OK folks, I have waited and waited for someone to bring this forth. Can't wait any longer!

Executive Council Meeting
August 14-15, 2010

http://www.modelaircraft.org/members...ecminutes.aspx

There is a whole lot of information in this report. The range is from, IMO, Very Good down to absolute bureaucracy/empire building, and associated the same old "Throw money at it..." stuff. Definitely, do read the "New Business" section. [sm=72_72.gif]

Hopefully some of you will get some really good discussions going on the plans and other items that are kicked around in this report. Please do not overlook the "between the lines" information. Lots of it there as I see it. Don't ask me for it. If you can't find it right off, it will come to you sooner or later.

Go get 'em Tigers!

I wonder if they will share this on their website?
"f. FAA
Council received a copy of the document Model Aircraft Flying Location, Flight Operations, and Airspace Utilization. The workgroup would like Councils’ concurrence on some additional content. Hanson noted item 7.5.3 was deleted. Council should review the document and be prepared to discuss it during a conference call in the near future."

Interesting stuff here;

<p dir="ltr" style="margin-right: 0px">MOTION X: Moved by M. Smith (EVP) and seconded by J. Wallen (IX) to allocate $10,000.00 initially to enable the Museum Steering Committee to begin the RFQ process and secure a consultant. Funding for the consultant will be from the Museum Patron Fund.
MOTION passed unanimously</p><blockquote dir="ltr" style="margin-right: 0px"><p dir="ltr" style="margin-right: 0px">e. Park Pilot Program
The staff was charged with creating an exit strategy (if needed) from the program. Internal discussion with the staff proposed the program be retired and the exit strategy would be: for the 2011 year AMA would give the Park Pilot member, at dues of $29.95, four issue of Park Pilot and 12 issues of Model Aviation; they would receive the regular card and would be recognized as a Full Open member. In 2012, the PP member would be a regular member at $58/year if they chose to be and could subscribe to the PP magazine for $9.95/year. AMA is not retiring their definition of a Park Flyer aircraft (not exceed 2 lbs, not exceed 60 mph and may not be powered with an internal combustion engine).

The program shows good growth recently, but has not performed to the level it was hoped it would. The subscription rate to the magazine has increased; advertisers are anxious to unload the 2 lb/60 mph cap, so they can review more and larger airplanes. The cannibalization rate from Open to PP was 30% in the first year, the second year it was considerably less and the third year it was negligible.

Bills/ballots are getting ready to be sent and a letter will be included in each explaining what will be done. A follow up will be done in Model Aviation and AMA Today about the change.

The President, along with others, was of the opinion that the PPP was unsalvageable but he shared the following numbers with Council: the first year the program lost $164,682 (a lot of that was due to the start up costs and advertising); last year the loss on the program was $68,631; this past May it showed at $77 profit and at the end of July it showed a $5,678 profit. As of August 7, 2010 there are 2,275 park pilot members. Nance discovered during a meeting with Horizon and Hobby Lobby that they support the magazine but are allocating limited advertising dollars to it because it is a niche publication. The indication Nance got from them was they would allocate more dollars if the magazine was targeting a greater number of electric type models.

The President asked Council if they were ready to sunset a program that is in essence self-supporting. We can do better if the scope of the magazine was expanded; which would open the door to additional advertising dollars and additional subscription dollars. In the meantime the President thinks there is something in the whole PP package that is missing. Bauer says the PP membership and PP magazine are two separate things, just because we do away with the membership doesn&rsquo;t mean we get rid of the magazine. Argenio was not sure that broadening the scope of the magazine would make a positive change. Mark Smith asked whether J. Nance and his staff could tweak the existing program to eliminate some of the barriers to entry we have now.

By consensus, Council agreed to do nothing and let the program go for another year (knowing it is being sustained by the magazine); Nance and the Marketing Committee were charged with trying to determine what is missing in the program. If the committee reports they can&rsquo;t find/do anything, there will still be time for Council to decide what to do next year. The committee will report to Council at the November meeting.

</p></blockquote>

Nice little tidbit here ...........


MOTION II: Moved by M. Smith (EVP) and seconded by C. Bauer (VI) to count the 2012 election ballots (to be counted in the fall of 2011), either internally and/or through electronic means.
MOTION passed unanimously
It should be noted that this will save Headquarters approximately $15,000.

" during a meeting with Horizon and Hobby Lobby that they support the magazine but are allocating limited advertising dollars to it because it is a niche publication."

So even though PPP is showing a better profit than MA, Our marketing team wants to kill Park flyer Mag (and indirectly PPP) because it doesn't fit "their" product line.
Nope, no bias there.

Maybe GWS ought to be on the team.

My personal opinion is that the Parkie stuff is selling like hot cakes and the bigger expensive stuff is declining (like AMA membership). Where would you put your advertising money?

Usually, opinions are based on some sort of factual knowledge. This one isan exception to the rule. The "bigger, expensive stuff"is not only not declining, it is flourishing.With your limited exposure to and time in the hobby, in particular giant scale, icanunderstand how easy it would be for you to make such a large error.

