EAA Going After AOPA's Market

I don't agree with everything AOPA does but then I don't agree with everything anyone does. I always find it humorous that people complain about the mailings, Don't want to join the wine club? Throw out the damn flyer! Don't want the life insurance? Throw out the flyer! Don't want to contribute to the PAC? Throw out the letter!

If AOPA did nothing else other than advocate for GA in Washington and the various states I'd say the due are worth the price of admission. Does anyone really think that lobbying in DC or Harrisburg or Boston or Madison or Sacramento is inexpensive?

I recall the airlines push to blame air traffic delays in GA trying to get them to pay user fees. I'd think AOPA would need an exec and lobbying frim equal to that of the airlines to push back. If you have a ton of force pushing against you trying to crush you, you best have a ton and a half to push back.

As for the "fund raising" well partnerships and affinity programs are a very successful method of rasing funds for non profits, PBOs do it, Universities do it, trade and professional associations do it. It helps keep dues down and fund events and programs. I seem to recall several years ago being told that revenues from the credit card were way down and that the majority of AOPAs operating expenses came from the cc vs. dues.

My biggest beef in recent years was that AOPA charged for listings on the APA section of their site. I thought how can they do that they should be promoting flying and charging members to list partnerships is counter productive. Ya Know what they changed that and its free now. They made a mistake and fixed it. I also found a good club that I am seriously considering thanks to the new listing of clubs on their Website.

I belong to both AOPA and EAA. I hear more than twice as much from AOAP as from EAA. I'm talking info about aviation not wine club solictations. Not bashing EAA its a fantastic group its just different from AOPA I think rarely if ever have I seen them come out and press GA issues in federal and local legislatures. I've never said one has to be enamoured of everything AOPA does but If AOPA were to vanish today GA would find themselves in a pretty deep hole and then GA would turn into a dog eat dog world with the piston pounders ending up with the short straw. JMO.
 
Last edited:
TomHaines said:
Ben,

Thanks for your efforts on behalf of the ASN volunteer program. You and the other 2,000 volunteers around the country are making a remarkable difference in how we advocate and protect airports. We could use another couple of thousand at other airports. Who's game?

My disclosure: As of last month I'm a 25-year AOPA employee and a pilot for 36 years; like many I joined AOPA when I learned to fly.
...
Click to expand...
Tom,
Thanks for coming over and participating and providing some facts. Katie showed up for a little while, but I haven't seen her for over a month. Clearly, as you can see by the public perception, AOPA has made some communication missteps that have hurt membership and engendered some very dissatisfied ex-members. Note that most of those complaining have been members in the past. I think that a greater transparency and inclusiveness is really needed, and I take your participation here as a step in that direction. Be warned, though, there are some here who pull no punches! :)

BTW, there are more than a few ASN Volunteers on the board here.
 
SkyHog said:
That's the deal. Tom is here, not listening to what members and former members feel is important, but instead to defend every boneheaded decision they've made.
Click to expand...

Nick, I've been lurking for months and seeing/hearing the concerns and providing feedback to others on the leadership team based on what is said here.

I don't mean to come across as defensive. I'm just trying to bring some insider perspective and additional information forward that those here may not be privy to and that might help explain some of AOPA's actions.
 
I continue to support AOPA and ABS (life member) even through thay have some shortcomings. Fighting some of the battles is quite a challenge and we have few folks with the expertise and funding to make a good case for us. I've watched a local airport get closed. Local leaders just didn't want it and kept dedicating enough resources to find a manner in which to close it (actually, not let it re-open). I watched in awe as one local person after another got up and said absolutely stupid stuff like they didn't know the airport was there when they bought their house. Duh, it had been there for years, just wasn't active. Bottom line was the community didn't want it! Leadership reflected their views.

AOPA has been a real resource at our local airport. Haven't won everything, but I hate to think about what might have been done if leaders hadn't seen there were consequences to their actions.

We have enough problem identifiers, we need more problems solvers. If you don't like what they're doing, please cite what you would do and how much of your time you've given to solving airport issues.

Best,

Dave
 
I've been an AOPA member for 48 years.....3083XX. This year I have let it go. Too much old boy back slapping wine drinking jet setting for me.

