RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to other AMA members?  
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 >> RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to other AMA members?
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>  

[Poll]

Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to other AMA members?
Yes, a 2lb plane traveling 60mph cant hurt anyone
  34% (29)
No, they are getting a better tiered rate than FF
  5% (5)
No, they are getting a better tiered rate than gliders
  1% (1)
No, they are getting a better tiered rate than 1/2a
  4% (4)
No, $58 bucks and $30 for family members for the right to vote!!!!
  53% (45)


Total Votes : 84
(last vote on : 4/11/2008 12:15:29 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to othe... - 4/2/2008 3:38:58 PM   
KidEpoxy



Posts: 3417
Joined: 10/14/2004
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Once I brought a 3wood, 5iron, & putter to a course. (save bag weight for beer)
They charged me the same $9 they charged my budy with his full set of clubs.


The basicly broken part :
Take 2 guys flying Zagis at the park
One guy has a brushless 6x3 15k and the other is running a .061nitro 6x3 15k
The premiss of offering $29 PPP to the electric is that he can fly at urban PPP clubs.
The nitro park flier is not allowed to get that discount.
But we now see the electric PPP want to fly at regular AMA nitro clubs.
... so why does the ElectricZagi get a discount to fly at nitro clubs while the NitroZagi dont?

Same plane, same performance, same liability,
quiet has nothing to do with it while at the nitro AMA club, and the only reason for the discount would be the noise.

If the Serfs (AMA* members) want a discount to fly at their Serf Club,
that is one thing,
but why do the Serfs get a discount based solely on noise if they want to fly somewhere loud.

Somehow Muncie figured flying a 1lb 40mph at the park is not park piloting, cause cox049s in the yard/parkinglot/shool/park for the past 3 or 4 decades dont count.


*PPP

_____________________________

Optional MA is part of AMA history, we can go optional AGAIN if we just say so

(in reply to P-51B)
       Post #: 126

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to othe... - 4/2/2008 4:35:02 PM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9221
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: online
quote:

If your going to use a golf analogy, at least make it valid.

In your analogy, you talk of different organaizations and venues. The corresponding analogy for model airplanes for your scenarios, would be, you can join AMA and fly, you can not join AMA fly, you can start your own organization and fly, you can fly on your friends private property, you can fly on your own private property etc.

But, if you join a particular country club, or play at the local muni, you pay the same rate for that venue regardless of which equipment you choose to use.
Well I guess we can just drop the golf analogy altogether, because typically no national sponsorship is required to utilize the flying club.

It just comes down to the fact that $58 members think they are getting screwed over, but it's just not true. Anyone can choose the PPP program or the $58 program, it's open to anyone and everyone. PPP's are not getting a price break at all, because you and I know a price break is based on a single product.

However every single symptom in an article I provided some time ago is now coming true. Whomever wrote this article, 3 pages totals, knows his tiered membership organizations, the guy is spot on. LINK

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to P-51B)
       Post #: 127

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to othe... - 4/2/2008 5:47:30 PM   
P-51B



Posts: 6173
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

Well I guess we can just drop the golf analogy altogether, because typically no national sponsorship is required to utilize the flying club.



National sponsorship is not required to fly at all flying clubs or sites, so the analogy stands.


quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot
It just comes down to the fact that $58 members think they are getting screwed over, but it's just not true. Anyone can choose the PPP program or the $58 program, it's open to anyone and everyone. PPP's are not getting a price break at all, because you and I know a price break is based on a single product.


No, it comes down to fair treatment of an organizations members.



_____________________________

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

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 128

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 5:54:59 PM   
KidEpoxy



Posts: 3417
Joined: 10/14/2004
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Coulda sworn I just demonstrated the same product for both would be being allowed to fly at the nitro AMA field.
PPP gets the break on being allowed to fly at the nitro club "AMA Req".
Cox049/AP061 dont get the price break on being allowed to fly at the nitro club "AMA Req".

The two zagi's Glow/Zappy: Same plane, same performance, same liability, same nitro field,
same product "AMA" to meet "AMA Req",
different price for electric

< Message edited by KidEpoxy -- 4/2/2008 5:56:23 PM >

_____________________________

Optional MA is part of AMA history, we can go optional AGAIN if we just say so

(in reply to P-51B)
       Post #: 129

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 5:55:09 PM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9221
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: online
quote:

National sponsorship is not required to fly at all flying clubs or sites, so the analogy stands.
Look at the title of the forum.

quote:

No, it comes down to fair treatment of an organizations members.
You mean you are not allowed to choose between your membership levels, or are you just undecided? Fair for whom??? What's not fair??? Pick a level that fits your needs .... go enjoy.

