Why all the resistance to the PPP?
09-12-2008, 06:51 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
09-12-2008, 08:45 AM
#2
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Mr67Stang
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1
09-12-2008, 09:10 AM
#3
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Clifton,
NJ
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Hi,
My problem with the PPP is that all the resources being used by this program could be better used in other areas, as I mentioned in another post.
The three main items, IMO, that need immediate attention are retention of existing fields, the FAA, and insurance to protect the property owner.
First is fields, without a place to fly, there is no hobby. This is a tough nut to crack, but I wish that some of the effort put into the PPP program would be used to develop a strategy or plan to help clubs retain the fields. As the population continues to grow and expand, the amount of land used for recreational purposes is naturally going to shrink.
I live in NJ and there are very few fields around here that you can fly anything bigger than a 60 size model. In fact, I drive to Pa, 1 ½ hours to fly. I’m not complaining, it just the way it is. Clubs are losing their fields in ever greater numbers and I wish AMA was pro-active and come up with ways for clubs to try and hold on to their existing fields.
Second, if anyone thinks that the FAA is going to ignore us, well, I have some swamp land for sale in Az. A gov’t agency, by definition, is about control and regulations, and there’s no bigger controller or regulator (except the IRS) than the FAA. IMHO, it’s only a matter of time that they will use the excuse that, in the interest of national security, they will formulate regs to control model aircraft operations. May not be next year, or even five years from now, but it’s going to come at some point. I know the FAA can’t be at every field to enforce their regs, but with regs in place, they can use them to punish those who they do find out have violated the rules.
Third is insurance. Then there’s a problem with the clubs, in that there are two different types of insurance, one for a regular member and another for the PF’s, and how to ensure the PF are not flying a model in excess of the PF specifications and therefore not voiding the coverage in case of an accident, exposing both the property owner and the club to legal action. Some on these forums just shrug their shoulders and say it’s not an issue, but of course it is if you want to protect the property owner and your field.
Lastly, PF are NOT models, they’re toys. A while ago a guy came to the field with a Wal-Mart special and asked for help, which we gave. Unfortunatelyt was breezy and the thing was just flitting all over the place, it was just too windy to fly. We tried to explain the limitations of the foamie and suggested that he go the conventional route, 40 sized trainer, etc, but he didn’t to spend the money, which, of course, is his decision.
Comparing PF to the Cox planes is interesting in that I always felt the Cox planes did more to turn off people to modeling than encouraged the customer to go to the next level. Other than the PT-19, most of the COX models were heavy, broke easily and were not “trainers†in any sense of the word. The big problem, of course, is when you are trying to teach yourself to fly you don’t know a lot of things, such as you have to have calm weather to fly them and you must keep the control lines taught when flying. Most Cox planes had a quick and violent death, especially since most were flown off pavement. If the person got the engine running, the first and last flight usually resulted in a wing over after takeoff, going straight into the ground.
Anyway, this has been discussed to death; just do a search and you’ll turn up numerous threads both pro and con.
BRG,
Jon
My problem with the PPP is that all the resources being used by this program could be better used in other areas, as I mentioned in another post.
The three main items, IMO, that need immediate attention are retention of existing fields, the FAA, and insurance to protect the property owner.
First is fields, without a place to fly, there is no hobby. This is a tough nut to crack, but I wish that some of the effort put into the PPP program would be used to develop a strategy or plan to help clubs retain the fields. As the population continues to grow and expand, the amount of land used for recreational purposes is naturally going to shrink.
I live in NJ and there are very few fields around here that you can fly anything bigger than a 60 size model. In fact, I drive to Pa, 1 ½ hours to fly. I’m not complaining, it just the way it is. Clubs are losing their fields in ever greater numbers and I wish AMA was pro-active and come up with ways for clubs to try and hold on to their existing fields.
Second, if anyone thinks that the FAA is going to ignore us, well, I have some swamp land for sale in Az. A gov’t agency, by definition, is about control and regulations, and there’s no bigger controller or regulator (except the IRS) than the FAA. IMHO, it’s only a matter of time that they will use the excuse that, in the interest of national security, they will formulate regs to control model aircraft operations. May not be next year, or even five years from now, but it’s going to come at some point. I know the FAA can’t be at every field to enforce their regs, but with regs in place, they can use them to punish those who they do find out have violated the rules.
