Should I join AOPA?

I joined as a student pilot because there was a cheap deal, and I got (and liked) Flight Training magazine. I renew now because I think any advocacy we can get in Washington is a good thing, and there are some other benefits that I keep meaning to explore.

They do, however, send the amount of crap junk mail for this and that sort of insurance that you will see from a lot of other organizations, as well as solicitations for more money for every program that they can dream up. I really wish they'd stop that and use my membership dollars the way I intended, rather than wasting it sending me crap that goes straight to the recycle bin. I probably need to do what I did with NRA, which was to write a letter telling them to stop or I'd drop my membership. It worked.

The magazine is OK... just OK. I like Sport Pilot (I'm an EAA member also) a LOT more. I really couldn't care less about the newest business turbine or who's putting a G5000 panel worth as much as my house in their latest multi-bazillion dollar jet. I suppose if I were chief pilot for a charter company, or a corporate guy, it might be more interesting, and I know there are a lot of those guys out there.
 
I'd like to see more coverage on the care of older cessna and piper style planes. Maybe walk thru how to buy a plane. I like the idea of doing plane reports on older planes. How has this model aged over time. Is it worth looking at a 1966 Piper Cherokee or not. I know hat the advertising market may not want you to focus on older planes, but it's still a bigger part of your readership.

I'd like to see more destination and human interest pieces. To me, this is that thing that is the hardest to convey over the Internet.

I think that looking at your forums, you could jump in and expand on the discussion. There's a hot topic on CFI liability for BFR's You could get the legal department to weigh in. I'm sure there are many folks who'd love to see the nuts and bolts of flying outside to US. You could do a piece on flying to the Bahamas and video the process.

I think your magazine is worth it and I can tell that you and your staff have been improving it. I realize it's tough to satisfy everyone, every issue. I like the pieces on turbines and I get the turbine version of your magazine. Jay doesn't. I get it.








Jay Honeck said:
I will take a swing at this one.

We need to keep the focus on grass roots stuff in the magazine. I know these are harder to obtain/write, but that is where most of your readership is.

Examples/Suggestions:

1. Aviation entrepreneurs. I am obviously prejudiced, but the articles you wrote about everyday people making a living in, or on the periphery, of aviation (Julie Boatman wrote about our Iowa hotel in 2004) were fascinating.

There are SO many aviation fanatics, willing to do all sorts of bizarre things, just to remain attached to this avocation we all love. Their stories make great reading.

2. Flight reports. Why have I been unable to find a professionally written flight review of my new ride, the RV-8A? It's one of the best-flying aircraft ever made, and a quick Google search turns up no AOPA articles. Why?

Articles on flying SpaceShipOne don't count. lol

3. Software reviews. These are hard to write, but we've got tablet threads here that go on for hundreds of posts. Obviously the interest is high.

I was happy to finally see the article on Android (p. 36, June) in the cockpit. Many of us have adopted the Google Nexus 7/GDL-39 combo for in flight nav/weather/traffic. It would be great to see a head-to-head comparison between this tablet and the iPad mini, for example.

I'm sure others will have more suggestions. I like the magazine, and from what I've seen lately it seems you are trying to focus more on GA these days, which is good. Unless I missed it, there wasn't a single article in the June issue on turbine-powered aircraft -- good job! :D
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DaleB said:
The magazine is OK... just OK. I like Sport Pilot (I'm an EAA member also) a LOT more. I really couldn't care less about the newest business turbine or who's putting a G5000 panel worth as much as my house in their latest multi-bazillion dollar jet. I suppose if I were chief pilot for a charter company, or a corporate guy, it might be more interesting, and I know there are a lot of those guys out there.
Click to expand...

And they have AOPA turbine pilot magazine as well seems kind of redundant.
 
I would like to see AOPA's membership decline until the Board pushes the "Reset" button and turns the organization back into what it claims to be. Then I'll rejoin.


  • AOPA does not need jets, dog treats (aka "Pilot Chews"), or high paid guys traveling around DC in limousines.
  • The companies that comprise our industry do not need AOPA competing in flight planning software, simulation hardware, or any other arena that is already well-served.
  • The members do not need their money ($75M) pi$$ed away through hare-brained venture capital schemes.
  • The sweepstakes airplane serves no AOPA purpose, marketing or otherwise except being a toy for some of the staff and filler for the magazine.
  • No one needs the greed that spawned the unneeded dues increase or the elimination of the economical legal services plan and free medical support in favor of an expensive upsell package.
  • No one needs the "AOPA Plus" membership, which is basically a member intelligence test. Buy one and you've flunked.
The magazine has some potential if it could be stripped of the self-aggrandizing puffery and endless pictures of the organization's president. As for editorial content, I agree that the book should lose the jets and concentrate on what the vast majority of members really fly. Granted, this might reduce ad revenue but so what? AOPA is rolling in dough.

