ORIGINAL: r/cnerd
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!
I think paragraph #3 asks the most important question in your post, where IS MAAC headed membership wise? I think the ratio of MAAC flyers to non-MAAC flyers a generation ago was actually quite high when compared to today. In short, you got into the hobby and a MAAC membership was part of the deal so to speak. Today, this is not the case and it may have something to do with the costs involved to join MAAC but I think it goes deeper than that. There are a substantial number of fellows out there that have no desire to fly in a 'club' atmosphere and therefore have no need or desire to join the association.
Although it may appear that I am defending MAAC in a previous post this is not the case, I am only defending the VALUE of what you get for your $75, regardless of WHO you were to buy the insurance from. Go out and try to personally buy the coverage affored by MAAC membership, even IF (and it is a BIG if) you can buy it personally, you will pay more.
If you were to follow this whole dues increase issue over the last number of months you would see that my feeling are that the increase in dues was poorly managed and could have been accomplished with lot less backlash. To not have an increase for years and then bump the dues 30% was likely an error. A small increase every year to accomplish the same end result may have met with little or no resistance....is all in the perception of the whole issue, not the issue itself.
Ron O.