further bluring the line
#51
Of course the AMA could use GoToMeeting or similar 20th century technology to increase transparency by allowing any and all members to attend. But they haven't done that, and that speaks volumes on how they feel about large numbers of people tuning in to find out what they're doing.
Mike
#52
I'm convinced that AMA really doesn't want the general population to have knowledge of what happens at EC meetings. That's why they insist on face to face in Muncie, despite no AMA bylaws or tax law reason to do face to face. It's also why Rich proposed not even having one at Expo West. He said something about getting more done in Muncie. Yeah, it was really to avoid transparency. Same reason they'll never do GoToMeeting or similar technology. That would give the unwashed masses too much insight into what they do, and they (EC) don't want that oversight.
Now I'm sure the acolytes will argue the opposite. To which I say, if everything is on the up and up, and the EC is doing such a great job, then one would think they'd jump at the chance to show members how great they are by allowing them to dial in via GoToMeeting etc. But they won't. And that speaks volumes about the EC.
#53
I haven't yet gotten to speak with any of my lawyer relatives , but my CPA relative took one look at some of Franklin's pie graphs that I showed her and and she told me not to send the AMA any more of my money .
Not good ......
Not good ......
#54
There's no force involved here. The AMA is trying to offer the best deal, and if they can do that and make a dollar or two in the process then why not?
As for this being an abandonment of the AMA's purpose, I simply don't see it that way. No one is talking about shutting down competition, not advocating for hobbyist interests, or discontinuing the flying site or museum. The magazine isn't being dominated by drone articles. Geez, this is the organization that still keeps a bi-monthly article about CL Navy carrier a solid 35 years after CL flying in general had given way to RC as the mainstream control method of choice. The AMA is not an abandon your legacy type of institution.
However, if they don't pursue new revenue streams, they will have no choice but to stop some of those things. If partnering with a related insurance business helps shore up their income, then that's an act in the best interests of the hobby and the AMA's mission. I haven't seen a single concern in this thread that actually could become a reality that hurts the AMA. Congressmen seeing the ad and thinking the AMA is all about commercial use? Please. How stupid do you think congressmen are? Dropping aeromodeling concerns because commercial drone pilots become the most important source of revenue? Only if enough of them join to create a voting majority and they mobilize/organize and traditionalists refuse to co-exist with them. None of those aside from the last one is likely.
How about having a little faith in the leadership? They aren't perfect, but they got where they are by serving this hobby before they were able to make a job out of it. Why not expect them to be working for the organization's mission? For that matter, how about understanding that the EC has a more intimate knowledge of what the AMA needs than a hobbyist, a consumer who's never even attended one of their meetings? Why does the knee jerk reaction have to be doom and gloom and a wholesale condemnation of the whole AMA leadership at the tiniest sign of something new? That's the same mentality that is killing so many clubs; young pilots can do nothing to please the glow ARF crowd so they leave as fast as they came. I fear the AMA may go the same way, not because its leadership destroys it with harebrained schemes, but because its membership stifles adaptation to the changing market to the point that no one wants to be members after the current generation is gone.
As for this being an abandonment of the AMA's purpose, I simply don't see it that way. No one is talking about shutting down competition, not advocating for hobbyist interests, or discontinuing the flying site or museum. The magazine isn't being dominated by drone articles. Geez, this is the organization that still keeps a bi-monthly article about CL Navy carrier a solid 35 years after CL flying in general had given way to RC as the mainstream control method of choice. The AMA is not an abandon your legacy type of institution.
However, if they don't pursue new revenue streams, they will have no choice but to stop some of those things. If partnering with a related insurance business helps shore up their income, then that's an act in the best interests of the hobby and the AMA's mission. I haven't seen a single concern in this thread that actually could become a reality that hurts the AMA. Congressmen seeing the ad and thinking the AMA is all about commercial use? Please. How stupid do you think congressmen are? Dropping aeromodeling concerns because commercial drone pilots become the most important source of revenue? Only if enough of them join to create a voting majority and they mobilize/organize and traditionalists refuse to co-exist with them. None of those aside from the last one is likely.