For replacement content, Tom, you only have to look at Belvoir. Deliver a blend of Aviation Consumer, IFR Refresher, and maybe some tutorial content like a survey of the many magic glare-shield boxes being sold these days. An every-six-month report on the flight planning software horse race, with a tabular feature comparison would be good. (This assuming that the ill-conceived and completely unneeded AOPA product is ditched.) A little less editorial bashing of Avemco would be good, too. If the insurance agency wants to hustle the membership, ditch the advertorials and tell them to do their own direct mailing.
 
Sac Arrow said:
It's like anything else. If they have a service you can use, knock yourself out. I only joined for one reason - to have online access to weather and airport data. Which obviously isn't a factor these days. When I joined, they were the only game in town.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
Sounds like AARP

for their come-on, they do offer to reduce my car/home insurance to 2/3 of present; but I should suspect that's only a 1 year "come-on" price like the DSL, Cable, and banks use?
 
airdale said:
I would like to see AOPA's membership decline until the Board pushes the "Reset" button and turns the organization back into what it claims to be. Then I'll rejoin.
Click to expand...

There is the reason not to. Just say no to AOPA.
 
ClimbnSink said:
There is the reason not to. Just say no to AOPA.
Click to expand...


Once they get ahold of your name and address it seems like they never stop sending you stuff, no matter how long you ignore the rewal notices.
 
airdale said:
I would like to see AOPA's membership decline until the Board pushes the "Reset" button and turns the organization back into what it claims to be. Then I'll rejoin.


  • AOPA does not need jets, dog treats (aka "Pilot Chews"), or high paid guys traveling around DC in limousines.
  • The companies that comprise our industry do not need AOPA competing in flight planning software, simulation hardware, or any other arena that is already well-served.
  • The members do not need their money ($75M) pi$$ed away through hare-brained venture capital schemes.
  • The sweepstakes airplane serves no AOPA purpose, marketing or otherwise except being a toy for some of the staff and filler for the magazine.
  • No one needs the greed that spawned the unneeded dues increase or the elimination of the economical legal services plan and free medical support in favor of an expensive upsell package.
  • No one needs the "AOPA Plus" membership, which is basically a member intelligence test. Buy one and you've flunked.
The magazine has some potential if it could be stripped of the self-aggrandizing puffery and endless pictures of the organization's president. As for editorial content, I agree that the book should lose the jets and concentrate on what the vast majority of members really fly. Granted, this might reduce ad revenue but so what? AOPA is rolling in dough.

For replacement content, Tom, you only have to look at Belvoir. Deliver a blend of Aviation Consumer, IFR Refresher, and maybe some tutorial content like a survey of the many magic glare-shield boxes being sold these days. An every-six-month report on the flight planning software horse race, with a tabular feature comparison would be good. (This assuming that the ill-conceived and completely unneeded AOPA product is ditched.) A little less editorial bashing of Avemco would be good, too. If the insurance agency wants to hustle the membership, ditch the advertorials and tell them to do their own direct mailing.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Excellent post! :thumbsup:
 
bnt83 said:
Once they get ahold of your name and address it seems like they never stop sending you stuff, no matter how long you ignore the rewal notices.
Click to expand...

How true. I've tried to get my name and address as well as my email address off of their system, yet I'm still inundated with their pleas of rejoining and buying their crap.
 
bnt83 said:
Once they get ahold of your name and address it seems like they never stop sending you stuff, no matter how long you ignore the rewal notices.
Click to expand...

Bounce a few checks:lol: They almost never bother me anymore, couple of letters per year. Dunno if there is something in their database ie credit ratings, current medicals, registered airplanes, that let some drop off the hassle list faster then others.
 
Brad Z said:
I think some folks on here confuse the advocacy side of the house with the development side of the organization.

The development folks sole job is to raise money. Advertising, sponsorships, product alliances, etc. For every product you poo-poo, there's another member out there ready to jump on it. Some of it is annoying, some not. Their mission is to provide the revenue that allows the organization to do their core work.

All of the advocacy folks I've interacted with are very dedicated. At my job at a Federal Agency many of you know and love dearly, I work with several AOPA alumni who generally have good things to say about their former employer. Most folks left the organization because the Feds pay better, while others left for commuting reasons.

