EAA Going After AOPA's Market

airdale said:
Warren Buffet named his first jet "The Indefensible."

And clearly his time is more valuable than that of the head of a very small magazine publisher, insurance agency, and a lobbying organization representing around 0.1% of the United State's population.
Click to expand...

Note: AOPA is not an insurance agency, it's contracted to a normal agency and their prices aren't particularly better than anyone else's.

I started to type up a long list of items I realized were problems, but I realized they're all adequately documented already.

Lets put it this way. Great member organizations offer some sort of value where if you're not a member you missing out on something.

Be it a great publication so good you can't miss it, awesome discounts way better than non-members can get, access to expertise found nowhere else, or even a proven kick ass track record in political battles.

What AOPA is missing is their own "killer" feature -- that you can't get anywhere else.

I join other clubs. I get things I simply can't get without being a member.

NRA is so effective they have people who've never touched a firearm frothing at the mouth (right here on PoA in the Spin Zone, even) about how effectively they spend their lobby money.

Car clubs, grant access to special events not open to the public on how to maintain said vehicle, or major discounts on products for that vehicle.

Ham Radio clubs pool resources to get access to mountain-top sites priced out of reach of average Joes for extending the reach and usefulness of radios, and often offer incredibly detailed and sometimes even negative reviews of products. (Never seen an aviation product AOPA didn't like. Aviation Consumer does not have this attitude. They'll put products head to head and shred a bad one, saving me the hassle, time, and ultimately money, on the bad ones.)

Professional organizations bring networking events, and technical journals to the table for my membership bucks. Or the ability to be published of one is into that sort of thing. (Not I, but I recognize the value to resume' padders.)

Cessna Pilots Assn has saved me at least the cost of the membership every year I've been an aircraft co-owner, even though their name is totally botched... I have joked with John that the organization has nothing to do with Piloting and everything to do with maintenance.

The key is finding killer stuff AOPA does and amplifying that.

I wouldn't care in the slightest if y'all owned a jet or had a wine club or did any of the silly stuff, if there were one thing I could point at my AOPA card and say, "I can't live without X feature." because no one on the planet did it better than AOPA.

I can't think of a single thing I'd truly miss badly if I didn't renew. That's the bottom line, Tom. What is that one indispensable thing AOPA offers members?

ASF and the training and research programs might be close, but I could see it being spun off as a separate entity that folks would join. Especialky if omeone could find a significant insurance discount for stating "ASF current", for example.

AOPA needs to be *better* at something than all the niche "competitors" or... they need to do the same thing as other stodgy old businesses do... Buy them to retain their market leadership. Or hire their best talent away and listen to them.

I felt during the Boyer tenure that AOPA was the only aviation organization that got a talking head on the TV, consistently and with the same unchanging message... "Aviation is good for the country and the people." That's gone.

Big tent? EAA is stomping in your turf hard there, and with their local Chapter-based system for local contact, might not be able to be beat. People don't go to Chapter meetings only to learn to rivet anymore, and haven't for years.

Reviews? Already mentioned Aviation Consumer. Kicking you up one side of the street and down the other, there.

Type Clubs: Better depth of knowledge about a huge aging fleet. Saves people big bucks.

Flight training: You have the eyeballs of every new pilot. That's a win. I'm not sure you have the eyeballs of their instructors though. Maybe some could comment on what their best-in-breed info source is for them.

Politics: The Legal and Medical defense offerings actually speak directly to political effectiveness if you think about it. Neither would be needed if AOPA was winning the legislative battles.

There's probably more but I'm tired. Going to sleep now.

Expo: ? Heck I get one week a year to do something extended related to aviation. The only way I'd spend that time on Expo is if I couldn't make it to Oshkosh that year.

So...

What is AOPA's current or future niche that no other organization can come close to? That's the thing to leverage the crud out of. And it's not Legal or Medical. Those are important tourniquets to lessen the bleeding GA suffers under the regulations, but that's why they're ancillary features, not primary ones.

Writers? Flying had that once, AOPA has had some authors of late who make a good showing, and even AbWeb toasted everyone's buns in the 90s. (Many of the articles written by their staff back then are the first thing that comes up in a Google search 15-20 years later. Nothing to this day touches Don Brown's "Say Again?" column, and Kevin Garrison turned his column into a successful book writing mini-career.)

