Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

If anyone cares, the issue of whether MA loses a $mil a year/does the grey text count, has been answered directly by the AMA comptroller over on the AMA (not US/AMA) forum.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/forums/...?m=448&mpage=4

Post #75

Hossfly

Robo, regardless of the circles being run by anyone about the $18, which is nothing more than absolute pure hype used by the knowing to confuse the unlearned, and obviously does, MA as an IRC 501 (c) (3) "Unrelated Business Corporation" is in deficit of over $1,000.000.00 each fiscal year. That information is in BLACK and WHITE within the confounds of the Annual Auditor's Report.

Anything less is nothing but wrangling to hide, and "Two-Step" around the most obvious point in the report.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

so robo, if we take the ama cpa at word, and i see no reason not to, they he is telling us that 11.00 dollars or so of that model aviation cost is in salaries and benefits for staffers, office space and other cost allotments apportioned to model aviation mag. i am guessing the largest part of that being the salaries and benefits portion.

KidEpoxy

But Hoss,
the AMA accountant just said we are to act like it was a separate company, wait... here we go:
"This transfer, on paper only, is for internal use but the idea is to treat publications like a separate company"
See, the AMA guy is telling us it is LIKE a separate company, not that it is.
Cause, if it actually were a separate entity, accounting would just show the millions going back & forth
... so it boils down to
if MA really is structured as IRC 501 (c) (3) "Unrelated Business Corporation"
then Muncie is not being too forthright with us members in their answers

Of course, the real trick is to not mention
if the dues $58 really was $40 Open + $18 directly to MA as 'member subscription revenue',
then that would drop the $7mil AMA Dues Revenue by how much?
The key is to only mention the receiving end of the transfer

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

*sigh*

KidEpoxy

Robo,
perhaps you could put forth your newfound info in application:

You say the answer of
"the issue of whether MA loses a $mil a year/does the grey text count, has been answered directly by the AMA comptroller"
Well,
if we are to stop saying MA is $2mil spent & $1mil Ads Reveue In = $1mil Loss ( by the anual report),
what are you putting in its place? What numbers are you wanting us to use to express MA operations given the new info?
MA Ops: $2.2mil Direct Costs out + $1mil AdRev In + $XXmil Gray18 MemberSubscription Xfer = $??mil MA profit
what do you want us to put in there now for $XXmil Gray18 MemberSubscription Xfer?


(its ok if you dont have an exact amount,
just ballpark it for now,
like "$1.8mil (18x100kguys)" or whatever you figure it to be)

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

Sounds like a good formula and it happens to reflect a change in the formula that some have tried to use for years in arguing the MA profitabilty point.

The formula that disregarded member subcription tranfer $ was/is incorrect. That is the position many, including mtself, have held through this long and drawn out debate.

Second guessing and speculation has been eliminated.

Put to rest. Over.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Look guys, I haven't said anything much about MA finances since in my mind MA is merely another tool that AMA uses to increase its hold on the model aviation community...therefore I see MA and AMA as one all inclusive package indivisible by the other.

In my mind AMA uses the power (money) of its membership base to provide a magazine that other publications can hardly compete with. (one of the longer threads on RCU is about RCM…)

Now, some will see this as promotion of the hobby and others will disagree…the difference will reside in gullibility or blind allegiance IMO. We probably all know of at least one fellow that says you should “fly blind the AMA way�…or something like that, such as some guy does at that other site…but I think AMA may have him on the payroll…so he doesn’t count for much but I think he has some empty head followers though.

Bottom line, AMA and MA are inseparable and it is the bigger picture that we should focus on. While we focus on this bit of minutia, bigger moves are being made in the name of MAP (model aviation promotion) by, but for AMA.

Hossfly

Robo, et. al., I was there on the EC when the big MA was being developed. MA was to be a money making vehicle for AMA to not have to increase dues. MA was going to pay most of AMA's expenses. Then one of the first things that caused the brown nosed EC members to hate Horrace Cain surfaced. I was adamantly against the plan, because any person with any concept of associations could see the immense flaws.
In addition the AMA/EC has lied, side-stepped, avoided, and obscured information on a continuos basis. That is the way associations exist. I am an ardent supporter of the NRA. Yet, I have strong objections to their member operation which is as confused as anyone could even imagine. OTOH, they keep government at bay as there are so many politicians that will destroy everything about personal freedom. In fact look what happened the past evening, 11-07-09, another '07 date of infamy.

