Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pine Bluff, AR,
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
A legal statement appears in every issue of Model Aviation. Below is the first paragraph verbatim.
“Model Aviation (ISSN 0744-5059, USPS 087-930 Publications Agreement No. 4068854) is owned exclusively by The Academy of Model Aeronautics, Inc. a nonprofit organization and published monthly at 5161 East Memorial Drive, Muncie IN 47302. Copyright Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2006. Model Aviation and the AMA and Wings & Torch logo are registered trademarks of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. All rights reserved. When membership in the Academy of Model Aeronautics includes subscription to Model Aviation, $18.00 of the dues are for subscription. Membership is open to all who are interested in model aviation.”
There seems to be at least two contributors here that dispute whether $18.00 of your “membership that includes a subscription to Model Aviation” goes the to plus column for Model Aviation.
I have read it over and over again and can not see where the confusion is so maybe someone with a sharper eye can show me where it indicates otherwise. It has been said that issue is unresolved but that would mean there was something that needed to be resolved. Can you resolve something that is not unresolved? Could it even need to be resolved?
Here is all I can manage to come up with. Either it is a fact that $18.00 of your membership is for Model Aviation or the AMA is knowingly printing an incorrect legal statement.
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
“Model Aviation (ISSN 0744-5059, USPS 087-930 Publications Agreement No. 4068854) is owned exclusively by The Academy of Model Aeronautics, Inc. a nonprofit organization and published monthly at 5161 East Memorial Drive, Muncie IN 47302. Copyright Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2006. Model Aviation and the AMA and Wings & Torch logo are registered trademarks of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. All rights reserved. When membership in the Academy of Model Aeronautics includes subscription to Model Aviation, $18.00 of the dues are for subscription. Membership is open to all who are interested in model aviation.”
There seems to be at least two contributors here that dispute whether $18.00 of your “membership that includes a subscription to Model Aviation” goes the to plus column for Model Aviation.
I have read it over and over again and can not see where the confusion is so maybe someone with a sharper eye can show me where it indicates otherwise. It has been said that issue is unresolved but that would mean there was something that needed to be resolved. Can you resolve something that is not unresolved? Could it even need to be resolved?
Here is all I can manage to come up with. Either it is a fact that $18.00 of your membership is for Model Aviation or the AMA is knowingly printing an incorrect legal statement.
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: Robotech
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
As you alluded to in a different message, it would be nice if all expenses and revenue associated with MA were tied up in one nice neat little piece. At least that would probably get some folks to quit just ignoring the above.
The exact number is not really critical to me, and some quick math and reasonable estimates seem to indicate that it's a bit high for true break-even numbers, but that's not really here nor there. The way I see it that means I'm getting a good quality magazine and AMA information for about two thirds of what I'm paying for the two other to which I subscribe. It also means that I'm getting all the other benefits of AMA membership for about $40 a year.
IMO that makes both the magazine and the balance of AMA benefits a real bargain.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: mongo
never believe everything ya read. be it on the printed page or the internet.
never believe everything ya read. be it on the printed page or the internet.
The only monthlies that I take that are any cheaper than that are Car&Driver and Road&Track. They are both cheaper by about a third, but have a MUCH larger circulation and reach a much more broad audience.......from folks interested in high dollar exotics, to the latest factory "muscle car" throwback hotrods, to family grocerie getters.
#7
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: Robotech
A legal statement appears in every issue of Model Aviation. Below is the first paragraph verbatim.
“Model Aviation (ISSN 0744-5059, USPS 087-930 Publications Agreement No. 4068854) is owned exclusively by The Academy of Model Aeronautics, Inc. a nonprofit organization and published monthly at 5161 East Memorial Drive, Muncie IN 47302. Copyright Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2006. Model Aviation and the AMA and Wings & Torch logo are registered trademarks of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. All rights reserved. When membership in the Academy of Model Aeronautics includes subscription to Model Aviation, $18.00 of the dues are for subscription. Membership is open to all who are interested in model aviation.”
There seems to be at least two contributors here that dispute whether $18.00 of your “membership that includes a subscription to Model Aviation” goes the to plus column for Model Aviation.
I have read it over and over again and can not see where the confusion is so maybe someone with a sharper eye can show me where it indicates otherwise. It has been said that issue is unresolved but that would mean there was something that needed to be resolved. Can you resolve something that is not unresolved? Could it even need to be resolved?
Here is all I can manage to come up with. Either it is a fact that $18.00 of your membership is for Model Aviation or the AMA is knowingly printing an incorrect legal statement.
