pilot_dude
En-Route
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 2,793
- Display Name
Display name:
pilot_dude
Left a couple years ago and never looked back. The only thing I miss is the mailbox full of junk mail from them. Wait, I don't miss that either.
So your position is that the association knowingly acted in bad faith, and was obligated to provide notice before expiration? If you had forgotten to renew at expiration, would a reminder during the following month have carried any urgency?
Airport is in Blue Ash (suburb of Cincinnati) but owned by Cincinnati. Blue Ash wants to build a park and golf holes on the airport property so they make moves to buy all airport land except the runway. They cite one of the options on file on the airport master plan to reconfigure the airport as such. Airport comunity gets worried as the plan they selected was rejected by the FAA because, well you can't fit an airport on that little land, but the AOPA comes in and after closed door meetings with Cincinnait and Blue Ash endorces the deal, even prints a bit in the mag stating that they have SAVED ISZ!!! Once AOPA is on board all oposition to the plan dies and the deal goes through. Land is sold and Cincinnati requestes FAA funds to reconfigure the airport and surprise of surprises the FAA says no, can't do that. March 2012 is the deadline to keep the airport, we will find out shortly if we have to find a new home.I wanna hear more about this. What happened?
Bottom line either through deliberate action or compleate incompotence the AOPA sold out my airport (one of the oldest in the world to boot) to be developed into a park, golf, and a performing arts center.
I want no part of them!
You are missing the point. AOPA has no obligation wrt my insurance. Apparently you missed the "I don't use AOPA for insurance"
Airport is in Blue Ash (suburb of Cincinnati) but owned by Cincinnati. Blue Ash wants to build a park and golf holes on the airport property so they make moves to buy all airport land except the runway. They cite one of the options on file on the airport master plan to reconfigure the airport as such. Airport comunity gets worried as the plan they selected was rejected by the FAA because, well you can't fit an airport on that little land, but the AOPA comes in and after closed door meetings with Cincinnait and Blue Ash endorces the deal, even prints a bit in the mag stating that they have SAVED ISZ!!! Once AOPA is on board all oposition to the plan dies and the deal goes through. Land is sold and Cincinnati requestes FAA funds to reconfigure the airport and surprise of surprises the FAA says no, can't do that. March 2012 is the deadline to keep the airport, we will find out shortly if we have to find a new home.
Bottom line either through deliberate action or compleate incompotence the AOPA sold out my airport (one of the oldest in the world to boot) to be developed into a park, golf, and a performing arts center.
I want no part of them!
What is AOPA's position with respect to this outcome? Do they acknowledge screwing the pooch or have a different take on the deal?
I plan to put their feet to the fire (and take them to task) this year and prove to me that they are still OUR advocates.
they don't give a rodents rear
Best of luck buddy, but for reasons stated above I'm out
I wasn't planning on renewing this year. I just am not convinced AOPA continues to represent my interests, and am unimpressed with the results of their lobbying efforts. I don't like their magazine that much, and was displeased with the unsolicited DVD.
All that said, I really don't feel they've been that big a pain with mailings or anything. Some of them have barely been on this side of loopy, though (wine club anyone?). Their occasional solicitations have not left a bad taste in my mouth at all.
LIKE!
I fully understand, Dunc. I remember the stories you were telling as the events were unfolding. I don't blame you one bit. They sold you guys out big time.
Ya think? Can anybody explain why it would be in the association's best interest to do that?
If they did and are ducking the responsibility doing so, that's obviously unacceptable. Somebody should be able to get an answer from them.
Ya think? Can anybody explain why it would be in the association's best interest to do that?
If they did and are ducking the responsibility doing so, that's obviously unacceptable. Somebody should be able to get an answer from them.
I doubt anyone would read malicious intent into their actions.
It's possible, but requires some reach without any real evidence.
The argument has been made that Boyer and Hal Shevers are on good terms and that Hals biggest competion for student pilots falls under my wrench.
Not sure I belive it though. I think that idiotic AOPA folks got suckered in by two cities that don't want the airport. But in the end it doesn't matter, they failed where it matters most, user fees and airspace issues are important but if they take away your airport what's it matter
[snip]
So, if anyone is interested in joining me then I would entertain:
1. Making this a petition/demand letter, taking electronic signatures and forwarding it along to AOPA.
and
2. Including other issues that YOU feel need to be addressed by AOPA (or issues that AOPA has) and that should be included in the letter.
Let me know, otherwise I'll just fly solo on this one.
Atleast EAA doesn't claim to be non profit
Not-for-profit is simply an IRS filing status that has little to do with profitability. Don't make the mistake of getting wrapped around the axle on that issue.
AOPA sent me lots of unsolicited things when I didn't renew, along with bills for said items.
I kept them all, I kinda like the 172/182 coin they sent me a while back. Wanted me to pay for it or send it back. Screw it, Ohio law says that if I didn't ask for it it's a gift and I don't have to pay OR return
I wouldn't think the association is so naive as to think they could bury this issue if they are in fact culpable in the airport's demise. I'm no longer active on their forum, but somebody should be able to obtain their official position on this issue.
Come on! It's only $40 a year.
Is magazine content your litmus test of the effectiveness of the organization?
I may have missed it but, unfortunately Wayne, I don't think AOPA responds to any issues brought to their attention on their forum. Many people have brought up issues like this one and the only response I've seen is crickets.
$1.00 is too much IF they're pi$$ing it away.
If the organization is doing anything of value for the members, that should be the majority of the content in the magazine.
I may have missed it but, unfortunately Wayne, I don't think AOPA responds to any issues brought to their attention on their forum. Many people have brought up issues like this one and the only response I've seen is crickets.
I remember Craig posting several times when Avweb did the smear.
$1.00 is too much IF they're pi$$ing it away.
Ron, do you know of any objective data concerning the political effectiveness of AOPA? The relentless chest-thumping and self-promotion that dominate the magazine seem to be what most people are basing their opinions on.Renew. Even if you never avail yourself of all the various member services, AOPA is our one big voice with the FAA and Congress. When Craig Fuller talks, they know he speaks for nearly half a million voters with average incomes well up in the campaign-donation player range. AOPA does more to keep flying available and affordable for us than all the other alphabets put together. Support the organization which supports you.
AOPA has a very steady and predictable income and has no need for such a huge pile of cash. Given that AOPA management also picks their own bosses, this is a classic precursor to financial malfeasance.
I remember Craig posting several times when Avweb did the smear.
Absolutely not. A high percentage of favorable lobbying efforts are never publicized, and for good reason.
Nope. Statement of fact. Unsupervised access to large amounts of money often leads to waste or theft. It would have been speculation if I had suggested that Fuller or Yodice is likely to misuse the hoard or steal from it.Speculation.
Nope. Statement of fact. Unsupervised access to large amounts of money often leads to waste or theft. It would have been speculation if I had suggested that Fuller or Yodice is likely to misuse the hoard or steal from it.
I don't think you've ever run a real business. If you had, you'd recognize the risk in the situation.How often? A real threat or "chicken little" gadfly mentality? Who says it's unsupervised? Where's the big hole in internal control that you're so worried about? How much does it take to be a "large amount" by your standards? Why would they be more likely to steal, or why would it be easier just because there's more rather than less?