I have started this thread to separate the AMA controversey and give a little background on the SFA situation.

1) The SFA initiated the litigation.

No 92-10412
In the District Court of Dallas County Texas

SPORT FLYERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
Plaintiff,

v

ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS, INC.,
VINCE MANKOWSKI,
CARL MARONEY,
GEOFFREY STYLES,
DAVE BROWN,
HOWARD CRISPIN
AND GENE HEMPEL,

Should anyone want the complete petition please e-mail me back channel. It is to long (10 pages)to take up space here.

Here are the words of an insider at the time.

From June of 1992 until about April 1994 I worked extensively with Al Zlogar and his strange little spinoff of SFA that he called HobbyLab. I worked less extensively with the SFA itself, although I did a good bit of volunteer work
and edited a couple of the SFA newsletters that appeared in RCM about then. I spent hundreds of hours working directly with Al Zlogar and Marsha Howard at two of the Dallas area SFA headquarters locations. I was a member of the SFA while I worked with the organization

Before I began, let me mention that I felt that the SFA was a grand idea. It would (and did) put pressure on the AMA to be a little more customer service oriented towards it's lifeblood, the average R/C modeler. It offered people a choice and a bargain for insurance coverage while pursuing their model aviation hobby. I know that Marsha and Al did much yeoman work towards helping these same folks with the SFA, especially in the area of flying site insurance and retention. (Perhaps not as much as the legends have it, though) However, the SFA had a much darker side few were aware of in the early days. I was there, I spent many, many hours in the SFA/HobbyLab offices and I witnessed it first hand.

I have no knowledge of the current management of the SFA under Mr. Janss. I am speaking only of the early SFA under Al Zlogar and Marsha Howard.

Simply put, based on conversations I had with Al Zlogar directly, the lawsuit with the AMA appeared to be part of his business plan *even before* the SFA opened its doors for business. Al had plans to expand the SFA from *before* day one with the proceeds of the lawsuit that he felt that he knew he was going to win. He provoked the lawsuit on purpose, to meet his plan.

As the games began, Al would spin convoluted tales of how the AMA was systematically harassing SFA members at various flying sites. This was at the core of his lawsuit with the AMA. Any reasonable person (especially one well
versed in model club politics) could tell from these stories that if anything at all was actually happening, it was nothing more than overzealous model club members (every club seems to have one or two, at least) that, ndependent of AMA management, were trying to enforce club rules regarding AMA membership. Al took these simple, intra club disagreements, mixed them with some AMA remarks he regarded as libel, added a dash of conspiracy (always spicy) and charged into the lawsuit as planned. It always seemed to me he was trying to make 5
gallons of guacamole out of a few very small avocados.....<G> IMHO, this action negated the good being accomplished by the SFA. Who needs frivolous lawsuits besides lawyers? Certainly not our hobby.

As this began, I was also troubled by the business and management practices at SFA headquarters. Any employee who began to have a clue as to what the SFA was really up to behind the scenes did not have long to survive. The tenure of receptionists, assistants and the like was usually measured in weeks at best. There is something wrong at the very core of an organization that has this kind of turnover. Many bills were not paid (not from lack of funds) and at least one person was fired for paying an overdue bill without permission. I have first hand knowledge of this.

One of Al's other grand plans for the SFA was not illegal, but always made me a little uncomfortable. He viewed the ultimate purpose of the SFA not as a model fraternity supplying benefits to it's members, but as helping to create
a ready pool of customers for whatever model related marketing scheme he was focused on at the moment. (Complete vertical integration of customer, product and supplier) Early on, he attempted to buy a number of well known model companies, such as Sig Mfg., in hopes of pursuing this goal. He later created HobbyLab as his personal tool to do this with. Ever notice how SFA newsletters became extensive commercials for HobbyLab products that were barely under development, much less ready to ship? I thought you might have........<G>

I will not speak much of HobbyLab, as it is not not the subject under discussion here. I worked as a product designer while Al was firmly in charge of the management, the marketing and the money (much of which came from the
SFA). It became a morass of good ideas and intentions never realized, too much marketing and not enough substance, broken agreements and commitments and fingerprinting. We did invent some fun models and I view the experience as: "That which does not destroy you, makes you stronger".....<G>. Others involved lost more than me, to be sure.