AOPA needs a hook. That one thing that keeps members coming back even when 99% of the organization is doing dumb stuff. The "I can't get that anywhere else in aviation" feature.
 
S. Force said:
NRA has a wine club? Given the level of sophistication of the typical NRA member I figured they had a "Cheap Beer" club.:rofl:
Click to expand...

Sir, I will accept your apology over a well-aged single malt scotch.

I am the NRA. Myself and five (5) million of my closest friends.

But let's discuss N4GA for a moment. Someone asked what mission it does. A quick glance at FlightAware shows the following recent trips:

KFDK - KDBQ (630 nm or about 5 hours in my 182)
KDBQ - KBIL (793 nm or 6+ hours in my 182)
KBIL - KIWS (1134 nm or 9 hours in my 182)
KIWS - KFDK 1068 or 8+ hours in my 182)
KFDK - KMSP (776 nm or 6 hours in my 182)

As you can see, these distances and flight times are lengthy for one of the most common GA birds. Winds aloft not included. Sure, the 182 is no speed demon, but it ain't a 150, either.

If someone came on here with the above mission and asked what to buy for reliable, fairly quick all weather transport what would we say? You're in turbine land, Sir. Can a FIKI twin do it? Absolutely, just a bit slower. But all that time you are paying a cabin full of employees to sit there, so slower can cost you.

We might recommend a Pilatus or King Air.
 
We might recommend a Pilatus or King Air.
Click to expand...
I think you're missing the large majority opinion here: AOPA does not need this type of transportation.

All the destinations you list are served by commercial airlines, as are IAD, BWI, and DCA.
 
Morne said:
We might recommend a Pilatus or King Air.
Click to expand...

I could live with a KA. Here's my take: Imagine a bell shaped curve with the left side being a tatty 1940 Taylorcraft BC-65, hand prop, no electric. The right side of the curve would be a G-IV. That represents the GA fleet, notwithstanding the UL and EXP crowd(I covered that too). Now, pick something in the middle of the bubble of the bell shaped curve. Nice twin? I am good with that. Personally, I'd stick with piston but a KA is maybe doable.

Why does GA need to be represented by the far right side of the bell curve?

As to paying the salaries of the guys sitting in the jet while it whizzes them at 420Kts to their destination, don't get me started on salaries and the avoided cost of getting rid of the jet upkeep. I bet you would actually save money getting rid of the jet and getting a decent twin, even a turbine twin over the cost of the jet and pilot, and co, and mx, and insurance, and, and, and. Does AOPA actually have a set of pilots that are on staff for the thing?

What's more, if they would get the hell out of the beltway, they surely wouldn't need a jet. The example of the EAA with it's regional chapters is going to kick the AOPAs azz. There should be a regional chapter of the AOPA that actually focuses on pilot needs, and then a separate arm for it's legislative clout, but no where near the number of people in MD. They can still call it all 'AOPA', but this would more align it with the NRA model too.

BTW, here's the blurb on the NRA wine club offering. When I compared it to what AOPA started with, I was agog. NRA did it right, and I even got the nice travel tote after a few samplings.

https://www.nrawineclub.com/em0113a/?src=nraem0113a
 
I am also the NRA. I also like beer > wine.
BUT, OMG, I'm educated. I hate to burst your bubble.
That was one of the more idiotic things I've read.


Morne said:
Sir, I will accept your apology over a well-aged single malt scotch.

I am the NRA. Myself and five (5) million of my closest friends.

But let's discuss N4GA for a moment. Someone asked what mission it does. A quick glance at FlightAware shows the following recent trips:

KFDK - KDBQ (630 nm or about 5 hours in my 182)
KDBQ - KBIL (793 nm or 6+ hours in my 182)
KBIL - KIWS (1134 nm or 9 hours in my 182)
KIWS - KFDK 1068 or 8+ hours in my 182)
KFDK - KMSP (776 nm or 6 hours in my 182)

As you can see, these distances and flight times are lengthy for one of the most common GA birds. Winds aloft not included. Sure, the 182 is no speed demon, but it ain't a 150, either.