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
A legal statement appears in every issue of Model Aviation. Below is the first paragraph verbatim.
“Model Aviation (ISSN 0744-5059, USPS 087-930 Publications Agreement No. 4068854) is owned exclusively by The Academy of Model Aeronautics, Inc. a nonprofit organization and published monthly at 5161 East Memorial Drive, Muncie IN 47302. Copyright Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2006. Model Aviation and the AMA and Wings & Torch logo are registered trademarks of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. All rights reserved. When membership in the Academy of Model Aeronautics includes subscription to Model Aviation, $18.00 of the dues are for subscription. Membership is open to all who are interested in model aviation.”
There seems to be at least two contributors here that dispute whether $18.00 of your “membership that includes a subscription to Model Aviation” goes the to plus column for Model Aviation.
I have read it over and over again and can not see where the confusion is so maybe someone with a sharper eye can show me where it indicates otherwise. It has been said that issue is unresolved but that would mean there was something that needed to be resolved. Can you resolve something that is not unresolved? Could it even need to be resolved?
Here is all I can manage to come up with. Either it is a fact that $18.00 of your membership is for Model Aviation or the AMA is knowingly printing an incorrect legal statement.
IMHO $18.00 of my dues goes to Model Aviation.
Like my checkbook: Just because I have blank checks in the checkbook does not mean that I have money in the bank.
However the following information has been quoted some emphasis added to make it simpler to NOT overlook corresponding information.
>>>>>
THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS, INC.
STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION
DECEMBER 31, 2007 AND 2006
Brady Ware Auditors, Dayton and Columbus, Ohio
Page 3: 1st figure is 2007. 2nd figure is 2006
Revenue
Membership: .................$ 7,502,780 $ ...................7,685,063
<<<<<<<<<<<<
Injected: This is the total amount of dues and contribution monies received from AMA members
<<<<<<<<<<<<
Model Aviation advertising: 1,005,434 ................ ..986,730
Model Aviation subscriptions: 55,470.....................72,575
>>>>>>>>>>>
Injected: The advertising revenues is what AMA collected for the MA over the 12 month period.
The "subscriptions" here is the monies received from the Hobby Shops that stock the magazine plus the syubscriptions from non-member subscriptions: Example: My club pays for 3 SCHOOL subscriptions.
<<<<<<<<<<<<
Expenses
Model Aviation magazine direct costs: 2,091,945 ......2,010,268
Page 5
>>>>>>>
Income Taxes - The Academy operates as a nonprofit organization and has received exempt status
under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Academy is, however, subject to unrelated
business income tax on magazine advertising, merchandise sales, internet advertising and rental income
from debt financed property. There was no unrelated business income tax expense for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006.
<<<<<<<
Page 6
>>>>>
Advertising Expense - The advertising and promotional costs of the Marketing Division are expensed as
incurred. Total advertising and promotional costs, excluding those direct production costs related to the
sale of magazine advertising space, were $417,937 and $452,535 for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively.
<<<<<
Operating Expenses;
Page 15
Insurance - membership: 1,380,852 15.1 ............1,215,325 13.0
THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS, INC.
SCHEDULES OF MODEL AVIATION MAGAZINE DIRECT COSTS
YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007 and 2006
Advertising costs
Commissions............................ $ 124,199 ........................$ 148,977
Printing ........................................460,633 ..........................445,598
Postage .......................................219,459 ........................194,132
.................................................. ..804,291 ..........................788,707
Production costs
Printing ..........................................773,513 ...........................750,881
Art and photo.......................................785
Miscellaneous ..................................41,426 ..............................1,589
.................................................. ........815,724 .........................752,470
Editorial costs
Articles, plans and pictures .........38,483 .............................48,295
Monthly columnist ......................45,195 ..............................39,707
Editorial drafting...........................1,000.......... ........................3,190
..................................................84,678.............................. 91,192
Mailings
Postage and envelopes........ ......362,185............................348,462 .
Advertising expense
Telephone and Federal Express 2,131 - ............................... 2,217
Staff travel .............................18,276 .............................. 21,828
Legal and miscellaneous ............4,660 .................................5,392
...............................................25,067 .................................29,437
................................................$ 2,091,945 ....................... $ 2,010,268
>>>>>>
Inserted: The total expense of the magazine without considering the 13 employees that are paid to administrate the function, also listed as an Operating Expense on page 3.
No matter how you beg otherwise, the AMA magazine, MA, in 2007 cost the AMA membership $1,086,511.00, plus the salaries and benefits of 13 employees. So, you crumble your cookies as you please.
