RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

EASYTIGER,

You didn't answer the man's questions. Looks like you need to smell what you are slinging.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Maybe the real question here is, how small can the AMA get and still remain viable? The misconception here is to think of the AMA as a competitive business entity that needs to employ various strategies to retain "its' share" of the market share. I don't know what this bottom line is, but for the AMA to remain forever as my hobbys' insurance agent, I'm pretty sure they don't need the help of any park flyers.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Those points are excellent discussion topics. Some factors that might also be considered are:
1. There has to be some profit within the insurance program to pay the overhead, if insurance is all that AMA should handle.
2. AMA is neither an AMA agent or an insurance carrier. AMA provides individual member insurance along with other lesser insurance units under a major policy for the AMA as a whole, which has a significant deductible.
3. IMO, AMA could survive a very large belt-tightening operation and become much more healthy. But then so could I! :)
4. All of the current investment programs of AMA promise far less potential than that which a significant increase in membership of at least a 5% annual growth rate will return.
5. People cannot join that which they do not know about. Local governmental units cannot be bothered by small groups that they never hear of. Favorable publicity begets acceptance by other local groups, which can pay dividends for model clubs searching for facilities.

I support several organizations simply because I believe in their cause and actually other than some funds each year, I contribute almost no personal effort. I feel that there are others that do the same. There are about 10 members of my 130+/- member RC Club that never come to any meeting or to the field. Their $150 annual dues go a long way to keeping up the field.
Those funds are part of the general funds which allow the Club to provide better for the individuals that do use the facility, such as contracted mowing.

So if the membership desires for AMA to assist in certain areas, provide better individual benefits, then the overall ability of AMA to fund those items is of paramount importance. Insurance is NOT getting cheaper, especially in the liability area. The cost of living will not go down, thus administration will not get any cheaper. The increasing cost of fuel within this country has and will continue by the square to have a major effect on how we live and operate within this country.

There are TWO major items that will keep AMA Viable: (1) MORE MEMBERS & (2) REALIGNMENT OF THE BUREAUCRACY TO MAINTAIN THE AMA's CORE RESPONSIBILITIES. It CAN be done.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Good evening HORACE, hope you had good EASTER day. The sentiment to bring the sport flyers into the fold to help the AMA recapture this market sounds good, but I think this a classic example of trying to lead a horse to water that doesn't want any. What ever effort that is expended here won't even pay back 10%, even if membership is practically given away. How do I know this? I don't, just my gut feeling.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Very well said, I could not agree more.

I used to be, until very recently, a vocal proponent of strategies designed to entice park fliers to join the AMA, for all of the good reasons Horrace mentions.

I must say that upon reflection, I realize that the AMA really offers virtually no benefit to the average park flier, therefore nothing short of zero cost will entice them to join. They are NOT flying park fliers as a prelude to big club type planes...they have a hobby that begins and ends in the park!

The insurance is the only tangible benefit AMA would bring them, but I think most park fliers just don't see the potential for harm or liability, so again the perceived benefit is very limited, and any funds spent chasing the park fliers will be wasted IMHO.

Over the long term, only the eventual regulation of park flying sites (ie local governments ban them) will cause any significant number of left over park fliers to come looking for a new home.

If this weren't bad enough, I do believe that at least SOME of the AMA membership is leaving to go to park fliers, and taking their dues with them. Also, we have a lot of social only members at our club (I bet less than half fly) and their numbers are dwindling as well.

To me, that only leaves the so called "belt tightening option". As I have said before, if I were king for day, I would start to develop business plans that would allow the maintanance of the insurance program even if the membership level plummets.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

That's a good post, Mr. Matt.
I'm not interested in chasing after the park flyers.
I am most definitely not interested in tiered membership.
I think DB is wrong. And I support DB. He's not perfect.
But, at least, he is throwing the idea out there.
Remember, this is not HIS idea.
He has a LOT of people bending his ear about this.
So, hey, he threw it out there to see what comes up. Maybe nothing.
Didn't we do this before, too, back in the Seventies, with Schoolyard Scale?
After you get thrown out of enough parks, most people end up at a club.
Park flyers are all the rage right now, but they may go the way of the slot car, who can say?
I'm not particularly concerned about them.
Just another two cents.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Hi Matt

Are your observations about park flyers based on some nationwide observations you have made, or are they your perception based on some limited number of observations in Southern California? How much factual data do you have to support your observations relative to park flyers nationally, or are they your perception?