Third is insurance. Then there’s a problem with the clubs, in that there are two different types of insurance, one for a regular member and another for the PF’s, and how to ensure the PF are not flying a model in excess of the PF specifications and therefore not voiding the coverage in case of an accident, exposing both the property owner and the club to legal action. Some on these forums just shrug their shoulders and say it’s not an issue, but of course it is if you want to protect the property owner and your field.
Lastly, PF are NOT models, they’re toys. A while ago a guy came to the field with a Wal-Mart special and asked for help, which we gave. Unfortunatelyt was breezy and the thing was just flitting all over the place, it was just too windy to fly. We tried to explain the limitations of the foamie and suggested that he go the conventional route, 40 sized trainer, etc, but he didn’t to spend the money, which, of course, is his decision.
Comparing PF to the Cox planes is interesting in that I always felt the Cox planes did more to turn off people to modeling than encouraged the customer to go to the next level. Other than the PT-19, most of the COX models were heavy, broke easily and were not “trainers†in any sense of the word. The big problem, of course, is when you are trying to teach yourself to fly you don’t know a lot of things, such as you have to have calm weather to fly them and you must keep the control lines taught when flying. Most Cox planes had a quick and violent death, especially since most were flown off pavement. If the person got the engine running, the first and last flight usually resulted in a wing over after takeoff, going straight into the ground.
Anyway, this has been discussed to death; just do a search and you’ll turn up numerous threads both pro and con.
BRG,
Jon
09-12-2008, 09:29 AM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Why do I resist the PPP?
Because I want PF guys to join the AMA, to be peers rather than serfs that pay thier taxes but dont get a vote.
Because the program is allegedly desgned to be a cheap way in for PFs, but they only discount $2 for all the restrictions. If they wanted a cheaper way for PFs to be fellow AMA members, rather than cutting members privelege and pulling the vote to give a $2 break, they could have left all the privleges in and let them have the parkie magazine instead of MA for a $26 discount: As it is, PPP restrictions with MA is $56 while PPP restrictions with parkie mag is $30. Why does muncie say the membership vote is woth less than $2.
Because PPP was from the start designed & intended to not be a destination. Muncie didnt want to embrace 20year or Lifer PPP, the program was designed to be bad enough that folks wouldnt want to stay there, that they will move up to real member status (pay the extra $2 to get a vote... oh, and have to give up the parkie magazine to pay $26 more).
Because Muncie (like micro$oft & standard protocols) decided to define parkfliers to exclude the planes that have been flying in parks & schoolyars for DECADES, the cox049. Has anyone told House of Balsa they should rename their Schoolyard Scale series of 1/2A planes because Muncie decided only electrics fly in parks & schoolyards? The PPP is not about flying in parks, it is a subsidy to electric planes (which might be ok, seeing Muncie has since admitted their definition of PPP planes had little technical & safety thought in it)
Because of the other insane exclusion as well: 4oz FF Ruber has to pay $56 while a 2lb 60mph 15k APC razor is plenty safe.
Because of way it was ran thru approval. We hear about the couple thousand positive replys to an email poll, but we dont hear how many non-positive replys there were in the poll of what, 60k folks? Maybe not a single one was non-positive... if we just throw out the responses from folks like Stickbuilder.
Because the actual costs will be burried, so we will never see what an anchor this becomes. How many staff hours are billed to this project? What are the additional advertizing costs for PPP. MA magazine has a few entrys on the anual report, I cant wait to see the entries on the parkie mags report... they might be great: They have a bunch of adds and dont have to print more than a few coppies to mail (again, if the PPP was just a different magazine for -$26 maybe they would be profiting the AMA vs losing AMA money on getting MA). Losing money on each sale is not made up in volume, but that is part of the plan, remember... make PPP bad enough that folks wont want to stay there as serfs.