If someone came on here with the above mission and asked what to buy for reliable, fairly quick all weather transport what would we say? You're in turbine land, Sir. Can a FIKI twin do it? Absolutely, just a bit slower. But all that time you are paying a cabin full of employees to sit there, so slower can cost you.

We might recommend a Pilatus or King Air.
Click to expand...
 
Dean V said:
One segment of AOPA that still deserves our support is the AOPA Air Safety Foundation. These folks still do good work that is relevant to GA.
Click to expand...

Amen brother! The Air Safety Foundation is a great benefit to me!

airdale said:
I think you're missing the large majority opinion here: AOPA does not need this type of transportation.

All the destinations you list are served by commercial airlines, as are IAD, BWI, and DCA.
Click to expand...

Well First I would not say that its the "majority" even if every poster here thought they did not need the Jet that dosen't come close to a majority of AOPAers.

Second, Think about the logic in Tom for example flying GA from AOPA HQ to say ORD or MDW to battle Chicago on the Miegs destruction and arguing that Meigs was vital to GA and vital to the City of Chicago and DA mayor asks "Tom how did you get to our fair city" and Tom responds " Oh I flew USAirways from IAD. " so the Mayor resonds " Oh so you got her just fine in time for our meeting on a commercial carrier" Obviously this is a fictional sceanario but its what would happen.
 
docmirror said:
I could live with a KA. Here's my take: Imagine a bell shaped curve with the left side being a tatty 1940 Taylorcraft BC-65, hand prop, no electric. The right side of the curve would be a G-IV. That represents the GA fleet, notwithstanding the UL and EXP crowd(I covered that too). Now, pick something in the middle of the bubble of the bell shaped curve. Nice twin? I am good with that. Personally, I'd stick with piston but a KA is maybe doable.
Click to expand...

In reality, if you look at registered aircraft, by far the majority of privately owned GA aircraft are single engine, fixed gear less than 200 hp. It would be nice if we were represented by a few, or even a fleet, of those, to help dispel the "rich guy" image we have been saddled with.

If it takes a bit longer to get to a meeting, so be it. It's what the assn. is supposed to represent. Let NBAA buy their own PR.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
In reality, if you look at registered aircraft, by far the majority of privately owned GA aircraft are single engine, fixed gear less than 200 hp. It would be nice if we were represented by a few, or even a fleet, of those, to help dispel the "rich guy" image we have been saddled with.

If it takes a bit longer to get to a meeting, so be it. It's what the assn. is supposed to represent. Let NBAA buy their own PR.
Click to expand...


The dues paying base is the SEP GA folks like you mention.
 
But I wrote a letter saying no how no way may Mssrs. Heintz, Trimble, and Hipp. have my proxy.
Click to expand...


Why don't we like these three fellows and if we revoke our proxy who will vote for us?

I noticed that you can only renew the proxy online and there is nothing about revoking it. I assume you have to write a letter but the aopa website does not say. Shady
 
Chip Sylverne said:
In reality, if you look at registered aircraft, by far the majority of privately owned GA aircraft are single engine, fixed gear less than 200 hp. It would be nice if we were represented by a few, or even a fleet, of those, to help dispel the "rich guy" image we have been saddled with.

If it takes a bit longer to get to a meeting, so be it. It's what the assn. is supposed to represent. Let NBAA buy their own PR.
Click to expand...

I'm good with that too. I wouldn't mind a nice 210, A36.
 
dell30rb said:
Why don't we like these three fellows and if we revoke our proxy who will vote for us?

I noticed that you can only renew the proxy online and there is nothing about revoking it. I assume you have to write a letter but the aopa website does not say. Shady
Click to expand...

I would suggest you find someone in the Frederick, MD area, as they tend to put the AGM on short notice with the smallest possible legal announcement thereof.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
In reality, if you look at registered aircraft, by far the majority of privately owned GA aircraft are single engine, fixed gear less than 200 hp. It would be nice if we were represented by a few, or even a fleet, of those, to help dispel the "rich guy" image we have been saddled with.

