AMA's 2019 Tax filing - the financial implosion continues
01-18-2021, 04:47 PM
#77
Thread Starter
Even the financial part of the 2019 annual report, page 32, is titled "Goal: Establish a Balanced Budget." Then they go on to say they "entered" 2020 with a balanced budget. Well DUH, they're running out of investments to sell so they really don't have any option BUT to create a balanced budget. And even their expense savings comment is misleading. They say that "AMA is on pace to reduce expenses by $2 million in 2019." They're "on pace?" How about talking about actual performance instead of wishful thinking! What really happened? They cut spending by just $1.39 million, unfortunately total revenue fell by an even larger number, $1.43 million!
Another metric for EC "performance"?
Over the period 2004 to 2014, the EC overspent revenue by $0.88 million.
Over the period 2016 to 2019, that EC overspent revenue by $3.17 million.
Note 1: Page 8, AMA 2019 Annual Report: "Over the course of the year, members received 6-plus million emails with information about the hobby and association."
Last edited by franklin_m; 01-19-2021 at 02:38 AM.
01-19-2021, 06:12 AM
#78
Thanks all.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
Last edited by PopeyeCharlotte; 01-19-2021 at 06:16 AM.
01-19-2021, 06:58 AM
#79
Thanks all.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
01-19-2021, 08:48 AM
#80
Thread Starter
Thanks all.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
What is the purpose of this thread? I understand it is to show that AMA is spending beyond its income. And that the total assets of the organization are declining, at a pace that the hobby will outlive the AMA.
It could also be a place to make meaningful suggestions – although it seems only one person from AMA is active (I suspect many are reading).
Inflation adjusted makes the numbers bigger, so the 4M loss becomes nearer to 6 M (roughly). (franklin_m, I think you may have annually compounded the initial number, and not the annual assets in the middle? If I convert 18M to 2019 dollars, it becomes 26M, as your graph shows. But the 4M lost over time only compounds to 6M – and that is assuming all 4M was lost in 2001.)
Regardless of the math details, the asset reduction is a large number – no doubt. And one that should move us to action.
Secondly, I am suspicious of the 35M cumulative losses of the magazine. Not that I doubt the data; franklin_m is accurately pulling data from the 990. However, I suspect there is something “sneaky” going on with the 990 filing.
My thinking: Magazine revenue is about 600K. Circulation of the magazine is 140k (per the AMA website). This means, for 140k members, $4.28 of each membership is paying for the magazine. That does not pass the “sniff test.” What other low-volume specialty magazine has a price of $4 / year? (Production cost for the magazine is 1.4M, or $10 per subscription – a number that makes more sense as a price point.)
What I suspect – but to be clear I have no clue on tax law – is that the AMA is moving numbers around on the 990 for tax benefit. Again, this is pure speculation on my part; it would be great is a tax expert could chime in.
Note, the 990 is completed and submitted by the AMA. The financial reports are created by an independent third party. I’ll tell you which one I trust more… 😊
In conclusion, I believe the issues are not as dire as the data by franklin_m show. But I agree with franklin_m’s conclusion. Something must change. Quickly. Now.
(My opinion: keep the magazine. I like reading it, and it reminds me to spend (more) money on the hobby. But that means job cuts at AMA to balance the budget – and it usually is not the executive committee who get the axe… sorry admin personnel ☹. Also I support tying executive committee compensation to a net-zero budget… say, 25% of their pay is basis meeting budget. Just my opinion.)
(Note, in the initial post by franklin_m, he states, "I was able to find the 2019 AMA IRS 990 filing, finally, on a public website ... in xml format". It is now on the AMA website for all us to review, in plain english, as franklin_m later corrects: "the 2019 AMA IRS 990 PDF is ... wait for it ... ON THE AMA's WEBSITE".)
Peace, and thanks again for getting us engaged in digging into the AMA website for the data. I encourage all of us to continue to do the same.
The comment about the 990 being on the website should be explained. I don't want to give AMA a stick to beat me with by using data in a public forum that comes from a members only portion of their site. So while the 990 has been there for a long time, I wait until one of the non-profit watchdogs get the big data dump from the IRS and post it on their websites (public). Alternatively, I can ask AMA for a copy. But to illustrate the culture of the organization, they wanted me to pay for it ... though all I asked was they just email me the PDF they generate w/ a couple keystrokes. I interpret that as making it difficult to get info. So I just wait until I can get it for free. To be honest, if they were really as interested in transparency, they'd move all their 990s (public documents under the law) from behind the members only to a public section of their website. But mark my words, they won't.