<Mark just confirmed that there is NO exit strategy or conditions, it will forever exist despite whether it works or not: Unconditional support of what may become an edsle. How many millions are we willing to lose on this? As many as it takes to keep it going forever unconditionally... cause it might bring in a couple hundred real AMA members over the years>
I am not against having some program to bring in parkies,
but it should be a destination as AMA peers, not something hamstrung and designed to make folks want out.
Also, I personally think it is horrific to sell $30 PPP to minors that should be paying $1/$15 for practically unlimited AMA membership... and to make the posterchild a overcharged child is a sad state of marketing: Why charge 17yo PPPGirl more than $1/$15. If PPP was for kids, it would cost just $1 rather than not even have a Youth discount like real AMA does.
Because I want PF guys to join the AMA, to be peers rather than serfs that pay thier taxes but dont get a vote.
Because the program is allegedly desgned to be a cheap way in for PFs, but they only discount $2 for all the restrictions. If they wanted a cheaper way for PFs to be fellow AMA members, rather than cutting members privelege and pulling the vote to give a $2 break, they could have left all the privleges in and let them have the parkie magazine instead of MA for a $26 discount: As it is, PPP restrictions with MA is $56 while PPP restrictions with parkie mag is $30. Why does muncie say the membership vote is woth less than $2.
Because PPP was from the start designed & intended to not be a destination. Muncie didnt want to embrace 20year or Lifer PPP, the program was designed to be bad enough that folks wouldnt want to stay there, that they will move up to real member status (pay the extra $2 to get a vote... oh, and have to give up the parkie magazine to pay $26 more).
Because Muncie (like micro$oft & standard protocols) decided to define parkfliers to exclude the planes that have been flying in parks & schoolyars for DECADES, the cox049. Has anyone told House of Balsa they should rename their Schoolyard Scale series of 1/2A planes because Muncie decided only electrics fly in parks & schoolyards? The PPP is not about flying in parks, it is a subsidy to electric planes (which might be ok, seeing Muncie has since admitted their definition of PPP planes had little technical & safety thought in it)
Because of the other insane exclusion as well: 4oz FF Ruber has to pay $56 while a 2lb 60mph 15k APC razor is plenty safe.
Because of way it was ran thru approval. We hear about the couple thousand positive replys to an email poll, but we dont hear how many non-positive replys there were in the poll of what, 60k folks? Maybe not a single one was non-positive... if we just throw out the responses from folks like Stickbuilder.
Because the actual costs will be burried, so we will never see what an anchor this becomes. How many staff hours are billed to this project? What are the additional advertizing costs for PPP. MA magazine has a few entrys on the anual report, I cant wait to see the entries on the parkie mags report... they might be great: They have a bunch of adds and dont have to print more than a few coppies to mail (again, if the PPP was just a different magazine for -$26 maybe they would be profiting the AMA vs losing AMA money on getting MA). Losing money on each sale is not made up in volume, but that is part of the plan, remember... make PPP bad enough that folks wont want to stay there as serfs.
<Mark just confirmed that there is NO exit strategy or conditions, it will forever exist despite whether it works or not: Unconditional support of what may become an edsle. How many millions are we willing to lose on this? As many as it takes to keep it going forever unconditionally... cause it might bring in a couple hundred real AMA members over the years>
I am not against having some program to bring in parkies,
but it should be a destination as AMA peers, not something hamstrung and designed to make folks want out.
Also, I personally think it is horrific to sell $30 PPP to minors that should be paying $1/$15 for practically unlimited AMA membership... and to make the posterchild a overcharged child is a sad state of marketing: Why charge 17yo PPPGirl more than $1/$15. If PPP was for kids, it would cost just $1 rather than not even have a Youth discount like real AMA does.
09-12-2008, 10:02 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ignacio,
CO
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Why?
#1: PPP members pay dues but can"t vote. I don't like the AMA creating second class citizens.
#2: PPP members have lower insurance coverage. I suspect the owner of some flying site is going to find out the hard way why this is a bad idea.
#1: PPP members pay dues but can"t vote. I don't like the AMA creating second class citizens.
#2: PPP members have lower insurance coverage. I suspect the owner of some flying site is going to find out the hard way why this is a bad idea.