Is there some data that you have access to that shows the AMA has or is losing money in recent years. Is there some factual data that leads you to believe that the rises and dips in AMA membership is anything not experienced before. If there some generally accepted accounting methods or forecasting methods you have applied to the data to project problems now or in the future, or is your post based on your perception?

JR

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

JR

I dunno but Matt’s dissertation seems plausible to me.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

I have not yet conducted an exhaustive cross country visit to all park flying sites in order to survey the participants.....maybe I will get to that next week.

My perception leading to my theory is more based on a different observation. I think many may think of park flyers as some sort of slow, trainer like, boring plane. The planes I have seen lately are fantastic, have super performance, great duration, etc. Just a very nice package. A complete hobby into itself. I am extrapolating that observation to other places as it seems this type of high performance "park flying" is going on everywhere.


No I did not do a GAAP analysis on the AMA business plan. Had to go to work today.

What I do know is that the AMA is loosing members, and I tend to agree with Dave Mathewson that we should not blame it on the dues increase forever. I think we need to do something BEFORE we start to actually loose money, I think I have been pretty clear on that in my recent posts.

I could make a standard disclaimer in the future about my posts if that would make you feel better...maybe:

"I am just a guy that blabs about the AMA on the internet and most of my posts are made while waiting for my coffee to kick in "

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

HI MATT, I can see for myself [in this area] that the trends you pointed out are pretty close to the mark. I can say optimistically that some of the park flyer folks will eventually want to come on board with the AMA, so in a way the park flyer movement , [as it stands], is a GOOD THING for the AMA, because I think it has attracted more people to model aviation, [this way], than would have come in through the front door..

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Hi Matt

I tend to agree that when we discuss park flyers, it should not be the cheap underpowered ones, but the higher performance ones.

In one of the threads on park flyers, a poster (from a more northern area of the country, IIRC) stated he flew at 5 indoor sites and that AMA was required at all 5. Is there any reason to believe that your observation, or his is more accurate? I will stick my neck out here and suggest to you that Tony Naccarato at T and A Hobby Lobby in Burbank probably knows more about the park flyer scene in So Calif than anyone else. He might be able to give you a more accurate assessment of your local observations.

Where Dave Mathewson is concerned, I would not presume for a second to put words in his mouth. Having said that, I think you read too much between the lines of what was reported in the EC Minutes. Give him a call. If you report back what he says, do him the courtesy of asking his permission.

The basic problem with perceptions is that they are not facts. If we are going to have the AMA run on perception instead of facts and data, then Dave Brown’s perceptions of turbines, large planes, Li polys, pylon, helicopters, and everything else have validity and appear plausible. He has access to more data points than any of us posting here do. At least in my opinion, that is nowhere near enough information to make determinations to run the AMA from.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Matt, I think your observations are accurate for So. Cal, So. Fla or most of the USA. Unfortunatley, the only thing the AMA has hung its hat on the last many years is the availability of insurance. As long as a club required you to join the AMA (and the main reason you wanted to join that club was to get access to a flying site) they pretty much had a monopoly, because you had to join the AMA in order to have a place to fly. With Park Flyers/Electrics, a "flying site" is not quite the same as it used to be. Now it is not necessary to join the AMA just to get access to a "flying site". I can go down to the school soccer field, football field, etc. No noise and nobody pays much attention. Except the next generation of "Park Flyers"! And they just want to know where you bought the plane. Until the AMA finds something that entices the Park Flyers to pay an annual dues, they are not going to attract many flyers. And paying annual dues to get a magazine and membership card is not going to do it. Being in this hobby off and on for over 40 years, I've been a AMA member during the times I have been active. But other than Insurance and a discount on a dorm room at the Lake Charles nats sometime in the early 70's, I'm not sure what the AMA has provided me.

