AOPA Membership Dues increase

I'm surprised I have not had a solicitation from them in a long time. I occasionally get some email through the Safety Foundation over something whether it be an accident review or a local meeting/event.
 
Maybe someone has already posted this info, but I think the following list (from FAA database) of aircraft owned by AOPA speaks for itself in terms of why membership fees are up:

N-NUMBER,SERIAL NUMBER, MFRMDL CODE,ENG MFR MDL,YEAR
102UC,15284832 152
152UC,15281879 152
152UF,15284001 152
163ME,172S8444 172
330ME,172S8462 172
4184T,2843418 Piper Archer II
4908L,15284243 152
4GA ,525B0055 CitationJet CJ3
52660,177RG1235 177
528MJ,18280991 182
6327M,15284673 152
93150,15285419 152
95999,15285998 152
 
John-1966 said:
Maybe someone has already posted this info, but I think the following list (from FAA database) of aircraft owned by AOPA speaks for itself in terms of why membership fees are up:

N-NUMBER,SERIAL NUMBER, MFRMDL CODE,ENG MFR MDL,YEAR
102UC,15284832 152
152UC,15281879 152
152UF,15284001 152
163ME,172S8444 172
330ME,172S8462 172
4184T,2843418 Piper Archer II
4908L,15284243 152
4GA ,525B0055 CitationJet CJ3
52660,177RG1235 177
528MJ,18280991 182
6327M,15284673 152
93150,15285419 152
95999,15285998 152
Click to expand...

Outside the CJ3, not a particularly expensive list.
 
I think all those 152s are part of that trial they were doing with rebuilding them and using them as $60/wet trainers.

They aren't planes they just play around in. I'm actually cool with AOPA doing stuff like that. That's how they should be spending money instead of fighting to save SMO.
 
I don't mind paying as the threat from enviro whackos, NIMBYs, etc. is more serious than ever before. Persuading congress and states to do what is logical and correct is more expensive than it used to be.
 
SkyDog58 said:
I don't mind paying as the threat from enviro whackos, NIMBYs, etc. is more serious than ever before. Persuading congress and states to do what is logical and correct is more expensive than it used to be.
Click to expand...


We've been seeing few results as of late, though. If they can keep SMO open, or get the medical reform through. Great. If not, why are we paying them?
 
It's not just SMO that has been threatened but other airports as well and AOPA has been a great partner to local aviators in keep many a flying field open. They were also instrumental in the Pilots Bill of Rights. Maybe you have not been personally impacted in a positive way by the efforts of AOPA but many of your fellow pilots have been. If that isn't enough to gain your support then so be it.
 
It was the Citation Jet that caught my eye. They haven't had it for too long. I wonder what it's used for or how it's justified? Nice toy, though.
 
John-1966 said:
Maybe someone has already posted this info, but I think the following list (from FAA database) of aircraft owned by AOPA speaks for itself in terms of why membership fees are up:

N-NUMBER,SERIAL NUMBER, MFRMDL CODE,ENG MFR MDL,YEAR
102UC,15284832 152
152UC,15281879 152
152UF,15284001 152
163ME,172S8444 172
330ME,172S8462 172
4184T,2843418 Piper Archer II
4908L,15284243 152
4GA ,525B0055 CitationJet CJ3
52660,177RG1235 177
528MJ,18280991 182
6327M,15284673 152
93150,15285419 152
95999,15285998 152
Click to expand...

One of the 152s is our next sweepstakes airplane. The others are part of our You Can Fly Project, funded by a donor. They are already rebuilt or are being rebuilt by Aviat as part of the Reimagined program. They will be used around the country by our ambassadors. They will be bringing high school students out to the airport for aviation experiences. The ambassadors will also be regional resources for flight schools and flying clubs, using the 150/152s to get around.

The Archer is regional transportation by our SW Regional manager, mostly in Texas.

The 182 is regional transportation out of Frederick.

The CJ is longer-range transportation.

The 172s are staff trainers and light transport.

The 177 belongs to an AOPA staff member; not sure why this list includes it with AOPA-owned airplanes.
 
