rich141

it is only my opinion
I'm a retied and just a Sunday spot flayer on a fixed incom but i do realize that I do admite i do need the affordable liability ins- that the AMA can provide,as one liability accident could cost me every thaing i own,but should I be forced to buy a magazine that has very little in formation that protein's to my kind of sunday flying,and support a extravagant facility, park and the event's and mint in Muncie. that ill never see from Texas.
rich 141 Galveston TX

mvigod

rich,

I seem to see more and more posts like yours and talk to more people who feel just the way we do. Read our latest AMA threads and it seems we are far from alone...the time for change will be at the ballot this year...in just 2 years of voting (a long road thanks to the non democratic election rules in the AMA) we can gain substantial control over the direction of the AMA and steer the ship in the direction most want to see it going in.

The very reason I came up with all this was one day flying at my field and looking around when I realized what the AMA means to 2/3 to 95% of it's members. Insurance. Most don't want the magazine but are forced to take it. Most will never step foot within 100 miles of the Muncie Palace. Made me wonder rather hard but not enough to do anything about it until a deal went down within the AMA that never should have. I figured that could not possibly be the only bad deal so upon digging I found I really didn't like what I saw there and felt it was time for a change.

I think people got used to the norm over the years and stopped questioning things or failed to take action to fix them. It just doesn't have to be that way anymore.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

So...join UMA, which gives you only insurance, and costs $40 or so.

kwizard

Easytiger, if he joins UMA $38, he still can't fly at any AMA fields.

The AMA doesn't allow it.

When you really think about this, it's so wrong.

It would be like Allstate insurance telling Geico that their policy holders couldn't drive on Allstate insured roads.

If there were a REAL choice, I truly beleive that there would be only a few members left at AMA & this is why we are where we are.

rsallen13

My Feedback: (1)

Regardless of how I may feel about AMA everyone please stop spewing this dribble. AMA has nothing to do with whether you fly at the field or not. It is the landlord and those who lease the field that decide the requirements to fly. There are several fields in the US that both AMA and non-AMA flyer's fly at. You only need AMA to belong to an AMA chartered Club. The club only relates to the people not the flying site. Since for the longest time AMA has been the only game in town so this rumor has grown to the point where people actually believe it.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

FALSE! Where do people GET this BS?
It's up to the SITE OWNER what insurance is acceptable.

mvigod

Easytiger - the hurdle is (fwiw) that most public places like parks require the AMA proof of insurance. In this case a township is the "site owner". Enter red tape syndrome. To convince the clerk there that your own homeowners insurance is primary would be an interesting task not to mention that you have UMA insurance and that it is just as good. Question becomes how many hurdles, town council meetings and such would you need to have to get yourself approved to fly with just your homeowners or UMA?

When it comes to private property fields that is correct that you need only convince the property owner that you are covered.

Still begs the question that if 2/3 to 90% plus of AMA members primarily only want and need insurance why is a disproportionate share of the $58 dues going to purposes that they don't want or serve them little or no purpose? This is what my biggest problem is.

Why not spin off 3 companies and everyone pays for whichever ones they want to be a member/subscriber of? One for the magazine, one for the insurance and one for the contests? A joint committee can be formed to handle issues with Washington DC or flying fields if that function is still preferred by many. It can even stay under the largest arm of the 3 separate companies (insurance) as the overhead the AMA has in saving fields and lobbying is typically insignificant in terms of dollars. So many possible solutions exist to improve the AMA.

xp8103

My Feedback: (16)

That is an improper analogy. The reality would be you (the UMA member) flying into a spectator at a field with an AMA charter, having the spectator sue you (as you wait for the UMA insurance to kick in) and the land owner who now has to rely on his OWN insurance to cover him since YOU weren't an AMA member and thus the AMA is not bound to cover HIM as a landowner which the club who leases the land promised he WOULD have.

fliers1

It's simple really. Just file a UMA policy with the land owner.
That's what happened when an AMA club didn't like the idea of an SFA club using a county owned field. We went to the county comissioner and filed a SFA policy along with the AMA one.

For some reason, the AMA club still didn't like it, but couldn't do anything about it. For what it's worth, the county officials stated that no extra policy was required, not AMA nor SFA, as the county had their own policy, but if they club wanted to file, that was fine with him. He said that it was a public park and anyone could use it as they wished, within reason of course. As far as law suits, he said they had many from ball players, spectators, and people tripping over painted lines in the grass. One kid was even several injured playing littleleague baseball.

Take care,
CCR
http://www.kites.org/rc_instructors

vpresley

My Feedback: (162)

rich

The AMA magazine is a broad based information source. Its not just for your little corner of the world. Its does have sunday sport flying info, plus alot of other stuff you might need at some time in the future. The AMA is for ALL Modeling, not one small part of it. This is what people need to remember, the BIG PICTURE. Every organization needs a heart and a soul. Thats what Muncie is, the AMA heart and soul. If you dont need it, there are those of us that do. There are more things than you will ever use available to you if you just look, not just whats in front of your eyes. I may never go to Muncie, but im glad it exists, incase I do get a chance to go. Thats just me of course.

Vince

Live Wire

It seems that all things pertaining to RC. or PC. will crash . All we can due is keep pluging away and hope for the best.

Matt Kirsch

My Feedback: (21)

No matter what you think, it's not as simple as, "I just want to fly." You can get insurance to fly from your local insurance agent. The hobby needs public exposure if it is to continue. Contests and fly-ins provide that public exposure. How long do you think the hobby will last if all we did was fly by ourselves? Most flying sites are off the beaten path because of the nusaince factor, not very accessible for spectators. Where else is the hobby getting public exposure, except in a negative light? Most commercials depicting R/C models depict them being operated in an unsafe manner, and are always advertising something else (e.g. Air Force recruitment, or sport-utility vehicles). You need public sentiment to be in your favor, or finding a place to fly will get awful difficult.

Without places to fly and new people taking up the hobby/sport to drive the industry, it will dry up. Sure, you have a flying site now, but nothing lasts forever. What do you do down the road when your lease runs out or development encroaches on your site to the point where it's no longer possible or safe to fly there? Sure, you have equipment now, and couldn't care less if the entire industry folded up and disappeared, but what about down the road when all your gear is broken down and worn out? Face it, contests are great advertising, and they do directly benefit YOU the average modeler.

Look, the magazine amounts to a whopping $7 of your annual dues. Most of the magazine is paid for by advertising.

To qualify as a not-for-profit organization, the AMA must publish a periodical newsletter. The magazine is that newsletter. Additional content is provided as a benefit to the members, and is primarily funded by the aforementioned advertising. No magazine, no AMA. It's that simple. It can't be optional, period.

If you think making the magazine optional would make things cheaper, think again. First, there's the added administration cost of keeping track of who does and does not want the magazine. Second, there's the new cost of publising a special newsletter for those that opt-out of the magazine. Third, there's the loss of ad revenue caused by the reduced readership of the magazine; you can charge more for an ad that reaches 136,000 than one that only reaches 16,000. In my club, running a bi-monthly newsletter that averages 3 double-sided printed pages costs way more than $7 per member per year.

Don't think the AMA hasn't considered your position. They are not FORCING you to receive the magazine; it's the most cost-effective way to fulfill their newsletter requirement while also providing content that could be useful and beneficial to the membership.

If most of you magazine naysayers had BOTHERED to ever read the magazine, you would realize it's not that bad, and you'd realize that in the coming year, they are changing the format of the magazine to better suit the majority of the membership. Many of the specialty columns will be reduced to bi-monthly, and more R/C content will be added.