Hugh

AMA 825815
LSF 2298
K4HLH

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Heater.. You are 100% correct. I have been in the hobby off and on for 50 yrs. I was a member of AMA during my "Club" years. I am now a Park Flyer. $58 seems like a LOT to me when my Home Owners insurance will cover my liability. I was a member as long as I was working. I do join AMA from time to time... to keep my number or to participate in AMA Club Meets.
Times are Hard for Seniors.

Rk

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Times are hard on a lot of people in general, and as the cost of the necessities in my life increase at a faster rate than my income, guess which kind of expenditures get eliminated from my budget first? The after effects of NAFTA and 9/11 have put a serious damper on peoples' fun money around here. I'm afraid model aviation is low on the pecking order,[ of entertainment money] compared to vacation money, going to the movies, and other activities that couples and families can do together. The boom of park flyers is emblematic of what I have been talking about. They are a way for newbies to get their feet wet, and a way for experienced modelers to keep having tremendous fun for very little. Some of these "newbies" will naturally want to experience more from the sport, and eventually will NEED the AMA. In the meantime, there does seem to be a lack of AMA flyers under the age of 30 at many club fields, but how many young men in this day and age of keeping up with 2 cars, a $400,000 mortgage, 3 phone bills, 50 hours a week at work, an average round trip commute of over an hour, etc., etc. have much left over for this sport? Evidently not as many as when I first got into the hobby.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

I think Horace is on track to the effect that we are not recognized enough in public to ensure the availability of flying sites. The only viable solution seems to be to enlarge the group of people that need flying sites. We have a couple very nice sites in the Houston area that are located on county property and even maintained by the county...if these sites were not heavily used (which, they are) I think we would lose them.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Matt, this is a great post, and must reading for any folks who are still in denial at the AMA about the future. Technology is going to change this hobby just as it has many other life-styles. People are going to want the most fun for the least money, and all the Internet pontificating in the world is not going to change that. Technology is going to deliver safe and quiet models at the performance and price points of .40 size glow power models, thus meeting the needs of the majority of AMA members. When that happens, who is going to need a 400 foot paved runway? Who is going to need a field dedicated to a small number of flyers? Who is going to need a noise buffer from residences? Who is going to need Safety Officers? Who is going to need frequency control when the engineers solve that problem? Who is going to need extra insurance for their hobby?

The answer is, probably, "Not many folks." My guess is that it will become impossible to keep the insurance business afloat, and that the folks who fly really big models are going to have to consolidate into some very isolated fields where spectators assume some of the risk. If I were king for day, and I wanted the AMA to last into the future, I think that rather than trying to keep the insurance program viable, I'd be trying to get out of the insurance business. Otherwise, it's just waiting around for the next big claim that wipes out the organization. (Google "nspi bankruptcy" for an example.)

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

I would rather try to keep the AMA intact with insurance, but I see your point. If you ask me, an AMA structure that could exist into the future (without insurance) is of little use to me, and I would hazard that it would be of little use to maybe 75% of everyone currently in the AMA. The hardcore fliers would create a new organization dedicated to insurance, and have a lot fewer fields to fly at at a much higher cost.....it would be just as easy for the AMA to stay intact and admisiter the insurance. And if one big accident happens, heck it was always possible, why not ban all spectators and have all AMA members indemnify each other? Might get to that someday, who knows.

I will repeat, I do think that (some) park flyers might eventually go to the AMA once they start loosing sites (and they will loose them, if California is any indication). I also think there might be some new 'electric only" AMA charter clubs that start cropping up to exploit this new technology.

Personally, I am not opposed to tiered rates. I think if a WORKABLE system can be developed, it would at least be worth a try. Unfortunately, I think a workable system is going to be very difficult to come up with.

But like I said, I am open to it. If insurance is the MAIN reason that most still have AMA, IMHO it is the ONLY reason you will get a park flier to join, until they need a field.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Getting out of the insurance biz would be a death nell for the AMA. We all know that is the biggest reason most of us have to join.

To be honest, I'd be the 1st to deep six them as I'd more than likley need to beef up my home owners policy. I don't normally read the monthy rag unless someone points out that Mr. Brown is bloviating again!