Just the view from my corner of the patch:

AOPA is more concerned with the manufacturers of GA stuff than they are with GA pilots.

Every year they promise me a new hat, and every year they "forget" to mail it to me.
 
Shepherd said:
Just the view from my corner of the patch:

AOPA is more concerned with the manufacturers of GA stuff than they are with GA pilots.

Every year they promise me a new hat, and every year they "forget" to mail it to me.
Click to expand...

Turn off autorenew. You'll get your free hat.
 
TomHaines said:
One of the 152s is our next sweepstakes airplane. The others are part of our You Can Fly Project, funded by a donor. They are already rebuilt or are being rebuilt by Aviat as part of the Reimagined program. They will be used around the country by our ambassadors. They will be bringing high school students out to the airport for aviation experiences. The ambassadors will also be regional resources for flight schools and flying clubs, using the 150/152s to get around.

The Archer is regional transportation by our SW Regional manager, mostly in Texas.

The 182 is regional transportation out of Frederick.

The CJ is longer-range transportation.

The 172s are staff trainers and light transport.

The 177 belongs to an AOPA staff member; not sure why this list includes it with AOPA-owned airplanes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the data.......

How many staff are training to be a pilot ?:dunno:
 
TomHaines said:
We probably have 8-10 in primary training at any one time and others working on additional ratings and many others maintaining proficiency.
Click to expand...

Kool...
.
Good for you guys....:thumbsup::thumbsup:..

Ps .. 4GA was here a few weeks ago and coming back next week...:)
 
Shepherd said:
Just the view from my corner of the patch:

AOPA is more concerned with the manufacturers of GA stuff than they are with GA pilots.

Every year they promise me a new hat, and every year they "forget" to mail it to me.
Click to expand...

True dat.

Just look at the Pilot mag. There are "scam" ads every month..when I expressed my concern about this to the editors, they said "our advertisers are our partners and the revenue they provide is very important to us." (Or some similar bullsh*t).

Translation..."we don't care if our advertisers f*ck you, as long as it makes money for us."

How is this advocating for the membership?

It's not, just like the rest of the organization.
 
All of those who have issues with how AOPA is doing what they do, please attend one of the open houses this summer and talk to Tom Haines or Mark Baker or whomever from AOPA HQ you can corner and have a conversation. They are all very approachable.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Turn off autorenew. You'll get your free hat.
Click to expand...

I don't have auto-renew. I make them beg and plead until the last possible moment. Then I renew online. After 8 weeks, still no hat, so I send them an email. Every year I get the same reply: "So sorry". Someone forgot to mail the hat." :yes:

I'm saving the emails. Eventually I'll have enough evidence to prove fraud. I'll blackmail them for the free plane. :goofy:
 
Darn they must not like you.:D next time tell them you won't renew until after the hat shows up.
 
I would like a sticker instead of a hat.
 
Is it fair to say AOPA did the following:

1) Get as many members on auto-pay as possible
2) raise rates
3) repeat step 2
 
SkyDog58 said:
All of those who have issues with how AOPA is doing what they do, please attend one of the open houses this summer and talk to Tom Haines or Mark Baker or whomever from AOPA HQ you can corner and have a conversation. They are all very approachable.
Click to expand...

This is very true. Tom Haines was very helpful to me a while back. For all the criticism here, he does a really good job.
 
SkyDog58 said:
All of those who have issues with how AOPA is doing what they do, please attend one of the open houses this summer and talk to Tom Haines or Mark Baker or whomever from AOPA HQ you can corner and have a conversation. They are all very approachable.
Click to expand...
I approached Baker at a recent pilot event and asked about the $75M cash hoard. He basically told me to pound sand, turned on his heel and walked away.
 
airdale said:
I approached Baker at a recent pilot event and asked about the $75M cash hoard. He basically told me to pound sand, turned on his heel and walked away.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of $59 fees.. What should they do with that money?
 
OkieAviator said:
That's a lot of $59 fees.. What should they do with that money?
Click to expand...
Well, fundamentally it is the members' money, so should be spent to benefit the members.

