franklin_m

While the AMA President, ED, and the rest of the EC are silent on AMA's grim financial position, the CFO is the only one with the moral courage to tell the truth. The July Model Aviation has the following quotes from him:

• "Membership numbers are slightly down" (note 1)
• "During next couple months and especially in the fall, we expect to see a downturn in memberships..."
• "The hobby is a discretionary expense..."
• "We still expect a decrease in revenue from events..."
• "...[W]e have seen a sharp drop in advertising revenue from companies that have been AMA sponsors for many years."
• "Print advertising has been especially hard hit ... I do not feel this revenue will return in the future..."
• "Now the magazine drains precious resources..."

We have AMA nobility in this forum, one of the Knights of the Taj-Muncie Round Table. And that member is silent on HIS ideas to reverse any of the trends. He's silent in the EC meetings on the subject, silent in these forums, and so far as I can tell - doesn't have ANY ideas to reverse the trends above. It appears that none of them do ... which reinforces what I've been saying for decades. They're in over their heads.

They need to take a machete to spending. Not six months from now. NOW. They need to fire the majority of the print staff, as they've been ineffective producing content that brings advertising. They don't need to give the advertising agency "more time" as advocated at a meeting recently, they need to fire them now. They don't need yet another committee to study the matter (meanwhile haemorrhaging money for another three months while they wait for the study) ... they need to act now.

Notes:
1. PAYING memberships have been for nearly every year for the last couple decades

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I'm sure they are working hard and doing everything they can.

It certainly doesn't help to come here and repeatedly air their shortcomings.

Geez...

Astro

Hydro Junkie

If they are doing everything they can, what are they actually doing?
If the CFO says they are losing money and the IRS reports show they are losing money, what are they going to do to slow that loss of capital? It seems to me we're watching a repeat of K Mart and Sears Holdings all over again. The companies both went bankrupt under the leadership of one man, who made a fortune in the demise of both companies.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

sounds like they are doing what they’ve always done, “give it more time”.

Maybe all of these things will magically fix themselves.....

Hydro Junkie

Not to sound like a Franklin parrot but, as he said, "They need to take a machete to spending", which is the same thing I've said for the past many times.

franklin_m

What baffles me is their 'plan' boils down to either 'give it more time' or do more of the same and hope for a different result. I keep posting these things to make sure that the EC knows some of us hold them accountable. They've not held the "marketing major" ED accountable (for marketing AMA better let alone cutting costs). They've not held the President accountable for use of the official publication to undermine a competitor in an election. And the EC seems more intent on sitting back and romancing about the glory days of yesteryear while the organization flounders.

We've yet to even hear our resident EC member offer a single idea to do something differently to change the economic trajectory - either here or in an EC meeting. The silence is deafening.

fliers1

Perhaps this is why those at AMA HQ resist our offer to help the hobby/sport:

How can you best understand a person's declining your offer to assist them?

Source:
To better grasp the apparent irrationality of another’s unwillingness to take what you’re perfectly happy to give them, here are four questions to ask yourself (and maybe ask them as well):

(1) Might they be too proud to accept your offer? As a matter of personal pride, they might feel that to take what you’re offering them would be to admit inferiority, inadequacy, dependency, or defeat. And such a reaction could be the case whether you’re proposing a financial gift or loan, or concrete assistance with something they’re struggling with. Any money offered them, even if only temporarily, could make them feel patronized—or as though they were some sort of “charity case,” pitiful enough to be offered a hand-out. Additionally, accepting non-monetary help on a task or project might be experienced by them as conceding an inability to successfully complete the work on their own.

(2) Might they feel too undeserving to accept your offer? Did they possibly grow up regularly receiving the message from their caretakers that they were entitled to nothing? And that asking for things was unacceptably selfish—a behavior they needed to repudiate? If so, they might feel they have no right to accept what you’re more than happy to offer them. That they haven’t sufficiently earned your proposed gift or assistance.
Since in the end it’s emotions that govern behavior, it’s safe to assume that if these individuals did allow themselves to take what you were freely offering, they’d feel guilty. For that would be the emotion most closely linked to violating a family rule that, earlier, they swallowed whole. They might even feel anxious that if they “dared” accept your generosity, they’d be punished (i.e., by the highly judgmental parental voices still echoing inside their head). For it may be that they were rebuked anytime they accepted something not explicitly authorized by their parents.

(3) Might they connect acceptance with incurring a burdensome sense of obligation? They may not wish to be beholden to anybody for anything. For they view all external help as carrying a heavy price tag, as implicitly demanding reciprocity later on that would seriously disadvantage them. So your offer may threaten their sense of freedom, independence, security, or autonomy. In such instances, they’re compelled, from deep within, to reject whatever you—or, for that matter, anybody else—might wish to offer them.

