Well, theKM, if they join the AMA, that's good. I suppose the funding the educational initiative was an experiment. If the membership went up as a result, or didn't--either way, they have real data. Anybody know how much was spent?

2 year lock in at the current rate, hook me up

Originally Posted by 7oneWo1f

Well, theKM, if they join the AMA, that's good. I suppose the funding the educational initiative was an experiment. If the membership went up as a result, or didn't--either way, they have real data. Anybody know how much was spent?

250,000.00 was allocated.
it will be difficult to get the total amount spent, but it will be well over the amount that was disclosed.

When 3,333 multi rotor owners join the AMA at 75.00 we will have our money back in the bank.

I am confident the surge of multi rotor owners joining will fall considerably short.

Truth being they will have to spend the AMA fee plus club dues. Not rational for a multi rotor owner to join a club to have a runway they do not need to fly. Better to spend that money on a battery and repairs.

FWIW, the AMA has been able to get waivers twice for a jet event at a filed in the Palm Springs area during a TFR covering the area. The club and the AMA coordinated with the FAA and Secret Service and it went off like clockwork. So progress is being made. But when it comes to VIP TFRs I think the FAA & SS are going to take it slow and start with event specific waivers as they are doing now. It is easier for them to shut down everything than it is to start parsing out who can fly and who cannot. Sledgehammer approach.

I am unhappy with the focus the AMA has put on trying to embrace the new breed of checkbook drone operator. I have a Phantom and spend some time on forums oriented towards that area of interest. Many are aware of the AMA and a good number have joined, as the increased AMA numbers show. But the bottom line is that most of them could care less and look at the traditional modeler community as a bunch of FOGs. Ironic isn't it?? They look at us they many in the 3D community feel they are looked at.

Regardless of their flaws, I still think we are better off with the AMA than without. This is a modest and long over due increase and hopefully the AMA will continue to keep the barbarians at the gates for a while longer.

Originally Posted by RJ 706

When 3,333 multi rotor owners join the AMA at 75.00 we will have our money back in the bank.

I am confident the surge of multi rotor owners joining will fall considerably short.

Truth being they will have to spend the AMA fee plus club dues. Not rational for a multi rotor owner to join a club to have a runway they do not need to fly. Better to spend that money on a battery and repairs.

They CAN join the AMA........ but they DO NOT NEED to join a club to fly at a field, backyard, public park (if allowed)..etc.

Originally Posted by 7oneWo1f

Well, theKM, if they join the AMA, that's good. I suppose the funding the educational initiative was an experiment. If the membership went up as a result, or didn't--either way, they have real data. Anybody know how much was spent?

If some of the quad rotor guys join the AMA, great. If a few of them see some of the material produced by the AMA on how to safely operate a model or a quad rotor and avoid doing something STUPID because of it, that''s still great.

If all that comes of the AMAs attempts to educate the quad users is a reduction in the negative publicity that they have been generating recently, then I think that goes along way towards protecting our interests.

Wayne

The problem with a fee increase, just like when it went to $58, now $75 is "perceived value". You send off money, get a little card, a once real crappy mag. (getting better) and that's it. You can't see touch or feel what that money is actually doing for the most part. True, $75 is not much money, but if you don't feel you're getting your money's worth, it could be $.75 and feel like a waste.

Unless you're more deeply involved in the AMA's workings, you don't see it, not sure there's any way for the AMA to show it's members all they do, when most members just don't care,, Until there's a fee increase that is.

No one has to join the ama. If the so called perceived benefit isn't there then perhaps it's time to explore other options.

BTW the purpose of the mag is to comply with a legal requirement of a 501c. To communicate with its members. Content is secondary.

The original purpose of the mag yes. The newsletter portion is like only 10 pages, it's current purpose is to insert advertising into your house. But that's a whole nuther thread

Originally Posted by FGNewbie

No one has to join the ama. If the so called perceived benefit isn't there then perhaps it's time to explore other options.

In my case, I had to join the AMA or I don't fly. I don't own enough land to fly big gassers on and the only clubs around me are AMA only so other options are limited for folks like me. Granted I could go out and buy land, but that is really not sensible for me.

I don't have a lot of thoughts about the AMA. I struggle with finding the need for a membership from my individual perspective, yet from a high-level I suppose it is good. I do question some of the directives, yet trust they are doing the best they can in the strategy department.

I cannot believe that there actually AMA members that question whether they are getting their full bang for their buck???? $58 per year, and going to $75 per year???? CHEAP.
I'll tell ya what.... go to your insurance agent and tell them that you want a 2 million dollar liability policy to fly your model aircraft where ever you legally want...... and find out what the yearly premium is...... and I hope you are sitting down when they tell you.

Originally Posted by flyin4fun

I cannot believe that there actually AMA members that question whether they are getting their full bang for their buck???? $58 per year, and going to $75 per year???? CHEAP.
I'll tell ya what.... go to your insurance agent and tell them that you want a 2 million dollar liability policy to fly your model aircraft where ever you legally want...... and find out what the yearly premium is...... and I hope you are sitting down when they tell you.

While I agree that $75 is still a bargain, comparing the insurance that AMA provides to it's members to a liability policy that you would purchase from an insurance company isn't a very realistic comparison. AMA insurance for it's members is secondary and would provide coverage only after all other liability policies have been exhausted. It's much less expensive to offer insurance when for a very high percentage of the claims, another insurance company will be on the hook for the loss.

Wayne

one, AMA is not an insurance company, it is a membership organization that includes liability coverage as part of the membership package. two, we all have choices. if i didn't make a choice to fly big airplanes I wouldn't need a second car (truck) to haul them around, take half of my garage for their storage, or be part of the endless best oil debate. life would be much easier and a heck of a lot less expensive if the extent of my model aviation interestes coud be satisifed with a 450 sized heli and couple of foamies!

I am sure AMA didn't take this increase lightly and weighed the pro/cons very carefully...I am confident they made the best choice they could, given the market and goals desired. I predict a drop in membership but the extra dues will offset that drop while decreasing negative exposure by virtue of eliminating those that are not otherwise well insured. A calculated move that will pay-off in a business sense.