Talk me out of renewing my AOPA membership

Not that a single membership at $89 would make the difference, but what if AOPA ceased to exist? What would become of the airspace and GA privileges? Would the other organizations step up, and if so would the dues be different? Would the corporate structure of EAA become different??

I really do not k is the answers, and I suspect nobody here does either.
I don’t even fly GA at this point, but still support it. I renew ever year. It’s not a huge expense.
 
Other Compensation? That’s a lot of hats and flight bags and flashlights and shirts and…..:D

Nice to see the Counselor so far down the list.

As far as the money, I’m surprised the amount is so low after reading all wailing and gnashing of teeth that goes on every time this topic comes up:rolleyes:.
 
X3 Skier said:
Other Compensation? That’s a lot of hats and flight bags and flashlights and shirts and…..:D

Nice to see the Counselor so far down the list.

As far as the money, I’m surprised the amount is so low after reading all wailing and gnashing of teeth that goes on every time this topic comes up:rolleyes:.
Click to expand...
For 40 hours of work per week, 1.5mil is still a pretty penny. He doesn't even need to show that he's actively doing anything lol. Just hoard cash a d wave at the crowd a few times a year.
 
SoonerAviator said:
For 40 hours of work per week, 1.5mil is still a pretty penny. He doesn't even need to show that he's actively doing anything lol. Just hoard cash a d wave at the crowd a few times a year.
Click to expand...
I’m calling BS on 40 hours per week… I’m sure they’re doing more than that - especially Finance and IT (but probably the rest too)
 
kaiser said:
I’m calling BS on 40 hours per week… I’m sure they’re doing more than that - especially Finance and IT (but probably the rest too)
Click to expand...
You'd think, but that's all that was claimed on the disclosure
 
SoonerAviator said:
You'd think, but that's all that was claimed on the disclosure
Click to expand...
I wonder if they’re not really allowed to disclose more than 40. I’m not saying AOPA is complex, but it’s embedded in our culture.
 
I can't think of any CEO that actually works a 40 hour week. The cash hoard drives far more questions for me than the $1.5 mil.
 
For everyone talking about keeping congress critters lobbied (i.e. bribed) and that's why we need the letter organizations...

Senator Manchin and others in there are GA pilots. It's in their personal interests to help GA. I'm only mentioning Manchin because I've been in a pattern and an FBO with him before but I know there are others. We need more pilots in DC and to support the ones we have moreso than we need to worry about the bribes/lobbyists.
 
Todd82 said:
For everyone talking about keeping congress critters lobbied (i.e. bribed) and that's why we need the letter organizations...

Senator Manchin and others in there are GA pilots. It's in their personal interests to help GA. I'm only mentioning Manchin because I've been in a pattern and an FBO with him before but I know there are others. We need more pilots in DC and to support the ones we have moreso than we need to worry about the bribes/lobbyists.
Click to expand...
Maybe AOPA should use their cash hoard to help pay for more Congress critters to get their Private ratings and we'll have more "guys/gals on the inside".
 
Well, $110M would train 11,000 new pilots at $10,000 each. AOPA could train a few hundred congresscritters and big chunk of FAA's 48,000 employees as well.
 
airdale said:
Well, $110M would train 11,000 new pilots at $10,000 each. AOPA could train a few hundred congresscritters and big chunk of FAA's 48,000 employees as well.
Click to expand...

but are they trainable?

do they have good character?

(now I'm in trouble....)
 
What is 'work'?

Are most heavily well compensated CEOs sitting in a cubicle from 9-5 everyday, absolutely not. Are they critical decision makers that set the tone and pace and direction for the company? Yes

Who cares what they're paid. Good for them!


**I'm just not sure aopa does that much to be honest. It's like if we all carried elephant repellent spray in our car and were told that that is why we can drive around without hitting elephants all the time.

No, US aviation is not at all comparable to anywhere in the world. I highly doubt that is purely because of aopa. The Wright brothers took to the skies and we've as a cultural identity always held certain ideals. Their [AOPA] founding message was not even initially to protect our rights to fly. If you look at the initial charitable organization goals they were based out of a country club with the goals of improving safety and growing pilot population while improving the airports and being a positive image for GA.. EAA and AvWeb do a lot more to that end

Does anyone here actually believe part 91 aviation would be revoked without aopa?
 
Pugs said:
After almost 40 years of working with or for the government it's very clear that the number of gov't people who will bear any sort of risk is very close to zero. It's not that they are bad people (well most) but the gov't system discourages them from taking risks to either their careers or their organization. Their rules are their rules, no matter how byzantine, and they will follow their interpretation of them that is least risky.
Click to expand...
Exactly - for an issue of import the agencies are generally NOT the place to start - elected reps are where the movement can be achieved. Direct cooperation is fine for issues in the an agency's comfort zone. But for a major issue, one that "scares" them, the change needs to be imposed. Sometimes they even (secretly) prefer that. Doesn't mean professional cooperation and even good relationships have to go away, but you gotta be willing to pick a fight when it matters - these are usually professionals who can agree to disagree and let the knobs on capital hill or the courts weigh in. You don't have to win every, or even most, fights - but the willingness to be raise Hell can move the bar on how an agency responds. AOPA may be a little too timid.
 
