quote:

ORIGINAL: HighPlains

Hi Dave,

I think that MA provides a great service. Of all the magazines that I buy or receive, it is the only one that I read cover to cover and study a number of articles. I think that I can carry the burden of a NICKLE a day for all time to come.

Changes I’d like to see:

I would drop out of it is all the beginner stuff that was recently put in. That stuff doesn’t change much from year to year, so could be bundled into a separate publication and sent ONCE to new members.

I would also ignore articles on ARF’s. There is plenty of focus on this aspect by the non-modeling modeling press. Absolutely boring!

Get more into the leading edge or bleeding edge of technology in all phases of competition. This has always been where the future of the hobby develops.

Keep up the great work.

Bob Dible
AMA 41701

quote:

ORIGINAL: mongo

it is Academy of MODEL aeronautics, not Academy of READY TO FLYERS aeronautics.

and since words do have meanings, maby we should start to weed out those that do not belong in our group of MODELERS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson


//SNIP//

Assuming the audit report paints an accurate picture of the magazine operation, in round numbers, it appears as an expense of roughly $1,000.000. Divide the million by, say 155,000 (figuring that not all youth memberships or 2nd family members receive the magazine) and that works out to about $6.45. So the question becomes could we create a black & white "newsletter" including paper, ink, printing, postage and the labor to put it all together for .54 per copy? I don't know.

Do you think we might do better if we tried to reduce the operating "loss" of MA by increasing, as an example, non dues revenue from things like adjusting advertising rates, improving subscription sales, etc. I agree with everything you say about the goals of a non-profit organization. It's just not as black and white to me that doing what you suggest is going to have the result you're expecting. The only way to really know would be for somebody to sit down and actually crunch some numbers. Does any of this make sense or do you think I'm missing something?
Dave

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson

Assuming the audit report paints an accurate picture of the magazine operation, in round numbers, it appears as an expense of roughly $1,000.000. Divide the million by, say 155,000 (figuring that not all youth memberships or 2nd family members receive the magazine) and that works out to about $6.45. So the question becomes could we create a black & white "newsletter" including paper, ink, printing, postage and the labor to put it all together for .54 per copy? I don't know.
Dave

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum

Jay,
You went the wrong way with the conversation...... but I find it difficult to call a guy who buys a ready built airframe and hangs a radio and engine in it a modeler. He may fly well, he may have LOTS and LOTS of 'stuff', but unless he can build (even with poor finishes) I don't think he represents a modeler. That is NOT a bad thing, just like having red hair is not a bad thing. If YOU choose to make it a bad thing, I know many ARF only folks who would be willing to argue the point with you.

quote:

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillyGoat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson

Assuming the audit report paints an accurate picture of the magazine operation, in round numbers, it appears as an expense of roughly $1,000.000. Divide the million by, say 155,000 (figuring that not all youth memberships or 2nd family members receive the magazine) and that works out to about $6.45. So the question becomes could we create a black & white "newsletter" including paper, ink, printing, postage and the labor to put it all together for .54 per copy? I don't know.
Dave

Dave, by your numbers MA represents $6.45 of my dues. Which I will have to admit is a bargain even though I rarely read it. As our club’s newsletter editor I’ve calculated it cost us approx $.90 to print and mail a single, three page, edition of the newsletter to a member. For the AMA to send an entire magazine for $.54 is great!

So in reality MA is an operating marvel (at roughly1/3 of it’s allocation of $18.00) instead of the money-losing proposition it has been labeled in this thread?

Personally I’d like to see the stock on which MA is published changed. As an example R/C Report is printed on a non-glossy paper, unlike MA. And I’ll read R/C Report twice before reading MA. Publishing on a “newsprint” certainly has to be less expensive, plus once R/C Report’s glossy cover is taken off it’s suitable for recycling, again unlike MA. Since the purpose of MA is a newsletter for AMA members, the shinny glitz of full color glossy print is just unnecessary excess.