>>>>>>
End of quotes from AMA Web site: public Information reproduced under the US copyright law:
[b]Copyright Law of the United States of America
§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use40[/b]
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
"....General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; ...."
edited: Typo.
#8
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pine Bluff, AR,
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
So because they don't break it out on this financial report it doesn't exsist? IMO it shows a deficiency in the report rather than change the fact that you and a few others choose to ignore the obvious.
Crumble your cookies as you will. Have some warm milk with them pardner.
SO then, I take it you are saying the legal statement in Model Aviation is a lie?
Crumble your cookies as you will. Have some warm milk with them pardner.
SO then, I take it you are saying the legal statement in Model Aviation is a lie?
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
Is $18 really taken for MA,
is that the question here?
DM seems to be saying maybe if you opt out of MA, you dont get $18 back cause they dont take $18
"based on the numbers in the annual audit report, the reduction in dues would be closer to $6.25-$6.75 "
Odd, if they really were taking that $18 and using it to have MA run at a profit,
why is DM refering to it as a $1mil expense and using the term 'operating loss'
Whoa, Strain on Dues Revenue?
DM really is redundant about how MA is costing AMA rather than bringing in profit to AMA,
which doesnt fit the basic concept that the $18 is making MA profit over $1mil year for AMA.
Lets see if DM says anything about member subscription costs
yup, looks like DM odes say something about that
'The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost" '
and he just said that was about $6, not $18
well, DM says a lot about MA and what members pay for it,
but I didnt see anything in these quotes so far that mentioned the $18 for MA specificly
oops, I spoke too soon
DM specificly talks about that $18
ROBO
Maybe you & DM should hash this out and let us know the results
is that the question here?
ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson 8/25/2004
Hi Punkindrublik,
I haven't heard any talk in the four years I've been here about making MA an option. Frankly, it it were made an option, based on the numbers in the annual audit report, the reduction in dues would be closer to $6.25-$6.75. That number would then be further reduced by the necessity to provide the non-subscribing member with some type of organization "newsletter". Of course, these numbers are extremely arbitrary because we don't know, for this discussion, how many members would continue to receive MA and that would impact the bottom line.
I do think MA should be operated as a well-run business entity with the intent of having the least amount of impact as possible on member dues.
Dave
ORIGINAL: punkindrublik
When are they gonna make MA an OPTION?? Of the 3 mags I recieve, it's the one I very rarely read. I'd much rather pay $40, recieve no MA and spend that $18 on RCReport. JMHO
punkindrublik
When are they gonna make MA an OPTION?? Of the 3 mags I recieve, it's the one I very rarely read. I'd much rather pay $40, recieve no MA and spend that $18 on RCReport. JMHO
punkindrublik
I haven't heard any talk in the four years I've been here about making MA an option. Frankly, it it were made an option, based on the numbers in the annual audit report, the reduction in dues would be closer to $6.25-$6.75. That number would then be further reduced by the necessity to provide the non-subscribing member with some type of organization "newsletter". Of course, these numbers are extremely arbitrary because we don't know, for this discussion, how many members would continue to receive MA and that would impact the bottom line.
I do think MA should be operated as a well-run business entity with the intent of having the least amount of impact as possible on member dues.
Dave
"based on the numbers in the annual audit report, the reduction in dues would be closer to $6.25-$6.75 "
ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson 8/27/2004
Assuming the audit report paints an accurate picture of the magazine operation, in round numbers, it appears as an expense of roughly $1,000.000.
<...>
Do you think we might do better if we tried to reduce the operating "loss" of MA by increasing, as an example, non dues revenue from things like adjusting advertising rates, improving subscription sales, etc.
Assuming the audit report paints an accurate picture of the magazine operation, in round numbers, it appears as an expense of roughly $1,000.000.
<...>
Do you think we might do better if we tried to reduce the operating "loss" of MA by increasing, as an example, non dues revenue from things like adjusting advertising rates, improving subscription sales, etc.
why is DM refering to it as a $1mil expense and using the term 'operating loss'
We also know that the majority of our members think there is some value in the magazine so I don't see it going away all together. Seems like there's a possibility here for a win/win situation. The members who like the magazine will be happy and at the same time we ease the strain on dues revenue
DM really is redundant about how MA is costing AMA rather than bringing in profit to AMA,
which doesnt fit the basic concept that the $18 is making MA profit over $1mil year for AMA.