As far as influence, I can't speak to their influence on the hill, but within my agency, AOPA = GA, just as A4A = airlines, AAAE = Airports, etc. When AOPA sends a letter, it gets answered. When we go out to industry about an issue that involves GA, AOPA gets invited.

Influence on the hill has more to do with $$ than anything else. That's no secret.
Click to expand...


Well said, I continue to be an AOPA member, along with a few other type clubs. All provide something a bit different and worth every dollar.
 
Another comment on the magazines.

Quit allowing advertisements that are total scams with the goal of screwing your membership. Cloraxin is one of these (IMO). I called about this company in January of 2012 and was told by the magazine ad dept that "our ad revenues are important to us also".

Translation: "We don't care if they're screwing the members who are stupid enough to buy their product as long as they pay for their advertising space".

What's next? A strategic partnership with Barron Thomas?

AOPA owes its membership a bit more than this.
 
timwinters said:
3EX remained open due to the efforts of local pilots. AOPA was AWOL.

ISZ closed. AOPA was AWOL.

I let my membership lapse last year when they placed an unauthorized charge on my card. I cancelled auto renew, called a few weeks later to confirm it was cancelled, and yet, when the time came, I auto renewed. This wasn't the whole reason...nowhere near it...just the final straw.

So, I re-upped when it was announced that Craig was leaving...thought it was time for a big celebration!

BTW...why is he still there?
Click to expand...

I wish AOPA had been AWOL, ISZ would likely be open today had they been
 
Okay, Dunc, I stand corrected. AOPA blessed the kiss of death plan.

Is that closer?
 
timwinters said:
Okay, Dunc, I stand corrected. AOPA blessed the kiss of death plan.

Is that closer?
Click to expand...

That is spot on, and once they blessed it all were blind to the fact that the closure was spelled out in the plan blessed by the almighty, all knowing, AOPA.

Someone once asked on CPS if they should renew, another poster responded to the effect of "if you are better off for AOPA renew"

Well for me the answer is easy, a big HELL NO!
 
SkyHog said:
Also - 99% of AOPA members don't care about the newest business jet on the market. I seem to remember an issue about a year ago that was 100% dedicated to the PC12 and how awesome it was.

It sure is awesome. But as a GA pilot that flies Cherokees and Skyhawks, why would I want an organization that represents me telling me how awesome a plane I'll never fly is?

Do you think that Harley Magazines include articles on 18-Wheel Long Haul Hazmat Trucks?
Click to expand...

That's how I feel.
 
bnt83 said:
Once they get ahold of your name and address it seems like they never stop sending you stuff, no matter how long you ignore the rewal notices.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, what happens if you change your address? Do they continue to accost the pour souls at the old address? I mean, say you changed it to...oh, I dunno...1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500?
 
jpower said:
Just out of curiosity, what happens if you change your address? Do they continue to accost the pour souls at the old address? I mean, say you changed it to...oh, I dunno...1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500?
Click to expand...

I had mailers at my new address before I moved in. No, I'm not kidding.

Apparently my wife did a change of address thingy at the post office, seems the only people who noticed were the folks I didn't want to.
 
Original question: Should I join AOPA?
Answer: No.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
I had mailers at my new address before I moved in. No, I'm not kidding.

Apparently my wife did a change of address thingy at the post office, seems the only people who noticed were the folks I didn't want to.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they have followed me through two address changes since I cancelled, they even were sending me stuff to one address before I had a chance to change my address with the FAA.:mad2:

It is finally tapering off but it has taken YEARS

Oh and FWIW I save the prepaid envelopes and send them as much of my junk mail as I can cram in there.
 
AOPA's huge member fee also gives a wide range of "free" safety seminars online, I've taken most and the review is always worth the small amount of time it takes. They help qualify for FAA Wings credit which then qualifies participants for certain insurance deductions, not to mention their primary function.

I forgot about Flight Training mag, free for students, and the great amount of materials they send CFIs in the form of teaching aids year after year. Most non-CFIs probably aren't even aware of those free resources, which even more importantly, are also used to help entice new flight students to GA.
 
I got an email from AOPA today about "new" webinars.

Looked like same stuff as ASF. Without FAA Wings credit.

I didn't have the heart to email the announcement address back and ask Why?

Looked to me like they want to mimic EAA webinars (which have been very good, BTW... they're using GoToMeeting and it works well on the iPad), without paying any attention to the fact that they could do it under the ASF umbrella instead of a separate "new" thing.

Did look like they'd be doing some non-safety related ones in the future.

Not applying for Wings credit and passing the info into Wings is just a sign that it's totally half-baked.
 
For the modest cost, I think membership offers enough value.