Last time I looked, the hoard was about three times the endowment of the Air Safety Institute. Possibly some could go there if it could be spent productively.

The easiest and most equitable thing would be to declare a dues holiday. For example, give two or three months of dues-free membership for each year that a member has belonged, with some mechanism to also compensate former members whose money is in the hoard.

$10-20M is an ample reserve for an organization like AOPA, which has very predictable revenue and costs. The existence of a huge hoard simply tempts foolishness, like the insane idea floated a year or two ago that AOPA should become a venture capitalist in the GA space.
 
OkieAviator said:
That's a lot of $59 fees.. What should they do with that money?
Click to expand...

airdale said:
Well, fundamentally it is the members' money, so should be spent to benefit the members.

Last time I looked, the hoard was about three times the endowment of the Air Safety Institute. Possibly some could go there if it could be spent productively.

The easiest and most equitable thing would be to declare a dues holiday. For example, give two or three months of dues-free membership for each year that a member has belonged, with some mechanism to also compensate former members whose money is in the hoard.

$10-20M is an ample reserve for an organization like AOPA, which has very predictable revenue and costs. The existence of a huge hoard simply tempts foolishness, like the insane idea floated a year or two ago that AOPA should become a venture capitalist in the GA space.
Click to expand...

AOPA is a business, period, get over it. They are selling you a dream, much the same as the late night televangelist that will promise you a spot in heaven if you send in your "love offerings".
 
SkyDog58 said:
All of those who have issues with how AOPA is doing what they do, please attend one of the open houses this summer and talk to Tom Haines or Mark Baker or whomever from AOPA HQ you can corner and have a conversation. They are all very approachable.
Click to expand...

Unless you can fund them completely yourself, your words will fall on deaf ears, BTDT. AOPA is about taking in money, nothing else.
 
Shepherd said:
I don't have auto-renew. I make them beg and plead until the last possible moment. Then I renew online. After 8 weeks, still no hat, so I send them an email. Every year I get the same reply: "So sorry". Someone forgot to mail the hat." :yes:

I'm saving the emails. Eventually I'll have enough evidence to prove fraud. I'll blackmail them for the free plane. :goofy:
Click to expand...
Thought I was the only one who has never received the free hat in the past few years.

I dropped my membership because there's no benefit to me. I havent seen any action yet, haven't gotten a free hat, never hear anything from them unless they want something. Well I guess there is a benefit, all those insurance flyers and junk mail from their "partners" makes good way to start the fireplace
 
OkieAviator said:
That's a lot of $59 fees.. What should they do with that money?
Click to expand...

They should use some of it for ground level promotion of GA and cost offsets for training. Grants, scholarships, etc.

What if they took just 10 million of that, bought 200 trainers (let's say 172s or Warriors) at 50k a piece, and gave them as grants to non-profit clubs with the stipulation that they must be rented for fuel costs, insurance costs, and a mx fund charge to students. Let's say $40 for fuel an hour and another $30-$40 into the mx/insurance fund per hour (I'll be conservative and assume only 300 hours a year flown). You could cover every region in America, giving students access to affordable flying options.

How many people would learn to fly or finish their training if they had a capable airplane for $70-$80 an hour wet?

But instead, let's spend millions on saving rich people from having to base their biz-jet a few miles further down the road. That really promotes and grows GA :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
flyingcheesehead said:
No, but if you are equipped, you get to see everyone who's on radar inside your "hockey puck" (15nm radius and +/- 3500 feet IIRC) regardless of whether they're equipped
Click to expand...

Yeah but.....

To be legal ,all you need is ADS-B (out).......

You will need ADS-B (in) to see the traffic and get weather info,...:yes:;)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
No, but if you are equipped, you get to see everyone who's on radar inside your "hockey puck" (15nm radius and +/- 3500 feet IIRC) regardless of whether they're equipped
Click to expand...

That's the key - those on radar. If the target isn't in radar coverage, you aren't going to see it.
 
retailguy said:
Pretty sure that the economics of that wouldn't look too good.
Click to expand...