If it takes a bit longer to get to a meeting, so be it. It's what the assn. is supposed to represent. Let NBAA buy their own PR.
Click to expand...
That argument is like saying that someone with the American Bicycle Association should go to all the towns they visit via bicycle. I think most people realize that one should choose the best transportation alternative for the mission. Getting five or ten people halfway across the country to a meeting on an airport that isn't served by the airlines in all weather is not a mission for either a 182 or the airlines. A large King Air or small jet is the starting point for that on a practical standpoint. Depending on how frequently these types of trips occur, a rental, fractional ownership, or outright ownership may make more sense.
 
denverpilot said:
...Expo: ? Heck I get one week a year to do something extended related to aviation. The only way I'd spend that time on Expo is if I couldn't make it to Oshkosh that year...
Click to expand...

Expo? It was renamed "AOPA Summit" a few years back, reflecting its growing focus on big donors and government types.

denverpilot said:
...Professional organizations bring networking events...
Click to expand...

So does AOPA. At Summit, for a big enough donation, you can rub shoulders with Craig and the high rollers and share a glass of wine at an exclusive night-before dinner.

denverpilot said:
...ASF and the training and research programs might be close, but I could see it being spun off as a separate entity that folks would join...
Click to expand...

It was spun off as a separate entity a few years ago. But it's not really a membership organization.
 
gprellwitz said:
That argument is like saying that someone with the American Bicycle Association should go to all the towns they visit via bicycle. I think most people realize that one should choose the best transportation alternative for the mission. Getting five or ten people halfway across the country to a meeting on an airport that isn't served by the airlines in all weather is not a mission for either a 182 or the airlines. A large King Air or small jet is the starting point for that on a practical standpoint. Depending on how frequently these types of trips occur, a rental, fractional ownership, or outright ownership may make more sense.
Click to expand...

A 182 not a bicycle, but a very capable aircraft for its type.

I was an exec with AVEMCO for a while when it was a public company, and we did just fine with offices scattered about the country with a FIKI P210 and a small fleet of 182's. We also had a Citation, which was a monumental waste of money for the amusement of the chairman/ceo. When larger groups had to travel, we rented appropriate aircraft. We made every effort to go the GA our customers flew.

The singles let us keep in close contact with our customers, and raised visibilty out in the field. Geez, maybe AOPA could use a little of that, too.
 
Last edited:
Well First I would not say that its the "majority" even if every poster here thought they did not need the Jet that dosen't come close to a majority of AOPAers.
Click to expand...
I said the majority here. As for a majority of AOPAers, I'd wager that most do not even realize that they are paying for a jet. The magazine misdirects (like magicians do) with homey stories about the Boyer 172 and the Fuller tail-dragger. I always thought the stock picture of Boyer in his leather flying jacket was hilarious.

The jet is well camouflaged on the tax returns, too.

... if we revoke our proxy who will vote for us?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter. The insiders still hold enough proxies to bury you.

In real member organizations they distribute ballots of course.
 
airdale said:
I said the majority here. As for a majority of AOPAers, I'd wager that most do not even realize that they are paying for a jet. The magazine misdirects (like magicians do) with homey stories about the Boyer 172 and the Fuller tail-dragger. I always thought the stock picture of Boyer in his leather flying jacket was hilarious.

The jet is well camouflaged on the tax returns, too.

It doesn't matter. The insiders still hold enough proxies to bury you.

In real member organizations they distribute ballots of course.
Click to expand...
I'm not at all sure that a majority "here" agree, unless by that you mean "the majority of those who have made their opinions known on this thread." Even then, I haven't counted. Personally, I support the jet.
 
What's your estimate of the annual own/op budget for it?

gprellwitz said:
I'm not at all sure that a majority "here" agree, unless by that you mean "the majority of those who have made their opinions known on this thread." Even then, I haven't counted. Personally, I support the jet.
Click to expand...
 
airdale said:
......
In real member organizations they distribute ballots of course.
Click to expand...

This a very good point, and one we are addressing with the EAA.....

When you have the board member selection committee consisting of sitting board members and the voting done by them only through the proxy system then the potential for inbreeding / cronyism/ good ol boy network is ripe and more often then not it leads to a top heavy, corrupt board..IMHO....

