AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

J-R wrote:

What does that have to do with the issue of presenting informaion developed for a club in a .pdf file on the AMA site? Information whose development was required by the by-laws?

Dues and land acquisition are another issue. Try creating another thread.


And after thinking about it, I decided that is a good subject to be beat up on for a while. My observation is that the biggest thing Muncie has brought to the AMA is several dues increases. Remember when they went to $42 because of the cash flow problems with the self insurance just after we were told that Muncie had been bought? Anyone got a better memory?

How many times have we heard someone somewhere talk about buying airports, hotels, and houses?

How many remember that last dues increase that was to solve a cash flow problem? Do you recall we paid more dues and then in February bought the IMS show? I recall raising lots of flack over that and being told that the purpose was to lower the dues of the membership. Anyone look lately and notice that the "profit" from that show is less than ONE dollar per member per year.


The point is that we recently underwent a LARGE dues increase. Any guesses what the AMA will buy next?

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

It seems there is a constant flow of real estate around the National Flying site. In addition to improvements, there seem to be purchases and sales. It might be that the acquisitions are protecting the boundaries against noise complaints. Some of the dealings might be necessary. There was an item in the EC minutes sometime back about leasing out some land for an EMT facility. That seemed like a good idea, even if it’s not profitable. On the other hand, I am having a very difficult time understanding why we should purchase Reese Airport.

One of the problems in trying to figure out what is going on, is that committee reports are submitted to the EC during EC meetings and the reports are purportedly never reduced to electronic formats suitable for posting on the net. I assume that the reports were prepared using a word processor, rather than longhand or a typewriter. It’s hard for me to understand why a requirement to submit electronic files along with written reports is not in place. Additionally, there are committee reports that are given verbally, with no written record at all. If this practice continues, it seems to me that the sessions should be recorded and either a transcription made or streaming audio be made available of such verbal reports.

It would seem the technology is here to make records and put them on the AMA site for all proceedings, other than Executive Sessions. There certainly should be records of Executive Sessions, that are not realeased to the membership. There is no apparent reason for Appendices and Committee Reports can not to be made available to the membership on the website.

If there is a Master Plan for Muncie, it should be made available to the membership. If there is no Master Plan, there should be. A hodgepodge of purchases and sales is not an acceptable way to operate a $25 million corporation (estimated value supplied by the president in a discussion).

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

I have a difficult time understanding why we have a national flying site. What a grand idea but is it fair to have a huge percentage of the membership finically support something we will never utilize?[:@]

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

If this upsets you, look around......Will I ever go to Iraq? Seems we are supporting that with our $$$.
I'm a long time EAA member, donated to build the museum and I have never flown in to Oshkosh. I belong to the ARRL (Ham radio) and I have never been to Hqtrs and operated the station there. The list could go on. Once you understand that our society will never be 100% fair, life gets much better.

One thing the National Flying site does that you can't put a dollar value on is it helps with creditability when we are viewed from other agencies, like the FAA, FCC etc.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

And why Muncie Indiana? Is it because it's kind of in the middle of the united states? I just can't seem to get the family wound up for a trip to Muncie Indiana. Does anyone know if there is anything else for a family to do in that area?

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Maybe not, but would you rather have Saddam come after your *****?

By the same notion, the AMA does put on contests, some to world contestants and audiance. Is the land more expensive than leasing sites throughtout the nation? You would have to add the increase in the value of the land to come up with that answer.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Hi ya;ll,
National Muncie site>
Have not seen this mentioned>
Before Muncie one item of major cost was the annual NATS.
This was deployed about the country (that had merits?) and the needs
for the meet were stored at headquarters and had to be taken to each site. Also numerous employees had to leave headquarters for NATS time.
The whole bit was both costly and time consuming.
Muncie relieved all that?
Same for the World Champs we entertain.
Also the national site allows other neat functions and flying AMA style.
Then all AMA groups have access to the facility for there own events.
Know that before Reston Va. AMA leased needed facilities. When Reston
was acquired the cost dropped and we acquired equity which eventually
became enough to allow Muncie.
There are more excellent reasons for Muncie but these alone mahe a
solid foundation?
How's zat?

Hal deBolt AMA 1520

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Hal,
I have a commercial/instrument ticket and an understanding. Avaiation is a black hole that sucks money. I percieve Muncie is a necessary evil, but the approach that has been used is right out of the avaiation world. All I see Muncie doing is acting like a black sink hole that needs more and more money.

The question is WHEN is enough? The secondary question is does ANYONE have any idea what the PLAN really is? Can you prove it?

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Why not take a trip and find out for yourself (lol)

....ghost rider.....out (from the corn fields of Indiana and 55 minutes drive away from AMA)

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

To JB and JR et. al.

memory is good enough for horrible.

