Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > M.A.A.C.
Reload this Page >

Contingency Fund

Notices
M.A.A.C. Discuss Model Aeronautics Association of Canada policies, decisions & any other MAAC related topics here.

Contingency Fund

Old 10-23-2005, 10:51 PM
  #1  
Hughes500E
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (16)
 
Hughes500E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Armstrong, BC, CANADA
Posts: 1,514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Contingency Fund

A general question !
Once the contingency fund equals 100% of the operating costs over a year, will the dues go back down?
or will we continue to increase the contingency fund to 200% 300% etc

Just wondering!
Old 10-23-2005, 11:51 PM
  #2  
Sharpy01
My Feedback: (12)
 
Sharpy01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Contingency Fund

Personally, if it's legal, we should continue to grow that fund until it is large enough to essentially self-insure if necessary. 6-10 mil? Dunno, and I'm sure folks with more business savvy than I may be able to change my thinking.

If we would have had another major accident this past summer, we would have apparently been looking at a premium over 1 mil for next year. We don't have that money in reserve and it would likely sink us. (unless Kenair came up with a million dollar donation).

Hopefully, the insurance situation will improve, but it wouldn't hurt to not be at the mercy of the industry if Murphey makes another appearance and things take a turn for the worse.

As for a decrease? Not likely unless there is an unforseen major shift in what MAAC's philosophy.............or a competitive association is born. After all, MAAC is a monopoly.

Old 10-24-2005, 12:07 AM
  #3  
Morison
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

That all depends on the whim of teh board at the time.
There are those that would scrap the increase immediately, thus crippling the association from building the reserve in the forst place.
Remember that building the 100-150% reserve will likely take close to a decade, particularly with program funding returned after this year. It is probably that once the association reaches the reserve level desired, the dues will be held at the then present rate rather than reduced. Also remember that if current inflation rates are anything to judge by - the dues in a decade should be just over $90/year.

Other factors will prevent the association from putting as much away as hoped - a proliferation of 3 year renewals, which lower the membership income overall, the cost of heating and utilities skyrocketing, and - of course - airfares increasing because of increased fuel costs. Everything that hits us as individuals also hits the association in terms of operating costs ... somethimes that is conveniently forgotten or overlooked.
Old 10-24-2005, 09:28 AM
  #4  
kenair
My Feedback: (10)
 
kenair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

The contingency fund is for one year operating expenses as stated in the " shaw rebuttal" statement by the Executive Committee of Model Aeronautics Assoc. of Canada that was printed in the Oct. 2005 MAAC mag on pag 31, in the SW Ont. Zone column.

Also stated by by the executive committee "are working on restoring programs cut back due to finances in the last few years".

It would appear that your dues will stay at this rate to pay for these programs that were cut back.

What programs were cut back ?????????????????????????, where is the need for these programs and who is aking for them ?????????
Old 10-24-2005, 12:10 PM
  #5  
Jim_McIntyre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

... apparently not Ken. I guess the question then becomes, why should we support aspects of the hobby Ken has no interest in?
Old 10-24-2005, 01:10 PM
  #6  
kenair
My Feedback: (10)
 
kenair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

guess the question then becomes, why should we support aspects of the hobby Ken has no interest in?
We support all the programs in maac and have a strong interest in each but at same time one must ask what programs we need and can afford.
We all like to do more, run more programs but the kitty is only so big. All the programs have a benefit, and the board must show value to the membership in the programs that and measure each program for it's effectiveness and report.
if we don't drop ssome programs, can we afford all the programs we now have and how do we introduce new programs.

Or we can all take Jim's approach, continue spending with justification and keeping raising the rates.

It could also be said that the board perhaps sold the raise in rates to the membership for the contingency fund and not for maac programs.
Old 10-24-2005, 01:43 PM
  #7  
Jim_McIntyre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

ORIGINAL: kenair
Or we can all take Jim's approach, continue spending with justification and keeping raising the rates.
Don't attribute any extremist approaches to me, I'm simply rebutting your extremist views from one end of the field.

I have no issues with evaluating programs, I do have issues with dropping programs based on one person's perception, especially when that person claims to comprehend/represent the needs of "most modellers/MAAC members".
Old 10-24-2005, 02:36 PM
  #8  
Sharpy01
My Feedback: (12)
 
Sharpy01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Contingency Fund


ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre

Don't attribute any extremist approaches to me, I'm simply rebutting your extremist views from one end of the field.

I have no issues with evaluating programs, I do have issues with dropping programs based on one person's perception, especially when that person claims to comprehend/represent the needs of "most modellers/MAAC members".
"Extremist view"?

..... I know you don't care for Ken's opinion Jim, but nobodys view expressed in this thread has been "extremist" in nature. You are placing an unjustified label to discredit a valid view. Your telling anybody reading this thread that if you agree that MAAC should consider cutting "services" to stay fiscally sound or worse yet, allow members to keep a few extra bucks in their pockets, You will be labelled an "extremist". Not fair ball.

Cripes, it sounds like federal politics.

...... what's next" "We're entitled to our entitlments" ?

Old 10-24-2005, 02:42 PM
  #9  
britbrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Deep River, ON, CANADA
Posts: 3,299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

ORIGINAL: Jim_McIntyre

[I have no issues with evaluating programs, I do have issues with dropping programs based on one person's perception, especially when that person claims to comprehend/represent the needs of "most modellers/MAAC members".
Jim, I hesitate to defend Ken, but it looks like your "sensitivity" to Ken's ideas & comments interferes with your common sense. What Ken said about value for money ( essentially, relevance to the membership) is emminently sensible. Because Ken opposes supporting a program, is not a valid reason for automatically pooh-poohing the idea of reviewing that program, or any other.

He doesn't speak for anyone but himself, however, the generic concept of program review is a good one.
Old 10-24-2005, 02:51 PM
  #10  
Jim_McIntyre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

Guys, I quoted the portion I was referring to, I was being miscredited for what I feel was an extremist view; spending on programs without review while increasing membership costs to cover associated expenses.

If that's not extremist, and if I'm not the 'Jim' Ken was attributing this to, I'll retract my view...... thought not.
Old 10-24-2005, 03:29 PM
  #11  
Sharpy01
My Feedback: (12)
 
Sharpy01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Contingency Fund

...you want extreme??

This is extreme................... and funny.

http://www.405themovie.com/Home.asp
Old 11-09-2005, 03:34 AM
  #12  
Hughes500E
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (16)
 
Hughes500E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Armstrong, BC, CANADA
Posts: 1,514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Contingency Fund

Personally, if it's legal, we should continue to grow that fund until it is large enough to essentially self-insure if necessary
Very nice, this is enough information to educate many modelers. It is in the best interest for us, semi young modelers to get this fund built up right away
A very large positive for sure!

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.