How about having a little faith in the leadership? They aren't perfect, but they got where they are by serving this hobby before they were able to make a job out of it. Why not expect them to be working for the organization's mission? For that matter, how about understanding that the EC has a more intimate knowledge of what the AMA needs than a hobbyist, a consumer who's never even attended one of their meetings? Why does the knee jerk reaction have to be doom and gloom and a wholesale condemnation of the whole AMA leadership at the tiniest sign of something new? That's the same mentality that is killing so many clubs; young pilots can do nothing to please the glow ARF crowd so they leave as fast as they came. I fear the AMA may go the same way, not because its leadership destroys it with harebrained schemes, but because its membership stifles adaptation to the changing market to the point that no one wants to be members after the current generation is gone.
Fly Your Drone With Confidence!
Insure your commercial flying with a custom policy at discounted prices.
Get pricing on liability insurance with protection of $500,000, $1 million, $2 million or more. AMA Membership is required for purchase, but you do not need to be a member to get a quote today.
Just answer a short list of questions. Within minutes, you’ll receive a quote, be able to make your purchase and be covered. It’s that fast!No One Knows UAV/UAS Requirements Like We Do!
For more than 40 years–since 1973–the AMA has provided its members with liability insurance for recreational flying. Now AMA members can purchase commercial drone insurance at a special low price. Better than the "per flight" app versions and good for all year.
Jester, I don't care how you spin it, THAT IS A SALES AD. SINCE IT SAYS RIGHT IN THE AD THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE A PURCHASE IN MINUTES, THAT MAKES THE AMA AN INSURANCE BROKERAGE AND NOT A CBO, MEANING IT CAN AND WILL COST THE AMA THEIR TAX EXEMPT STATUS. ONE OTHER POINT, THERE IS ONLY ONE PLACE IN THE ENTIRE AD THAT SAYS AMA MEMBERSHIP IS REQUIRED AND I HI-LITED IT IN BLUE. MOST WOULD PROBABLY NEVER NOTICE IT UNTIL THEY WERE ALL SIGNED UP AND GOT THEIR AMA CARD
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 12-30-2017 at 04:43 PM.
#55
Gee, could that have anything to do with how loud the Prowler was? That thing could rattle the fillings out of your teeth at full throttle. If you lived under the landing pattern(like I did) night flight ops tended to cut down on how much sleep you got
#56
.................Jester, I don't care how you spin it, THAT IS A SALES AD. SINCE IT SAYS RIGHT IN THE AD THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE A PURCHASE IN MINUTES, THAT MAKES THE AMA AN INSURANCE BROKERAGE AND NOT A CBO, MEANING IT CAN AND WILL COST THE AMA THEIR TAX EXEMPT STATUS.............
I knew in my heart a vote for Frank Tiano was the right thing to do , and now it's coming into much clearer focus why ......
#57
Moderator
HydroJunkie- Posting something in all caps doesn't make it any more true. NPO's sell things all the time. They are allowed to do that. I've already explained in a previous post why this new insurance deal is no threat at all to the AMA's NPO status.
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
#58
My Feedback: (1)
Jester, there are always two sides to every story. What some seem to be ignoring is that while the AMA does do some things well, right now, we are in the midst of a battle to retain the basic freedoms that are crucial for every member of the AMA to enjoy the airspace. This is paramount to our hobby and should be #1 on the EC’s list. While you continue to stand on your soapbox and preach your “everything is fine” sermon, a few things come to mind:
”Don’t mind the man behind the curtain” and can’t see the forest for the trees come to mind.
This thread is about the AMA blurring the lines, not about their tax-exempt status. You can continue to deflect to that if you wish, but it is not the topic of this thread.
The fact is that the AMA has definitely blurred the lines by advertising commercial drone insurance.
Astro
”Don’t mind the man behind the curtain” and can’t see the forest for the trees come to mind.
This thread is about the AMA blurring the lines, not about their tax-exempt status. You can continue to deflect to that if you wish, but it is not the topic of this thread.