If you might remember, AMA hid the purchase of the Northrop trade show for months, because a dues increase was used to make the purchase.
Before AMA purchased the Muncie site, I prepared a large document concerning the plan and the area where AMA should locate. That study probably hit the File 13 before it was even opened, yet AMA spokes persons have testified that no one cared to send in any desires concerning AMA's intent to purchase acreage.

Now if you go back and research your old magazines, you will find that as soon as the 2003 dues increase passed, $48 Open dues to $58, Open dues. The gray figure immediately jumped from $12 to $18, a $6 increase - 60% of the total dues increase - was allocated to building up a frigging Association Media, which should be self supporting, as most are, and placed on the shoulders of the membership to bear.

Edited to add: Also you will find EC testimony that the dues increase was because of insurance expense, and to preclude another increase within a couple years. THE TRUTH is that the dues increase was simply to fatten the MA purse to increase the magazine bureaucracy. YOU keep electing these people. [sm=confused.gif]

So argue, P&M, formulate and do as you wish. The bottom line of MA is:

1.) MA Advertising is only a self supporting bureaucratic make-work activity that basically produces nothing of value as far as AMA's organizational message-media is concerned.

2.) The AMA Open membership dues provide the expense monies of the production of AMA's informational newsletter as sent to the membership labeled Model Aviation.

3.) As a member-paid product, the media "Model Aviation" would cost little or nothing more to the membership if it were just a magazine without advertising, and thus require much less of a bureaucracy. But then of course the Peter Principle would be sacrificed.

4.) Model Aviation, as a separate "unrelated business" as defined under the IRC 501 (c) (3), and exclusively owned by the Academy of Model Aeronautics, costs the membership over one million dollars per year as substantiated by the annual audits of AMA's financial position.

5.) Advertising in the magazine makes no difference as it stands. No advertising could possibly reduce the staff expenses and thus reduce production costs.

So that is the final epitaph for those desiring to put it all to rest.

KidEpoxy

Robo,
Let me try again-


perhaps you could put forth your newfound info in application:

You say the answer of
"the issue of whether MA loses a $mil a year/does the grey text count, has been answered directly by the AMA comptroller"
Well,
if we are to stop saying MA is $2mil spent & $1mil Ads Reveue In = $1mil Loss ( by the anual report),
what are you putting in its place? What numbers are you wanting us to use to express MA operations given the new info?
MA Ops: $2.2mil Direct Costs out + $1mil AdRev In + $XXmil Gray18 MemberSubscription Xfer = $??mil MA profit
what do you want us to put in there now for $XXmil Gray18 MemberSubscription Xfer?


Cause a lot of us want to see how many millions you want to transfer out of the AMA $7mil Dues
to be able say MA takes in that many million by the transfer.
Are you going to say $2mil?
Are we to drop the AMA Dues Revenue from $7mil down to $5mil..... to show where MA is getting its $2mil FROM?

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

Perhaps you would like to put a number there. For all I care you can use the IIRC $17.87 the comptroller used. Have a ball. It's your obsession, not mine.

Twist and shout buddy.

KidEpoxy

Obsession?
Just who started this RCU thread, buddy?

If AMA now spends $2mil on MA, and gets $1mil back,
we are still just where we were for years: Million Dollar moneypit.
What new info changes that

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Calling others obsessed after posting this sweaty palmed and hand wringing thread is too funny.
The pot calling the kettle black.

The final proof about all this will come in the future as either the cookie will continue to crumble or there will be future prosperity.

How's it lookin' so far?

Put to rest?

Over?

Better call in Baghdad Bob for a better version of the truth.

skipperwayne

Robo, you're right. The comptroler answered the question. Some people won't be happy until they redefine the word 'is'.

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

I posted the link to the AMA site.

There's plenty of info there for anyone who cares to go there and look.

The punks can have their playground back now.

804

My Feedback: (1)

Right, just like we were when you asked what's-his-name at AMA for an accounting. $18/member, $6/member, what the blank does it matter? It's statistics, or statistical lies, depending on your viewpoint.
Everything else staying the same, overhead-wise, I figure if AMA loses another 17,000 members, give or take, there goes the 1 mil subsidy. Considering it has gone from 173k to 142k, 31k by my math, losing another 17,000 isn't a stretch. Then, it would take a dues increase of about $8 to make that up.

Some folks are comfortable with that, some aren't. Some don't give a R's A. Like you said, what new info changes that?