< Message edited by STLPilot -- 4/2/2008 5:56:57 PM >

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to P-51B)
       Post #: 130

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 6:37:07 PM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9221
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: online 		A snippet from the article I posted above. It's like this columnist wrote this article for the new AMA PPP. I mean can she be any more right? I wouldn't have been surprised if the AMA didn't look at this article beforehand.

As a result of member discontent with the aforementioned model, (tiered membership models) more organizations are exploring a tiered membership structure in which membership and subsequently dues are based on membership levels or benefits packages rather than on categories determined by specific demographic criteria. "Embracing one of the fastest growing trends nationwide, more associations are turning to a tiered membership structure to replace outdated dues structures that do not communicate value to members," says Moliterno, who has worked with several organizations in their transition from a fair-share model to a tiered membership structure. She outlines these primary reasons for the switch:

To give members control and choices. A tiered structure accommodates companies regardless of size (or individuals regardless of professional specialty) and ensures appropriate investment for the resulting delivery of services and products. Participants customize their memberships by selecting their levels of involvement and investment.

To realign business purposes to match customer needs. A tiered membership structure allows associations to easily adapt to rapid change and significant competitive challenges because they can adjust their benefits to address new trends while adding value to their memberships at specific levels. They can also demonstrate a return on investment for members, since the tiers are segmented to match specific products and services to member needs and desires.

To create one clear and concise message. Often, members say that they don't know what they receive for their dues. When shown the tiered concept, however, members appreciate the compartmentalized areas of information that they can easily digest.

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 131

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 6:40:46 PM   
littlecrankshaf



Posts: 2135
Joined: 12/9/2001
From: here
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STLPilot

What's not fair??? Pick a level that fits your needs .... go enjoy.


stl

You just don't get it. I think you just want to stir the pot or have some other hidden agenda.

A truly tiered AMA would have tiers...not just two sides. If and when AMA has actual tiers for turbine pilots, large scale, pylon, soaring, electric, small scale. Rubber. FF, etc... then your line of reasoning will be plausible. When and if that were to happen then we could discuss the parameters of each tier and the costs associated with each. Either way the tiers would consist of real members with a vote.

Your erroneous perception of a tier does not fly...it is wrong and it misses on many counts IMO.


_____________________________

Wow! Another epiphany…that is why the suckups suckup. Super sucking protection power. Yea baby.

(in reply to STLPilot)
       Post #: 132

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 7:15:03 PM   
BalsaBrkr


 

Posts: 22
Joined: 4/7/2006
From: Ashland, MA, USA
Status: offline 		Having read this thread it strikes me as if that people might prefer it if the structure were:

- Basic membership at some cost like ($15) that includes a vote

A required insurance package at some cost, which is tiered and based on what you fly
- Rubber / FF balsa under 8 ounces (Waived)
- Park Flier / larger FF / larger Rubber / under 28 ounces ($20)
- Standard ($30)
- Turbine ($50)

- and an optional magazine package ($10)

Sign up and fly anything up to your insurance package as indicated on your AMA membership card....

Let the actuarials work with the AMA to define rates and criteria (I just made crap up) for insurance packages, make them differentiated to recognize risk level differences while keeping it simple enough that there are only 4 or so options running from basically free to $50 bucks or so.....

Have uninsured member insurance protect AMA fields and clubs from members flying above their package (have it built into the premium structure like in other insurance vehicles). And, of course, let insurance companies go after members flying above their insurance package to recover damages thereby providing an incentive for members to maintain adequate insurance and not fly underinsured to save a few bucks.

Nothings perfect... If this has already been suggested - sorry. If you hate the suggestion, shrug.

My two cents...

(in reply to littlecrankshaf)
       Post #: 133

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 7:36:36 PM   
littlecrankshaf



Posts: 2135
Joined: 12/9/2001
From: here
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BalsaBrkr

Having read this thread it strikes me as if that people might prefer it if the structure were:

- Basic membership at some cost like ($15) that includes a vote

A required insurance package at some cost, which is tiered and based on what you fly
- Rubber / FF balsa under 8 ounces (Waived)
- Park Flier / larger FF / larger Rubber / under 28 ounces ($20)
- Standard ($30)
- Turbine ($50)

- and an optional magazine package ($10)

Sign up and fly anything up to your insurance package as indicated on your AMA membership card....

Let the actuarials work with the AMA to define rates and criteria (I just made crap up) for insurance packages, make them differentiated to recognize risk level differences while keeping it simple enough that there are only 4 or so options running from basically free to $50 bucks or so.....