The magazine is good enough for the price. I read it all. The photos are nice. The best articles are those that relate to piloting and ownership of piston engine planes. An article about a cross country trip taken by a pilot is best, but doesn't happen often enough. The same for articles of interest to experimental owners or wannabe owners. Weather forecasting products that are free would make a good story, but it would take an effort, unlike a story about a new commercial product that is spoon fed by the vendor. An article about maintenance or used plane shopping is good, too. Safety articles usually relate well. Articles about turbines and spaceship one, not so much -- although if it involves a memorable character like Burt Rutan I'll read it.

It's supposed to be an association of piston airplane owners and pilots, and if the magazine would tweak its content to stick close to those interests, it would be more than just "good enough for the price." The same for the whole organization.
 
Last edited:
Where did you get the idea that the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association was supposed to be restricted to only, as you stated:

"It's supposed to be an association of piston airplane owners and pilots," ....?

NoHeat said:
For the modest cost, I think membership offers enough value.

The magazine is good enough for the price. I read it all. The photos are nice. The best articles are those that relate to piloting and ownership of piston engine planes. An article about a cross country trip taken by a pilot is best, but doesn't happen often enough. The same for articles of interest to experimental owners or wannabe owners. Weather forecasting products that are free would make a good story, but it would take an effort, unlike a story about a new commercial product that is spoon fed by the vendor. An article about maintenance or used plane shopping is good, too. Safety articles usually relate well. Articles about turbines and spaceship one, not so much -- although if it involves a memorable character like Burt Rutan I'll read it.

It's supposed to be an association of piston airplane owners and pilots, and if the magazine would tweak its content to stick close to those interests, it would be more than just "good enough for the price." The same for the whole organization.
Click to expand...
 
I do cut AOPA some slack because they try to serve ALL of GA. That's a lot of territory to cover. And, while hanging around our local FBO indicates there are probably 10 private pilots flying old airplanes for every corporate jet jockey or guy with a Pilatus or Eclipse (or even a King Air), the spending is probably tilted a little in the other direction.

So who's going to be the top priority for advertisers - the guy renting from the FBO, the guy with the 1960s vintage Bo or 182, or the guy whose annual aviation budget is in the six or seven (or more) figures? That's easy to figure out. The tougher question is, how is the organization as a whole going to find any balance?
 
DaleB said:
I do cut AOPA some slack because they try to serve ALL of GA. That's a lot of territory to cover. And, while hanging around our local FBO indicates there are probably 10 private pilots flying old airplanes for every corporate jet jockey or guy with a Pilatus or Eclipse (or even a King Air), the spending is probably tilted a little in the other direction.

So who's going to be the top priority for advertisers - the guy renting from the FBO, the guy with the 1960s vintage Bo or 182, or the guy whose annual aviation budget is in the six or seven (or more) figures? That's easy to figure out. The tougher question is, how is the organization as a whole going to find any balance?
Click to expand...

I don't care which segment of ga gets served in the mag, what have they done for the little guy in congress. I don't feel freer.
 
I cancelled years ago and my mailman (who, by the way, I've had for almost 20 years) still thanks me for the better fuel economy in his truck for not having to haul AOPA's junk mail.
 
Long in the works, AOPA and EAA just submitted a bill to allow pilots to use their DL in lieu of the standard medical, see today's AvWeb.
 
TomHaines said:
What would be your recommendations for improving the magazine?
Click to expand...

First, I am on the cusp of reinstating my AOPA membership after a lapse of some years based on this and your other posts. You cannot imagine the credibility this sort of outreach gives your organization. Well done.

Since you asked, I suppose I should give my version of an answer. Of course the magazine is horribly written like most aviation periodicals, though I suspect that is well beyond the organization's ability to fix and might be counterproductive if they did. Obviously the magazine is going to try and feature stories about the new, most magazines will. The problem is anything new in aviation is usually un-Odinly expensive, and thus not available to the majority of the readership. Keep in mind the majority of the readership is on the lower end of things, since the majority of people are on the lower end of things.

On a more general note, either very publicly justify the jet financially or loose it. Damn thing's an albatross when you're asking a guy like me for money. Lots of info out there on what the membership thinks, the board and its officers would be well advised to listen and very publicly respond. The organization that doesn't respond to its membership risks extinction.
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
Long in the works, AOPA and EAA just submitted a bill to allow pilots to use their DL in lieu of the standard medical, see today's AvWeb.
Click to expand...

Sorry to be picky, but AOPA and EAA are not congresspeople, and cannot submit bills in the US Congress. Only politicians can do that.
 
steingar said:
You cannot imagine the credibility this sort of outreach gives your organization. Well done.
Keep in mind the majority of the readership is on the lower end of things, since the majority of people are on the lower end of things.

