AMA insurance  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> AMA insurance
Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
AMA insurance - 11/12/2002 12:02:47 PM   
Dave Bowles


 

Posts: 575
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: KS
Status: offline 		I don't know the complete history of how the AMA started the insurance Benefit, I do know it was not part of the AMA when they first started . But Looking at how Model Aviation has grown I would guess it was necessity and attracting more members and remember AMA was started when Free flight was the main activity. At some point it became apparent to clubs and land owners that liability insurance is going to be needed, Cost being the biggest factor, the AMA choose to seek a inexpensive option for clubs. Part of the reason the AMA insurance is cheap is because of the AMAs rules and guidelines . I think many people forget that there is more to it than their own membership insurance, you can't expect a carrier to cover a property without some kind controls.
IMO , sometime in the near future you are going to see Home Owner and Umbrella Policies excluding model aircraft liability because more people are getting larger and faster aircraft. Its just a matter of time before they get wind if the potential damger and eather up the premiums or drop it. My life insurance will not pay off if I do many activities, I can't die while offroad Motorcycle riding or ATV , SkyDiving, Ultralight Aircraft, Private Aircraft, Auto Racing, MVA death without seatbelt, and the list goes on. So I don't see it being a wise decision of the AMA members to want to get rid of the insurance any time soon .

Mentioned earlier
The problem you are going to run into with open insurance is you are not going to find very many carriers that are willing to cover against liability of a property (club) without a uniform set of rules and Safety Guidelines, They are going to require each user of the field have their own liability , and will probably require some kind if assurance that the users are qualified to operate a Model Aircraft. IMO you are going to run into much more Hassles than now.

Lets look at what the AMA insurance does ..

1- Its inexpensive and easy to set up for clubs and members.

2- AMA Safety Guidelines already meet the carriers concerns.

3- Mandatory Membership ensures the Carrier That all users are following the same Safety Guidelines.

4- With the exception of certain Aircraft, there are no requirement as to skill level of its members.

5 Carrier is covering every member with almost no history or information about the members.

I have no problem with Competition or choices as long as they are offering as good as service as AMA, and I mean all the services. So far , all the alternatives that have tried have fallen way short of what the AMA provides making AMA still the best choice , and why Clubs choose to go with AMA , and why you and I are required to be AMA members to fly at those facilities.

Sence the insurance is a big attraction and numbers certianly help the organizaton I don't see the insurance being dropped unless the premiums get to high or our current carrier drops us.
( then we are all screwed)

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 26

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/12/2002 1:19:13 PM   
J_R


 

Posts: 4446
Joined: 1/4/2002
From: Corona, CA,
Status: offline 		Dave Bowles

Do not take this unkindly. You are not paying attention. The AMA has received information from it's insurance company that the premium will be going to something over $900,000 in about 5 months, IF the insurance company can find someone to underwrite it. That's roughly double what it is now.

In preparation for the possibility that the insurance will not be placed, the AMA has created a captive insurance company. The reason for that is so that IF the insurance company can not place the insurance, the AMA can self insure itself.

In the last EC meeting, a few days ago, Dave Brown, Doug Holland and Carl Maroney were named to the BOD of the new corporation.

IF the insurance company does not come through, the AMA is prepared to Self Insure. The captive will then have to be funded. The information is in the minutes and motions of the last two EC meetings.

You would be well advised not to worry much about United Modelers. That is a proprietorship that is for profit. Quit worrying about trying to convince the AMA membership that buys a license, for the insurance only, that it is worthwhile. I think that you can feel assured that sooner or later the competitions price will go up. You would be well advised to sign up more members to help offset the future costs.

Fortunately, the AMA has substantial liquid assets so that the captive may be funded. If the problem obtaining insurance is a relatively short term one, it will not be a big problem. If it continues for a long period of time, you can probably look forward to service cuts or dues increases. If we are really lucky, the policy will be placed this year and become a non-issue... until next year.