09-12-2008, 10:07 AM
#6
Thread Starter
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Deffinately some good points that of course I could not see. As there was no PPP when I joined and I knew I was going to be getting larger models anyway.
I always felt the responsability for the growth of this hobby is on the members not the administration. No one joins a club because of administrative marketing. It's because they met a member and had a few beers together and the non-member says, "So, How hard is to fly one of those?" Or "I always wanted to try that."
I always felt the responsability for the growth of this hobby is on the members not the administration. No one joins a club because of administrative marketing. It's because they met a member and had a few beers together and the non-member says, "So, How hard is to fly one of those?" Or "I always wanted to try that."
09-12-2008, 10:18 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Mr67Stang
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Agree or disagree that it will be effective, that is the driving force behind it. I say give it 2-3 years and see if it's worked. If not, move on to something else.
09-12-2008, 01:08 PM
#8
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bourbonnais , IL
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Bob good points as usual, but no one has mentioned that the PPP has really upset alot of the full dues AMA members, for alot of reasons. The reaction of the existing members was probably never considered, yes I have heard of the poll Joyce did, but now the AMA should give the full membership an opportunity to vote this thing in or out.
09-12-2008, 01:19 PM
#9
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Bob Mitchell
PPP was established as one tool to improve declining AMA membership. The feeling being that reaching out to those who fly small electrics, giving them a group to belong to (either AMA or a PPP club) would be one way to draw and hold new members.
Agree or disagree that it will be effective, that is the driving force behind it. I say give it 2-3 years and see if it's worked. If not, move on to something else.
PPP was established as one tool to improve declining AMA membership. The feeling being that reaching out to those who fly small electrics, giving them a group to belong to (either AMA or a PPP club) would be one way to draw and hold new members.
Agree or disagree that it will be effective, that is the driving force behind it. I say give it 2-3 years and see if it's worked. If not, move on to something else.
When the AMA started, models were either rubber powered, hand launched, tow line variations of free flight. Then along came reciprocating engines, CO2 and gas ignition. Still the same cost for membership. Then radios began to appear, still the same cost for membership. Then glo fuel, control line, dynajet and on to giant scale, still the same membership cost. Now turbines and electric - again same membership cost. The AMA can spend themselves (and the membership) silly with promotions to increase membership without a hint as to why membership is not growing. They fail to realize that it is the nature of many adult hobbies today - growth, as it was in the past cannot be sustained in the face of social changes where instant gratification is the norm and dedication to any endeavor that requires anything more than plug and play is non existant in the general population.
My son in law is into model railroading - while visiting him a few weeks ago he was host to an "operating" session in Atlanta attended by model railroad buffs from as far away as Virginia and Michigan - He (at 52) was the youngest in attendance. I had the opportunity to discuss our hobbies with a number of people there and came away with the general consensus that people today are no more interested in trains and layouts as they are in building and flying model planes. It is just the way things have developed. We can agonize over what to do to turn it around, throw money at it, whatever. If anyone think things are going to change they are going to be disappointed in a big (and expensive) way.
Unfortunately giving the PP Program 2 or 3 years will only install it as a permanent fixture in the AMA no matter the how effective it has been in increasing membership. Its proponents will continue to tune it. Kind of like adding more thrust to cure a tail heavy model.
09-12-2008, 01:22 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: k3 valley flyer
Bob good points as usual, but no one has mentioned that the PPP has really upset alot of the full dues AMA members, for alot of reasons. The reaction of the existing members was probably never considered, yes I have heard of the poll Joyce did, but now the AMA should give the full membership an opportunity to vote this thing in or out.
Bob good points as usual, but no one has mentioned that the PPP has really upset alot of the full dues AMA members, for alot of reasons. The reaction of the existing members was probably never considered, yes I have heard of the poll Joyce did, but now the AMA should give the full membership an opportunity to vote this thing in or out.
I think it's hard to know just what the majority of current members think about it. There are some pretty vocal folks here who oppose it, and some that support it. Many of those that don't support it seem to claim that everyone they ask is against it, and vice-versa. I think it's here to stay for a least a couple of years, until it's been shown to have worked or not worked.