I won't cry about no "50" year pin smooze.
 
Member since 1986, how ever long that is. As most I do not agree with everything that goes on at AOPA, but then I have no huge grievances either. I think Tom is giving us a chance to air out some issues we have all had and when someone at his level is listening I feel it is best to give concise information rather than a rant. Nuff said.

My most recent disappointment with AOPA was a questionnaire I received about FAA Safety Stand Down seminars. Having just a few days earlier attended one I was happy to give my two cents worth and probably spent the better part of a half hour typing a detailed account of my experience. When I hit the submit button I was presented with a donation screen that had to be filled out to leave my survey. I felt that my time had been wasted in an effort to provide pertinent data regarding my experience and that my advocate really didn't wanted my opinion as much as they wanted my $$.
 
This is a summary of the feedback I gave AOPA when I left.

1. Sell the jet, if you want to fly around in support of GA get a Baron with FIKI and if that won't get you there maybe join a lease arrangement for a Citation or something. Owning your own jet still rankles a lot of Cessna and Piper drivers.

2. Stop playing nice on the hill. For an example, take the history of the NRA. For 20+ years, the NRA played nice, and didn't rock the boat, and tried the go along to get along method. It was nothing short of total failure. Targeted financial and media support for those who support and sponsor GA, and excoriate those who denigrate it, and try to further regulate or impose fees, don't try to buy them. Politicians understand one thing; clear and obvious attacks from their detractors. An ideal example would be all the pols who use GA constantly, and then want to regulate the rest of us. Again - go back to the recent debacle on the hill of the gun legislation. It was a clean sweep for NRA, and most of the pols who voted for more restrictions are gun owners themselves! That stuff does not play well in middle America. Imperialism in US politics is dead.

3. Stop using liberal only mouthpieces. Freeman and Ford are the two biggest liberal supporters in the world. Why not someone like Angelina Jolie? At least she's an independent, not to mention hawt. Or, find another middle of the road media savvy pilot and get them out there. Or, go further and get Palin. She's been in lots of GA planes, and as a Alaska gov certainly is on board with GA. However, she does rub libs the wrong way, not that that is a bad thing.

4. Move or lease 80% of your sq ft office space in the beltway. You need a presence there but you suffer very badly from the beltway mindset. If you had regional offices in KC, Atlanta, Orlando, DFW, PHX, Seattle, you would be gobsmacked at the disconnect you have from the rest of the GA world in your little fief in the beltway. Get out there!

5. Commercial activities. You are a not-for-profit corp registered in 1998 in NJ. As such, the activities sponsored by the corp cannot show a ROI. However, the activities of your various income sources might not bear close scrutiny. When you earn more money from commercial endorsements TO pilots than you earn in revenue FROM those pilots, something is very wrong. For 2011, the numbers are ~$16M from member dues and >$18M from??????? You don't have to tell me, but should a HR member ever want to look over your books carefully I suspect crap like the wine club, BofA, and Sportys and whatever else you ring up for selling our personal info might be sketchy. What's more, I don't mind that you send out fliers, and email, and other targeted marketing materials, but at least offer up some benefits. Frex; The wine club was something I take a passing interest in so I looked at what they offered, and then I looked at my sources for the same offering and in most cases the wine club prices were the same or higher!? BofA, was the same. Offering for 'pilots' using BofA services was the same as any other person off the street. Sportys gave a small discount for orders over some minimum, and that lasted for a while, but I don't think you get much anymore, and certainly not on consumables. So, go ahead and forge alliances with vendors, no prob. Go ahead and sell your collection of email and snail mail addresses to anyone else and take in money on it. But - you will run afoul of the regulators some day, and in the mean time all it does is **** the people off that your mission statement 'says' you are supposed to be supporting.

