Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Historical membership figures?

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

Historical membership figures?

Old 11-26-2007, 02:10 PM
  #1  
mr_matt
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (10)
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default Historical membership figures?

Hi everyone,

I did a cursory search on the AMA website but I could not find a tabulation of the historical AMA membership figures, by year.

Does anyone have those figures that they could share?

Thanks very much in advance for your help!

Regards,

Old 11-26-2007, 03:56 PM
  #2  
Red Scholefield
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Here is the best I can do for you 87 through 2004

ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS
MEMBERSHIP COUNTS


Year End Total

1987 122,880
1988 136,044
1989 153,103
1990 165,359
1991 168,190
1992 165,350
1993 168,074
1994 158,927
1995 154,322
1996 153,675
1997 149,700
1998 152,565
1999 157,331
2000 165,365
2001 170,754
2002 173,420
2003 168,075
2004 163,709
Old 11-26-2007, 03:59 PM
  #3  
mr_matt
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (10)
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Thanks Red!

I heard it was at about 150K for last year (2006)?

Thanks again for taking the time to help,

Old 11-26-2007, 09:02 PM
  #4  
tailskid
My Feedback: (34)
 
tailskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tolleson, AZ
Posts: 9,552
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

And what years were due increases enacted?
Old 11-27-2007, 12:08 AM
  #5  
Hossfly
 
Hossfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New Caney, TX
Posts: 6,130
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: mr_matt

Thanks Red!

I heard it was at about 150K for last year (2006)?

Thanks again for taking the time to help,

Well mr. matt, I can assist you with some figures a bit more closer to date.

2005........... 161006
2006........... 156765
2007........... 151394


No dues increases the past couple years. Just a bigger fatter magazine with increasing red-line figures. OTOH, they don't have to print so many.
Old 11-27-2007, 03:59 PM
  #6  
Lomcevak Duck
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
 
Lomcevak Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Enterprise, AL
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

1997 149,700
1998 152,565
1999 157,331
2000 165,365
2001 170,754
2002 173,420
So what was going on these six years that changed and resulted in a complete reversal over the next five years? Anything?
Old 11-27-2007, 04:16 PM
  #7  
Red Scholefield
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: Lomcevak Duck

1997 149,700
1998 152,565
1999 157,331
2000 165,365
2001 170,754
2002 173,420
So what was going on these six years that changed and resulted in a complete reversal over the next five years? Anything?
Yes, real modelers are dying off faster than they are being replaced. Check the membeship in almost any organization - it is the sign of the times - whats in it for me as opposed what can I contribute.


Old 11-27-2007, 04:49 PM
  #8  
JUGFLIER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muscle Shoals, AL
Posts: 1,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: Lomcevak Duck

1997 149,700
1998 152,565
1999 157,331
2000 165,365
2001 170,754
2002 173,420
So what was going on these six years that changed and resulted in a complete reversal over the next five years? Anything?

Lipo batteries and Park Flyer aircraft.
Old 11-27-2007, 05:06 PM
  #9  
mr_matt
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (10)
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: Red Scholefield

Yes, real modelers are dying off faster than they are being replaced. Check the membeship in almost any organization - it is the sign of the times - whats in it for me as opposed what can I contribute.
A kewpie here!
Old 11-27-2007, 06:25 PM
  #10  
mr_matt
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (10)
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: JUGFLIER
Lipo batteries and Park Flyer aircraft.
And a giant Kewpie here for the winner!
Old 11-27-2007, 06:51 PM
  #11  
Red Scholefield
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: JUGFLIER


So what was going on these six years that changed and resulted in a complete reversal over the next five years? Anything?