IMO the program won't be a success unless in the long run it results in bringing in full open members, and not just park flyers. IOW, two years down the road if we've got 20,000 park flyers, but the open membership remains the same or drops, then it's not a success. The other thing that needs to be taken into account is the number of open members who change to park flyers. I believe that's one of those "unintended consequences" we here about.
09-12-2008, 01:33 PM
#11
Banned
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newberry, FL
Posts: 5,925
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Bob Mitchell
.
IMO the program won't be a success unless in the long run it results in bringing in full open members, and not just park flyers. IOW, two years down the road if we've got 20,000 park flyers, but the open membership remains the same or drops, then it's not a success. The other thing that needs to be taken into account is the number of open members who change to park flyers. I believe that's one of those "unintended consequences" we here about.
.
IMO the program won't be a success unless in the long run it results in bringing in full open members, and not just park flyers. IOW, two years down the road if we've got 20,000 park flyers, but the open membership remains the same or drops, then it's not a success. The other thing that needs to be taken into account is the number of open members who change to park flyers. I believe that's one of those "unintended consequences" we here about.
A number of us are wondering about those "unintended consequences".
I've posed the question to Mark Smith on his forum (9-11) - of the 1000 PP members how many were originally open members?
09-12-2008, 01:40 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Bob
You speak of a conditional timeline for PPP.
I would love you input in the old thread on what the ppp exit Condition/Timeline/Strategy should be.
I'll look for it and bring it to the front.
You speak of a conditional timeline for PPP.
I would love you input in the old thread on what the ppp exit Condition/Timeline/Strategy should be.
I'll look for it and bring it to the front.
09-12-2008, 01:54 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
I'll tell ya what I think an take it however ya want.....
The ama is losing full members due to age, death, an just the way times an the younger gen are now. The best thing a org like this would like to do, is to maybe get that 150-200K members back again with absolutley no say what so ever about how the org is run. With no voting power, the org can do what it dang well wants to an not have to answer to the members anymore.
If you study a little non profit corp law, you will find out that they can even vote themselves pay, pensions an other perks. But its hard to get away with when you have voting members. Theres ALOT of things they can get away with if you stop an investigate it a little..........
The ama is losing full members due to age, death, an just the way times an the younger gen are now. The best thing a org like this would like to do, is to maybe get that 150-200K members back again with absolutley no say what so ever about how the org is run. With no voting power, the org can do what it dang well wants to an not have to answer to the members anymore.
If you study a little non profit corp law, you will find out that they can even vote themselves pay, pensions an other perks. But its hard to get away with when you have voting members. Theres ALOT of things they can get away with if you stop an investigate it a little..........
09-12-2008, 01:55 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
Bob
You speak of a conditional timeline for PPP.
I would love you input in the old thread on what the ppp exit Condition/Timeline/Strategy should be.
I'll look for it and bring it to the front.
Bob
You speak of a conditional timeline for PPP.
I would love you input in the old thread on what the ppp exit Condition/Timeline/Strategy should be.
I'll look for it and bring it to the front.
09-12-2008, 02:02 PM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (21)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan,
NY
Posts: 9,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
If you study a little non profit corp law, you will find out that they can even vote themselves pay, pensions an other perks. But its hard to get away with when you have voting members.
Members "votes" are PURELY "ceremonial" as they are official. The AMA is giving the membership voting privy's only to make they feel they are part of something. The membership will never ... ever be able to vote salaries ever.
09-12-2008, 02:19 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
I won't even bother to answer you because you are a nobody as far as I am concened, you have no idea what you are talking about as usual You just use up bandwidth an thats about the size of it............Pffffffftttttt
09-12-2008, 02:23 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: STLPilot
This time your so out of touch with reality it's not even close. The voting membership of the AMA has no impact on the corporation at all ... none. Nothing to do with policies ever, other than some survey monkey's they send out from time to time for feedback they may or may not use as their discretion.
Members "votes" are PURELY "ceremonial" as they are official. The AMA is giving the membership voting privy's only to make they feel they are part of something. The membership will never ... ever be able to vote salaries ever.