6. Almost complete disconnect with EXP/SP/LSA. This sector of the GA community is growing! In fact, it's the future, and go look at the AOPA tabs on the main website. Now, drill into each of the sub-headings and you will find -- almost NOTHING on LSA/SP/EXP activities! One small article on the Icon weight increase. One tiny link to Tecnam low budget flight training. And way down in 'advocacy>regulatory>LSA/SP article. Look in the 'frugal flyer' column. This should be chock-a-block with stories about hand propping a Luscombe, or how to transition to a UL from a Bonanza, or a desperately needed primer on how to keep a two stroke engine from dying every 250 hours, or something/anything about LSA/SP/EXP. This is the one area that might just save your asses and you kind of ignore it! There should be a whole section of the AOPA website, and your publications devoted to advancing SP/LSA/EXP. Even the one article about the LSA movement was negative from the first para. And further down in the discussion they missed a whole segment of the LSA/SP market when they missed current pilots who cannot pass a third class phys. Gaaaaahhhhhhhh!

There's more, but this would be a good start. My humble opinion is that AOPA is stuck in the 80s. AOPA doesn't want GA enthusiasts, it wants a stable and predictable revenue source made up of high earning, liberal, college educated drones. People who keep a Cirrus or a Pilatus at the local airport should they want to go to Vail or Boca for a long weekend. I say get over yourselves, look at what's happening to your actual revenue from dues and wake the hell up.
 
AdamZ said:
I don't agree with everything AOPA does but then I don't agree with everything anyone does. I always find it humorous that people complain about the mailings, Don't want to join the wine club? Throw out the damn flyer! Don't want the life insurance? Throw out the flyer! Don't want to contribute to the PAC? Throw out the letter!
Click to expand...

its not that simple, Adam - everything costs money. The money comes from members. When AOPA wastes money on something other than their stated mission, which is advocacy for general aviation pilots and owners, then they are wasting money.

I detailed once how much AOPA had wasted trying to recruit me as a member when I already was a member. Even at discounted bulk postage rates, they were spending more money per year than I was paying in dues to try to get me to join - in other words, I might as well not have been a member.

So I left.

Truthfully, its gotten better now, except now they try to recruit my wife instead, and I continually get PAC requests.

But waste, at any level in the organization, is unacceptable. AOPA needs to do the following to succeed again:

1. Cut the top end down.
2. Cut out the PAC requests. Once per year is fine.
3. Stop taking credit for other's success, and instead, report their success
4. Spend money logically on advocacy efforts, not on "new products."

I applaud Tom for coming here to glean information to pass to leadership to improve. I can only hope that they take the feedback seriously. The next president needs to make some drastic changes, very quickly.
 
You know what else would help them get feedback from the membership? An actual representative board of directors that represented their membership, rather than the current proxy system and an elite Board of Trustees.

So long as members have only one option for really voting (ie. voting with their feet), that's the outlet you will see taken.
 
FYI - Tom, and I mean this from the heart: I am willing to speak to anyone in AOPA's leadership to give advice on what they could do to retain someone like me as a member. I am a very tough person to please, which actually could work very well for AOPA, because if you've pleased at least part of me, you'll have stopped the bleeding of most of the GA population, and will at the very least remain static in your member count, rather than losing the members as quickly as you are today.

Let me know if anyone has any desire to talk to me - PM me, or whatever, but its a serious offer, and one that AOPA should accept. Worst case scenario, you have an executive talking to a guy that has demands you guys can't possibly meet. Best case scenario, you get an executive that leaves a conversation saying "Wow! We can totally make those changes at both a strategic and a tactical level, and everything will be better soon!" Most likely it'll be somewhere in between.

Also note - I am not talking about someone in whatever retention department you have, I mean those that can actually affect change.
 
an article acknowledging that congress is against user fees because it undermines their authority to collect money would go a long way with me. every president ever offers a budget with user fees in it and AOPA immediately says the sky is falling and you better join up and donate to the PAC. The fact is that a budget is not law, and in my opinion congress is against user fees in general because they would rather collect taxes, and AOPA lobbying probably isn't making a bit of difference.
 
Why do I get the idea that I'm getting the same old pat answers as always?

TomHaines said:
I get it that members aren't asking for more mailings. The Wine Club was an attempt at a new product. It was not well received. We heard that. Canceled it. Learned from it and moved on. Any organization that is willing to try new things is going to fail from time to time. New Coke, anyone?
Click to expand...
 
JeffDG said:
You know what else would help them get feedback from the membership? An actual representative board of directors that represented their membership, rather than the current proxy system and an elite Board of Trustees.

So long as members have only one option for really voting (ie. voting with their feet), that's the outlet you will see taken.
Click to expand...