All members should be given a ballot and let the masses vote on the board members...:yes::yes:... And... that voting process needs an independant, outside observer too during the vote count..:yesnod:
 
Last edited:
Alexb2000 said:
Are you guys serious? Crossing the country in a Caravan below 12K at 170-180 knots at 55 GPH?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they should probably get a Baron.

The reality is that AOPA's membership generally uses its airplanes where they make sense. I don't take the RV-6 when I need to carry 3 people to the West Coast, I take Delta.

AOPA needs to face the reality that GA has its niche, but it isn't a one size fits all proposition. If they need to go from DC to LA or Dallas, Delta may be a better option that owning a corporate jet or plodding there in the 200 knot airplane that is a reasonable compromise for everything East of the Mississippi.
 
I fly to Palm Springs once a year just like they do, have been doing so since the 70', have flown American almost every time.

gprellwitz said:
I'm not at all sure that a majority "here" agree, unless by that you mean "the majority of those who have made their opinions known on this thread." Even then, I haven't counted. Personally, I support the jet.
Click to expand...

Alexb2000 said:
Are you guys serious? Crossing the country in a Caravan below 12K at 170-180 knots at 55 GPH?
Click to expand...
 
All members should be given a ballot and let the masses vote on the board members...
Click to expand...
Yes. There should also be a nomination mechanism through which any member can run for the board.

Knowing full well that typing this is a total waste of time, I'll suggest one path that could transform AOPA:

Board of Trustees (BOT) actions:

  • Resolve that all future annual meetings of the corporation will be held as open sessions at the AOPA convention.
  • Submit their resignations en masse, effective the 2014 convention.
  • Develop a BOT nomination process (probably by petition) that balances member opportunity and limiting the candidates to a reasonable number. Optionally, there can be additional nominations by a board committee. Any sitting member of the 2013 BOT can be automatically nominated if they wish to continue to serve.
  • With staff, work out a schedule that gives time for member notification and the nomination process itself, followed by publication of nominee's resumes and position statements with a paper ballot bound into that issue of the magazine. Announce the results in the magazine issue preceding the convention.
  • As N801BH suggested, hire an outside organization to count ballots and certify results.
  • Hold a brief organizational meeting (of the new board) on or before the first day of the 2014 convention, then hold the annual meeting of the corporation as scheduled. Accept that it will be a little raggedy-andy as the new board learns to operate.

Some of the implementation details:


  • The new BOT should establish some means to stagger its members' terms going forward so that approximately 1/3 of the board is up for election each year.
  • BOT member expenses to attend meetings to be paid by AOPA, preventing it from being a rich man's club.
  • Term limits should be established, allowing no member to serve longer than a certain number of terms, maybe two.
  • Substantive summaries of all board meetings and actions to be published on line in a timely fashion following each meetiing.

Pie in the sky. The only people who could implement such a revolution are the insiders who benefit from the current system.
 
I found AOPA helpful when I joined as student pilot. Now that I am a pilot and own an aircraft, I can find little that AOPA has to offer me.

Fuel prices have doubled. Labor and parts have increased in price. The FAA has doubled the cost of my annuals every other year with a new AD. There are some very nice planes rotting in the hangar....where are you AOPA?

My airplane didn't cost $500,000. I fly on a limited budget...can you afford to lose me AOPA? A wine club? Really? I've cut $150 in utility expenses in the past year trying to make ends meet. Are recreational flyers not important to GA? I think we will soon find out. Do you care AOPA?
 
airdale said:
There should also be a nomination mechanism through which any member can run for the board.
Click to expand...

The AOPA bylaws (http://www.aopa.org/info/governance/bylaws.html) say:
"These By-Laws may be altered by a majority vote at a duly called meeting of the members, provided that the Board of Trustees shall have had circulated a notice to the entire membership at least ten (10) days in advance, setting forth substantially the proposed change."
​
The how and when of such meetings:
"All meetings of members shall be held at such place and time and for such purposes as the Board of Trustees, with its Chairman voting, shall decide. Meetings of members shall be presided over by the Chairman of the Board of Trustees who may, if there is less than a majority of the membership present in person or by proxy, declare the meeting postponed. Unless the meeting is postponed, any number of members in attendance shall constitute a quorum."
​
Good luck getting all those requirements to align.