Source:
(4) Might they associate taking from others as rendering themselves more vulnerable to them? This final explanation is an overarching one. And in a sense the first three explanations could all be viewed, indirectly, as necessitating a greater willingness to experience personal vulnerability. But here I’m focusing specifically on the individual’s fear of accepting something because of abiding trust issues. They may fear that taking—as opposed to giving—will place them one down in the relationship, and that such subordinate “positioning” will lessen their ability, going forward, to protect themselves.
If in the past such “taking” was, unexpectedly, used against them, then why in the world would they open themselves up to the possibility of re-experiencing such betrayal? Victimized precisely because in the past someone convinced them that it was okay to accept some sort of unearned “perk,” they learned—or more likely, overlearned—the sad lesson of distrust. If the gift received was in reality an instrument of manipulation later used to exploit them, then now anything like a gratuitous offer can rouse their suspicions, strongly prompting a knee-jerk refusal.
An extreme example of this “learned distrust” might be an individual who was molested as a child—by a person who “groomed” them for such molestation through carefully contrived favors and gift-giving. Made to feel super-special, valued, and loved by the pedophile, at some point they felt compelled to acquiesce to the increasingly intimate physical advances made upon them. Such early trauma can lead to lasting distrust of anyone professing concern for them—anyone offering to give them something or help them with something.
article continues after advertisement
So, consider: the next time a person you’d sincerely like to assist (either with time, energy, or money) pretty much dismisses your offer out of hand, then—rather than take it personally—think about what, frankly, might be making it impossible for them to be the willing recipient of your largesse.

Hydro Junkie

Fliers1, if we were dealing with an individual, I could see where one of those four scenarios would apply. In this case, however, we are dealing with a self serving organization that spent the past several years trying to manipulate everyone to do their bidding. Now that they have been put back in their place by Congress and the FAA, the CFO is(in this case correctly) screaming that "THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' If the powers that be can't figure out how to cut costs and work within a reduced budget, they will be filing for bankruptcy in the very near future.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

Only one standing on the soapbox, one outsider with no dog in the fight and two AMA members. If this were a wadi I'd say things are drying up. LOL

Come on guys I've only got a couple of months before I retire if you guys dry up n blow away now what do I do to pass the time at work. I'll miss the entertainment.

Hydro Junkie

I have only three words for you:
DEAL WITH IT

franklin_m

For "one standing on a soapbox..." let's see:
- Not one but two direct quotes used as justification by FAA for not allowing AMA number in lieu of registration
- With one well worded email, got government agency to make major policy statement regarding whether 336 required membership
- In response to above, "Dear Leader" devoted most of an entire month's column in MA trying to describe why FAA was wrong

And I'm not done yet. I pointed out to FAA (and to OMB who will also get insight into comments), that FRIA concept imposes up to $60 million in annual costs on recreational flyers not already members of AMA - $60 million in costs NOT considered by FAA in their analysis supporting the RemoteID rule.

ECHO24

A life not worth living.

Hydro Junkie

I don't know if I would go quite that far. Seems to me that someone doesn't seem to understand that all modelers have a "dog in this fight", regardless if they are AMA members or not. I build planes, build & race boats and don't want to see everything go "to hell in a hand basket". It's already getting more and more difficult to get parts for our models so we don't really need someone that thinks it's "funny" and his "sole source of entertainment" at work to be acting like he knows all.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Hydro, we also don't need somone trying to destroy the hobby to satisfy his need for vengeance, I.E. They didn't listen to me, they didn't accept my help, they didn't help fund my flying field on a military base......

Hydro Junkie

I can see you just don't get it. IF you were to look past all the bluster and arguing, you would see that all Franklin is trying to do is to make the "powers that be" accountable. No one holds anyone in Muncie accountable for anything, hence the dropping treasury and decreasing membership. When you really look at it, a $9,000,000 treasury should be able to keep the AMA up and running for a couple of decades with ease WITHOUT ANY DUES INCOME. Due to the lack of accountability and no fiscal planning, that money will be gone in less than 10 years, EVEN WITH INCOME FROM LOYAL DUES PAYERS!!!!!!

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

And just how is opposing the FRIA concept that will opsolete 100M +( 10K for me alone ) worth of models holding AMA accountable? WHAT YOU DON'T GET is that everyone who agrees with Franklin has very little to loose including YOU. To be perfectly honest here, since you are not a member and currently don't fly, where is your dog in this fight?

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Why do you keep supporting the AMA despite their obvious lack of ability to protect your $10K investment?

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

How does opposition of Franklin automatically mean support of the AMA? What I support is the HOBBY AND INDUSTRY as a whole. Have any of you thought about the negative impact the loss of pattern, soaring, IMAC, giant scale and jets will have on the hobby? Franklin talks about the 60M in cost to participate but leaves out the 100M plus in lost investment and the loss of industry sales, taxes through those sales, employment taxes by people currently employed by the R/C industry.


Just look at his opposition to AMA holding the Nats in spite of several SIGs backing out. How do you think Muncie as a whole is going to do without the economic stimulus that the Nats with its thousands of participants over a two month time frame brings to that community? The Nats brings revenue to restaurants, hotels, gas stations, airlines, car rental companies etc. Some of these businesses depend on that additional income each June and July. Start looking at the whole picture.

