cj_rumley

The parents of those kids paid AMA 2,500 bucks for each team of 4-8 participants. Do they need subsidizing by our dues as well?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Tens of dollars here, tens of dollars there, a hundred dollars here, a hundred dollars there. Pretty soon we're talking real money! It all comes from the same pot.

If we take the examples of polls and how they generally work here, picture that across 150,000 members able to vote. #Disaster. Then again, they would probably do it right, but it's an absolutely ludicrous position for the AMA to put themselves in, and for that matter, one that doesn't come cheap.

But hey, if there is such a groundswell of opposition to the magazine for instance, or this sudden need to immediately address something mentioned in a meeting note about what might happen in the future, how does one realistically get their message out there? Do they post online with the usual complaints, or do they do something meaningful to affect change. So far, I have the answer to that. Want to be heard, contact your DVP. If someone doesn't feel like that's enough, contact an executive in Muncie.

Still concerned your concerns aren't being addressed? Nobody in Muncie listening to your suggestions, perhaps there's more than one of you. Get some feedback from this site, and RCG, and FG, and GSN. Now were building consensus right, getting our ducks in a row. Power and strength in numbers. Get a letter together, or say, a petition. Make it clear, concise, and for the love of god, spell people's name right! Next up, where to send this declaration of We Will Be Heard. First stop, again probably a DVP. Impress upon this leader for him (it's always a him right?) to hear his constituents complaints, and take action for CHANGE! NExt up, an executive. Try to get the DVP to bring this up at a meeting. Hey...better yet, attend the meeting yourself and present the information, some of these meeting are wide open for anyone to attend. #moretransparency. So, back to the petition or letter....so did the issue get brought up in the meeting? EC notes show it was a point of discussion? If not, oh well.

Chances are, it's not an issue that enough of the membership is interested in changing, or concerned with. That will happen. Once outside of the framework of a RCwebsite, it's surprising to hear and see what many many members of the AMA are really concerned with. Doubtful it's office supplies, shirts, or miscategorized receipts for the gala lunch at Cracker Barrel.

So I think i've given a few real life examples of what can be done to have "our" voices hear. Of course, we know what happened to another, similar petition/letter than was sent to the EC by 14 of the presumed most important and influential representatives of "traditional modeling". A disastrously written diatribe that barely got any signatures. Certainly didn't garner many here. Would love to hear how that whole thing ended up. God knows the online petition fell extremely short of getting anywhere, did it ever get over 800 signatures? Doubt it. So we have options, what are we going to do with them?

We have candidates running for office, two that talk about the need for change. Frank isn't on-board with any drastic change to the mag, it's a benefit. Use it or don't. I agree completely. Tougas is silent on the issue. Not sure where the others are...can we ask them?

If we presume the AMA/IRS tax fiasco that wasn't, is over with, now we're on to the following:

Do something different with the magazine, numerous suggestions made.

Ask the membership how they want to spend the AMA's money next year.

O/K, who's going to lead the effort on these issues?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Absolutely, unequivocally, without a doubt. Be it with specific direct financial assistance, or by providing logistical and/or site assistance. Yes. They should. Just as they do with this program featuring "traditional" aircraft:

http://www.amaflightschool.org/campama

I'm sure folks out there probably feel like some of the dues should go to attracting new members to come into the AMA and hobby to scratch-build control line planes, or perhaps free flight models, or even Warbirds (nitro and gas only please!) The demographics, and the hard and fast "fact/logic/reality numbers show this wouldn't work. I'm perfectly fine having part of my dues spent on all different kinds of youth programs.

The good news is though, there's money to be had for lots of different programs, and the AMA dishes it out. Wonder how many clubs don't avail themselves of those and other benefits afforded to them by virtue of their membership?

Do you have a problem or a concern with the AMA using part of your dues to subsidize youth programs?

franklin_m

What I learned from that is that you want folks to approach change in the manner you want it done. Yet you then give an example of just that, which went nowhere.

How I choose to try and drive change is my business. They've made changes to their NOTAMS pages (they're no longer posted months past expiration date), they've had to address the whole CBO membership thing in their blog pages, the drone survey they promised to post over two years ago is finally posted. And missing insurance and other reports are posted as well.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

I'm glad you agree, it did in fact go absolutely nowhere. But don't misunderstand, I don't care how people want to try to get change done. If you want to attribute them changing to your suggestions, fantastic. I've not told you specifically what to do or not to do, that's up to you. I'm just putting some options out there. Where one group failed, the other may be successful.

cj_rumley

I don't have a problem with my dues subsidizing youth membership that gets them in the gate at a chartered flying site. In that instance the cost for a youth to get some flying instruction and experience is nothing, and at least at the clubs I belong to he or she will be warmly welcomed and gain some valuable experience that could lead to a worthwhile lifelong hobby. I have some concern about the pricey structured programs AMA is promoting, especially if cost paid by his/her family still needs to be subsidized by our dues. Just isn't apparent that it's a good cost/benefit situation.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

I think the programs they offer, and those offered at the club level are very different. As as IP Instructor, I can only get one on one training with a prospective member, or even with a current one learning how to fly. I or other instructors can only spend so much time with them, and the off they go do do other things. I'm not able to do what these programs do. Bring them together in one place, for an extended period of time (3-5) days for highly intensive building, theory, and flying. I suppose some clubs could put that together,but it takes a willingness on the clubs part to put some money up, and probably the harder piece, manpower. I wouldn't know what the AMA is paying or how they are underwriting the programs, but I have to presume they are sensitive to costs as well, but might also be looking at this from the investment perspective. Invest time, effort, and energy into what might be the next paying members...some of these kids are in the teens and will stick with the program and end up actually paying. I look at someone like Andrew Jesky as an example of this. Not only is he part of the AMA now, he's a fantastic ambassador for the hobby and youth, and hopefully will be part of the EC someday.

franklin_m

If indeed the AMA is "sensitive to costs as well," then I hope they are paying attention to these from cost / benefit perspective, since they are in fact asking all of us to subsidize the effort. If the kids turn into paying members, great.

But say it cost AMA $10K to support this. To keep the math easy, say that kids become members at $75 each for membership. But 100% of that money does not offset the initial $10K. Say $60 of that membership fee pays AMA operating costs, leaving say $10 of the $75 that isn't otherwise consumed. If fifty kids become members as outlined above, that $10 x 50 or $500 annually in "profit" each year as a result of the 50 new members. At that rate, it takes 20 years for the memberships gained to offset the money spent.

I would hope that this is part of the calculation at some level in the organization. Not saying it's not a good idea to do these things, and surely there's an emotional attachment to the idea of these bringing in new members, but we need to keep objective figures like payback time in the consideration of measures of effectiveness.

franklin_m

Excellent point. ROI absolutely needs to be considered. New members are great. I hope these events do bring in some. But just because someone joins at $75 a year does not mean that entire $75 is measured against the cost of acquiring that member. As we've seen in other posts, a good portion of the $75 annual fee is committed to just support the organization. Only the "profit" so to speak could be applied to the cost of acquiring these members.

Here's an example of how I've used these kind of calculations. When deciding what energy savings projects to fund at my base, DoN established an inflation adjusted 20 year payback requirement. So any project had to recoup the entire cost in energy savings within 20 years. If it met that standard and fit within my obligation authority, we could fund it. We could still submit for approval projects with a longer payback, but it required justification and approval by higher HQ.

So here's where AMA could use some of the data they're collecting. I'm sure they have internal analysis showing that average new members remain paying members for yy years. The yy years figure might be a good start for payback calculations.

Just a thought.