Pie in the sky.
Click to expand...
Yes.

One can always try starting an alternate organization. Given the way the AOPA bylaws are crafted and the impossible job of getting the trustees to amend them, it would be easier to start an organization from scratch than try to change AOPA.
 
Not feasible. AOPA's endowment and revenue from ongoing ops can outlast any start-up.

Jim Logajan said:
The AOPA bylaws (http://www.aopa.org/info/governance/bylaws.html) say:
"These By-Laws may be altered by a majority vote at a duly called meeting of the members, provided that the Board of Trustees shall have had circulated a notice to the entire membership at least ten (10) days in advance, setting forth substantially the proposed change."
​
The how and when of such meetings:
"All meetings of members shall be held at such place and time and for such purposes as the Board of Trustees, with its Chairman voting, shall decide. Meetings of members shall be presided over by the Chairman of the Board of Trustees who may, if there is less than a majority of the membership present in person or by proxy, declare the meeting postponed. Unless the meeting is postponed, any number of members in attendance shall constitute a quorum."
​
Good luck getting all those requirements to align.

Yes.

One can always try starting an alternate organization. Given the way the AOPA bylaws are crafted and the impossible job of getting the trustees to amend them, it would be easier to start an organization from scratch than try to change AOPA.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Not feasible. AOPA's endowment and revenue from ongoing ops can outlast any start-up.
Click to expand...

I suspect the fortunes and future of AOPA are somewhat decoupled from the feasibility of a competitive start-up - even if the competitor is an entity like EAA, which hardly qualifies as a start-up. I see at least three possible outcomes if a real start-up was tried:

  1. It succeeds, making AOPA's future success or failure irrelevant to the start-up's goals.
  2. It fails to gain enough members to be influential because AOPA changes in ways that mimic whatever competitive advantage the start-up was trying.
  3. It fails to gain enough members to be influential because AOPA members are in fact satisfied with the status quo.
In cases 1 and 2, the underlying goals of the start-up are realized regardless of the fate of the start-up.
 
1 is highly unlikely. "Say whaaat" will be the most predictable response to fund-raising for such a venture.

2. is remotely possible, but you'll never know it due to the smokescreen of new leadership, yada yada.

3. should (IMO) be restated to say that some members aren't particularly happy and the rest don't know or care but aren't going to get exercised over $40 per year.
Jim Logajan said:
I suspect the fortunes and future of AOPA are somewhat decoupled from the feasibility of a competitive start-up - even if the competitor is an entity like EAA, which hardly qualifies as a start-up. I see at least three possible outcomes if a real start-up was tried:

  1. It succeeds, making AOPA's future success or failure irrelevant to the start-up's goals.
  2. It fails to gain enough members to be influential because AOPA changes in ways that mimic whatever competitive advantage the start-up was trying.
  3. It fails to gain enough members to be influential because AOPA members are in fact satisfied with the status quo.
In cases 1 and 2, the underlying goals of the start-up are realized regardless of the fate of the start-up.
Click to expand...
 
Jim Logajan said:
One can always try starting an alternate organization. Given the way the AOPA bylaws are crafted and the impossible job of getting the trustees to amend them, it would be easier to start an organization from scratch than try to change AOPA.
Click to expand...

You could also start a campaign to gather proxies from members. That's how you fight from within, as a proxy war.

Yes, every member gets the default proxy to the current leaders, but there's absolutely nothing preventing people from campaigning to get members to assign their proxies to someone else. Get enough proxies, and voila, the organization changes rather rapidly at that point.
 
Proxies can concentrate control among insiders, but it's not their reason for existence. Have any of you started a not-for-profit corporation? The organization would be paralyzed without proxies, because you'd never have a quorum.

The people put forth as proxies are chosen because they're reliable attendees at meetings. If you want someone else to be your proxy, I'd expect there's a way to choose someone other than those proposed by the board, but you'd want to be sure whoever you chose would show up.
 