Lipo batteries and Park Flyer aircraft.
Right, and airsoft guns have cut the NRA membership.
Old 11-28-2007, 06:51 AM
  #12  
Mode One
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Park Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

How about the simple ebb and flow of such things? The years 93 to 97 also saw a decrease in membership. The question becomes will it rise again? Even with the drop to 151K in 2007, since I first joined, the membership has almost risen to 3 times that amount in 30+ years. Statistics are wonderful things and give real indications of trends. However, they're only valid when given enough numbers to compair with.
Old 11-28-2007, 07:54 AM
  #13  
STLPilot
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan, NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Right Mode. Would be nice to see all the years in a single line chart. Also on the same line chart a bottom line profit and loss overlay. Funny but I went through last years financial report and the AMA saw gains in just about every area with decrease in membership. I'm sure there is a break point to a loss, but it appears it would have to go well below 125,000 members. One of the biggest money makers for the AMA is their cash invesments. They also have a good bit of property which can come in handy if they want to invest on margin. I don't think most realize just how important it is for any organization to hold on to as much real estate as possible for future bailouts if needed.
Old 11-28-2007, 08:10 AM
  #14  
DocYates
My Feedback: (102)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

I think another thing to take into effect is the general state f the economy during those years. We had a tremendous boon in the economy during that period. That dollar was good against foreign currency, the stock markets were doing well, and people were more at ease in their jobs and futures. Like JF said the evolution of electrics did play a significant part in the solvency of the membership. There was an aspect of the members who saw an opportunity to do something where they did not need a club or a large field to fly. The AMA was probably slow to respond to that aspect of modeling, but then again those modelers felt like they did not need the AMA nor the amentities that went along with it.
I remember thinking that with every issue of every magazine there was more and more electric and PF stuff in them, nor they have their own magazines as well.
I think there are multiple things going on here, it is not just one or possibly two things. They are all interconnected.
Tommy
Old 11-28-2007, 11:33 AM
  #15  
Bird of Paradise
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Collins , CO
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Folks:

The ebb and flow of membership is nothing new but we may be missing something very important; that is, the reasons why members don't renew. My understanding is that many fail to renew after 2 yrs. Ideally we would be able to determine why those members did not renew.

IMO, there are likely several reasons for this including not successfully soloing, lack of instructors or a good training program, bad experiences with clubs (these occur more frequently than we might think), coming to the realization that aeromodeling is not what they wanted to do after all, too expensive, etc. Certainly economic conditions will have an impact as well. I recently saw a 30% Extra RTF in a local shop with a sign indicating that the hobby was just too expensive for the seller. Folks also come to the realization that they can't afford to crash!!

Its clear that several of the above reasons can be laid directly at the doorsteps of clubs as they are key to successful introduction to the hobby/sport and retention of members.

Its been said that "we live in a time in which instant gratification is too slow". How many newbes want to start out flying a 40% aerobat, giant warbird or turbine jet? Let's face it, we live in an "I want in now" era. This has led to some extent the proliferation of the really outstanding ARFs that many of us enjoy. People also spend a lot of money on entertainment (i.e. disposable income) and think nothing of "investing" in a flying model only to use it for a year or two.

Regards

Mike
Leader Member
AMA 20640
Old 11-28-2007, 02:30 PM
  #16  
KidEpoxy
Senior Member
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Sure Doc,
It just makes sense that it probably aint just one thing, I also agree that many of these causes are somehow related to various extents. This is a hobby of disposable income, and when that supply shortens you will see the recruitment dropping due to the other reasons gaining strength by the tight money situation.

More folks are going the PF route these days rather than the club.
How many of them do that because it is percieved as a cheaper way to fly. How many go PF so when they crash they can just glue the 4 parts of the plane back together at the field without worring about buying balsa & ironing cover & skill with those. How many go PF so they can toss the LilSparkie in the parking lot at lunch.... and how do we tell the LunchFliers that they need to join AMA to do that.

We dont have the national PF numbers from 1997 to 2007
but who here thinks Non-AMA flying has takes a big hit vs saying the PFs have grown by an insane amount of people while AMA dropped. How many of us have seen RC Aircraft at walmart & on TV? Why is the RC industry screaming gains such that others can advertize on TV & sell container upon container of RC Aircraft to the masses while AMA membership goes down.