Can't, it is technically a 'non-profit' so it has to have a board of trustees. BOD is reserved for a profit corp. However, as I mentioned in my rant summary, the activities of this non-profit do not bear close scrutiny. Most of their revenue does not come from member dues but from commercial activities with for-profit entities. So - they are basically acting as a shell or pass-through organization for access to members.
 
I'm surprised at the number of people complaining about the jet. You would think as pilots we would understand the value of private aviation and the cost of peoples time. AOPA is not a North East organization, it's national and having a aircraft that can reasonable make long distance flights in a shorter time then the airlines is a valuable tool.
 
docmirror said:
Can't, it is technically a 'non-profit' so it has to have a board of trustees. BOD is reserved for a profit corp. However, as I mentioned in my rant summary, the activities of this non-profit do not bear close scrutiny. Most of their revenue does not come from member dues but from commercial activities with for-profit entities. So - they are basically acting as a shell or pass-through organization for access to members.
Click to expand...

OK, that's a terminology difference, and actually varies based upon which state they are incorporated in. But the principle is still that a board, representative of members in some fashion, would provide that feedback more effectively than trolling some internet forum.
 
jtheune said:
I'm surprised at the number of people complaining about the jet. You would think as pilots we would understand the value of private aviation and the cost of peoples time. AOPA is not a North East organization, it's national and having a aircraft that can reasonable make long distance flights in a shorter time then the airlines is a valuable tool.
Click to expand...

I agree, weird that a GA organization would criticize the use of GA. I sure don't want to fly coast to coast in a Baron every week. The larger picture IMO is that if we can't even agree as a GA organization to use GA, then there isn't much hope for us.
 
SkyHog said:
FYI - Tom, and I mean this from the heart: I am willing to speak to anyone in AOPA's leadership to give advice on what they could do to retain someone like me as a member. I am a very tough person to please, which actually could work very well for AOPA, because if you've pleased at least part of me, you'll have stopped the bleeding of most of the GA population, and will at the very least remain static in your member count, rather than losing the members as quickly as you are today.

Let me know if anyone has any desire to talk to me - PM me, or whatever, but its a serious offer, and one that AOPA should accept. Worst case scenario, you have an executive talking to a guy that has demands you guys can't possibly meet. Best case scenario, you get an executive that leaves a conversation saying "Wow! We can totally make those changes at both a strategic and a tactical level, and everything will be better soon!" Most likely it'll be somewhere in between.

Also note - I am not talking about someone in whatever retention department you have, I mean those that can actually affect change.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer. Check your PM.
 
The reserve is in the neighborhood of $70 million ... that amount is on par with the amount that our accounting firm, Grant Thornton, recommends an association such as AOPA should have on hand.
Click to expand...
I would like to see that letter. I think someone is lying to you. Speaking as an investor who has analyzed many, many companies' financials and as a retired CEO, I see nothing about AOPA's business that would militate towards such a huge cash hoard.

First, the business's revenue and expenses are relatively stable and predictable. Uncontrollable changes from year to year are likely to be single-digit percentages. This is in contrast to, for example, an organization like the Red Cross where income and expenses can vary widely due to natural disasters and wars.

Second, AOPA's main activities are the insurance agency and the magazine. Both of these activities have low fixed costs and high personnel costs. In both cases the personnel skills are fairly easy to find in the marketplace. This means that it is easy to manage expenses by adding or cutting staff (and magazine pages) as income ebbs and flows. This is in contrast to, for example, a teaching hospital with extremely high fixed costs. It is also in contrast to a spacecraft business with a uniquely skilled workforce.

So a good manager should not need massive reserves to navigate the ship, given the ship's nature and the relatively small wavelets that must be dealt with.

I would be interested to see one or two plausible scenarios where even one half of of the hoard would be required to keep the business afloat.

But as we all know, none of this really matters. AOPA is firmly controlled by its insiders and their only goal is to maximize customer happiness and, hence, customer revenue. Until AOPA starts binding ballots into the magazine (as NRA does) and starts facilitating real member participation in organizational governance, nothing will change. And there is absolutely no reason (other than personal integrity, I suppose) for the insiders to make such changes. Life is good for them.
 
jtheune said:
I'm surprised at the number of people complaining about the jet. You would think as pilots we would understand the value of private aviation and the cost of peoples time. AOPA is not a North East organization, it's national and having a aircraft that can reasonable make long distance flights in a shorter time then the airlines is a valuable tool.
Click to expand...