Have uninsured member insurance protect AMA fields and clubs from members flying above their package (have it built into the premium structure like in other insurance vehicles). And, of course, let insurance companies go after members flying above their insurance package to recover damages thereby providing an incentive for members to maintain adequate insurance and not fly underinsured to save a few bucks.

Nothings perfect... If this has already been suggested - sorry. If you hate the suggestion, shrug.

My two cents...

Not that I prefer it but at least it would be a tiered system and discussion about a tiered members organization would then be valid.

_____________________________

Wow! Another epiphany…that is why the suckups suckup. Super sucking protection power. Yea baby.

(in reply to BalsaBrkr)
       Post #: 134

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 7:37:21 PM   
P-51B



Posts: 6173
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BalsaBrkr

Having read this thread it strikes me as if that people might prefer it if the structure were:

- Basic membership at some cost like ($15) that includes a vote

A required insurance package at some cost, which is tiered and based on what you fly
- Rubber / FF balsa under 8 ounces (Waived)
- Park Flier / larger FF / larger Rubber / under 28 ounces ($20)
- Standard ($30)
- Turbine ($50)

- and an optional magazine package ($10)

Sign up and fly anything up to your insurance package as indicated on your AMA membership card....

Let the actuarials work with the AMA to define rates and criteria (I just made crap up) for insurance packages, make them differentiated to recognize risk level differences while keeping it simple enough that there are only 4 or so options running from basically free to $50 bucks or so.....

Have uninsured member insurance protect AMA fields and clubs from members flying above their package (have it built into the premium structure like in other insurance vehicles). And, of course, let insurance companies go after members flying above their insurance package to recover damages thereby providing an incentive for members to maintain adequate insurance and not fly underinsured to save a few bucks.

Nothings perfect... If this has already been suggested - sorry. If you hate the suggestion, shrug.

My two cents...



If the AMA went this route, which I am against, it seems that the PF and Electric flyers would have the highest rates. How many turbines have crashed causing damage vs how many lipo batteries have burned up cars and houses?

I realize that your list was just an example, but I just wanted to point out that people may get something other than what they envisioned with such a setup.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BalsaBrkr)
       Post #: 135

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 7:47:43 PM   
DocYates



Posts: 2636
Joined: 1/2/2002
From: Killen, AL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: P-51B


quote:

ORIGINAL: BalsaBrkr

Having read this thread it strikes me as if that people might prefer it if the structure were:

- Basic membership at some cost like ($15) that includes a vote

A required insurance package at some cost, which is tiered and based on what you fly
- Rubber / FF balsa under 8 ounces (Waived)
- Park Flier / larger FF / larger Rubber / under 28 ounces ($20)
- Standard ($30)
- Turbine ($50)

- and an optional magazine package ($10)

Sign up and fly anything up to your insurance package as indicated on your AMA membership card....

Let the actuarials work with the AMA to define rates and criteria (I just made crap up) for insurance packages, make them differentiated to recognize risk level differences while keeping it simple enough that there are only 4 or so options running from basically free to $50 bucks or so.....

Have uninsured member insurance protect AMA fields and clubs from members flying above their package (have it built into the premium structure like in other insurance vehicles). And, of course, let insurance companies go after members flying above their insurance package to recover damages thereby providing an incentive for members to maintain adequate insurance and not fly underinsured to save a few bucks.

Nothings perfect... If this has already been suggested - sorry. If you hate the suggestion, shrug.

My two cents...



If the AMA went this route, which I am against, it seems that the PF and Electric flyers would have the highest rates. How many turbines have crashed causing damage vs how many lipo batteries have burned up cars and houses?

I realize that your list was just an example, but I just wanted to point out that people may get something other than what they envisioned with such a setup.

P51,
I agree. However for most it is not about the risk, they had rather others pay more because of WHAT they fly not the fact that it is more or less dangerous. The tier system does nothing except respond to "plane envy", it would also require the AMA to admit that they are acting as an insurance agency, which is something they want desperately to avoid.
Tommy

_____________________________

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares, will plow for those who did not".

(in reply to P-51B)
       Post #: 136

RE: Is the cost of the PPP membership fair to oth... - 4/2/2008 8:20:12 PM   
STLPilot


 

Posts: 9221
Joined: 3/12/2003
From: Manhattan, NY, USA
Status: online 		What category is for the largest percent of insurance claims? Those who are not even members of the AMA? How do we charge them the most, for something they have no intention of joining?

Doc's right, the PPP wasn't designed to address risk, it was designed to address a void. As the price of the $58 grows to infinity, there is nothing to compare it against it's value, as the article above clearly explains. The PPP gives site of value of not only the it's own tier, but also the $58 tier.

_____________________________

Here At The Wall

(in reply to DocYates)