Regards,
Bart

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

Maybe I just don't have a clue but it looks a lot like "Chicken little" and the "sky is falling". I recognize that the hobby is going through some major changes, advances. I recognize that the park fliers are becoming more popular. I don't see this taking away from the hoby, only intensifying it. I hated ARF trainers but it has brought modelers out of the woodwork. Without ARF's a large percentage of modelers would have never gotten into the hobby. While some leave and decide to fly in parks, others want to fly airplanes that require runways, ands some enjoy being around people, eating hot dogs and swapping stories. That will never change. Let the Park fliers be, it's a free country. Those that gain the desire will come. There are so many interesting aspects to the hobby that those with "Real Interest" will seek them. If we re-structure the AMA to gain them, we'll only irk off a lot of other people and loose the core.

The only way I would suport a seperate rate for park fliers is to have "Park fliers clubs" sponsered by AMA. Limit the size A/C to 2lbs, make it all electric, no indoor (Fire hazard from Litiums) and give them NO rights at normal full service AMA fields. Beyond that, if they want to fly airplanes that require a runway, let them join like everyone else. If they want to, the'll come.

Too often, we do things for idealism that screw the world and we wonder why everything falls apart. Far better not to do it and not to screw up what we have.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

1966 insurance program for landlords starts with 166 AMA chartered clubs and about 20,000 members already existing

1980 about 1300 AMA chartered clubs are in existence
1980 AMA membership was 77,736

2004 about 2500 AMA chartered clubs are in existence
2004 AMA membership about 160,000

Up until about 1983, the FCC required a license to operate an RC “station”. The number of AMA members ran about 1/3 the number of FCC licenses. Unfortunately, the comparison is no longer available because of the discontinuance of the licenses.

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

J_R, More Data, More statistics, would also like to compare the statistics with things like the economy, the growth of arf's regulations, and the Growth of Krispy Cream Donut Company. Without the suger and coffie, we may never of had the energy!

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

So how do those numbers compare with the rate of population growth in this country?

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

P-51B

Drink some of Matt's coffee, eat some of gow589's dougunuts, get on Google and find out for us. :)

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

FWIW, I've flown at two indoor sites locally this winter. Both are indoor soccer complexes. No AMA required. You sign the same waiver the soccer players sign and go ahead and fly. I actually showed them my AMA card and tried to explain and they laughed at me. "OK fella, thanks for showing us your toy airplane license. Now you can go fly."

I also fly quite a lot in my own yard these days which is something I never did a couple of years ago. I honestly think park flying something more than a passing fad simply because convienient and the planes have become quite capable in the right hands.

I'm not quitting my club. I still like my big planes, but I can see how some people could be quite happy flying nothing but small parkfliers and never miss the AMA or what it might have to offer them.

Wiz

RE: Does AMA have a real future?
 

As the historical tracking of FCC licenses, and more recently the attendance at the AMA Convention show, more RC pilots are not AMA members than are. 58% of the tickets purchased at the AMA convention were purchased by non-AMA members (certainly some small number were wives and girl friends, but if you have attended any large modeling show, it is mostly attended by males).

The question posed by for this thread asks if the AMA has a real future. As long as AMA supplies landlord insurance, it’s a good bet that it does.

The AMA will never get all of the RC pilots, unless there is some unforeseen governmental intervention that requires it.

The question becomes: can the AMA offer services, including insurance, that appeal to enough people to keep it viable. That is exactly the role that the EC has given Don Koranda in their appointment of him as the Executive Director of the AMA. He is in the process of determining which existing programs should continue, which should be discontinued, and what additional programs may appeal to the market.

The AMA is a business. A business based on some very altruistic principles, but, never the less, a business. It has products just as any business does. How well they market those products will determine just how big, or small the future is for the AMA. The current EVP, Doug Holland, along with the EC saw that the time had come to quit trying to micromanage the operation and hired Koranda. Apparently, the new EC members have bought into his expertise as well. Take a look at the D 9 web site where Mark Smith gives his views in the VP’s corner. http://www.amadistrict-ix.org/VPCNR.htm