Let's not forget the magnificent Model Aviation magazine that was some 25 years ago set up to finance AMA. I still be a'waitin' fer that!!:(
Just think, (read the audit reports) Model Aviation management can spend almost a dollar for production expenses and the commission to the adv. agent -- DB's neighbor (20+/- miles) -- for each $ the agent brings in. [:-] THE MAGAZINE IS FINANCED BY THE MEMBER DUES. So much for any long range plan , eh, JR? Unless the plan is really to furnish jobs for special good-ol-boys. :eek: See later!
Even DM doesn't touch that one very much. My question, in his forum, was answered very politically. Of course if he loses the election he still has to face that crowd. I will wait to see.

Buy an airport! What else?

07/02/04 EC Minutes, President's Report:
>>>"Authorization was given for an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the Reese Airport property and AMA has received the Phase I assessment. It was suggested to proceed with a Phase II ESA. (Cost approximately $7,500-$15,000.) Prior to the Phase II assessment, the Executive Director will request 3-5 year financials on the airport. "
<<<

Phase II (P-2) is just before the purchase. The current owner definitely does not want a P-2 unless he is ready to sell because he doesn't want a bad report in the history.
If the intent to purchase is not serious, then the AMA's CURRENT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER -- THE EVP -- is definitely OK with wasting a chunk of change for no anticipated return. No use doing a P-2 then waiting while the owner dumps a truck-load of contaminated waste over the property.

The current President has wanted that airport for some time. He told me directly to my face on two occassions, one at Muncie and at the first SWAC in Arlington, TX.

Same EC meeting but the EVP's report;
>>>"There will be changes in how things appear in the financial statements; requests for more information and questions should be directed to the EVP."

"The EVP explained that Congress wants to pass a law that states every three or four years each C3 organization must review its purpose and reapply for C3 status."
<<<

Let me think: AMA buys an airport. DB has a place to keep his airplanes. DB sells DB Products and becomes MORE wealthy. DB moves close to Muncie. By that time an AMA Foundation, (501 (c) (3) will be started and most administrative assets transferred to that unit. AMA loses (gives up) its IRC 501 (c) (3) Much of the fiscal and real assets stay with the AMA per se and then AMA becomes the holding company for a very profitable Insurance Company handling member claims. DB as Pres. of the AMA's Captive Insurance company can also hold that Lobby Job in DC for a couple days a week get-away. Besides being the CEO of AMA, and President of the Insurance company, he is a big wig in DC.

H_ll, JR, there just may well be a long range plan after all. [>:]

BTW JR. Those committee reports could be outlined in the EC minutes. I suspect there are very good reasons. 'er excuses that is, why some are, and some are not.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

First lets drop the Iraq thing, that doesn’t belong in RCU!

I don’t begrudge a flying site that only select few ever enjoy, my beef is paying to support it every year. I looked up the other two organizations you mention and guess what? they both have a yearly dues that is 30% less than the AMA. If the AMA had comparable yearly dues AND supported a national flying site, you and I wouldn’t be exchanging pleasantries.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Let us not forget that Dave Mathewson is the majority owner of a private airport in NY. The idea of the AMA owning an airport probably sounds good to him too.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Let us not forget that Dave Mathewson is the majority owner of a private airport in NY. The idea of the AMA owning an airport probably sounds good to him too.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

While I fully support the notion of the national flying site, and would like to see several (or more) such sites all around the country, I do not see any reason for the AMA to own an airport. If someone can explain to me how owning an airport is beneficial or supports the AMA mission of MODEL aviation, then maybe I will change my mind, but until then...NO AIRPORT FOR AMA![:@]

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Hey Billy,

In his forum, Mathewson has ALREADY said he is against the purchase of Reese and stated his ownership of one airport has taught him all he wants the AMA to know about it.

Your other comment about paying for Muncie every year is more nearly on target than not. IIRC 'we' worked out total insurance costs to be around (lets be generous here) say $15. That would adjust our dues down to $43 which is still more than AOPA dues. MA can be considered a wash as AOPA has a magazine also. Now we might be able to scream and holler a bit because MA seems to be a cost center rather than a profit center, but I perceive that as just another reason for someone to raise our dues again.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

I used Iraq as an analogy of support and not to argue the event. Maybe I should have used sometime like the Secret Service that we supply all past Presidents for life after they leave office or some such thing. Pick your own.

You are correct on the dues, but neither one of the others supply insurance as the AMA does.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Hi Horrace

Did DB say why he wanted an airport? That is a question I would love to know the answer to. My assumptions are similar to yours.

The current size of the site in Muncie stands at about 1100 acres. Just how much of IN does the AMA intend to own? That is really the question. Do you suppose there really is an answer?