As for 990s vs. third party reports, my money is on thee 990s, if for no other reason than knowingly submitting false info exposes them to federal criminal charges. I don't think the third party report is done under the same risk of criminal liability.
01-19-2021, 09:52 AM
#81
Understood. But the delta, inflation adjusted is much different to the individual amounts, inflation adjusted. Math error somewhere. But I don't want to debate the minutea... the big picture aligns.
Error on a tax filing, might be found on an audit, at which point you pay the erroneous tax plus interest. (Assuming not a criminal / malicious error.) Third party has their reputation on the line. Both legally, as financial decisions (loans, etc.) are made basis their audits, as well as professional reputation. I trust third party auditors. (Plus the odd allocation of revenue from magazines on the 990 does not make sense.) I think we'll have to agree to disagree 
.
Again, we disagree somewhat on the small stuff, but agree on the important stuff.
.Again, we disagree somewhat on the small stuff, but agree on the important stuff.
01-19-2021, 10:04 AM
#82
Thread Starter
01-19-2021, 10:16 AM
#83
And some of us have been AMA members for a very long time.......
01-19-2021, 12:45 PM
#84
01-19-2021, 03:39 PM
#85
PopeyeCharlotte, I would like to commend you on your last few posts. While you questioned part of what Franklin has posted, you gave your reasons why and gave Franklin a way to respond IN A TACTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE WAY. That has me responding with two words:
WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, about us all being members of the AMA, I'll be the first to say I AM NOT A MEMBER. I don't have the desire to be a member of a mismanaged organization that's methods of trying to force membership are questionable at best and borderline illegal to totally illegal at worst. IF the powers that be ever clean up their act, then maybe I might join but, that being said, it's going to take a while before I trust the AMA to be what its charter says it is
WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, about us all being members of the AMA, I'll be the first to say I AM NOT A MEMBER. I don't have the desire to be a member of a mismanaged organization that's methods of trying to force membership are questionable at best and borderline illegal to totally illegal at worst. IF the powers that be ever clean up their act, then maybe I might join but, that being said, it's going to take a while before I trust the AMA to be what its charter says it is
01-20-2021, 06:37 AM
#86
Banned
PopeyeCharlotte, I would like to commend you on your last few posts. While you questioned part of what Franklin has posted, you gave your reasons why and gave Franklin a way to respond IN A TACTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE WAY. That has me responding with two words:
WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, about us all being members of the AMA, I'll be the first to say I AM NOT A MEMBER. I don't have the desire to be a member of a mismanaged organization that's methods of trying to force membership are questionable at best and borderline illegal to totally illegal at worst. IF the powers that be ever clean up their act, then maybe I might join but, that being said, it's going to take a while before I trust the AMA to be what its charter says it is
WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, about us all being members of the AMA, I'll be the first to say I AM NOT A MEMBER. I don't have the desire to be a member of a mismanaged organization that's methods of trying to force membership are questionable at best and borderline illegal to totally illegal at worst. IF the powers that be ever clean up their act, then maybe I might join but, that being said, it's going to take a while before I trust the AMA to be what its charter says it is
01-20-2021, 04:07 PM
#87
Thread Starter
As a consequence of correcting the data, some numbers actually got worse. Earlier I said over the 10 year period '04-'14 total assets dropped by 28%? With the corrections, it's actually dropped by 36%. And the current EC is doubling that pace, in the three years '16-'19, total assets have dropped by 17%.
01-21-2021, 02:50 AM
#89
Will this help gain membership revenue?
AMA invited Nickelodeon’s hit TV show “Dude Perfect” to fly at AMA’s Richardson Radio Control Flying Club in Princeton, Texas (pictured above). AMA Youth member Rhett Lambert helped arrange the shoot and participated in the episode. The episode debuted May 1, 2019, as 720,000-plus viewers that night were introduced to the joy model aviation on Nickelodeon.What happens after this exposure? The mindset is deeply embedded in the minds of the public that crashing is assured if they try to fly RC airplanes. Therefore, the exposure idea doesn't mean a thing to the public. That fact never seems to get across to the hobby's leaders. Or if it did, they have no place else to go.
AMA invited Nickelodeon’s hit TV show “Dude Perfect” to fly at AMA’s Richardson Radio Control Flying Club in Princeton, Texas (pictured above). AMA Youth member Rhett Lambert helped arrange the shoot and participated in the episode. The episode debuted May 1, 2019, as 720,000-plus viewers that night were introduced to the joy model aviation on Nickelodeon.What happens after this exposure? The mindset is deeply embedded in the minds of the public that crashing is assured if they try to fly RC airplanes. Therefore, the exposure idea doesn't mean a thing to the public. That fact never seems to get across to the hobby's leaders. Or if it did, they have no place else to go.