Can you point out the exact verbiage that supports your statement?

As I read it, even if the PPP is killed off, PF magazine will continue.

So where are your facts that it is flourishing?

A lot of guys at my clubs field fly electrics and Parkflyers, BUT the number of 100+ inchers is definitly NOT on the decline!!! Sometimes I don't even bring out my 60 sized planes because so many "big" guys are around and my 60 seems small.......Not to mention that nothing flies like a 120"r. One member had a 120"+ extra with a DA 150 twin in it, and it flew soooo realistically. Looked as real as they can get......

That one caught my eye too,,,
I'm all for saving money,, but they sure do put themselves in a position that could come back to bite them in the butt

That also seems to be very true in this area, however IMO, it is the same old "keep up with the Joneses" as now .60-.120 airplanes, once big stuff, are out of style.
I say that because the big gassers are becoming more and more common at the flying sites. (I belong to 4 active clubs)

However the AMA membership annual drop is still in style. OTOH there is a slowing of the drop and maybe that shows a bottom out happening.
2008.................148487
2009.................142231
2010.................139515

Unfortunately, for both AMA and the Clubs, I see the move to real large and expensive airplanes as possibly a detriment to the future of RC model aviation simply because so many cannot afford to be a "Jones". Unfortunately for our society, folks under 50 years of age seem to be mired in such "I gotta' have more and bigger than him." Speaking of merchandise and toys, of course!

See http://www.jetero.com/imac.htm If that doesn't work just try www.jetero.com and select 2010 Shootout in the subjects on the left side. Seems Mark may be working on that item right now.

YEP. That position has happened back in the past, specifically in 1980. I've posted that incident before.

OTOH when for 30 years you contract the same folks to count ballots each year, is it unthinkable that a count just may be prearranged?
Maybe some kind of change is in order.

As a member of an association for 28 years with more folks than AMA, I always said that the ballots were counted before they were even printed. The vote was always within 2% of the officials' desires. All votes always 68-72% for the officials' desires!
Funny, HUH?

I'll ask this in return. How many IMAC or 3D events have you attended?How many flying sites outside of the Wally World parking lot or soccer park have you visited?

Get out from behind the KB and see for yourself. Maybe your view of the AMA is so myopic because you haven't really done the legwork to see the RC hobby in it's entirety.

I have. Though I must say I still haven't spotted the elusive schoolyard lecky flier in my travels.

Once again K-bob can't back up what he says, instead goes on the attack.
No proof, no facts, no nothing except "my club" "my peception".
Gee, with all those 100+ inchers being sold every year why aren't any of their owners joining the AMA?
Because you are wrong?

Not at all. Folks reading these threads know who is wrong and who is right and we'll leave things there.

I'm not going to waste my time or the others time who know the hobby by responding to your silly argument. I'm definitely not going to waste my timecreating a database of sales figures for the giant RC industry here and abroad to prove a point to someone so obviously out of touch with reality. You ask for proof that the Sun exists when all you would have to do is take a look outside your basement.

So you are still refusing to back up anything you say.Yup, we know who is wrong.

You are going to "create" a database? Where you going to get the data? The AMA has some sales analysis figures ( I bet our marketing team could provide them) based on EC minutes but they don't seem to be disclosing it to members.

Or are you saying you could "create" as in "make up" a database.

Nope.

Your trying to bait me into yet another one of your silly, off topic, thread locking,arguments will not work.

You waste my time.

I would be willing to bet that most of the PPP members are former full AMA members that because they are flying parkies have decided to down size to the PP membership. It would be interested to see how many are actually former members.
As for the giant scale fliers, I also see an increase in their number from years previous, simply because of the cost of servos and gas engines have decreased, and one only has to look at the ARFs which are presently available to see that there are a huge number of giant scale planes available at a decent tprice, which makes it easier to get into the bigger planes.

I am asking you to back up your statements with something other than you're imagination.
I have never seen you post a single fact here..ever. Just personal attacks with nothing to back it up.

From the minutes:

Some forum regulars have been racking up epithets (hi KE), add cannibal to growing list.

My recollection is that the member survey prior to the launch had just two questions, both asked to assess the likely rate of "cannibalism." We who are the AMA 'approved' of the program by responding in sufficient number that we would not drop down to the lower caste.

IMHO, 30%, like me, decide that the PPP was something different than what they were lead to believe and decided to pay extra for voting rights and/or 5 times the insurance coverage and/or the ability to join a club ?

How does that back your imaginary sales figures? Where's that sales database? Where are the facts?

hey now... that was once, and along time ago.
If I had know what they really meant when they invited me to "Jims BBQ"
I would never have gone back for a second plate


[8D]

something else that caught my eye
Is this a typo or just a really bad choice of words??
Are the Advertisers the ones really doing reviews in the Mag?? or do the mean they can review what they choose to advertise in the Mag??