I'll comment / respond to some the things above, but won't burden the thread with a bunch of quotes.
In terms of rhetoric, I simply ask: "What IS it going to take for AMA to take ownership of their financial trends and the consequences of decisions they've made these past several years?" Talking politely and offering constructive advice doesn't seem to produce any changes. In fact, I don't think our resident EC members has ever acknowledged the financial trends I've noted in other threads. No acknowledgement that membership revenue trends are strongly down not one or two years, but year after year after year. Not once has he acknowledge that the third highest paid person is the publications director, yet the magazines have lost money for decades. Tens of millions of dollars. And the list goes on. Instead, the ED, President, and EC obfuscate. They talk "increased new member acquisition rate," but it's absent any context. By example, last year might have been ten, and this year was fifteen, so that's a 30% increase. But if they had a net loss of hundreds over that same period, it doesn't matter. That's what I mean by obfuscation. So maybe, let's just see if Andy will even acknowledge the trends have not been good for a decade or more, that revenue is decreasing faster than spending, and the magazines have lost money every year for years.
Again, what WILL it take for them to be open and fully transparent with members about their financial situation? When will they take ownership that nothing they've tried over the last five or ten years has changed these trends?
I note that "the only CBO" has come up again. We were asked not to criticize AMA, its decisions, and financials when they were fighting registration because they were the only CBO. We were asked to wait and the AMA would address these after they got through that. The "fix" never happened. Then we were asked again to refrain while they were fighting to keep 336, and again told the AMA would address these issues after that crisis. And again the "fix" never happened. This refrain repeated with the RemoteID, TRUST, and now the draft AC. Given that we've been told AMA would address these issues multiple times over the past few years, and each time that never happened, sorry if I no longer care that they are "the only CBO." It's long past time they address these issues, or as some have noted, they won't be a CBO much longer.
Lastly, it was asked what I would consider a win. That's a really good question. As you can tell, I do not subscribe to the "less bad than it could have been" school of win/loss. I come from a world where the guy who finishes second doesn't get a trophy, he (or she) gets a coffin. And third place? That's not even "the first loser." AMA has a fiduciary responsibility to its members to remain financially solvent. By any measure, given the trends I've identified, they're rocketing toward a second place finish. If they don't survive financially, it really doesn't matter what policy objectives they achieve. So their number one priority, by a long shot, is finances. And thus, I would define a win as follows (all constant year inflation adjusted dollars):
- Increase membership revenue, year over year, across five straight years; without a dues increase
- In any year where revenue does not increase, decrease spending by a greater amount (total dollars)
- Not liquidate any assets/investments for five straight years (unless reinvested the same year)
- Magazine advertising revenue exceed expenses, year over year, for five straight years
Did I address them all? If not, what did I miss and I'll comment further.