01-21-2021, 03:50 AM
#90
Thread Starter
Will this help gain membership revenue?
AMA invited Nickelodeon’s hit TV show “Dude Perfect” to fly at AMA’s Richardson Radio Control Flying Club in Princeton, Texas (pictured above). AMA Youth member Rhett Lambert helped arrange the shoot and participated in the episode. The episode debuted May 1, 2019, as 720,000-plus viewers that night were introduced to the joy model aviation on Nickelodeon.What happens after this exposure? The mindset is deeply embedded in the minds of the public that crashing is assured if they try to fly RC airplanes. Therefore, the exposure idea doesn't mean a thing to the public. That fact never seems to get across to the hobby's leaders. Or if it did, they have no place else to go.
AMA invited Nickelodeon’s hit TV show “Dude Perfect” to fly at AMA’s Richardson Radio Control Flying Club in Princeton, Texas (pictured above). AMA Youth member Rhett Lambert helped arrange the shoot and participated in the episode. The episode debuted May 1, 2019, as 720,000-plus viewers that night were introduced to the joy model aviation on Nickelodeon.What happens after this exposure? The mindset is deeply embedded in the minds of the public that crashing is assured if they try to fly RC airplanes. Therefore, the exposure idea doesn't mean a thing to the public. That fact never seems to get across to the hobby's leaders. Or if it did, they have no place else to go.
So that episode aired in May 2019. And yet membership revenue declined in 2019 as it has in many other years. It obviously didn't work. Additional proof it didn't work? They had to hire a "membership acquisition" person. Yep. Revenue's declining, so lets ADD to the staff.
01-21-2021, 06:33 AM
#91
I hate to say it, but the hobby started to jump the shark at the advent of ARF's becoming more popular. Don't get me wrong, I am NOT blaming ARF's. It's just that historically, this hobby was truly a combination of STEM, woodworking, craftsmanship, electronics, design, love of aviation and airplanes, camaraderie, etc.
Along comes the ARF and a good portion of the original appeal is removed. The, "quick fix" if you will. This drive-thru culture is not conducive to lifelong membership as the "traditional" hobby was. It was great for a while as the, "quick-fix" guy would buy into the flashy marketing hype and drop a bunch of money into a beginner setup join AMA in order to fly his new stuff, crash, rinse, repeat a couple of times and then move on to something else.
Enter the drone craze (a completely different hobby than the "traditional" hobby that the AMA was founded upon), that appealed largely to a completely different demographic than the vast majority of existing AMA members, and the AMA's "all-in" eagerness to capitalize on these MILLION$ of new members, and....well.......here we are today.......
No need to take over the world, AMA. Cut your staff, go back to your roots. Serve your core membership and figure out how to bring value to THEM and you will remain relevant for a long time. Contrary to popular dialogue in these threads, there is no need for the AMA to grow exponentially, or even at all in order to remain stable and relevant. If it would simply bring value to its core members (i.e. by providing some FAA exemptions and protections), those core members will keep the organization afloat indefinitely.
Sorry AMA, this member does NOT send you $$ each year to have access to telemedicine or group auto insurance, but I DO expect you to adequately lobby for model aviation and provide a backbone for the modeling community, rather than being the vehicle in which manufacturers market their goods to us.
Regards,
Astro
Along comes the ARF and a good portion of the original appeal is removed. The, "quick fix" if you will. This drive-thru culture is not conducive to lifelong membership as the "traditional" hobby was. It was great for a while as the, "quick-fix" guy would buy into the flashy marketing hype and drop a bunch of money into a beginner setup join AMA in order to fly his new stuff, crash, rinse, repeat a couple of times and then move on to something else.
Enter the drone craze (a completely different hobby than the "traditional" hobby that the AMA was founded upon), that appealed largely to a completely different demographic than the vast majority of existing AMA members, and the AMA's "all-in" eagerness to capitalize on these MILLION$ of new members, and....well.......here we are today.......
No need to take over the world, AMA. Cut your staff, go back to your roots. Serve your core membership and figure out how to bring value to THEM and you will remain relevant for a long time. Contrary to popular dialogue in these threads, there is no need for the AMA to grow exponentially, or even at all in order to remain stable and relevant. If it would simply bring value to its core members (i.e. by providing some FAA exemptions and protections), those core members will keep the organization afloat indefinitely.
