is the only one at this point … So you either have a 107 certificate or you’re a member of the AMA (emphasis added).” Tony Stillman, Flying Site Coordinator, Academy of Model Aeronautics, in undated interview approx 9 months ago with Hobby Geek (approx 15 minute mark)


Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
I do however still question your motives. You claim to be here as a hobbyist and I simply can't believe that. There is no disputing that you have connections with organizations that would be more then happy to see recreational R/C gone.
No. I want government to perform its proper role in balancing ALL interests in the airspace in the name of the general public good. That means balancing among manned aircraft, unmanned aircraft, recreational and commercial interests. Rule making (even safety code rule making) is inherently governmental. AMA and other CBOs should not be writing rules for PUBLIC airspace, anymore than AAA should be writing rules for the PUBLIC highways.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
There is no disputing that you place a high value on your time yet spend a lot of time on RCG and RCU, I suspect you spend even more time on other forums as well.
How I spend my time is my business.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
The fact that you don't seem to comprehend ( or maybe just don't care ) about the huge handicap that a 400' altitude limit will place on absolutely everyone who flys models larger then 40" span. The fact that 400' altitude limit means that the US would only be able to field world championship teams in pylon, scale and helicopters would be a huge loss.
Flying models larger than 40” span will not be affected by the 400’ altitude limit, unless you’re telling me that the laws of physics prevent it. The hyperbole isn't necessary, as planes greater than 40" span fly just fine below 400 feet, otherwise takeoffs and landings would be impossible. As for fielding teams of toy plane flyers for international competition, that sounds like a “want” more than a need. Again, government’s job is to balance all interests. As a product of that there will be compromises. I really don’t think impeding a multi-billion dollar industry so the toy plane flyers can field a team of 20-50 people is a compelling public interest.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
You claim to be a smart business man but the impact this altitude limit would have on the industry would surely put many vendors out of business.
Businesses come and go in the natural progression of capitalism. I’m not in favor of artificially protecting an industry when it can’t survive on its own. Besides, the vendors are going out of business already, and it’s not due to what I’m doing, but more that the hobby itself is dying. Look at AMA’s PAYING membership revenue. Look at AMA’s charter club revenue trends. I’ll save you the time. They’ve both been declining for a decade (as measued in constant inflation adjusted dollars).

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
I can only see your motives of constantly attacking the AMA as a ploy to reduce the membership in order to weaken our voice with lawmakers so the organizations you truly represent will get what they WANT.
No. I want government making rules for operation in the PUBLIC airspace, not a private dues collecting organization.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
On RCG you questioned the fairness of moderation. Perhaps the moderation over there have figured out your motives and are a bit pissed that you use their site as a platform to wage war against the hobby.
Yep. Perhaps. But it undermines their credibility. Furthermore, I see it as a sign of weakness. For when you shut down one side of an argument, or allow another side to do as they wish, it’s all but an admission that absent putting their finger on the scale, that one favored side can’t carry the day w/o help.

Last edited by franklin_m; 10-26-2018 at 08:31 AM.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 07:50 AM
  #36  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,463
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Franklin, you might want to add a link to that interview or some won't believe it's actually out there. You know how that goes
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 08:30 AM
  #37  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Franklin, you might want to add a link to that interview or some won't believe it's actually out there. You know how that goes
I had it in the post, but the interface kept acting funky. Here it is:
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 09:02 AM
  #38  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,463
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I found the audio of the interview and Tony was constantly referring to things two and three years previously or, as far as I can tell, things that were never actually fact. He claimed that, to legally fly an R/C aircraft, you had to either be a member of the AMA or hold a 107 certificate, something that wasn't true even a year ago, IIRC. He claimed that you had to have a 107 certificate as well as a spotter to fly FPV, not so sure on that one, basing his statement on the requirements needed to get an instrument rating in a full sized aircraft. The biggest one that I had to laugh at was that, since you had to be 16 to get a 107 certificate, if you weren't an AMA member, it was illegal TO FLY ANYTHING IF YOU WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 16!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As of a few weeks ago, everything he said in the interview was not applicable anyway since the laws have now changed

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 10-26-2018 at 09:06 AM.
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2018, 09:08 AM
  #39  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
I found the audio of the interview and Tony was constantly referring to things two and three years previously or, as far as I can tell, things that were never actually fact. He claimed that, to legally fly an R/C aircraft, you had to either be a member of the AMA or hold a 107 certificate, something that wasn't true even a year ago, IIRC. He claimed that you had to have a 107 certificate to fly FPV, not so sure on that one, basing his statement on the requirements needed to get an instrument rating in a full sized aircraft. The biggest one that I had to laugh at was that, since you had to be 16 to get a 107 certificate, if you weren't an AMA member, it was illegal TO FLY ANYTHING IF YOU WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 16!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As of a few weeks ago, everything he said in the interview was not applicable anyway since the laws have now changed
If you go to the RC Geek site, and hover over the "9 months ago" in upper right, it shows the interview was done on 25 January 2018. So as recently as then, AMA was still pushing the narrative that you either had to be a member or fly 107. And they were doing that despite having a copy in hand (I provided it) of the FAA letter to me saying membership is not required.
Attached Files

Last edited by franklin_m; 10-26-2018 at 09:15 AM. Reason: Changed to PDF copy of letter
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 04:36 AM
  #40  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

On the magazine issue, I happened to have my February 2018 issue out to cite quotes. Some comparisons from Feb to Nov issues.