The fact is that the AMA has definitely blurred the lines by advertising commercial drone insurance.
Astro
#59
HydroJunkie- Posting something in all caps doesn't make it any more true. NPO's sell things all the time. They are allowed to do that. I've already explained in a previous post why this new insurance deal is no threat at all to the AMA's NPO status.
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
1) I'm not calling anyone in this thread anything or accusing anyone posting in it of anything
2) I have worked in retail and have had classes in marketing and know when something is being sold, which the AMA is doing, if not directly, as a brokerage
3) I have not cut down the EC or AMA in any way in this thread, other than pointing out(using their own ads in my last post) that they are violating their own mission statement, using deceptive advertising practices and endangering their 501C3 status.
Trust me, I also belong to an organization that is under 501C3 tax exempt status and we have been warned by the IRS that having that status is tenuous at best. The organization I'm a member of has an annual budget of less than $10,000 and a membership of less than 100 and all we do is host one square dance per month. That being the case, how can the AMA due what they are doing without risking their tax exempt status? Offering insurance as part of a membership is one thing, considering the Washington State Square Dance Federation does so with their 4,000 or so members, just like the AMA has done for years with hobby flyer members. To be selling commercial insurance and forcing those that buy to join the AMA isn't the same thing, it's almost bordering on extortion since for someone to get the price break, they have to join the organization. The fact that there is only one line in the ad that says you must be a member to buy yet says in several areas that you don't need to be a member for a quote is deceptive, to say the least.
#60
Hydro my Friend , have you ever wondered if the people who will parrot the same BS over and over ; "The AMA isn't selling commercial insurance" even in the face of quoted AMA advertising that does in fact say that the AMA IS selling commercial insurance , are sent to the forums to specifically spread misinformation ? As in the old politician's mantra "Deny Deny Deny" when approached with proven facts rather than just go ahead and admit to the truth of what's actually happening ?
I knew in my heart a vote for Frank Tiano was the right thing to do , and now it's coming into much clearer focus why ......
I knew in my heart a vote for Frank Tiano was the right thing to do , and now it's coming into much clearer focus why ......
#61
That's funny, but true. The "Double Ugly" was definitely loud.
#62
HydroJunkie- Posting something in all caps doesn't make it any more true. NPO's sell things all the time. They are allowed to do that. I've already explained in a previous post why this new insurance deal is no threat at all to the AMA's NPO status.
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
I'm disappointed at how hard it is to have a productive conversation when the AMA is concerned. I'm impressed that everyone waiting until page 2 to make a reference to Nazis, as this is usually the go to for someone who gets frustrated about having their points refuted. But other than that little bit of restraint, I see the same old stuff. The wholesale condemnation of the leadership, having a tiny issue become the entire AMA's direction, paranoid suspicion of unknown dealings, it's all here. How about weighing this tiny maneuver with all the other stuff the AMA is doing well? Why do these conversations have to go straight to black and white absolutism and degenerate into name calling when we are capable of so much better?
#63
" This thread is about the AMA blurring the lines, "
I don't care how many say they are not selling drone insurance. Point is the wording in the advertising makes it look like they are thus 'blurring the line". We are a hobbyist organization that's were the focus should be. All this does is confuse the same law makers we're supposed to be trying to work with for the hobbyist.
Mike
I don't care how many say they are not selling drone insurance. Point is the wording in the advertising makes it look like they are thus 'blurring the line". We are a hobbyist organization that's were the focus should be. All this does is confuse the same law makers we're supposed to be trying to work with for the hobbyist.
Mike
#64
Moderator
I can see the point that this could create some perception issues with people who don't bother to look beyond the ads. I think that's a small concern, but I'll agree it's a concern.