Sorry AMA, this member does NOT send you $$ each year to have access to telemedicine or group auto insurance, but I DO expect you to adequately lobby for model aviation and provide a backbone for the modeling community, rather than being the vehicle in which manufacturers market their goods to us.
Regards,
Astro
01-21-2021, 07:26 AM
#92
Quick update; I've been busy with my "day job" (gotta make ends meet, you know )
I sharpened my pencil, and while my #s don't agree perfectly with Franklin_m; I get that today's assets, inflation adjusted, are roughly 54% of what they were in 2001.
While this backward-looking (in time) metric looks terrible, looking forward the problem does not seem that hard to solve... 6% reduction in annual expenses. Where can that be found? Tie compensation to meeting it.
AMA, are you listening out there?
)I sharpened my pencil, and while my #s don't agree perfectly with Franklin_m; I get that today's assets, inflation adjusted, are roughly 54% of what they were in 2001.
While this backward-looking (in time) metric looks terrible, looking forward the problem does not seem that hard to solve... 6% reduction in annual expenses. Where can that be found? Tie compensation to meeting it.
AMA, are you listening out there?
01-21-2021, 11:17 AM
#93
My Feedback: (28)
I hate to say it, but the hobby started to jump the shark at the advent of ARF's becoming more popular. Don't get me wrong, I am NOT blaming ARF's. It's just that historically, this hobby was truly a combination of STEM, woodworking, craftsmanship, electronics, design, love of aviation and airplanes, camaraderie, etc.
Along comes the ARF and a good portion of the original appeal is removed. The, "quick fix" if you will. This drive-thru culture is not conducive to lifelong membership as the "traditional" hobby was. It was great for a while as the, "quick-fix" guy would buy into the flashy marketing hype and drop a bunch of money into a beginner setup join AMA in order to fly his new stuff, crash, rinse, repeat a couple of times and then move on to something else.
Enter the drone craze (a completely different hobby than the "traditional" hobby that the AMA was founded upon), that appealed largely to a completely different demographic than the vast majority of existing AMA members, and the AMA's "all-in" eagerness to capitalize on these MILLION$ of new members, and....well.......here we are today.......
No need to take over the world, AMA. Cut your staff, go back to your roots. Serve your core membership and figure out how to bring value to THEM and you will remain relevant for a long time. Contrary to popular dialogue in these threads, there is no need for the AMA to grow exponentially, or even at all in order to remain stable and relevant. If it would simply bring value to its core members (i.e. by providing some FAA exemptions and protections), those core members will keep the organization afloat indefinitely.
Sorry AMA, this member does NOT send you $$ each year to have access to telemedicine or group auto insurance, but I DO expect you to adequately lobby for model aviation and provide a backbone for the modeling community, rather than being the vehicle in which manufacturers market their goods to us.
Regards,
Astro
Along comes the ARF and a good portion of the original appeal is removed. The, "quick fix" if you will. This drive-thru culture is not conducive to lifelong membership as the "traditional" hobby was. It was great for a while as the, "quick-fix" guy would buy into the flashy marketing hype and drop a bunch of money into a beginner setup join AMA in order to fly his new stuff, crash, rinse, repeat a couple of times and then move on to something else.
Enter the drone craze (a completely different hobby than the "traditional" hobby that the AMA was founded upon), that appealed largely to a completely different demographic than the vast majority of existing AMA members, and the AMA's "all-in" eagerness to capitalize on these MILLION$ of new members, and....well.......here we are today.......
No need to take over the world, AMA. Cut your staff, go back to your roots. Serve your core membership and figure out how to bring value to THEM and you will remain relevant for a long time. Contrary to popular dialogue in these threads, there is no need for the AMA to grow exponentially, or even at all in order to remain stable and relevant. If it would simply bring value to its core members (i.e. by providing some FAA exemptions and protections), those core members will keep the organization afloat indefinitely.
Sorry AMA, this member does NOT send you $$ each year to have access to telemedicine or group auto insurance, but I DO expect you to adequately lobby for model aviation and provide a backbone for the modeling community, rather than being the vehicle in which manufacturers market their goods to us.