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

I understand now. You and your oxpecker consider starting a thread that points folks to the AMA's comptollers direct answer is an obsession. Numerous posts that ignore that information is what? Your version of what you want to believe is the truth. You have been saying over, and over, and over, for years, that the gray text subscription monies don't count toward MA profitability. You have been told, officially, that they indeed do count.

Obsession, denial, take your pick. Better to turn your full attention to the metal prop ban.

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

Again, posting a direct link to official information is obsession? Don't think so. Sweaty palmed and hand wringing? Where'd you get that? You're the joke that's too funny.

And not the ha-ha funny either.

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

You win. I keep responding to this post/drivel, using as much restraint as possible, and it gets deleted.

I'm gone.

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

Well, hmmm, let's quote someone, somebody ........ you.

"Yeah, its a transfer of Gray$18($mils) out of AMA to MA, and then another transfer of MA Profit to zero sum MA and give AMA a 'Owned Subsidiary Corp Revenue' line"

Emphasis added.


Million dollar moneypit? Valuable member benefit? That's just opinion. You say you like to deal with facts. You got them. Own it.

Next up: AMA insurance coverage, the humongus moneypit ............

KidEpoxy

Robo-
so you just plan on never letting us know how many millions we have transfer?

Its a simple question, no need for all your spin & misdirection.
You said the MA financing was put to rest,
yet you continue to refuse to provide the simple number (in millions) added to the MA bottom line ( & reduces the AMA Dues$7mil)

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

No misdirection or spin on my part. We have a definitive answer from the AMA. I have not added or changed it one iota. You are trying to spin off the fact that a long argued issue has been clarified and your pet issue and the ability to argue it has been seriously curtailed. If you want you can argue that the comptroller is lying but other than that the issue has been put to rest.

Maybe if you want those numbers that concern you so greatly you should ask the AMA comptroller. He has numbers and columns and all sorts of neat stuff. He can give you an official, authoritative and accurate answer like he did with your last question.

We can continue with conjecture and second guessing for a gazillion posts like with the gray text issue or just get an answer straight from the horses mouth. I'll look in on that thread for your question and the answer.

Just follow the link I gave in the original post, scroll to the bottom, and ask away. Anything else is recreational arguing.

KidEpoxy

"We have a definitive answer from the AMA."

great, lets hear the how many million then


"Maybe if you want those numbers that concern you so greatly you should ask the AMA comptroller"
wait... didnt you just say we just got the answer?

Cause you linked in post#1 a thread where I asked AMA about the member cost,
as clearly evidenced on the first page of the thread
by me having to explain to the griping folks what I wanted the info for.... and it was explained that it was for later use in debating Optional MA. Thats the little piece of info we got from AMA, individual cost to member, not the actual sum of how many millions MA is making or losing.

YOU are claiming it puts the MA financing to rest- the AMA guy didnt say that & I didnt say that.
You make the claim it is put to rest
but you cant answer the most basic of accounting question on MA: How much in & how much out.

If you cant answer that for starters,
then obviously it hasnt been put to rest at all.

You made the claim, and you are refusing to support your statement at the most basic level.
To wit:
I hypothesize that MA is only getting $25k transfered in vis Gray$18 from the $7milDues
If that is true, then MA is still losing a million dollars itself.

Well, Robo, does my hypothesis hold water
... or do you have some other Gray18 amount in the millions that you think we should use?
According to your thread topic, its been solved, so lets have it.

Robotech

My Feedback: (9)

From the same thread.

KE said:

Lets Review:
Kid Epoxy asked.
Kid Epoxy has cheerfully accepted the answer. (fits his grand scheme sweet)

Not too cheery anymore or what?

Anyways .........
It's not that I can't, it's that I won't.
You cannot suck me into your recreational arguing and twisted prose.

Done.

Put to rest.

Finished.

Adios muchacho.

KidEpoxy

What answer are you citing?
I sure did cheerfully accept the $18 member cost answer,
but there has been no XX??? millions answer regarding bottomline MA operations: How much IN and how much OUT.

even though you have been asked repeatedly here to provide it
you/we dont have that number


MA ops 2008: $2.2million OUT, how many millions IN?

NOT
PUT
TO
REST
.






but it is great, really sweet, to get the official MA accounting answer that
$58 Open is really $40 Open + $18 MA
cause that will be a great starting point for discussing in some other thread
$58 OpenMA & $40 OpenNoMA options in the future.
So obviously I am tickled that we heard from muncie that its $40 + $18,
but left wondering about MA Ops $2.2mil OUT how many mil IN?