If you do a cost/benefit analysis, you cannot justify a private jet. Period, end of story.

Now, if you are a Fortune 100 company that has to provide one as an executive perk or if you are a wealthy individual and don't want the inconvenience of airlines, that's your business. But AOPA cannot look me in the eye with a straight face and tell me that the jet makes financial sense.

Maybe fractional ownership makes sense. A Baron would make sense.

But not 100% ownership and use of a jet.

The bottom line is that AOPA is a (largely) member funded organization and needs to clearly demonstrate that it spends the member's money as effectively as possible. Barring a very effective argument, supported by data, the jet screams otherwise.
 
Last edited:
If you do a cost/benefit analysis, you cannot justify a private jet. Period, end of story.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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...

Surely you guys realize that ANY private use aircraft serving a national organization is "The Indefensible" vs. commercial from a purely cost perspective. This conversation doesn't give me much faith in the future of GA.
 
I've flown almost 14,000 GA hours, most for business transportation, and only a few of the trips have been in a jet. The fact that some of the trips are long distance doesn't mean the GA plane must be used for all of them.

I think much of the criticism of the jet is symbolicand based on the perception of many members that a "let them eat cake" mentality has been fostered within the ranks of the hired help at the organization.

I'd also be willing to bet that more miles have been logged by trustees than by rank-and-file dues-paying members, which might also factor into the reason for mixed opinions as to its necessity.

Alexb2000 said:
I agree, weird that a GA organization would criticize the use of GA. I sure don't want to fly coast to coast in a Baron every week. The larger picture IMO is that if we can't even agree as a GA organization to use GA, then there isn't much hope for us.
Click to expand...
 
When OPM is used to pay for it, the cost rationalization seems to be easier to gag down.

Alexb2000 said:
Surely you guys realize that ANY private use aircraft serving a national organization is "The Indefensible" vs. commercial from a purely cost perspective. This conversation doesn't give me much faith in the future of GA.
Click to expand...
 
jtheune said:
I'm surprised at the number of people complaining about the jet.
Click to expand...

What mission or function of speed/payload/distance does AOPA serve that needs this kind of jet? I mean, I'm not a guy that points the finger and shouts 'Hah -- rich dude, cut him back'! I'm all for jets in GA, but really let's look at the mission and task the plane accordingly. They got along from 1939 to 2002 or something without a jet, suddenly they 'need' a jet to get places? What's the rush?
 
TomHaines said:
Many organizations have successful wine clubs, including the NRA
Click to expand...
NRA has a wine club? Given the level of sophistication of the typical NRA member I figured they had a "Cheap Beer" club.:rofl:
 
airdale said:
I would like to see that letter. I think someone is lying to you. Speaking as an investor who has analyzed many, many companies' financials and as a retired CEO, I see nothing about AOPA's business that would militate towards such a huge cash hoard.
Click to expand...

Aside from the misuse of the word 'militate', an excellent 'put up' statement. What it sounds like to me, is exactly what's wrong with the national infrastructure: 'We've got xxx million to burn, so where do we start spending'. Might as well be a federal 'crat.
 
wabower said:
When OPM is used to pay for it, the cost rationalization seems to be easier to gag down.
Click to expand...

This. How many of AOPA's senior staff pay for a private jet when they have a personal transportation need? Probably none.

And if it isn't a good value for them as individuals, it isn't a good value for the company.

The old line is that Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. AOPA's management must be above suspicion of wasting the association's money.

I'd also like to follow up on the comment that AOPA's accounting firm thinks $70 million in reserves is an appropriate amount for an organization of AOPA's size. I've been in similar discussions with high dollar external accountants. Since it isn't an issue of standard accounting principle, the accountants don't care and will provide whatever opinion the client wants and is willing to pay for.
 