Much of the discussion here sounds like typical class-envy whining. I have no problem with the jet, and honestly the salaries to me don't look out of line. Effectiveness in a not-for-profit organization requires the same qualifications and skills as are required to be effective in business, and if that's what expertise costs these days, so be it. If you're jealous because a handful of these guys make more than you do, then make a note to improve your skills, education and networking to the point you can compete for their jobs.

The real issues for me with AOPA are the "demographic chasing," a focus on how to enrich the organization, at the expense of attention to the issues facing a majority of members. It also disgusts me to see AOPA so willing to wallow in the corruption in DC. I'd rather see my PAC contribution go to help elect candidates who espouse the free-market principles which will get aviation a fair shake, than to see it support a crook who happens to be a reliable vote for a particular aviation entitlement program.
 
These AOPA is "milking us" discussions are pretty humorous. AOPA could be chaired by a guy making $10 an hour, flying a 150 around, camping out 200 days a year, and still there would be criticism (mostly that he wasn't getting anything done).

Ask anyone on the street what GA means to America. Let's call it private aviation, because they won't know exactly what GA means. Most would say it is private jets carrying celebrities and the rich around. Not a group that anyone sees needing help or support from law makers. Any law makers that do publicly support GA are seen as pandering to the filthy rich. This is on par with law makers coming out in support of yacht owners and polo teams.

This is a much tougher road to accomplish something on than say gun rights, because even the poorest welfare recipient probably has at least one gun.

Start giving welfare recipients a Cub to fly around looking for work and we may stir up a little support on the hill. :D
 
Alexb2000 said:
.......
Start giving welfare recipients a Cub to fly around looking for work and we may stir up a little support on the hill. :D
Click to expand...

Welfare recipients DON'T want to find a job.... They have it damn good just as they are...:mad2::mad2:

Free housing, free food, free cell phone, free legal services, free energy, free medical...Etc,..........
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
Welfare recipients DON'T want to find a job.... They have it damn good just as they are...:mad2::mad2:

Free housing, free food, free cell phone, free legal services, free energy, free medical...Etc,..........
Click to expand...
Take it to Spin Zone.
 
You could also start a campaign to gather proxies from members. That's how you fight from within, as a proxy war.
Click to expand...
Yup, that is certainly what the insiders would say. Do you think it would be accompanied by an offer to distribute your proxies for you?

My guess is that a proxy fight would cost north of a half million dollars, maybe even a million. Start with the legal battle to get members' names and addresses. Follow with the probably unsuccessful battle to get email addresses. Then you get to direct mail the membership at least twice at a cost of fifty cents to a dollar per piece. If you start looking dangerous, then you pay to defend the legal challenge to your proxies.

Somewhere along the line, your nominees are kicked out of AOPA for "for conduct by that member which is likely to endanger the interests of the corporation." So there's that legal battle too.

Then in the end you lose, because those members who " don't know or care but aren't going to get exercised over $40 per year" continue to sign the insiders' proxies.

The only thing that can give control of AOPA to its membership is an unprecedented attack of personal integrity within the Board.
 
airdale said:
Yup, that is certainly what the insiders would say. Do you think it would be accompanied by an offer to distribute your proxies for you?
...
The only thing that can give control of AOPA to its membership is an unprecedented attack of personal integrity within the Board.
Click to expand...

Why do you need all that? You know, it's actually possible to conduct a campaign by word-of-mouth. Lots of AOPA members on here that you could solicit proxies from, PB same thing. Hell, solicit proxies over on the Red Board if you like.

Have those folks talk to their friends, and them to their friends. Hang around your local airport and you'll run into a bunch of members. This is a small, fairly tight-knit community where the members of it are fairly concentrated around discreet physical locations (airports)
 
Pipedream.

JeffDG said:
Why do you need all that? You know, it's actually possible to conduct a campaign by word-of-mouth. Lots of AOPA members on here that you could solicit proxies from, PB same thing. Hell, solicit proxies over on the Red Board if you like.

Have those folks talk to their friends, and them to their friends. Hang around your local airport and you'll run into a bunch of members. This is a small, fairly tight-knit community where the members of it are fairly concentrated around discreet physical locations (airports)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top