I looked at your comments in Mathewson’s forum again, relative to MA. Perhaps if you asked a question, he would answer it. You made a statement, then said don’t answer it.

Since you communicate with DB, you might want to discuss the captive with him. Things are not always as they appear.
*********


Jim Branaum

Your paraphrase of Dave Mathewson’s post about Reese Airport is a little strong, in my opinion. This was part of his actual response:

“Here's were I stand based only on the limited facts I have in front of me. I'm not sure AMA should be in the FBO business. I've been over to Reese quite a few times and I think I have a pretty good concept of the operation. Coincidently I own a small airport very similar to Reese but, IMO, a notch or two better with 10 or 12 more airplanes hangared there. Unless something dramatic comes to light, I don't see me changing my mind. As far as buying the property as farmland only as a buffer, I'd need a whole lot more information before I could make a decision . Right now there are some things over there that worry me more than the need to have a buffer to be protected against some future development that may or may not happen. I still have a lot of questions that need answers.
Dave”
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_20...anchor/tm.htm#
*********

IIRC the cost of all insurance for the membership, clubs and landlords was estimated more closely to $22 per year of open member dues, including the Self Insurance Reserve (SIR). Model Aviation Magazine comes out to about $6.50 per year of open member dues. After looking at the financial statements for several years, it appears there is about $3-$5 “discretionary” income. It appears most of that goes toward the National Flying site, not including HQ operations or the self sustaining museum, which are in the other costs. I could see spending money for a new museum building long before the purchase of a full sized airport, but, that is just my opinion.

I am not in love with the Muncie location, nor how the purchase was made. Having said that, the cost of living and attendant cost of labor is lower than many other areas. HQ needs to exist, as does the museum, to maintain the IRS 501 (c) 3 status of the AMA. I thought the “floating” NATS was a very positive thing for the AMA, even if it cost a little each year. The fact is: Muncie is there, and it is not going away anytime soon. The AMA seems to have realized the positive effects of a traveling NATS. The GRAND EVENT now attempts to get some of that enthusiasm spread around the country. It seems to be having a problem finding hosts, since it needs to be self supporting. D VIII has just stepped up for the next one. It’s nice to see that areomodeling will get exposure to the general public at this event. Let’s hope that, as time goes on, this event grows.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

J_R,


If we assume your insurance cost numbers are on target, and I recall them as being more like $12 but I have been mistaken from time to time, the comparison is a good one.

However I think that rather than raise dues we should insist the MA at least operate at a $0 cost to the membership. I would prefer it become a profit center, but that word seems to be a significant curse word to many since they would rather tax and spend.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

As opposed to the "good guys", who would rather borrow and spend. ;)

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Jim

You have to realize that there is no subscription income. As Horrace suggested, maybe some amount of dues should be directly set aside for the purpose of offsetting that lack of income. He suggested $5, which seems reasonable.

On the other hand, it would be interesting to get an explaination for the cost of advertising approaching the selling price of advertising.

There are two issues. One: that the AMA have a newsletter. On that issue, $6.50 seems reasonable. Two: MA should be treated as a business (less subscriptions) and should stand on it's own two feet.

Until some explaination is forthcoming, it's hard to make a legitimate assesment.

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Ref; the airport: The only reason ever given was for more land for the Free Flight crowd. :eek::eek: Yep, Sure!

Muncie: 1100 acres. Look at the site map. There are a number of acres that have a significant amount of long-distance power lines across them. Must have been a good buy!!

I tried not to place a direct load on DM, and his answers empty of much volunteer information;

quote:
<<<<<<<
ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson

Hi Jim,
It was a great weekend........ if you were a penguin.

I think that's a legitimate question. I'm not totally familiar with the advertising rates for the other publications but I'll take your word for it and make a couple comments in general.

First I think it's important that we (the Council) allow the paid staff, the experts, the latitude to run the day to day operations of the organization. That's not to say that we shouldn't oversee the operation, set direction, and be ultimately responsible, but we have to rely on the staff to make appropriate decisions in the areas they're educated in.
Now, this really applies to all areas of AMA that are a type of business entity. That would include the magazine, supply and service, custom products, etc. We should look at these as stand alone businesses. The directors and managers should make an effort to make their division as profitable for AMA as possible. The philosophy I'd like to see them bring to the table is to run their "company" as if every expense was a dollar out of their pocket, and every dollar of income was a dollar in. Using that concept it would seem that every entity would be doing its best to improve our "bottom line". For the most part, I think our staff is doing a god job. I know we adjusted our advertising rates a year or little more ago. If it turns out they're unrealistically low, my opinion (without the benefit of an explanation as to why they are what they are) would be that it may be time to take another look.
Dave
>>>>>>>>

Dave, I agree that the EC should set goals and give the tasks to the employees, yet I certainly believe that the EC should MANDATE high-performance levels. That requires that each EC officer be intimately familiar and aware of how the upper management employees are performing.