JR

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 27

AMA - 11/12/2002 2:01:29 PM   
Dave Bowles


 

Posts: 575
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: KS
Status: offline 		Thanks for the information JR.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 28

Useless/useful poll? - 11/12/2002 7:10:35 PM   
raistlin12



Posts: 125
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Euless, TX, USA
Status: offline 		I won't say which way I voted, but since we supposedly have over 18, 000 active members of this group, the 51 who have voted so far are statistically insignificant, and no RELIABLE trend can be established. The only thing this poll illustrates is that there are a handfull of folks who care, one way or another, about the AMA, and there a vast majority who feel they have "better things to do" than listen to those in here argue the benefits, or lack thereof, of the AMA. It's interesting to see that there are actually as many who voted yes as there are, but in the overall scheme if RCUniverse, it's meaningless, and in the overall scheme of AMA (170,000+ members), it's even more meaningless.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 29

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/12/2002 8:06:16 PM   
J_R


 

Posts: 4446
Joined: 1/4/2002
From: Corona, CA,
Status: offline 		raistlin12


Statistically, you are probably right. Practically, you are probably wrong. Consider this. In the last election, about 10 percent of the membership cast ballots that counted. That was the Presidential election for the AMA which had a larger than average turn out.

In Dist V, last time, the election was decided by about 50 votes. If each person that cares and posts on RCU voted and talked 3 other people into voting, it could have changed the election if they voted as a block.

There are several other web sites where there are just a few votes to be had. When a consensus is formed, as it appears to on most of the other sites, it could very well determine who is running the AMA and where it goes in the future.

Also consider that not everyone posts or votes. These threads are here to read for a long time for anyone that wants to read them. Look at the 'hit' numbers. They are probably the most important information you will see in a political type thread. Keep in mind too, that there is some double counting on most threads when people look to see what has been posted after they post. The numbers can still get quite high.

If you are one of the 90% that don't vote, don't give the direction of the AMA a second thought. The other 10% will take care of it.

JR

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 30

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/12/2002 8:23:36 PM   
P-51B



Posts: 6173
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Heavybird


What?

If the AMA did not offer insurance the clubs would no longer force you to have AMA membership. You could fly anywhere you want. But No, if the AMA sanctions your field you are forced to be a member to fly there. Why doesn't the AMA get out of the insurance business and let someone else worry about it?

This is what I find so frustrating, we must join the AMA to fly at fields, contests, flyins, you name it. [/QUOTE]


O.k., let's look at this a bit closer. Right now, most clubs are "AMA chartered clubs". You must be a member to fly at them. This means you agree to abide the rules. One of those rules says you will not fly within 3 miles of another club.

Now let's pretend the AMA is no longer "in the insurance business", and you can "fly anywhere you want". You take up your $1000.00 pride and joy that took you 2.54345 years to build, only to have your neighbor take up his trainer on the same frequency.

While there are currently scenarios where this may happen anyway (the parkflyer issue for one example), the chances are much smaller when everyone agrees not to do those things.

Just a thought.

< Message edited by P-51B -- Nov 12 2002 3:34PM >

_____________________________

In order to think "outside the box", one must first accept there IS a box.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 31

Re: Useless/useful poll? - 11/12/2002 8:28:42 PM   
Crashem


 

Posts: 2221
Joined: 8/15/2002
From: Jewett, NY,
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by raistlin12
I won't say which way I voted, but since we supposedly have over 18, 000 active members of this group, the 51 who have voted so far are statistically insignificant, and no RELIABLE trend can be established. The only thing this poll illustrates is that there are a handful of folks who care, one way or another, about the AMA, and there a vast majority who feel they have "better things to do" than listen to those in here argue the benefits, or lack thereof, of the AMA. It's interesting to see that there are actually as many who voted yes as there are, but in the overall scheme if RCUniverse, it's meaningless, and in the overall scheme of AMA (170,000+ members), it's even more meaningless. [/QUOTE]

You missed the point!!!!
I never stated this was going to be statistically significant.
If you actually read my original post you would see that I was interested in asking a question in the form of a poll..

