2005 MAAC Nats

2005 MAAC Nats
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> M.A.A.C. >> 2005 MAAC Nats Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 2:00:12 AM

kenair

Posts: 493
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Status: offline

Scuttlebut around the campfire at this past weekend fly-in was that the registration at the maac nats was low - what's the word down east?
maac nats

< Message edited by kenair -- 7/18/2005 11:27:44 PM >

_____________________________

[link]http://www.upaero.com/[/link]

Post #: 1

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 3:05:21 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Scuttlebut....

What little involvement I've had with these things, I can tell you that you offer everything, and cancel those events that fail to produce registrations. I think we can expect some events to be cancelled due to lack of participation. I think this is sound fiscal responsibility.

I only reply because, based on past history... 'someone' will be spinning "event cancellation due to lack of interest" to insinuate some failing of the organisers.

Further, given the recent sporadic Nats offerings, I think it's reasonable to view this as a building time. In my humble opinion, we need to get a few years of scheduled Nats back to back to build the numbers back up to where they once were.... maybe even beyond.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 2

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 3:37:58 PM

kenair

Posts: 493
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

I only reply because, based on past history... 'someone' will be spinning "event cancellation due to lack of interest" to insinuate some failing of the organisers.

Jim, you are the KING of spinning, so it's only natural spin was in your first reply to the topic.
Long Live the King of Spin.!

I also see the pre-registration dealine was extended.

_____________________________

[link]http://www.upaero.com/[/link]

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 3

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 4:05:27 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Thanks 'bud'.

"KING of spinning" I like it. My spin scores have improved since it was pointed out to me that I was failing to enter correctly (aircraft not fully stalled).... Ooops, I guess I missed your "spin", you were referring to politics rather than flying .... as usual.

You're just sore that I may have stole your thunder before you could pounce in the event of bad news related to MAAC eh?

Maybe you should ask yourself, what kind of person goes hunting for bad news, hoping to find it...?

Here's to another successful Nationals, regardless of how it may be spun by those "in-the-know" types who don't compete, volunteer or even attend!

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 4

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 4:27:38 PM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

.......you two stop dancing.

What was heard that registrations were around 75 of an expected 200.

Bottom line:

That sounds like another large financial loss in the making if these numbers hold true. We need to learn from our past mistakes.

All the political BS aside. If we are on track for another big single event loss, shut the damn thing down and cut losses. It's the responsible thing to do.

Wasting money for a "concept" that nobody is buying into is stupid. Not spin. Good sense.

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 5

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 4:29:49 PM

kenair

Posts: 493
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Status: offline

Actually it's just news!

_____________________________

[link]http://www.upaero.com/[/link]

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 6

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 4:43:05 PM

britbrat

Posts: 3299
Joined: 6/15/2004
From: Deep River, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

I hope that the event is successfull. The consequences of failure would be unpleasant for the organizers, the parent organization (MAAC) & all of the rest of us, as the "dancing" in the aftermath would likely become a bit noisy & unfreindly.

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 7

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 4:55:41 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

No... actually it's just scuttlebut as Ken originally pointed out, unless you can verify that who you heard from, has real information.

As for shutting down the Nats (Jim sighs, trying to remain calm

) ....

I think the Nats are in a rebuilding phase.
Personally, I see no issues with running the Nats at a small deficit, not only as a service to modellers, but as an investment in the future. MAAC is not a for-profit organization, it is a service organization. Services cost money. It's nice when you can recover some costs, even nicer when you can turn a profit... But that seems very difficult these days.... why should MAAC be "raked over the coals" for what so many other service organizations have failed at?

If you'll allow me to draw a parallel, I've had a little experience at getting new companies "off the ground". Any company who's prospetus claims to turn a profit within the first 18 months, is probably not worth investing in as it's too good to be true. I think it's unfortunate that many expect to simply turn the switch on, and have a large event like this be a financial success out the door. Competing at a Nationals is not something individuals simply show up to like a funfly. It takes preparation .... for example, I wasn't ready to compete at this level this year, I couldn't get my work schedule co-ordinated to allow me to be there, let alone have a documented aircraft (and myself) ready.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to kenair)

Post #: 8

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 7:08:34 PM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

I hear what you are saying Jim, but MAAC isn't a fledgling organization. We seem to have gotten in the habit of sucking up some big losses for single events and I don't agree with that.