Since it was brought up and I'm a fan of full disclosure, I have not been asked by anyone to take a particular position on any issue, AMA or otherwise. The attitude of the management at RCU is that mods are forum members first and are free to express their opinions as long as they follow the community guidelines. I see many things the AMA does well, some that I think they miss the boat on. I've been in their position before though (not with aeromodeling) where I had to sit in closed meeting and make hard decisions with a committee about the direction of an organization. Then I had to deal with the court of public opinion as people who weren't aware of the nuances of the situation had knee jerk reactions. Sometimes the right direction failed because the group didn't see the need or just didn't want to see change. I've been on the receiving end of the unfair criticism and complaints, the accusations of corruption and collusion with "enemies," the perception that I've forgotten the organization's purpose simply because I saw a new opportunity and wanted to take a shot at it. Unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary, it's a safe bet that the executive council or other leadership team of any organization is working for the overall good of the organization. That doesn't make them infallible, but it does make them the ones doing the research and asking the hard questions. They will get it right more than they get it wrong. So I approach news like this with an attitude that it's for the good of the organization and the hobby in general, and then ask if there is a clear way that's the case. I don't approach it with an attitude that if it's new it must be bad or with suspicion toward our leadership.
In this case, the AMA has engaged in a little side business to make money from commercial drone pilots. Given the revenue trends and the general decline of RC flying nationally, it's probably necessary to find some new income. Nothing has been changed about AMA activities or the budget, Nothing has been changed about the bylaws or roles of officers. The AMA is 99% the same as it was before drones even were a part of our hobby. Yet some are preaching the end of all that is holy based solely on the fact that the AMA saw an income opportunity and went for it. What they are doing is perfectly legal (BTW, is anybody actually so dense as to think the EC would have moved forward on this without checking with the AMA's lawyer to make sure it was kosher?) and may result in an increase in membership. If it does, the EC will revisit the situation in a couple of years and have those hard conversations again to see how they can use that leverage to further advance the AMA's purpose. They won't get it right every time, but they will be working for the good of the organization and the hobby in general.
Since it was brought up and I'm a fan of full disclosure, I have not been asked by anyone to take a particular position on any issue, AMA or otherwise. The attitude of the management at RCU is that mods are forum members first and are free to express their opinions as long as they follow the community guidelines. I see many things the AMA does well, some that I think they miss the boat on. I've been in their position before though (not with aeromodeling) where I had to sit in closed meeting and make hard decisions with a committee about the direction of an organization. Then I had to deal with the court of public opinion as people who weren't aware of the nuances of the situation had knee jerk reactions. Sometimes the right direction failed because the group didn't see the need or just didn't want to see change. I've been on the receiving end of the unfair criticism and complaints, the accusations of corruption and collusion with "enemies," the perception that I've forgotten the organization's purpose simply because I saw a new opportunity and wanted to take a shot at it. Unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary, it's a safe bet that the executive council or other leadership team of any organization is working for the overall good of the organization. That doesn't make them infallible, but it does make them the ones doing the research and asking the hard questions. They will get it right more than they get it wrong. So I approach news like this with an attitude that it's for the good of the organization and the hobby in general, and then ask if there is a clear way that's the case. I don't approach it with an attitude that if it's new it must be bad or with suspicion toward our leadership.
In this case, the AMA has engaged in a little side business to make money from commercial drone pilots. Given the revenue trends and the general decline of RC flying nationally, it's probably necessary to find some new income. Nothing has been changed about AMA activities or the budget, Nothing has been changed about the bylaws or roles of officers. The AMA is 99% the same as it was before drones even were a part of our hobby. Yet some are preaching the end of all that is holy based solely on the fact that the AMA saw an income opportunity and went for it. What they are doing is perfectly legal (BTW, is anybody actually so dense as to think the EC would have moved forward on this without checking with the AMA's lawyer to make sure it was kosher?) and may result in an increase in membership. If it does, the EC will revisit the situation in a couple of years and have those hard conversations again to see how they can use that leverage to further advance the AMA's purpose. They won't get it right every time, but they will be working for the good of the organization and the hobby in general.
#65
Both Franklin's and Mike's posts hit the nail squarely on the head , in all aspects of life appearances matter .
And it sure appears our AMA wants a foot in both worlds , hobby & commercial operations .
Should our AMA embrace such a diluted mission , "jack of all trades , master of none" , Or stick to what it's done best for 80 years , advocate for our hobby only , and let the commercial side take care of itself ?