Troubled by the mismanagement and many other issues, I severed my contacts with SFA and HobbyLab completely in late 1994. After the smoke had cleared, more than one person has noticed that the whole HobbyLab deal (and to a lesser extent, SFA) had an amazing resemblance to the plot of that classic Mel Brooks movie, "The Producers".

SFA...a great idea, poorly executed in many ways in the early years, but with too much attendant baggage to survive in its original form.

******* end of testimony ********

More to follow if anyone is interested. Next - Elliott Janss, how did he fit into the picture?

Red Scholefield
AMA 951 Leader Member/CD

Red: Thank you for the SFA report. We too soon forget the real facts in these matters. It was good to hear from an insider about the way matters were handled at SFA. I had always heard that the other real intent was to sell insurance. Wasn't the SFA founder an insurance company owner? Look forward to the next installment! Regards.

Red,

Let's see, wasn't it reported that Dave Brown and Carl Maroney joined SFA so as to acquire standing to petition a certain New England state's insurance board to get SFA's insurance charter revoked? I think that was part of the lawsuit. I had a copy of the lawsuit at one time, dunno if I still do.

CR

Red, speaking of Model Labs in your post, who came up with the safety needle valve adjuster that they sent to new members?
I still have one in my flight box just to show people that there are complicated ways to injure yourself while adjusting needle valves. Personally, I would rather just stick my finger in the prop directly rather than having all that additional flying plastic in my face when I get it and my finger in the prop.
You were right about a good idea being poorly executed. They lead a lot of people in the DFW metroplex down the garden path.

STILL leading people down the garden path.

Hi,
I can tell you how Eliot entered the picture. For those who didn’t know Elliot personally, you need to know that for 30 years, he ALWAYS had a field. Elliot’s philosophy about his club was: when you join a country club to play golf, you’re not expected to cut the grass, same with his field, you paid your dues, $300/yr, in my case $600 since my son was also a member. No meetings, field clean up, etc, you pay your money and go fly.
Peter Acosta owned the land the field was on and wanted an increase in liability from $1M to $2M. Since we were an AMA charted club, Elliot called AMA and after talking to some people at HQ about getting an increase on the policy, he was told that AMA could not get a policy with $2M coverage, as they had “never heard� of anyone wanting that much coverage. After going back and forth for several weeks, the AMA told Elliot they can’t do it and if he doesn’t like it, go find it somewhere else. At this point, we’re weeks away from losing the field and Elliot finally finds SFA, calls Marsha and she says no problem, gets a policy and sends it to him. He gives it to Acosta; field saved.
Elliot calls up the AMA and asks if SFA can get a policy why can’t AMA. Their response to Elliot was to get bent. They also informed him that the AMA insurance was no longer in effect, since he now had SFA insurance and they were going to write to Acosta informing him that AMA would not cover any accidents. In addition, they were revoking the club charter if Elliot did not get rid of SFA, which, of course, he did not.
Elliot was a strong supporter of SFA, by his own admission to stick it to AMA. Everyone in the club joined SFA, since it was now an SFA chartered club.
I’m not privy to all the back room stuff that was going on but Elliot, at some point, decided to buy SFA, for whatever reason. He owned a garbage business; euphemistically called carting, in NJ in a time when people who controlled that industry last names ended in a vowel. That he was able to make a go of it speaks volumes on how he ran a business. IMHO, his good business sense was clouded by his desire to get even with AMA in buying SFA. I know, even at the end, when he was really sick, he felt he could make SFA successful. I remember I was talking to one of the lawyers and he explained that Elliot doesn’t understand that when you’re going to a gunfight, you need to bring more than a penknife. He never really had a chance against the 800-pound gorilla (AMA).
The one thing I will NEVER forgive AMA for, was their attempts to collect money from Elliot’s wife after he passed away. Her nickname was Wally and she was in dire straits, both emotionally and financially after his death, but that didn’t stop those bloodsuckers at AMA from trying to get their pound of flesh, no doubt in revenge against Elliot for getting involved in SFA. Wally was NOT involved in anything that had to do with AMA, SFA or the club and the AMA knew it but that didn’t stop them from harrasing her for money.
I don’t know what happened after Elliot’s death as the club disbanded and we went our separate ways.
All I know is it was the best “club� I’ve ever belonged to.
BRG,
Jon