Lets see if DM says anything about member subscription costs
ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson 8/30/2004
I think it was earlier in this thread that I wrote that MA should be operated as a viable business entity. The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost". I don't know that MA could sustain itself without "selling" any subscriptions. I think I would be comfortable with whatever the number was as long as I knew that the magazine operation was being run as well as it could be.
Dave
I think it was earlier in this thread that I wrote that MA should be operated as a viable business entity. The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost". I don't know that MA could sustain itself without "selling" any subscriptions. I think I would be comfortable with whatever the number was as long as I knew that the magazine operation was being run as well as it could be.
Dave
'The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost" '
and he just said that was about $6, not $18
well, DM says a lot about MA and what members pay for it,
but I didnt see anything in these quotes so far that mentioned the $18 for MA specificly
ORIGINAL: Dave Mathewson 8/30/2004
I think it was at the beginning of this thread where I tried to explain the reference to $18 that appears in the magazine. I'm certainly not saying that member dues don't subsidize a portion of the costs of producing MA. If you'd like to see a better breakdown than what I've offered here it can be found in the 2003 annual audit in the member's only section of the AMA Website. On page 3 you'll find the general income and expense entries and on page 16 there's a breakdown of MA direct costs.
I think it was at the beginning of this thread where I tried to explain the reference to $18 that appears in the magazine. I'm certainly not saying that member dues don't subsidize a portion of the costs of producing MA. If you'd like to see a better breakdown than what I've offered here it can be found in the 2003 annual audit in the member's only section of the AMA Website. On page 3 you'll find the general income and expense entries and on page 16 there's a breakdown of MA direct costs.
DM specificly talks about that $18
ROBO
Maybe you & DM should hash this out and let us know the results
#10
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pine Bluff, AR,
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: KE
yup, looks like DM odes say something about that
'The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost" '
and he just said that was about $6, not $18
yup, looks like DM odes say something about that
'The amount of member dues that goes to subsidize the magazine really equates to the "subscription cost" '
and he just said that was about $6, not $18
They take in $18
They actually use $6
What do you call the excess $12?
Thanks, Dave.
OK let's try this.
Your club charges you and your buddies $18 a piece for coffee and donuts.
It ends up the coffee and donuts only cost the club $6 per buddy
Your club ends up with $12 extra per buddy that you can put in the club treasury.
So.........
According to the 5 year old quotes from DM, MA is clearing $12 per member with MA subscription.
Dang. That's a pretty hefty profit.
Only in America.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
They take in $18
They actually use $6
What do you call the excess $12?
They actually use $6
What do you call the excess $12?
When DM explained it, I believe him.
If you dont believe DM, thats cool.
What DM calls it is
expense
operating "loss"
strain on dues revenue
... but then, those are his words not mine. Clearly his word are not Profit Gain Revenue Income
Your club charges you and your buddies $18 a piece for coffee and donuts.
It ends up the coffee and donuts only cost the club $6 per buddy
Your club ends up with $12 extra per buddy that you can put in the club treasury.
It ends up the coffee and donuts only cost the club $6 per buddy
Your club ends up with $12 extra per buddy that you can put in the club treasury.
My club members dont ask for $20 to buy food and pocket the $13 excess.
We amazingly tender a receipt for stuff like that and get reimbursed.
DM says MA is just getting kinda reimbursed<not his word> the $6 and change they actually spent,
hence the $6 reduction in dues for folks that Opt Out MA instead of the mythical $18.
According to the 5 year old quotes from DM, MA is clearing $12 per member with MA subscription.
Dang. That's a pretty hefty profit.
Dang. That's a pretty hefty profit.
cite me some DM where he says that
cause he dont in my quotes of him
[i"]subsidize a portion of the costs of producing MA"[/i] is completely not saying Pays All Costs Plus $1mil Profit.
and that is what you are in the opinion of <per "IMHO" in op>,
that there is some $2mil+ un-financial-reported subscription revenue paying all $2mil MA Direct Costs and then some
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pine Bluff, AR,
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
Sounds like you need to re-read your posted DM quotes again.
It's so simple yet you have this need to twist and obfuscate rather than see and judge by the facts.
Fact: The AMA has publicly stated that $18 goes towards the MA subscription.
You come back with 5 year old quotes from DM that say that of the $18 collected only $6 is spent to even up revenues Vs. costs for MA.
It is plain to see that if the numbers DM, and now you, post are correct then $12 per membership with MA subscription is going back into the AMA coffers to be used to promote aeromodeling in other ways. He11, without the $12 profit from MA we couldn't afford PPP. (red meat offering)
Simple answer. What do you call revenues in excess of costs?