If you study a little non profit corp law, you will find out that they can even vote themselves pay, pensions an other perks. But its hard to get away with when you have voting members.
Members "votes" are PURELY "ceremonial" as they are official. The AMA is giving the membership voting privy's only to make they feel they are part of something. The membership will never ... ever be able to vote salaries ever.
09-12-2008, 02:28 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Ozarks,
MO
Posts: 1,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
The guy is not even smart enough to figure out who he's posting to. Of course, this is nothing new.
It makes me wonder if he is even from this country?
It makes me wonder if he is even from this country?
09-12-2008, 03:58 PM
#19
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Ok guys. Let's stop the personal insults here. It's one thing to not agree with somebody and argue with him, but it's not cool to start the personal insults. If you don't like somebody that is fine, but personal attacks aren't going to be allowed here.
Ken
Ken
09-12-2008, 04:06 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Mr67Stang
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Hello, I started flying about 3 years ago. My first plane was a Park Zone J-3 Cub. This plane sparked my interest and I found a local club. The club officers informed me that I would have to join AMA to be allowed to fly at the club and explained why... which incedentally is obvious now. Three years later, now, I am flying a 50cc AeroWorks Extra 260 as well as about 18 other aircraft in my hanger including "park fliers" and helicopters. I see these park fliers as this eras Cox planes that I vaguely remember playing with as a kid. Now I even dable in 1/2a just because I like making old things work. I will not claim to be politically informed about this issue. Thus my question. Why is there so much (any) resistance to the PPP? Or is this a case where the minority has a louder voice?
Don'tcha just love irony? [sm=71_71.gif]
09-12-2008, 04:25 PM
#21
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: RCKen
Ok guys. Let's stop the personal insults here. It's one thing to not agree with somebody and argue with him, but it's not cool to start the personal insults. If you don't like somebody that is fine, but personal attacks aren't going to be allowed here.
Ken
Ok guys. Let's stop the personal insults here. It's one thing to not agree with somebody and argue with him, but it's not cool to start the personal insults. If you don't like somebody that is fine, but personal attacks aren't going to be allowed here.
Ken
Why don't you ban that idiot? These threads pretty much move along at their own speed until he sticks his snoot in. His sole purpose seems to be to get threads locked. I won't even respond to him any more. You keep promising to take action toward those who won't toe the line. Why don't you put up? He ain't shuttin up!
Bill, AMA 4720
09-12-2008, 04:26 PM
#22
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
ORIGINAL: Red Scholefield
It is interesting that the AMA seemed to survive with a single price adult membership for 75 years of more. The $1 membership for Jr.s should have pulled in all the kids that the the AMA so desperately wants to attract.
When the AMA started, models were either rubber powered, hand launched, tow line variations of free flight. Then along came reciprocating engines, CO2 and gas ignition. Still the same cost for membership. Then radios began to appear, still the same cost for membership. Then glo fuel, control line, dynajet and on to giant scale, still the same membership cost. Now turbines and electric - again same membership cost. The AMA can spend themselves (and the membership) silly with promotions to increase membership without a hint as to why membership is not growing. They fail to realize that it is the nature of many adult hobbies today - growth, as it was in the past cannot be sustained in the face of social changes where instant gratification is the norm and dedication to any endeavor that requires anything more than plug and play is non existant in the general population.
My son in law is into model railroading - while visiting him a few weeks ago he was host to an "operating" session in Atlanta attended by model railroad buffs from as far away as Virginia and Michigan - He (at 52) was the youngest in attendance. I had the opportunity to discuss our hobbies with a number of people there and came away with the general consensus that people today are no more interested in trains and layouts as they are in building and flying model planes. It is just the way things have developed. We can agonize over what to do to turn it around, throw money at it, whatever. If anyone think things are going to change they are going to be disappointed in a big (and expensive) way.
Unfortunately giving the PP Program 2 or 3 years will only install it as a permanent fixture in the AMA no matter the how effective it has been in increasing membership. Its proponents will continue to tune it. Kind of like adding more thrust to cure a tail heavy model.