That's a downright INSANE revision of history. It's like Holocaust deniers and such.
106 has a BIG grudge against AMA and Dave Brown, always has, so everything gets twisted into anti-AMA screed. It becomes tiresome.

"Wally was NOT involved in anything that had to do with AMA, SFA or the club and the AMA"

WRONG. On the payroll of SFA, along with other family members.
He also transferred the assets of SFA to her, in an attempt to dodge the judgement.
Revenge? Guess who paid the legal bills from the bogus lawsuit SFA filed?

I did. All AMA members did.

Guess who made money off of it? Elliot and his family. Screw THAT.

SFA could write any old policy they wanted, because THE POLICY WAS WORTHLESS.
I have never seen ONE claim paid. Not ONE. You can toss around all the pieces of paper you want, it don't mean nuthin until someone actually files a claim. I have NEVER EVER EVER heard of ONE SFA claim paid. I have heard of a few denied. On the other hand, I know about hundreds of AMA claims paid.


F106 is really typical of the "opposition". Guys with some long standing grudge against AMA because DAve Brown took their favorite parking spot back in 1978 or something. Then EVERYTHING Ama does is somehow twisted into an evil conspiracy.
Look at that other thread...a newsletter comes back misadressed, and therefore they are calling for the ouster of a VP. How clueless is this?

The whole story above is so far from reality, it's painful to read.

For once, I have to support something Red Schoenfeld said, his post is pretty much right on, maybe he can continue the story, and maybe attribute it to the correct source, as I do beleive that person published it very publicly...

I've had enough. Bye.

ET,
Where in my post does it say I'm anti-AMA?
How did DB get into this discussion? I didn't bring him into to it.
I was there. We almost lost the field because of insurance, don't sit there and tell everyone it didn't happen. I don't recall that you were a member of the club. I talked to Elliot all the time. Don't tell me it's not true, because IT IS!
I have no idea if SFA paid any claims or not, has nothing to do with my post.
YOU obviouslly know more about SFA than Elliot or Wally. I was told by both that she had nothing to do with it. If you're calling them liars, and can prove it fine, as I have no way of refuting that since I was not privvy to the inner workings of SFA.
As far as the policy being worthless, it was good enough for Acosta and his lawyers.
Funny how after about 6 months or so, as best as I can remember, the AMA WAS able to find a policy that provided $2M coverage for the land owner.
BRG,
Jon

I for one am of the opinion that monopolies are not in the best interest of the people. The SFA may have been a farce but the concept of having competition for our membership dollars CAN be a good thing to all modelers.

I know locally that anyone with SFA was denied access to "AMA" fields. I wonder how many other clubs would not allow SFA members to use AMA flying fields? I think that was the root complaint from SFA and it's members. I had heard that for some AMA clubs claimed they would lose their charter if they allowed SFA members on their fields. Don't know if it were true (loss of AMA coverage) or a misconception on the part of AMA members. Can anyone shed any light on the subject?

CCR

CCR-

See http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-Files/909.pdf

It wasn't clubs that didn't allow SFA members (or any non-AMA members for that matter) to use AMA chartered club sites, it was/is an AMA mandate. A goodly number of clubs were chartered with both AMA and SFA. The link above is the response of AMA's insurance czar to that. AMA club's claims that they would lose their charter if they allowed SFA members on the fields are valid. They were told so directly by AMA HQ. Those that were dual chartered had the choice of dropping SFA and compelling the SFA members to join AMA, or getting the boot from AMA.