Some folks may have a hard time admitting the truth even to themselves. Especially if it knocks a gaping hole in their crusade against a personal bug-a-boo.
Maybe now a post about bug-a-boos.
Is MA the biggest bug-a-boo or does the PPP have the most bug-a-boo-ness.
Or maybe because they are both part of the AMA then the AMA is the bug-a-booiest of all.
It's so simple yet you have this need to twist and obfuscate rather than see and judge by the facts.
Fact: The AMA has publicly stated that $18 goes towards the MA subscription.
You come back with 5 year old quotes from DM that say that of the $18 collected only $6 is spent to even up revenues Vs. costs for MA.
It is plain to see that if the numbers DM, and now you, post are correct then $12 per membership with MA subscription is going back into the AMA coffers to be used to promote aeromodeling in other ways. He11, without the $12 profit from MA we couldn't afford PPP. (red meat offering)
Simple answer. What do you call revenues in excess of costs?
Some folks may have a hard time admitting the truth even to themselves. Especially if it knocks a gaping hole in their crusade against a personal bug-a-boo.
Maybe now a post about bug-a-boos.
Is MA the biggest bug-a-boo or does the PPP have the most bug-a-boo-ness.
Or maybe because they are both part of the AMA then the AMA is the bug-a-booiest of all.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lexington,
KY
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: Hossfly
No matter how you beg otherwise, the AMA magazine, MA, in 2007 cost the AMA membership $1,086,511.00, plus the salaries and benefits of 13 employees. So, you crumble your cookies as you please.
No matter how you beg otherwise, the AMA magazine, MA, in 2007 cost the AMA membership $1,086,511.00, plus the salaries and benefits of 13 employees. So, you crumble your cookies as you please.
The $18 of my dues allocated to support MA as a subscription fee (assuming a membership of 150K) cover the $1.1M you point out above, and also cover the 13 employees salaries & benefits..........unless they make over $125K each with fringes, that is. It's simple math. Assuming an approximate benefits rate of 35%, that would mean an average salary alone of ~$92K. I hazard a guess that they don't make that much. I believe that you and KE can figure out what that means.
Perhaps I should email the publishers of FlyRC and MAN, and ask them to quit charging me subscription fees, since it should be so easy for them to cover all of their operating expenses from advertising revenue alone. They don't need no steeenking subscription fees to break even.
#15
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pine Bluff, AR,
Posts: 1,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
ORIGINAL: Bob Mitchell
Perhaps I should email the publishers of FlyRC and MAN, and ask them to quit charging me subscription fees, since it should be so easy for them to cover all of their operating expenses from advertising revenue alone. They don't need no steeenking subscription fees to break even.
Perhaps I should email the publishers of FlyRC and MAN, and ask them to quit charging me subscription fees, since it should be so easy for them to cover all of their operating expenses from advertising revenue alone. They don't need no steeenking subscription fees to break even.
I'm still waiting for his answer to what we should call the $12 extra. Maybe Hoss would like to answer in his stead.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
Perhaps I should email the publishers of FlyRC and MAN, and ask them to quit charging me subscription fees, since it should be so easy for them to cover all of their operating expenses from advertising revenue alone. They don't need no steeenking subscription fees to break even.
AMA does to,
AMA does not list $2mil+ in the finaccial report as a second line item
of MA Members Subscriptions below the existing the $0.1mil Subscriptions
besides
Dont you guys think I would love for AMA to fully admit & embrace the $18 For MA idea?
$58 Dues would be $40 to AMA + $18 to MA when they get MA
$XX Dues would be $40 to AMA + $0 to MA when they dont get MA
lets see... that would mean XX = ... um.... why, that would mean No MA Dues = $40
sweet
I hope you convince DM to embrace your $18 idea
#17
RCU Forum Manager/Admin
My Feedback: (9)
RE: Is the AMA printing untruthful legal statements?
As I said yesterday, this subject has been discussed many times in many different threads. We are not going to start a new thread with a different name just to continue this discussion. I will allow a discussion on this matter if, AND ONLY IF, a representative involved with the finances of the AMA is willing to discuss the financials involved. Until then this is all speculative, and this discussion continues to go round and round in an endless circle. And in case you are wondering why I care about this. This is because over the last several days I have received PM's from members that tell me they are through participating in the AMA forum because of discussions like this. For those members that want to continue to discuss this issue in a never ending spitting match, I would suggest to find someplace else to discuss it. Because unless concrete evidence either way is brought forward this is a dead issue here on RCU.
Thread closed.
Ken
Thread closed.
Ken