BTW JR is right I found it very interesting how many views of this thread are being tracked as opposed to number of responses (even taking double views into consideration)

Are far as which way you voted it doesn't matter.

I was interested in seeing the numbers only because most threads in this forum end up bashing the AMA.

Also those of you who point out that without insurance the dues would be lower. for the purposes of this poll assume no dues change.

If people think cost of dues is a concern then I would have to say that is a different issue.

I simply was curious because in almost all the threads regarding the AMA someone brings up the fact that in order to fly at most clubs in the US you need to have their insurance and be a member in good standing

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 32

Re: Useless/useful poll? - 11/12/2002 8:40:05 PM   
P-51B



Posts: 6173
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by raistlin12
I won't say which way I voted, but since we supposedly have over 18, 000 active members of this group, the 51 who have voted so far are statistically insignificant, and no RELIABLE trend can be established. The only thing this poll illustrates is that there are a handfull of folks who care, one way or another, about the AMA, and there a vast majority who feel they have "better things to do" than listen to those in here argue the benefits, or lack thereof, of the AMA. It's interesting to see that there are actually as many who voted yes as there are, but in the overall scheme if RCUniverse, it's meaningless, and in the overall scheme of AMA (170,000+ members), it's even more meaningless. [/QUOTE]


Actually, from a statistical standpoint you are partially correct. 51 votes does qualify as a statistically significant sample size. But, the problem is that the sample is considered biased because it only includes those who look at this forum, not a random selection of AMA members. If the 51 votes were randomly taken from the 170,000 members of AMA, then it would be meaningful.

_____________________________

In order to think "outside the box", one must first accept there IS a box.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 33

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/12/2002 10:14:58 PM   
raistlin12



Posts: 125
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Euless, TX, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by J_R

If you are one of the 90% that don't vote, don't give the direction of the AMA a second thought. The other 10% will take care of it.

JR [/QUOTE]

I have no idea where you came up with this. I sent my ballot in within a couple of weeks of receiving it. I'm of the opinion that, regardless of the election, if you don't vote, don't b***h about the outcome, or subsequent fallout.

If I didn't care, I wouldn't be in this forum in the first place.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 34

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/12/2002 11:49:43 PM   
tailskid



Posts: 5486
Joined: 11/30/2001
From: Tolleson, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		I guess what confuses me is the number of individuals who "Hate" paying AMA their due$ because of the so called 'misuse' of the funds (in their minds that is....Muncie, FAI, etc.) BUT are (or were) willing to send almost that same amount to another company - a 'let's make a profit' company....daaaaaaa.

Jerry

_____________________________

# 93 in Club Saito

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 35

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/13/2002 12:25:04 AM   
J_R


 

Posts: 4446
Joined: 1/4/2002
From: Corona, CA,
Status: offline 		Tailskid

A lot of that attitude comes from lack of knowledge and information. I'm the first one to say that the insurance cost is $10 per year per member. That is only part of the picture. It does not include administering the program or keeping track of the members.

I have been told that the 'hard cost' of an AMA membership was $36-$38. The key is WAS, I am sure it has gone up this year. That gave the AMA about $10 per year per member to spend when the dues was $48. The immediate assumption is that it goes to the NSF. That's not the case. It funds a lot of things, including scholarships, grants to clubs, educational programs, flying site programs, etc, and of course some does goes to the NSF. Up until this year some went to subsidize the IMS show. This year the IMS show returned a profit of about 17 cents per member.

You have to remember that most members join because they are told they must, in order to belong to a chartered club. The club tries to sell the advantages of the club, but, the AMA is never sold to the new members. Most never read the material sent to them nor that contained in MA. When they are under the assumption that the only reason to belong to the AMA is insurance and they they get nothing else in return, they 'compare' comparable services and the question is why should we pay $10 extra because the insurance is from AMA? Not a dumb question, given that they believe that is all the AMA offers.

Just maybe it would be a good idea of some of the other magazines had a column on the AMA each month. hint, hint.