ORIGINAL: Bob Mitchell
PPP was established as one tool to improve declining AMA membership. The feeling being that reaching out to those who fly small electrics, giving them a group to belong to (either AMA or a PPP club) would be one way to draw and hold new members.
Agree or disagree that it will be effective, that is the driving force behind it. I say give it 2-3 years and see if it's worked. If not, move on to something else.
PPP was established as one tool to improve declining AMA membership. The feeling being that reaching out to those who fly small electrics, giving them a group to belong to (either AMA or a PPP club) would be one way to draw and hold new members.
Agree or disagree that it will be effective, that is the driving force behind it. I say give it 2-3 years and see if it's worked. If not, move on to something else.
When the AMA started, models were either rubber powered, hand launched, tow line variations of free flight. Then along came reciprocating engines, CO2 and gas ignition. Still the same cost for membership. Then radios began to appear, still the same cost for membership. Then glo fuel, control line, dynajet and on to giant scale, still the same membership cost. Now turbines and electric - again same membership cost. The AMA can spend themselves (and the membership) silly with promotions to increase membership without a hint as to why membership is not growing. They fail to realize that it is the nature of many adult hobbies today - growth, as it was in the past cannot be sustained in the face of social changes where instant gratification is the norm and dedication to any endeavor that requires anything more than plug and play is non existant in the general population.
My son in law is into model railroading - while visiting him a few weeks ago he was host to an "operating" session in Atlanta attended by model railroad buffs from as far away as Virginia and Michigan - He (at 52) was the youngest in attendance. I had the opportunity to discuss our hobbies with a number of people there and came away with the general consensus that people today are no more interested in trains and layouts as they are in building and flying model planes. It is just the way things have developed. We can agonize over what to do to turn it around, throw money at it, whatever. If anyone think things are going to change they are going to be disappointed in a big (and expensive) way.
Unfortunately giving the PP Program 2 or 3 years will only install it as a permanent fixture in the AMA no matter the how effective it has been in increasing membership. Its proponents will continue to tune it. Kind of like adding more thrust to cure a tail heavy model.
You got it. 100% Middle Of Target.
Bill, AMA 4720
09-12-2008, 06:26 PM
#23
Thread Starter
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Sorry Ken if this got out of hand. I was mearly wanting to understand one of the issues as it may pertain to the upcomming election. It seems the two canadates have different perspectives and I do not want to jump on one band wagon or the next without seeing as much of both sides as I can. That whole open mind thing I guess.
I still don't quite know where I stand on the issue as there are good points on both sides of this fence
I still don't quite know where I stand on the issue as there are good points on both sides of this fence
09-12-2008, 07:03 PM
#24
RE: Why all the resistance to the PPP?
Stang, PPP wasn't completely "thought through", you could call it "ill conceived". The size and speed limitations are ridiculous from a safety stand point. 2 pounds at 60 mph is not just potentially deadly but would amount to a threatening nuisance at a public park. There could be a 1 pound 40 mph limit placed that would still make the planes somewhat dangerous but much less of a threat to public safety.
The guys who belong to PPP could be given 1/2 a vote instead of none.
The potential benefit that recruiting PFers will ever have on the AMA has been grossly over-hyped. If this "irresistable force", this, "huge untapped resource" already was in place, then the PPP should already be paying huge dividends....well at least something by now.
Nothing wrong with a wait and see approach, somethings take time to take root.
I don't think there is any evil, mean spirited conspiracy to abolish electric flight, PFers, etc. That is just a bunch of paranoid hogwash. It's Napoleon complex thinking.
There are a few here who hope that this isn't [already] a pork barrel project.
The guys who belong to PPP could be given 1/2 a vote instead of none.
The potential benefit that recruiting PFers will ever have on the AMA has been grossly over-hyped. If this "irresistable force", this, "huge untapped resource" already was in place, then the PPP should already be paying huge dividends....well at least something by now.
Nothing wrong with a wait and see approach, somethings take time to take root.
I don't think there is any evil, mean spirited conspiracy to abolish electric flight, PFers, etc. That is just a bunch of paranoid hogwash. It's Napoleon complex thinking.
There are a few here who hope that this isn't [already] a pork barrel project.