But while some folks say the current doward trend is just cyclic and will come back by itself, why bet the farm on that being the case. Shouldnt we look at some (if not many) of the causes and see what we (the AMA) can do to reduce their impact on the member count. If we sat it is cyclic, then we dont need new lures to gain members, we will just gain them automaticly... but why not look at the thingsthat are getting the number to drop & do stuff to stop that.
Old 11-28-2007, 04:40 PM
  #17  
STLPilot
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan, NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: DocYates

I think another thing to take into effect is the general state f the economy during those years. We had a tremendous boon in the economy during that period. That dollar was good against foreign currency, the stock markets were doing well, and people were more at ease in their jobs and futures.
It's pretty fair to say that economics played a pretty powerful role in the AMA membership. And why shouldn't it, the economy has an effect on everything, including the weather. Of course there are those that could argue Model Aviation magazine drives them away.

Here is membership against the Dow in the same time period. Something look familiar?
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Ay75979.gif
Views:	15
Size:	6.0 KB
ID:	814220   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ni22514.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	21.0 KB
ID:	814221  
Old 11-28-2007, 07:59 PM
  #18  
DocYates
My Feedback: (102)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

When you look at the graph combined with KE's premise that the PFs have increased it pretty much explains what we see happening in the AMA. I do not think the AMA has outgrown its usefulness, but there are aspects of the AMA mission that will sooner or later dissapear (ie, frequency allocation). I think the advent of the 2.4 Ghz technology will do nothing if not expand exponentially. Combine that with the increasing exposure of the "regular" consumer (ie, Walmart) customer to the PF and AirHogs and you have a diminshed "percieved need for the AMA". Most of the people picking up these type of models will not buy another given their experience with them. Of course there are those that will have an enjoyable experience and go on to more advanced types of flying.
I have no doubt that part of KE's hypothesis is correct, I am just not sure howwe address it, or if it really has to be addressed. In the words of the songwriter, "Times they are a changing".
Tommy
Old 11-28-2007, 08:30 PM
  #19  
STLPilot
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan, NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

I think your right too Doc. And I don't think it's the people flocking to Wallyworld or flying Team Airhogs making any kind of effect on the AMA, because they were never part of the org in the first place. They are the trees that fell in the woods with nobody around. Yeah the AMA will take em, but they've never had impact.

But I think one of biggest effects of downturn if the fact that noise issues are now a thing of the past. Also wing loading is also a big factor. It used to be you had to keep building them big to get the right wing loading that makes the plane fly it's best. But now with these new and lighter building techniques, bigger is no longer better. Add the 2.4 ghz radios into the factor and what used to be a drive the field, is now a drive down the road to a park, schoolyard or right out the back door.

Bottom line is that you can have just as much fun now with a much smaller plane in a much smaller area with a much lower cost. Hopefully the AMA's new e-ticket coming this Jan will have some ummmph. But if it does not have some kind of lower price tier, it will most likely flop. The e-trend is going to a lower point in all facets and it's going to stay there for a while, thanks to our friends in the far east.
Old 11-29-2007, 02:18 AM
  #20  
KidEpoxy
Senior Member
 
KidEpoxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Doc-
It is anybody's guess as to the breakdown of what the Walmart/AirHog has done to the masses yearning to fly.

How many grabbed up an AirHog and found out flying was not for them.
Previously they would have gone to the club & gotten some guest/intro/prorated whatever to give them training. They may or may not have stayed with it, but they had to get the AMA exposure & sales pitch. No real exposure to the AirHog buyer trying it out at a school or parkinglot.