I thought the mission of AOPA was to grow GA, not make a profit?:dunno: Aren't they a 'non profit'? I think the economics would be just fine as it would greatly increase the utility of GA thereby attracting, and retaining, more pilots. The more people who utilize the planes, the more economical they are. With a national rental fleet that can be flown one way across the country and dropped off and back into rental, rather than a fleet that is single based, makes the economics for someone trying to take a GA vacation and can't afford to own a much more palatable proposition than paying 3 hours a day minimum, plus ramp/storage fees.

I always hoped Cirrus would try to develop this model considering they have so many Service Centers around the country. Rent either an SR-20 or SR-22 wherever you want on one check out. Cessna, now that they own Beech, are also in a good position to do it.
 
Henning said:
I thought the mission of AOPA was to grow GA, not make a profit?:dunno: Aren't they a 'non profit'? I think the economics would be just fine as it would greatly increase the utility of GA thereby attracting, and retaining, more pilots. The more people who utilize the planes, the more economical they are. With a national rental fleet that can be flown one way across the country and dropped off and back into rental, rather than a fleet that is single based, makes the economics for someone trying to take a GA vacation and can't afford to own a much more palatable proposition than paying 3 hours a day minimum, plus ramp/storage fees.

I always hoped Cirrus would try to develop this model considering they have so many Service Centers around the country. Rent either an SR-20 or SR-22 wherever you want on one check out. Cessna, now that they own Beech, are also in a good position to do it.
Click to expand...

Being a non profit does not mean you have to spend every dime as it comes in the door. it is good to build the reserves up. That being said, there may be some very good ways to spend some of this reserve that would not hurt them and might help GA. I do believe that is what they try to do but striking the perfect balance is not always easy and usually you cannot make everyone happy.

I do wish that someone would develop a national rental fleet that you could take one way and that would not require a separate checkout each time. I really like what Open Airplane is doing in regards to the standardized checkout. Though you must return the airplane to where you got it and the rental fees at many of the locations seem inflated. Of course, a one way rental system would need to be a little more expensive as there would be times where aircraft would need to be ferried to balance out the fleet. Ferry flights burn gas and of course you MUST pay the ferry pilot.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Being a non profit does not mean you have to spend every dime as it comes in the door. it is good to build the reserves up. That being said, there may be some very good ways to spend some of this reserve that would not hurt them and might help GA. I do believe that is what they try to do but striking the perfect balance is not always easy and usually you cannot make everyone happy.

I do wish that someone would develop a national rental fleet that you could take one way and that would not require a separate checkout each time. I really like what Open Airplane is doing in regards to the standardized checkout. Though you must return the airplane to where you got it and the rental fees at many of the locations seem inflated. Of course, a one way rental system would need to be a little more expensive as there would be times where aircraft would need to be ferried to balance out the fleet. Ferry flights burn gas and of course you MUST pay the ferry pilot.
Click to expand...

Open Airplane seems to be available only at the very highest of rental prices.
 
Henning said:
I thought the mission of AOPA was to grow GA, not make a profit?:dunno: Aren't they a 'non profit'? I think the economics would be just fine as it would greatly increase the utility of GA thereby attracting, and retaining, more pilots. The more people who utilize the planes, the more economical they are. With a national rental fleet that can be flown one way across the country and dropped off and back into rental, rather than a fleet that is single based, makes the economics for someone trying to take a GA vacation and can't afford to own a much more palatable proposition than paying 3 hours a day minimum, plus ramp/storage fees.



I always hoped Cirrus would try to develop this model considering they have so many Service Centers around the country. Rent either an SR-20 or SR-22 wherever you want on one check out. Cessna, now that they own Beech, are also in a good position to do it.
Click to expand...


I agree. The manufacturers haven't done their part. I took some lessons in the early 1980s from a Cessna Pilot Center at Palwaukee (Now Chicago Executive) and they were a welcoming place, actively looking for students. Now they've all but disappeared except for some relic signs at some airports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top