I was only a member since 2003, starting with the six-month trial membership offered through my flight school. Two things really rubbed me the wrong way:

A few years ago, my AOPA VISA jacked my interest to 29.9% following a mistake by the bank. I paid off the card and cancelled it, and blamed the "partner" bank for the policy, but it left a bad taste for this affinity program and AOPA.

But AOPA really lost me during the last election cycle. I got an emergency fund-raising letter from the PAC telling me that if we didn't send in money right away, some members of the GA caucus might not get re-elected. That one was too much. I should reward corruption on every other issue just because they occasionally vote with GA? If they were in my state I'd be working on the competing campaign!

I sent a reply suggesting that perhaps AOPA PAC could get more bang-for-buck educating incoming lawmakers than paying off corrupt, entrenched ones. And I didn't renew with AOPA.

I greatly appreciate much of what AOPA has done in the past. I sensed a derailment after Fuller got in, but it could be Phil Boyer was just better at managing the impression.

I recently got an offer of a ball cap if I'd reconsider. I don't need more swag, and I have all the caps and headphone bags I need. I hope the organization gets the message sent by the only real ballot we have, and reverses the bloat and the mission sprawl that has it competing with both other non-profits and its own sponsors.

If it looks like that's happening, I'll be back.
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
.....
2. Stop playing nice on the hill. For an example, take the history of the NRA. For 20+ years, the NRA played nice, and didn't rock the boat, and tried the go along to get along method. It was nothing short of total failure. Targeted financial and media support for those who support and sponsor GA, and excoriate those who denigrate it, and try to further regulate or impose fees, don't try to buy them. Politicians understand one thing; clear and obvious attacks from their detractors. An ideal example would be all the pols who use GA constantly, and then want to regulate the rest of us. .
Click to expand...


This is a great post...:thumbsup:

First off... Tom, Thanks for jumping into the boiling vat of oil to try and spin the AOPA in a good light.

Second.... As a non profit, all salaries of ALL employees should be made available and totally transparent to anyone requesting them..:mad2:..
If it was a private company I would expect that info to be kept secret. BUT........ AOPA is NOT a private company..:no::nonod:

Thirdly.. I agree that AOPA's jet, N4GA is a tool and properly utilized, it can function as a great billboard for GA.. it is the potential abuse of it that can lead to distrust among the ranks....

And lastly... Doc said it best..... If there are politicians out there talking out both sides of their mouths , I say.......... Don't give them a DIME... Fund the ones who are consistant with our views... For instance, there are 100's of FBO owners who bust their ass serving GA, it doesn't matter if you are flying a Cub buying 10 gallons of 100LL or 4000 Gallons of JetA for their G-650.... Then they turn on the evening news and hear some politician saying " Stick it to the fat cats and their jets"... I have suggested to a very successful FBO owner that he should tell the next politician who used that talking point and then stops in on their next campaign whistle stop tour that unfortunately they just ran out of Jet A, and there is NO room on the ramp for their private 737 / G-5 or whatever..;)..

These politicains love the versatility of GA ,and yet as soon as they are elected/ re-elected, they instantly bad mouth private jets just to get a sound bite for the evening news so the idiots that vote for them will hold them to a higher standard...:mad2::mad:..

In closing.... I put my money were my mouth is... I am a LIFETIME member of the EAA and after it became clear of the poor direction Rod was taking it, a group of us got together on an internet chat room, compared notes and apparently were able to unseat Hightower. Altho I am sure it was coming anyway.... Fuller saw that and he is bailing too..... I really hope the AOPA wakes up and changes course...:yes:..

Tom....As a fellow pilot, we need to stick together..:)
 
Last edited:
wabower said:
FWIW, I have a 35-year AOPA membership pin. I also haven't renewed since the December expiration, and think the organization needs a wake-up call.
Click to expand...

I think next year would be 20 for me and I didn't renew this month when I got the notice. I've been pretty vocal about my complaints. I will remain a member of EAA and look forward to the day AOPA earns my return membership. Half of me thinks I'm making a mistake ("it's the only voice we have") and the other half thinks money talks and it is the only way to communicate to the organization. I sincerely hope that I will return to AOPA one day. I also sincerely hope that general aviation, in a form that resembles what I love, is available to my children in the future.