It becomes expected that the rest of us should be funding the fun for a limited number of members, most of whom seem to be the same people because there appears to be little new interest in serious competition.

I could probably stomach a "small loss", but if this is looking like losses are going to reach up beyond a few thousand bucks, then I believe the smart thing to do is move on and hope for a better response in BC. In light of MAAC's budget woes,it would appear that we have better places to invest our money than in making the same mistakes over and over.

Yep, we need some real numers. Perhaps you can ask those on the committee what they are? I know they won't give them to me.

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 9

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 9:28:15 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

I think we must disagree on your statement of "little new interest in competition"...

No MAAC is not a fledgling company but, a Nationals is a new venture, as it has not had a stable history of recent.

I'm not on the Nationals committee, and don't pretend to be "in the know", given the politics surrounding the event, I think any communication should come directly from them.

I find it difficult to believe there could be a loss "in the thousands" for a National level event. There's simply no need for expenses like accomodating international judges etc.

The sky is not falling and I would think the current exec would be on top of the situation.... why not exercise your rights and call your Zone rep?

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)

Post #: 10

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/18/2005 10:10:44 PM

reo

Posts: 231
Joined: 12/15/2003
From: Millet, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

Even IF we get 200 to register for the Nats this is still less than 2% of the total membership participating. Maybe not a relative comparison but if a business ran and advertised a sale and less than 2% of the 'customers' responded the sale would be classed as a failure and not repeated.

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 11

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/19/2005 1:09:21 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

That's a poor comparison, how are the Nationals to be compared to a sale?
That would be like saying advertising at the superbowl is a bad idea because most customers don't compete in the superbowl....

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to reo)

Post #: 12

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/19/2005 3:48:09 PM

Sharpy01

Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre

That's a poor comparison, how are the Nationals to be compared to a sale?
That would be like saying advertising at the superbowl is a bad idea because most customers don't compete in the superbowl....

......that comparison isn't that good either. The main difference there is that a rather large percentage of "non-participants" in the superbowl have an interest in the event.

Again, the problem I have is the potential for avoidable losses to the association being incurred. What I do know, from my ZD, is that board approval and some "seed money" was given to the event prior to a proper budget submission. What I don't know is how much that was and what the numbers needed to be to break-even and repay that money? I think the budget should be posted on the MAAC website so the membership knows the facts.

I would be very interested to know if there are other expenses that are expected to be covered by a minimum number of entries that the committee will look to the association to cover if more losses beyond any "seed" money.

I would like to know if the minimum "break-even" number of participants required was pulled out of the air or based on past event participation numbers, etc, etc.

This isn't about vague "romantic" ideals of past history, bla, bla...........it's about being responsible with the membership's money, particularly in light of or known budgetary situation.

It shouldn't upset anyone or be taken personally.

I will be asking through "proper" channels for details related to this event, including the full budget and moneys that have been forwarded and intend to post every last bit of it for all members to review. .........I also expect that I won't be provided with it, but will instead receive some lame reasons why I can't have it.

.....stay tuned.

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)

Post #: 13

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 7/19/2005 4:53:49 PM

Jim_McIntyre

Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharpy01
......that comparison isn't that good either. The main difference there is that a rather large percentage of "non-participants" in the superbowl have an interest in the event.

... you're assuming the opposite viewpoint. Fine. Both are assumptions but you state yours as fact ... this is what I often refer to as spinning....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharpy01
... What I do know, from my ZD, is that board approval and some "seed money" ...

So what you're saying basically, is you don't trust the board to make decisions....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharpy01
It shouldn't upset anyone or be taken personally.

Unless there is an established track record of how such information is used and abused...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharpy01
.........I also expect that I won't be provided with it, but will instead receive some lame reasons why I can't have it.

See above.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)