R_Strowe

To add onto Speed's post, the amount of innovation that comes from both the Nats as well as competition in general has benefited EVERY modeler, whether they fly in competition or not.. And the promoter of said competitions, at least in this country? The AMA. And they continue to be.

R_Strowe

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

dunno how muncie will look, but i bet it can not be worse than places where nascar, indy car and other races were canceled.
and that does not even come close to the economic losses from other sporting events that have not been happening.

Hydro Junkie

The FRIA concept isn't a concept, it's a con. Why is it a con? All you have to do is look at who benefits.
Who benefits the most from initiating FRIAs? Look no further than Muncie, who's treasury will grow by roughly 700% if everyone that flies anything is forced to become an AMA member. Now comes the next question, who has anything to lose? I DO!!!!!! Right now, I have a Futaba 9C that I'm planning on using to fly my planes. For me to use that same 9C in the future, if FRIAs become the only place to fly, I'm now FORCED to pay a club for access to a FRIA and the AMA for the ability to fly. If FRIAs don't happen, I still have to pay, considering my 9C will no longer be a legal piece of equipment. That means a $600+ radio will be sitting on the shelf since it will be illegal to turn it on and I'll be looking at spending the same amount of money to replace it as you will to replace yours. I don't have the desire to fly in competition or go to Muncie to see the AMA's monument to its own greatness so being a member is nothing more than wasted money for me. You say your $10,000 worth of toy airplanes will be obsolete. Any plane I build(and yes, I do have plans for several 50cc gassers) will be the same way and yet I'm still going to build them. And now, with all of this said, I see myself looking at answering a few questions:
1) Is the sky falling? Of course not.
2) Is the AMA the answer to all our problems? Again, NO, since it can't even protect its members from this calamity the powers that be created.
3) Is the hobby going to die? Once again, no. It may require retooling but we will still be able to fly our planes

R_Strowe

Hydro,

Your equipment will be obsoleted without a FRIA period. The way the FAA has worded things there is no way to fly it legally with either Limited or Standard RID. And it seems to me that the FAA really didn’t want to do the FRIA scheme, given that they expect to phase them out over several years. So the fact that the AMA was able to help secure FRIAs as an option is not a bad compromise.

Honestly I’m pretty sure you’ll see other groups apply for and get CBO status, it is just now that the AMA is the only game in town.

My other hobby is sports car racing, specifically SPEC Miata. If I want to run not only do I need either an SCCA or NASA license, but also need to be a member or pay higher entry fees. I realize that a track is not a public road, but in actual application is it really any different?

I’ve also asked others this question before; What did people expect of the AMA, a group without effectively unlimited funds, that actually has its hand tied by tax law (due to their 501(c)3 status, to be able to accomplish? It seems too many expect groups to go to Washington and get their way. I can tell you that, as a union-represented airline pilot, that my union (ALPA) loses more than they win, and they spend way more than what AMA does.

R_Strowe

Hydro Junkie

My equipment will be obsolete either way, just a matter or when. With FRIAs, it may be a few years longer than without. Either way, I have to replace my radio gear with new. It's just a matter of when. The rest of my response is hi-lited above

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

LOL. The WHOLE picture? The WHOLE picture is that the liberals in our Government have forcefully CLOSED many of those businesses all on their own.......

Look around, look past your own nose. Look at the craziness that is happening all around us, all the whilst you are sniveling about your measly $10K.......some might say you are overly privileged and should share some of that bounty with your comrades.....

Astro

jcmors

We can argue and discuss all day long about what was done, what went wrong, what should have been done, etc... and at the end of the day we will still be in the same situation with the FAA and the government trying to shut us down. My opinion:

1. The AMA should not have attempted to force membership in our organization using FAA regulations. That was just plain wrong.
2. Call for the prosecution, basically, of everyone not an AMA member who is flying recreational model aircraft in the Hill alienated many folks.
3. As an organization we should have concentrated on our members and not "romanced the drone" for now we are ALL "drones".
4. The AMA is in dire financial straights due to not paying attention to trends and yes, basically mis managing funds.

So, having said all that, and voiced my opinions... what now? It is obvious to me that the AMA is NOT going to save model aviation. FRIAs are really not the answer. Consider the dream of FRIAs causing all of the registered but non AMA members actually being forced to join the AMA in order to fly their existing equipment. Picture 700,000 folks streaming into our ~2000 club sites that are approved as FRIAs, there will be no room and no opportunity to fly there anyhow! We would be standing in line for hours waiting to get a 10 minute flight in!

We can argue all day about what was done wrong, what should have been done, what would have happened if this or that was done differently and we can keep arguing and fighting among ourselves. The past is the past, we are here now and dwelling on the past won't fix our problems. Lets consider something that most of us here may be able to agree on, the fight to save our hobby is now our responsibility, each one of us as individuals. We need to present a positive image of our hobby to the general public and to our representatives in Congress. It is OUR responsibility as hobbyists to come up with ways to make a difference. AMA member or non AMA member, as hobbyists we are all in this thing together and we need to work together towards solutions.

Again, just my humble opinion.