How many Grabbed an AirHog & became proficient HogPilots.
So they mastered the hog, and got bored. Maybe they grabed a Firebird or some other advnanced toy, but dont get to the point that they need to stop flying the way & place that the have been Hogging. They might even get up to the Brushless Foamies but stay at their school/parkinglot doing knife edges or advanced maneuvers with the family or work buddy.

And how many used the WalHog as a stepping stone to the full field of clubworthy electrics?
Maybe the AirHog is a gateway plane that gets them hooked on flying... hooked enough to want more & more till they find themselves with an Leader Number and CD position at their local AMA club.

We have no idea whether the AirHog is bringing folks in, or driving folks (that would have clubbed without AirHog) away. But we do know they are selling a ton of Hogs, and not just to AMA members.
Old 11-29-2007, 06:34 AM
  #21  
Mode One
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Park Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

Why does the Air Hog thing need to be looked upon as bad for, as drawing people away from membership in the AMA? It's exposure to R/C, and any exposure to R/C, from my point of view is good for the hobby. This getting involved with this hobby, should eventually be good for the AMA. These people are starting with a very simple R/C airplane, if the activity holds their attention, eventually they will come cross information about the AMA and join if the mood strikes their fancy and go on to build or assemble more sophisticated airplanes.
Old 11-29-2007, 07:27 AM
  #22  
STLPilot
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan, NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

I don't think anyone is saying that they are bad for the AMA Mode. And I really don't think they are having an impact either way. But if I owned Airhogs, I don't think I would even want to partner with the AMA for the sticker shock and that's just the reality. Airhogs have produced a line of product which just doesn't require AMA membership. And when you own your own company, you want to keep your customers as your own, again, the reality in the situation. But what the AMA can do is find a way to grab that audience, with the help of the members. How they will do it is to be determined. I've got some ideas on how this can be achieved, but lets see what the rollout of their new program looks like first.
Old 11-29-2007, 11:01 AM
  #23  
Jim Thomerson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,086
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

The real bottom line question here is, Will the AMA continue to hide model aviation under a bushel rather than promoting it? This is a very well established and entrenched part of AMA headquarters culture. I think/hope our new president will be able to overturn and reverse this thinking. It seems to me that this policy of nondisclosure, never sound, is very much less appropriate in the world of today.
Old 11-29-2007, 11:04 AM
  #24  
sscherin
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
sscherin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Eugene, Or
Posts: 1,152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?

The drop from 2003 on probably has a bit to do with disposable income..

Check the unemployment rates for the same time



now Interest Rates


Now in the last few years unemployment rates have dropped but interest rates are on the rise.
The mortgage market is a mess and home values are sinking.
So people don't have the extra cash to keep flying.

Looking closer I see something that I can't explain.. when unemployment is up so is membership..
Old 11-29-2007, 11:43 AM
  #25  
STLPilot
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan, NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Historical membership figures?


ORIGINAL: Jim Thomerson

The real bottom line question here is, Will the AMA continue to hide model aviation under a bushel rather than promoting it? This is a very well established and entrenched part of AMA headquarters culture. I think/hope our new president will be able to overturn and reverse this thinking. It seems to me that this policy of nondisclosure, never sound, is very much less appropriate in the world of today.
But Jim the real question is, who is the AMA? The people in Muncie? No, they are just the operations for the membership. We are the AMA and the EC and Muncie have given the members PLENTY of resources to help promote the hobby. If the members can't do the actual legwork, then what's the point in having any kind of membership or unity in the first place? Maybe we'll just go with KidEpoxy's theory of turning the AMA into a vending machine of low cost products which you can choose from, but no sort of membership required. Do not put the burden on the AMA for not promoting the AMA, especially those in Muncie, that's all they do, everyday from 9-5. We the members are to blame and nobody else. Go talk to some boy scout groups, go build some paper planes with them. Go to a high school and fly on of those butterfly or something small on stage and pass out some black and white flyers. Get out and promote ... if you say the AMA hides under a bushel ... your talking about US and YOU.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.