Model Aviation has lost almost a million dollars each year (in the audit reports) of 2002 and 2003. Outside subscription income in 2003 was some $11,000 less than '02. The advertising income increased by $48,000 yet the amount of advertising has increased by a significantly larger amount. The low cost of the advertising is evidenced in the significant amount of income tax reduction in 2003.
>>>>Income Taxes - The Academy operates as a nonprofit organization and has received exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Academy is, however, subject to unrelated business income tax on magazine subscriptions and magazine advertising. The unrelated business income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 was $105 and $5,950, respectively.<<<<

Now while tax reduction is great, if my taxes dropped such, then it would mean that my income also had dropped. That portion of the taxable income subject to taxes increased by about $36,000 yet tax went down, evidencing a significant change in rates, profits, and/or proportionment. This may well be a good innovative change HOWEVER: OTOH since the expenses of producing the advertising income of $851,000 + change was offset by advertising expenses of $771,740, then there isn't much profit left to pay tax on. Except for some $80,000+/-, the membership foots the entire Model Aviation bill for a number of people to have a fat-cat job where they can do as they please.
Also take a look at the advertising costs which include a 15% commission for the agent over and above the administrative costs. Kind of a fat deal. Easily Sell lots of cheap advtising, get a healthy commission, have no expense and set back with a case of cold ones.

As AMA President I know that little item would get CHANGED. How about YOU, Dave?

Also >>>The Academy of Model Aeronautics, Inc. (the "Academy" was incorporated in 1966 under the laws of the District of Columbia. The Academy's primary objective is to promote the educational and scientific aspects of model aviation.<<<<<

Therefore I think that the EC should mandate that Model Aviation, an unrelated business entity should be separately funded,
separately accounted, and required to live on its own merit. For example, an initial WAG would be that:
(1)AMA provide $5 per open member to the entity of MA along with the minimum requirements of MA to fulfill the
requirements of the stated objective.
(2) All costs are borne by the entity MA.
(3) MA would be required to return 5% of gross to AMA, plus all net profit.
(4) Bonus plans would apply to the employees for all net profits returned. No profit = no bonus, Loss = new managers.
(5) Take a long look at in-house advertising as done by all the other mags that have to make a profit.

Hey Dave, don't try to answer all this in big detail. Just place it all in the memory bank. The fact that you will now be aware of some of the significant items concerning MA expense could help place you in the lead in future discussions.
__________________________
Horrace Cain
AMA 539
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
quote: by DM

ORIGINAL: Hossfly

Dave, as I wrote in the thread "More Model Aviation" the concept and operation of MA as it is, is a prime example of a very poorly managed business. Like any business subsidized by the government, MA subsidized by the AMA membership only leads the managers to accomplish little outside pomp and glitter.
Model Aviation as a non-related business must stand on its own. This can only be done by making the advertising rates competitive with the market. After all, MA has a captive audience of some 160,000 readers.
Fancy colors and glitter in the magazine simply do not justify an expense over and above its income.
I fully understand the needs of the magazine to address all model disciplines. Regardless of other inputs in this thread ARFs are a way of the world in modeling. ARFs, electrics, and turbines are the wave of the future. CL Stunt is not a relatively super popular activity, regardless if it's my favorite thing and obviously the MA Editor's.
MA should go with the trends and contemporary activities while paying token attention to the past and the forecast future.
Most of all MA should pay its way in the world through advertising rates, which don't simply go to pay the agent's commissions and the cost of obtaining the advertising. If the AMA EC produced as much RHETORIC about the losses and costs of MA as they produce about insurance, then those advertising rates would double overnight.


Hi Horrace,
The concept that MA has to work under is that it has to be everything to everybody. It really needs to touch on every discipline and do justice to each. An impossible task at best. At the same time, I agree, it needs to be entertaining and relevant to the interests of the majority of today's members.

I think it was earlier in this thread that I wrote that MA should be operated as a viable business entity. The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost". I don't know that MA could sustain itself without "selling" any subscriptions. I think I would be comfortable with whatever the number was as long as I knew that the magazine operation was being run as well as it could be.
Dave

RE: AMA dues increases and land acquisitions
 

Horrace

Ask Mathewson a question. In the second quote from you I don't detect one ? . He commented on your statement. If there is something specific you want to know, ask. Pose it as a question.

LOL, you have been watching too many of those "interviews" on TV. You know... the ones where the reporter puts the words in the mouth of the interviewee and then adds "isn't that right?".