Regards,
Astro
01-21-2021, 11:38 AM
#94
I think Astro's post hit the nail squarely on the head, ARFs weren't the cause of the hobby's decline, but they enabled people who, if required to build their own, wouldn't have gotten involved in the first place.For my part in all of this I'd just be happy to see one organization, be it the AMA or whoever, advocate strictly for the recreational line of sight flying of models of real aircraft, without trying to be the end all be all controller of anything and everything that's remotely piloted
01-21-2021, 04:39 PM
#96
The part that no one looks at is the AMA wasn't originally a lobbying organization. That is something they have taken upon themselves. I for one, think they need to cut back on the lobbying(it's pretty much self serving and ineffective anyway) and their legal staff as they aren't doing anything constructive anyway. The AMA was founded to be an information gathering/disseminating organization for ways to build and fly aircraft as well as a place to get plans. The insurance and lobbying were added after the fact and are now the AMA's main selling points, not what it was founded to do. As I see it, the AMA needs to get back to it's roots and do what it was created to do, not what it is doing
01-22-2021, 05:16 AM
#97
Banned
I think Astro's post hit the nail squarely on the head, ARFs weren't the cause of the hobby's decline, but they enabled people who, if required to build their own, wouldn't have gotten involved in the first place.For my part in all of this I'd just be happy to see one organization, be it the AMA or whoever, advocate strictly for the recreational line of sight flying of models of real aircraft, without trying to be the end all be all controller of anything and everything that's remotely piloted
01-22-2021, 11:18 AM
#98
I think having been the "One organization" is a big reason for their current fiscal issues. The AMA basically had a closed shop for many years as the only game in town. No competition so no real reason to stay lean and efficient. Now they're fat and broke. Look at what happened when the Sport Flyers (SFA) started up. AMA immediately banned it's clubs from co-mingling with anyone SFA. To the point of threatening the charter of some clubs who did co-mingle. Now is that the behavior of an organization that's confident in its product?
Hi Retired,When I said "one organization" I was saying that meaning "At least one" and not "One and one only". With the AMA's failed romancing the drone campaign I didn't (still pretty much don't) feel that anyone is strictly looking out for the "traditional" RC hobbyist as the singular focus of their efforts. With the AMA apparently more focused on it's own survival VS the survival of the hobby itself I sure do wish there was an SFA or PMA to advocate strictly for us good ol LOS flyers of traditional models of full scale aircraft.
01-22-2021, 11:34 AM
#99
Hi Retired,When I said "one organization" I was saying that meaning "At least one" and not "One and one only". With the AMA's failed romancing the drone campaign I didn't (still pretty much don't) feel that anyone is strictly looking out for the "traditional" RC hobbyist as the singular focus of their efforts. With the AMA apparently more focused on it's own survival VS the survival of the hobby itself I sure do wish there was an SFA or PMA to advocate strictly for us good ol LOS flyers of traditional models of full scale aircraft.
01-23-2021, 05:34 AM
#100
Banned
Hi Retired,When I said "one organization" I was saying that meaning "At least one" and not "One and one only". With the AMA's failed romancing the drone campaign I didn't (still pretty much don't) feel that anyone is strictly looking out for the "traditional" RC hobbyist as the singular focus of their efforts. With the AMA apparently more focused on it's own survival VS the survival of the hobby itself I sure do wish there was an SFA or PMA to advocate strictly for us good ol LOS flyers of traditional models of full scale aircraft.
In my opinion your traditional LOS flyers need to abandon the AMA and form a new organization. To fix the AMA at this point would probably result in an internal war that would take too much time and effort. In fact I suspect the current EC would promote such a war for the simple reason that time would be on their side. A similar tactic was used with the SFA.
However, a new organization would need something for the members which the AMA does not and preferably can not provide. Something tangible and while the new one can be assumed to be properly run and managed in an ethical manner, the majority of the LOS Modelers out there really don't give a hoot about that. The voter participation of the AMA is testimony to that. So the new organization would need something, some service or benefit the AMA couldn't or wouldn't be able to match. The SFA did it with Primary insurance coverage at half the membership price of the AMA. But I suspect that won't work this time but could still be part of the overall package. No, what a new organization would need to start is funding and lots of it. Even before the first member joined. Funding that can provide something the clubs need.
And on the flip side, I can just imagine how the dedicated few of the AMA membership would attack and run down such an organization in places like this and other forums. The lies, rumors, intentional mis-quotes, etc would no doubt run rampant. And don't say they wouldn't. We both know better. And in the end the new guy would no doubt end up between a rock and a hard place having to either sew some slandering individuals and maybe even the AMA itself or just walk away. And that would be a no-win situation for the new guy as it would harm the hobby way more than it would help. But would the AMA care? How about their membership?