Some lite reading for you all over during your Thanksgiving break.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/Members...lstatement.pdf

Mike

Here's data straight from AMA's IRS 990's (public documents). This is in constant year (inflation adjusted) 2013 dollars. If anyone is interested in the raw data, I've got AMA's IRS 990's going back to support all the calculations / graph presented herein.

What's clear is that except for the years where AMA EC has increased dues prices, the EC has been unable to reverse constant declining membership revenue. And yet, while they knew the membership revenue was decreasing, the EC was voting to spend substantial sums of money at "Taj Muncie." It would also seem to indicate a failure of their organizational strategy, no matter how much lipstick they try and put on this pig.

A pictures worth a thousand words.

Mike

I haven't done the analysis yet, but any bets that their expenses (staff size) went the opposite direction?

Odds are pretty good there.

Mike

Here's another 1,000 words. This is their total income, straight from line 12 of their IRS 990, which are thankfully public documents. The numbers are inflation adjusted to constant CY2015 dollars. Pretty unmistakable trend.

It only goes through 2015, so I've formally requested - from AMA - a copy of their 2016 filing. Under the law, they have 30 days to provide.

But everything's just great just ask them. So great in fact we need a indoor flying site.............................................. .........

Mike

That's being funded with "Foundation $$"....LOL

Astro

Than all operating expenses paid for by the AMA good fairy fund.

Mike

This foundation is going to prove to be a myth. There's some numbers out there for non-profits that say that for every $100,000 a year you want in income from a foundation, you need $2,000,000 in capital. They're going to need a lot more money. As Mike has so often said, it (AMA) is being managed like a second rate bake sale.

The numbers are clear from their tax returns, total revenue is dropping over time. I'd much rather see them put money into turning that around rather than an indoor flying site in the middle of the country.

Are you suggesting that the AMA get back to their roots, listen to their members, and actually provide VALUE to being a member, so that people WANT to join, rather than trying to FORCE them to?

What a concept!

Astro

I think it's a question of behavior economics. People look at the $75 a year for AMA and ask themselves, "What do I get for my money?" For those that perceive they get "enough," they either join or stay members. For those that do not perceive "enough" value, then they either don't join or leave. The biggest tangible benefit is the local AMA club, as AMA membership is required for access. And yet AMA spends far more on the superb facility in the center of the country, when the overwhelming majority of it's members are located more than a day's drive away. I think that's foolish, but hey, what do I know.

This just in, now were getting involved in the "personal flying devices" end of things. Thought we were a model aviation organization?

AMA Supporting GoFly Flight Competition | AMA Education Blog

" “AMA is excited to partner with GoFly in support of this creative initiative,” said Dave Mathewson, AMA executive director. “AMA has always supported advancements in aviation technology, and we look forward to witnessing the success of the GoFly program.”


Mike

You`re right. $75.00 seems to be a little steep for a magazine subscription and access to the local club (another $25.00) where you`re not sure if the grass will be short enough to take off from when you get there.

Sounds to me like the EC has totally lost track of WHAT THE AMA IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING!!!!!!
The fact that they are becoming what amounts to an insurance brokerage, sponsoring A MANNED FLYING DEVICE event, USING MEMBERSHIP SUPPLIED FUNDS, and not doing anything to help the clubs and flyers that actually could use the help tells me the EC members need to be recalled, fired, or whatever other term is used by the AMA bylaws

In my case, it's $75 for AMA plus $100 for the club, with rough grass.

And therein lies the AMA's problem. They plow much more money into "Taj-Muncie", a field that most members will never use, while fields close to home are expensive and not that great. Therefore, no reason to join AMA. Just fly smaller stuff in the park or at the nearby school.

So AMA's been saying that reason behind 336 was to preserve the hobby. This chart shows that the reason may well have been to reverse a decade long decline in membership revenue. Now it makes much more sense why AMA Government Affairs continues to imply (wrongly per FAA email to me) that membership is required to comply with 336...

Ouch! The club I previously belonged to was up to $50.00 a year, but the runway was always kept very nicely mown. But I guess it just depends on various factors. At my present club, I offered to donate a mower if there could be a shed provided for on-site convenience. I was told that couldn't be done because of occasional flooding at the site. I wouldn't mind mowing it myself, but I`d have to get a trailer. Oh well, whaddaya gonna do. How deep do you want to dig for the privilege?