ORIGINAL: Jim Thomerson
As a disinterested observer, I think too much, too soon, is what I hear. If I were a PPP pusher, I would be thinking in terms of maybe a 5 year trial period. I'd have interim goals and do market analysis to see what I needed to do to meet or exceed those goals. To talk of dumping a program after only one or two years seems to me to reflect an expectation of failure, and concern for cutting losses, rather than expectation of success.
Jim, I respect your comments, and will say that in the year that I've been posting here, and a member of the AMA my opinion on this has changed quite a bit....for a couple of reasons.
First, by the end of this year AMA will have spent close to $500K on PPP. Add another 3 years and it will top $1M. Given the lackluster results from last year, targets for this year that fall short of a break even situation and that by Dave's admission will be difficult to reach, I'm of the opinion that additional funding for 2010 will probably amount to throwing good money after bad. I think those funds could, at least in part, better server the membership by being directed towards acquisition and retention of full scale fields. I think last years PP membership numbers indicate that this particular approach isn't going to be successful, and I think AMA leadership is beginning to recognize that...or at least to acknowledge that they are recognizing that.
Second, one of the things that became quite apparent to me shortly after I joined AMA, my club and this board is the degree that different factions have developed within the RC community. Stick and scratch builders that look down their noses at those who fly ARF's; gas/glow flyers that look down their noses at anything that's electric or non-ply and balsa, etc. A two tier membership such as that created with the PP program sets up another "us vs them" scenario and in the long run I think it will serve to further polarize the organization.
That said, I think it's a good idea for AMA to reach out to younger folks who are buying less expensive, lighter and slower equipment. I suspect that the average age of AMA membership has significantly increased over the past couple of decades, and some new blood is needed to replace those of us that are "leaving" (to put it delicately). OTOH I've also heard it said that perhaps AMA should be reaching out to us boomers who are or will retire in the next few years, who may be looking for a hobby to fill some of what used to be work time, and may have some disposable income to spend on it. Given the current economic conditions that may not work well right now either.
Jim, this is not a knee jerk reaction on my part, but something to which I've given a fair amount of thought, and as I said, my opinion has changed over the past few months. I'm sure that there are a least a couple of folks here who would attest to that.