If it were put to a vote , my vote would be of course to concentrate exclusively on the hobby , even if it means forgoing the huge influx of commercial dollars .
And it sure appears our AMA wants a foot in both worlds , hobby & commercial operations .
Should our AMA embrace such a diluted mission , "jack of all trades , master of none" , Or stick to what it's done best for 80 years , advocate for our hobby only , and let the commercial side take care of itself ?
If it were put to a vote , my vote would be of course to concentrate exclusively on the hobby , even if it means forgoing the huge influx of commercial dollars .
#66
[QUOTE=jester_s1;12394304]
......Since it was brought up and I'm a fan of full disclosure, I have not been asked by anyone to take a particular position on any issue, AMA or otherwise.......
Thank You , I appreciate this answer . I do believe your "for real" and yes indeed we do have our different opinions about the AMA but the bottom line is that we are dwindling in number and I don't personally believe the commercial side will be the AMA's savior . We should have already seen a huge boost in membership #s in the past couple of years and we haven't .
.........to make sure it was kosher?.......
But , but , what if I'd prefer Halal ?
......Since it was brought up and I'm a fan of full disclosure, I have not been asked by anyone to take a particular position on any issue, AMA or otherwise.......
Thank You , I appreciate this answer . I do believe your "for real" and yes indeed we do have our different opinions about the AMA but the bottom line is that we are dwindling in number and I don't personally believe the commercial side will be the AMA's savior . We should have already seen a huge boost in membership #s in the past couple of years and we haven't .
.........to make sure it was kosher?.......
But , but , what if I'd prefer Halal ?
Last edited by init4fun; 12-31-2017 at 09:58 AM. Reason: fix broken quote
#67
" I can see the point that this could create some perception issues with people who don't bother to look beyond the ads. I think that's a small concern, but I'll agree it's a concern. "
Here's my biggest issue with the whole thing. We ( as a hobby) are under the microscope as far as the feds go. The more we confuse them ( which is easily done now-days) with a stance other than we're "just a bunch of hobbyists " the worst off we'll be. Why risk it?
Happy New Years
Mike
Here's my biggest issue with the whole thing. We ( as a hobby) are under the microscope as far as the feds go. The more we confuse them ( which is easily done now-days) with a stance other than we're "just a bunch of hobbyists " the worst off we'll be. Why risk it?
Happy New Years
Mike
#69
Moderator
I don't think we are under nearly as much scrutiny as many of us think. Take your typical senator in Washington with his busy work day. He has 1000 decisions to make about budgets and bills and all the networking he has to do. Congressmen don't care about flying toys. The press put enough goofballs in the spotlight that the FAA had to do something just to look responsive, so they hit us with a $5 fee every few years. That's not the action of an organization that sees us as a significant threat. Sure, if a lot of drone pilots start getting stupid we may see more regulations, but that community is becoming more mature and more organized every month. The worst is probably over.
#70
I don't think we are under nearly as much scrutiny as many of us think. Take your typical senator in Washington with his busy work day. He has 1000 decisions to make about budgets and bills and all the networking he has to do. Congressmen don't care about flying toys. The press put enough goofballs in the spotlight that the FAA had to do something just to look responsive, so they hit us with a $5 fee every few years. That's not the action of an organization that sees us as a significant threat. Sure, if a lot of drone pilots start getting stupid we may see more regulations, but that community is becoming more mature and more organized every month. The worst is probably over.
Mike
#74
Moderator
Has this conversation actually degenerated to arguing over semantics? In common parlance, "drone" is a multirotor vehicle with a camera on it. I'm aware that the more traditional meaning of the word is an autonomous military aircraft, but the common usage of the word has come to include multirotors too.
#75
Has this conversation actually degenerated to arguing over semantics? In common parlance, "drone" is a multirotor vehicle with a camera on it. I'm aware that the more traditional meaning of the word is an autonomous military aircraft, but the common usage of the word has come to include multirotors too.
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 01-02-2018 at 12:19 AM.