On a more general note, either very publicly justify the jet financially or loose it. Damn thing's an albatross when you're asking a guy like me for money. Lots of info out there on what the membership thinks, the board and its officers would be well advised to listen and very publicly respond. The organization that doesn't respond to its membership risks extinction.
Click to expand...

Well said.
I too am about ready to reinstate a membership I resigned after more than ten years when a miserable AME on the forum overstepped his bounds and got nasty. Seems they finally trimmed his wings and I've between schooled on the fact that nothing gets done in DC without money, lots of money. Only the AOPA is in position to collect the funds and get the job done. If the stupid magazine caters to TBM owners, so be it. They seem to have some covers recently that reflect at least an acknowledgement that there is a lot more to GA. Time to give them our support in these ugly times when DC is going to hell in a handbag. What else have we got? The EAA is a joke. They change personnel monthly. The sooner Pober Jr.gets out of the way the better. Until they pull their head out we have AOPA, and they have the know-how in DC.
As the old saying goes, united we stand - divided we fall......:dunno:
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
Sorry to be picky, but AOPA and EAA are not congresspeople, and cannot submit bills in the US Congress. Only politicians can do that.
Click to expand...

You are no doubt correct, I thought of that after posting and defer to the AVweb article for more accurate particulars.
 
steingar said:
On a more general note, either very publicly justify the jet financially or loose it. Damn thing's an albatross when you're asking a guy like me for money. Lots of info out there on what the membership thinks, the board and its officers would be well advised to listen and very publicly respond. The organization that doesn't respond to its membership risks extinction.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. It is this sort of profligate spending that REALLY ticks off members of a "grassroots" organization.

Remember Phil Boyer's Golden Parachute? Over $4 million, as I recall, when he retired? (I could be wrong on the dollar amount.). THAT very nearly caused me to cancel.

No one likes to feel duped by an organization they willingly joined with the hopes of bettering GA.
 
Here's a suggestion for AOPA. Promote the Sport Pilot and LSA more to everyone involved or interested in aviation, especially the flight schools. 9 years later after Sport Pilot/LSA was born, the number of flight schools across the U.S. that have sport pilot programs, including flight schools dedicated to sport pilot training, is scattered at best. I'm at a flight school now that is dedicated to sport pilot, and even though it is over an hour drive from my home, I love the LSA I train in, and my CFI is a great instructor. Promoting LSA and Sport Pilot and encouraging flight schools to incorporate a SP program into their curriculum is something AOPA should look into. With less regulatory burden for less cost and less time, I think this is a way to get the non-flying public into aviation and flying.
 
Thanks for the constructive comments. They are appreciated and helpful.


NoHeat said:
For the modest cost, I think membership offers enough value.

The magazine is good enough for the price. I read it all. The photos are nice. The best articles are those that relate to piloting and ownership of piston engine planes. An article about a cross country trip taken by a pilot is best, but doesn't happen often enough. The same for articles of interest to experimental owners or wannabe owners. Weather forecasting products that are free would make a good story, but it would take an effort, unlike a story about a new commercial product that is spoon fed by the vendor. An article about maintenance or used plane shopping is good, too. Safety articles usually relate well. Articles about turbines and spaceship one, not so much -- although if it involves a memorable character like Burt Rutan I'll read it.

It's supposed to be an association of piston airplane owners and pilots, and if the magazine would tweak its content to stick close to those interests, it would be more than just "good enough for the price." The same for the whole organization.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the comments, although if you could explain the "horribly written" comment in more detail, that would be more helpful.

We would welcome you back.

steingar said:
First, I am on the cusp of reinstating my AOPA membership after a lapse of some years based on this and your other posts. You cannot imagine the credibility this sort of outreach gives your organization. Well done.

Since you asked, I suppose I should give my version of an answer. Of course the magazine is horribly written like most aviation periodicals, though I suspect that is well beyond the organization's ability to fix and might be counterproductive if they did. Obviously the magazine is going to try and feature stories about the new, most magazines will. The problem is anything new in aviation is usually un-Odinly expensive, and thus not available to the majority of the readership. Keep in mind the majority of the readership is on the lower end of things, since the majority of people are on the lower end of things.

On a more general note, either very publicly justify the jet financially or loose it. Damn thing's an albatross when you're asking a guy like me for money. Lots of info out there on what the membership thinks, the board and its officers would be well advised to listen and very publicly respond. The organization that doesn't respond to its membership risks extinction.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top