Abel

Abel,
You are correct and Elliot's club was the first to get the boot.
BRG,
Jon

This post is just my opinion, and not directly related to the specific topic.

If anyone has ever been in a lawsuit, the only thing you can be assured of is that the parties to the suit, and their attorneys, are the only ones that have a clue as to what really transpired. Reading legal complaints and the legal answers to those complaints gives only the point of view of those preparing the legal documents. Even access to depositions and/or testimony assumes the honesty of the individuals giving the deposition or testimony. I have been involved in enough lawsuits to believe that when the very existence, financial or otherwise, of a being, real or corporate, is at stake, that doubt is the only realistic stance for an outsider.

It also seems to me that when an organization’s prime motive is to turn a profit for the owners, its motives are different than those of a charity where the assets of the charity may be owned by no one, but, that is just my opinion (notwithstanding claims by some that those in charge of a charity intend to run off with the assets of the charity).

We can argue and squabble, but the truth will elude debate, IMO. It’s pretty unlikely that the principals actually involved in the case will come forward and present their views. All we will ever see is the tip of the iceberg, with the body remaining forever undiscovered.

Note the date this thread began.

I was the NL editor of the Horizon City, TX, club during this time and thus the club contact. AMA did threaten to pull the charter and site insurance of any club that allowed SFA members to fly at the club field. I was a member of both AMA and SFA at the time. We had other SFA members in the club. We just decided that there ws no need to tell AMA about it. What they didn't know couldn't hurt us.

One thing that should be pointed out was that the SFA insurance was primary while AMA's was secondary to your homeowner's or renter's insurance, still is.

CR

Charlie;
I'm a member of the HCRC and was during that time. We were dual chartered with the AMA and the SFA. To my knowledge at no time were we ever contacted by the AMA and told we would lose our charter. When SFA went belly up we all just went AMA. I wasn't to happy about it but we had no other way to go. Thats back in the days when B.S. was our Club sec. and handles all that paperwork stuff. Hope all is well. Mike

Whatever it WAS, I will not argue as I don't care to waste time in research for such.

However here it IS: AMA web site, Document 909.

&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&g t;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;
Unicorn,
Loch Ness Monster,
Big Foot
and Dual Charter
Each is a Myth!!!

Like the unicorn, loch ness monster, and big foot—dual chartering, using the same club name, is a myth.

The same name cannot be used to charter a club with both the AMA and any other organization. An AMA chartered club is a unique, identifiable entity which is composed exclusively of AMA members and is protected by AMA insurance.

An AMA chartered club is protected by AMA insurance because all club members must be members of AMA, and all members must follow the current AMA Official AMA National Model Aircraft Safety Code.
AMA Club insurance does not extend to non AMA members except under the siteowner’s provisions and the special instruction programs.
An AMA member may belong to other organizations*, but an AMA club must be chartered only with the AMA and cannot be chartered with any other organization. If a club does plan to also charter with another organization, it must do so under a different name.
Maintaining the unique name and organizational identity of the AMA club conforms to the AMA bylaws and simplifies complex insurance matters in the event of a claim. For the same reasons, sanctioning an event with two organizations voids the event, and the event will not be recognized by AMA.
Support the uniqueness of your AMA club, and enjoy all the benefits that AMA has to offer.

* An AMA member may also belong to the special interest groups listed on the back of this document, join
other related organizations or be a part of completely unrelated organizations, national or foreign. There
are no restrictions.

dtp\graphics\cdr\insur\dualchrt.cdr 3/99
TM

&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&l t;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

Now if "A-Club" is AMA, and a certain group within wished to charter with I'magoodbunch Modelinsurefolks, then simply break that group off into "B-Club", agree on the same site usage -- AMA recognizes such -- and the problem is solved. [&gt;:]
Unfortunately AMA follows a narrow-view as a certain staffer wants to be a dictatorial expert within the insurance business.

This blindness to the real world is more evidenced by the statement, "....sanctioning an event with two organizations voids the event..." While it may well void AMA's sanction, It is totally up to the event's host and sponsor whether the event continues or does not continue. Events can and do happen without AMA's blessing.