Jeff
 
TomHaines said:
Bruce,

I find your post misleading.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the update. Very refreshing.
.......Most of the others are VP-level positions in AOPA's Government Affairs Division. You won't find those people at EAA because they don't have a large advocacy team. They have two people whose titles suggest roles in government affairs--none of them actually based in Washington. We have a full-time team of six in DC and many others who are based in Frederick but are in DC on a daily basis working advocacy and regulatory affairs issues, serving on industry committees, and shaping the future of general aviation from an airspace, navigation, security, and communications standpoint.

As those who work in non-profits know, VP-level positions are common titles in government affairs departments in associations of any types. In one of those uniquely DC situations, getting the attention of the right people on the Hill and in the various agencies requires someone with "vice president" in their titles. A simple "director" doesn't get a call back. Therefore, the ratio of VP positions to total staff is not an effective measure. And, for what it's worth, there are only about 200 people working at HQ--far short of 240.

"Relieving" the association of this list of top talent and its expertise, contacts, and insights would be a serious blow to all of general aviation. While you may not recognize or appreciate their expertise, know that AOPA VPs are freqently recruited away by other aviation associations and the FAA.

BTW, one of the positions you note was eliminated several weeks ago.

There is at most one position on the above list whose salary is in the $250k range. Most of the others are well below that.
Click to expand...
Tom, I'm glad to hear, as I haven't been close to the organization since 2011 when the board of Aviation Medical Advisors resigned over Mr.Fuller's harebrained, impossible to get approved scheme and Hackman (he's IS still there) refused to hear the application that even the Yodices thought would go. Fred Tilton said he would support state CDL for super light sport. We asked Craig if he had spoken to Dr. Tilton. And Hackman said, "he didn't have to".

To Mr. Fuller it appears to be the "deal". To those of us who gave 15 years to AOPA and have the opportunity to advance the cause (get the medical OUT of Washington and OK city), "who cares about if we can get it or not?" "To ask for less wouldn't be proactive".

I have no patience for that c_ap. It took Gutierrez, Crump, Fries, and myself 5 years to get SSRIs approved. We asked for something, got support from within (Dr. Tilton was the deputy, his boss Dr. Jordan, wasn't interested) and worked continuously for something practical.

"Oh no, we can't ask for that, it wouldn't be "proactive" enough".

Doesn't matter how many you have in advocacy it they advocate the impossible.

I am HAPPY to see the payroll down from 225 (2011) to 210.
I still think the top end is bloated bloated bloated. You know who did the heavy lifting on the SSRI protocol? Luis Gutierrez. Was he a VP? Nope. He was barely paid enough to raise his family of 6 and live in West Va. So now he works for the FAA.

I have run a million dollar nonprofit, Tom. When I was board chairman (3 years) it was my duty to go with the staffer to make the pitch. The information and contact came from the staffer, but I had to make the pitch. I was Chairman. AOPA, on $45 per pilot per year, can hardly afford to do much more. Is sure don't see our fearless leader doing any of that.

Wrong model.
More Gutierrezs.
Fewer Harvey Cohens
Mores teams of six dedicated to the individual directorates.
Fewer gold plates.
More trench level expertise.
And the Boss makes the pitch. You CANNOT lead from the command tent.

The turnover that you cite is just evidence that the current model can't work.

Not that it will do any good, I just did renew. But I wrote a letter saying no how no way may Mssrs. Heintz, Trimble, and Hipp. have my proxy.


I encourage the remaining members to do the same.
Member since 1992.
 
Last edited:
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...

:yeahthat: (or, as they're now called, the Air Safety Institute)
 
TomHaines said:
Nick, I've been lurking for months and seeing/hearing the concerns and providing feedback to others on the leadership team based on what is said here.

I don't mean to come across as defensive. I'm just trying to bring some insider perspective and additional information forward that those here may not be privy to and that might help explain some of AOPA's actions.
Click to expand...

Tom,
Thanks for monitoring the concerns of pilots regarding AOPA. I started as a giant supporter for AOPA when I became a member 10 years ago. After Phil left, my impression has been that it has become more of elitist org and less concerned with the wants and concerns of the average pilot.

I welcome your debates here. Please keep it up. I hope you and AOPA can change my opinion and others about this organization.

john snapp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top