Pages (February / November ) : 148 / 136
Non-AMA Advertisers (February / November ): 57 / 52
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 05:40 AM
  #41  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 807
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
On the magazine issue, I happened to have my February 2018 issue out to cite quotes. Some comparisons from Feb to Nov issues.

Pages (February / November ) : 148 / 136
Non-AMA Advertisers (February / November ): 57 / 52
Not what I would call a significant change for the time involved. But certainly one to take notice of and watch. If the trend continues it would suggest even more problems are afoot.

Now, some statistics like this going back a couple of years would better show the direction things are going. But I also suspect the negative trend of these stats holds true for many years back.

Another indicator, Stopped in the local "hobby shop" yesterday. My first visit since having moved here a year ago. They boast 6000 feet of floor space and it looks it. A few, maybe 6 to 9 RC planes hanging from the ceiling. But not a single radio, engine or RC kit. Not even an ARF. Mostly plastic with railroad a close second. Lots of collectibles of various types. One small stack of MRs. And of course paints and such to support the plastics. And an AMA Club field just 7 miles away. Sad really. They did have the piano wire I needed. And a paint color I've been looking for for years. So it wasn't a total loss.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 05:44 AM
  #42  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 807
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
I found the audio of the interview and Tony was constantly referring to things two and three years previously or, as far as I can tell, things that were never actually fact. He claimed that, to legally fly an R/C aircraft, you had to either be a member of the AMA or hold a 107 certificate, something that wasn't true even a year ago, IIRC. He claimed that you had to have a 107 certificate as well as a spotter to fly FPV, not so sure on that one, basing his statement on the requirements needed to get an instrument rating in a full sized aircraft. The biggest one that I had to laugh at was that, since you had to be 16 to get a 107 certificate, if you weren't an AMA member, it was illegal TO FLY ANYTHING IF YOU WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 16!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! As of a few weeks ago, everything he said in the interview was not applicable anyway since the laws have now changed
It strikes me that were they polled, the leadership of the AMA would not agree as to what it is they want nor what the current rules allow. And it would seem that most if not all of them are preaching what they as individuals "want". Confusing the membership with a lot of fake news.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 07:11 AM
  #43  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,253
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
On the magazine issue, I happened to have my February 2018 issue out to cite quotes. Some comparisons from Feb to Nov issues.

Pages (February / November ) : 148 / 136
Non-AMA Advertisers (February / November ): 57 / 52
Thank You Franklin for confirming what I had noticed , M.A. is shrinking and I'll bet the M.A. of a few years ago was at least twice as thick as today's .

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
It strikes me that were they polled, the leadership of the AMA would not agree as to what it is they want nor what the current rules allow. And it would seem that most if not all of them are preaching what they as individuals "want". Confusing the membership with a lot of fake news.
Appowner , you know the deal , it's just like politics , repeat something patently untrue enough times , and eventually it becomes Law ......
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 09:18 AM
  #44  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,463
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
It strikes me that were they polled, the leadership of the AMA would not agree as to what it is they want nor what the current rules allow. And it would seem that most if not all of them are preaching what they as individuals "want". Confusing the membership with a lot of fake news.
And you would probably be correct. Now that the AMA's legal team/lobbyists have had their backsides handed to them by Congress, the EC has no idea of what to do to push their case. I wouldn't be surprised to see several new stories coming from several different people.
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 09:46 AM
  #45  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 807
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
.......................................

Appowner , you know the deal , it's just like politics , repeat something patently untrue enough times , and eventually it becomes Law ......
Only when the few who know better elect to do nothing.

"Evil Prevails When Good Men Do Nothing"

Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2018, 10:31 AM
  #46  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

UPDATE: MA November 2017 to November 2018

November 2017 : 156 pages, 63 non-ama advertisers
February 2018 : 148 pages, 57 non-ama advertisers
November 2018 : 136 pages, 52 non-ama advertisers
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 01:14 PM
  #47  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,253
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
And to continue the shrinking magazine discussion , the November 2018 edition just showed up , all 136 pages of it .
December 2018 Model Aviation , 128 pages .
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 01:35 PM
  #48  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I think we all agree that the hobby’s popularity and participation is decreasing. Where our opinions differ is the cause.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 01:43 PM
  #49  
init4fun
Thread Starter
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,253
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
I think we all agree that the hobby’s popularity and participation is decreasing. Where our opinions differ is the cause.
I believe the two biggest reasons for the missing pages are the shrinking pool of advertisers and the shrinking number of hobby events/contests listed in the sanctioned event calendar . For whatever reason lots of hobby events just don't have the turnout they once did .
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 11:38 AM
  #50  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,494
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

True, participation in events is down. Seems people are not much interested in competing like what we had on the past. When I was working in a hobby shop 30 years ago the November issue of all the magazines was usually the largest. Manufacturers and retail outlets running their Christmas ads. Now all they need to do is update their web page. Magazine ads take 3 months from time of submission to publication ( at least that was the case back then ). Now web updates are instant.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service