JR

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 36

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/13/2002 12:58:44 AM   
J_R


 

Posts: 4446
Joined: 1/4/2002
From: Corona, CA,
Status: offline 		raistlin12

Your right. I should not have made a blanket statement like that. It was really aimed at anyone reading the post.

Now, let me really upset some folks and ask a question of you and anyone else. Do you really want the 90% (use your own number if you don't like mine) voting if they are uninformed about what they are voting for?

Do we really want to elect an official on the basis of the nicey nice campaign statements in MA and that come with the ballot? Do you really want people re-elected just because they have 'incumbent' next to their name? Some vote for any new face, some for an incumbent, knowing nothing else about them.

In my opinion, the EC majority is a good group. There are a few I would like to see replaced. If you don't know the record of a incumbent or what agenda a new face might have, why make the change. I personally would like to see votes from the people that make the effort to find out what they are voting for.

In last years election, approximately 10,000 votes were not counted. They were sent to Muncie instead of the the Auditor's. Good riddance. I would almost bet that the huge majority were marked incumbent (we won't ever know). Anyone that did not take enough time to read the instructions to vote probably did not take the time to do due diligence on the candidates, IMHO.

In my estimation, anyone reading this forum is at least interested enough to try to find out what the issues are. Again, I apologize to you raistlin12, your making the effort.

JR

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 37

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/13/2002 2:04:32 AM   
raistlin12



Posts: 125
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Euless, TX, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by J_R
raistlin12

Now, let me really upset some folks and ask a question of you and anyone else. Do you really want the 90% (use your own number if you don't like mine) voting if they are uninformed about what they are voting for?

JR [/QUOTE]

I don't really think we have to worry about that! Most people, whether it be at the federal, state, or local level, do the same, i.e., pay their dues/taxes and keep on keepin' on without bothering to even vote, let alone check the candidates.

Here in Texas, we had a guy running for governor who hadn't bothered to vote for the past several years, including the preceding gubernatorial election! Apathy is the biggest enemy we have in this country. The problem is, nobody cares.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 38

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/13/2002 3:59:43 AM   
MikeL



Posts: 2334
Joined: 3/8/2002
From: Bloomington, MN, USA
Status: online 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by P-51B
Now let's pretend the AMA is no longer "in the insurance business", and you can "fly anywhere you want". You take up your $1000.00 pride and joy that took you 2.54345 years to build, only to have your neighbor take up his trainer on the same frequency.

While there are currently scenarios where this may happen anyway (the parkflyer issue for one example), the chances are much smaller when everyone agrees not to do those things.[/QUOTE]

And just what is to say the neighbor with the trainer will join the AMA? You're assuming that the AMA somehow keeps us safe from each other. Even if the guy with the trainer joined the AMA, that won't necessarily stop him from flying where he chooses.

One of my gripes with the AMA is that they aren't effective in working with the industry. I hear a lot of unsubstantiated talk about the AMA working with the government, which I think is largely a myth. One thing I never hear of is the AMA working with the industry. How hard would it be for all those pre-packaged park fliers to ship with 27mhz radios, an AMA membership form, and some bennifits to finding instruction? They've got warnings about frequency conflicts. That's just great.

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 39

Would You Still Join the AMA if They Did NOT Provide In... - 11/13/2002 7:48:19 PM   
Sport_Pilot



Posts: 7597
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: Acworth, GA, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by FLYBOY
What would be the point of joining them then?
They do serve a few other purposes, but I bet they would have less than 25% of the members they now have. Just my 2 cents. [/QUOTE]

When I first joined the AMA it was mostly for the mag, and there was no local club nearby, the Cobb County field had closed down looking for a new field, I had just bought a new Ugly Stick from Mickey Walker and we flew from a field off of Fulton County Industrial south of Charley Brown and Six Flags, we didn't use a buddy box but passed the transmitter. Well the poll is now over 30% of people who would join without insurance. If more people realized that the insurance is mostly for your club and almost noncollectable for an individual and the other benefits that AMA could be more aggressive about, I think it would be well over 40%

(in reply to Crashem)
       Post #: 40

Would You S