You guys can defend all you want but I know many others who feel as I do. If you guys actually speak for MAAC, which would seem to be the case (since your so defensive to my ideas), then you should be listening to feedback and really considering the implications of how MAAC presents itself. Every quack like me represents a silent group who feel the same way. I'm not critcizing to attack MAAC or it's management, I am giving you valuable feedback of how you are perceived by those outside of the core. If you actually represent MAAC you should be appreciative of feedback even if it differs from your view.

Some Questions for the MAAC folks:

1) If the major impediment to a new flyer flying at a sanctioned site is insurance, and the insurance portion is only 15$ a year why doesn't MAAC offer the insurance without the other "perks". You could mark it up 50% to $30 a year, which I'm sure would be cosidered an excellent margin. Heck, it could even become a profit centre to subsidize the activities and what-not that are included in a full membership. BTW aside from the magazine which is not really of any interest to me I don't know what all the other stuff that MAAC does for me is, but I'm interested if anyone wishes to enlighten.


2) I would assume the Insurance rates are based on Acturaial data....are they? and if so is there any data that anyone could share which covers model airplane accidents and insurance claims for the past ? years? Has a 1 oz freeflight plane ever caused a pileup? And if it did would the owner really end up liable? Have there been many parkflyer incedents, both macc insured and not?

3) do you have any data re average age of MAAC members/predicted retirement/sucsession ages etc that show where MAAC is headed membership wise? Iguess wat I am asking is what's your ratio of members who are likely to be active for years to come versus those who are stepping down.

Please don't take my comments personnaly.....I want to discuss opinions not trade insults!