In the SFA days I never gave SFA much consideration. To me SFA was never an option. I rather doubt that anyone will fund any organization to ever compete with AMA in the future, that future starting now and forever as long as people play with toy airplanes. That is bad as competition does provide for enhancement of the product.

There is only ONE solution to AMA's dictatorship, and yet no one wants to work at that one thing. Like fighting a war, even with a superior weapon, which you fail to use, then you simply just fight and eventually LOSE the war.

Gezz....... Sorry....... The fact remains that what we did, never heard a thing from either bunch. I kinda wish they were still around. -Mike

Check your facts. We were all AMA members before SFA surfaced. Some of us, like me, joined SFA and retained our AMA memberships because we thought it would help to support SFA; figuring, "Competition improves the breed." Some of us joined SFA and dropped AMA because it was cheaper to go that way. Carl Maroney wrote threatening letters to the clubs alright. It was also published in MA that there'd be no dual charters allowed and that no SFA members would be allowed to fly at AMA-club fields, on threat of expulsion. As I said before, we just figured that what AMA didn't know wouldn't hurt us.

It all happened, whether you knew about it or not.

Happy flying,

CR

Those are the facts........ I talked to the they guys who held office back then ( Heck, I was President a few of those years) Nobody remembers being told AMA would cancel our charter. This went on for several years till SFA folded. Even the guys in Northeast let us fly with the SFA cards and they are AMA to the bone. I wish we still had a choice. Mike

Charley, Do you remember this..... If you were elected to a club office and were SFA the club would pick up the tab for your AMA or the other way around if you were AMA we picked up the tab for SFA. We did that so we would have the same officers.Mike

It has been my experience that most guys don't have the foggiest about AMA policies. Most guys will tell you,"I don't know or care about that stuff. I 'm only in AMA for the insurance." Or you can substitute, "I just joined AMA because it's a club requirement." Shucks, around here most guys don't know who Dave Brown is.

The club never picked up the tab for anything for me. I wonder if all the things you're relating happened after I left the El Paso area in the spring of '93.

Cheers,

CR

Consider yourself lucky if they don't know who he is.

All I really remember about the time and the SFA was that:

A, The AMA contact told our club secretary that to retain the club charter and liability insurance, all members and guest flyers had to be AMA members. Legalities were involved with the insurance company.

B, There was absolutely no prohibition against any AMA member carrying any additional insurance, whether SFA or any other, mentioned.

C, From the previous AMA letter, it appears that the restrictions against dual charter were of a legal nature, and not necessarily an internal AMA directive. There obviously were provisions to allow a group to obtain a version of dual charter by having the non-AMA group take on a different name within the same club structure, without jeopardizing their AMA charter. This sounds like a lawyer thing rather than an AMA thing.

D, After a number of my own inquiries with reps from SFA, I was never able to get any direct confirmation that SFA insurance would protect me while flying anything other than R/C aircraft. They would only confirm that their insurance would protect the property owner, not me or any one else actually flying. After several such inquiries, I started to have doubts that the SFA insurance would actually cover any flyer. Since I and a number of other current and former club members also fly CL and FF, this reduced the value of the SFA membership to us.

E, I remember during some problems locking in the exclusivity of our current R/C frequencies, there was an article in RCM stating how they were instrumental in aquainting some members of Congress especially John Glenn, with model aviation. The suggestion I got was they thought mr Glenn, and a couple other names they mentioned, were ignorant of model aviation until they were appoached by the SFA with demos. Actually, there were several photos of Mr. Glenn, and several others from the mentioned group shown with their own models in older issues of the model press, including pictures taken at the NATs. Reminded me of some TV informationals, and started me thinking of the SFA in the same terms as I thought of the sellers of "become a millionaire through Negative cash flow" investment schemes.

A competent competitor might be good to have. The AMA is an organization run by human people, and therefore automatically imperfect. They will make, are making, and have made mistakes. They have also done many good things. The SFA, and the lately failed UMA, may have been honest attempts to provide competent quality competition for the AMA. Neither had what was needed