SoonerAviator said:
That's my main problem with the claim that "they have the biggest voice" for lobbying. Says who? AOPA? There's no substantive evidence that Mark Baker or the rest of AOPA has any more pull in Congress than EAA or any number of aviation outlets. They may very well be a reason why GA rights have been protected, but they do such a ****-poor job of detailing what they are currently working on and who they are working with that it's hard to say they are doing anything at all.

The cash hoard is unnecessary for a group of their size. They have little reason to increase annual dues when their numbers are dwindling and they have less appeal to small GA. Granted, the little guy is not who their target audience is, as business jets generally pay for the airport operations. AOPA could at least pretend that they are trying to keep our interests at the forefront. Instead they'll resurrect the wine club or something lol.
Click to expand...
I admit I have only read about half of this thread so I thought I would give you my perspective on AOPA at this time. In 2004 I got back into flying and my wife took flying lessons for the first time. During that year I earned my private pilots license and we bought an airplane that I finished my training in and we kept and flew for 14 years.

Back in 2004 AOPA was a major advocate to help me make the decisions necessary to buy an airplane. They had purchasing advice and tutorials, they had purchasing appraisal arrangements and financing, and they had flight insurance. Now granted all these various services were in various different sections of AOPA but all of them were opened to me with my membership card. Fast forward 15 years, and none of these services were readily available or at competitive pricing enough to make it worthwhile for me to use AOPA for any part of my next airplane purchase. It's like they have forgotten that we exist and still want their help.

I do still currently have an AOPA membership but the only perk that I see, and it's not really that much of a perk, is the legal aid part of the membership. Rental cars from airports are expensive and AOPA membership doesn't really do much for that. AOPA aircraft insurance isn't any better than you can get anywhere else and they don't call you back readily. AOPA aircraft financing might as well not even exist, I went through a third party aviation loan broker to purchase my bird.

When you call them the friendly helpful people that you talked to a decade ago don't answer the phone, don't know anything, and don't care. From a point of view of customer service I would give them a zero except for renewing your membership, in which case they do that exceptionally well. Maybe they're advocacy is good and they are doing the things they say but how do you know? From the few times I have contacted them for specialized services that they at one time promoted, they appear to be a broken organization. I must not be the only one that sees it that way because they're down from a high of 400,000 members to about 250,000. Those numbers indicate that there is something seriously wrong with AOPA
 
William Pete Hodges said:
I admit I have only read about half of this thread so I thought I would give you my perspective on AOPA at this time. In 2004 I got back into flying and my wife took flying lessons for the first time. During that year I earned my private pilots license and we bought an airplane that I finished my training in and we kept and flew for 14 years.

Back in 2004 AOPA was a major advocate to help me make the decisions necessary to buy an airplane. They had purchasing advice and tutorials, they had purchasing appraisal arrangements and financing, and they had flight insurance. Now granted all these various services were in various different sections of AOPA but all of them were opened to me with my membership card. Fast forward 15 years, and none of these services were readily available or at competitive pricing enough to make it worthwhile for me to use AOPA for any part of my next airplane purchase. It's like they have forgotten that we exist and still want their help.

I do still currently have an AOPA membership but the only perk that I see, and it's not really that much of a perk, is the legal aid part of the membership. Rental cars from airports are expensive and AOPA membership doesn't really do much for that. AOPA aircraft insurance isn't any better than you can get anywhere else and they don't call you back readily. AOPA aircraft financing might as well not even exist, I went through a third party aviation loan broker to purchase my bird.

When you call them the friendly helpful people that you talked to a decade ago don't answer the phone, don't know anything, and don't care. From a point of view of customer service I would give them a zero except for renewing your membership, in which case they do that exceptionally well. Maybe they're advocacy is good and they are doing the things they say but how do you know? From the few times I have contacted them for specialized services that they at one time promoted, they appear to be a broken organization. I must not be the only one that sees it that way because they're down from a high of 400,000 members to about 250,000. Those numbers indicate that there is something seriously wrong with AOPA
Click to expand...
I have had a similar experience in a mostly identical time frame. I had student/renters insurance through them while doing the Private training in '07-'08. Liked a lot of the magazine (both regular and training) and the red forum was mostly helpful. Used vRef while tire kicking and such. Outside of that, AOPA was just a $40/year charge. Fast forward, they aren't worth anything for insurance, the magazine went digital unless you want to pay extra, and they killed the red forum all for $60+/year.

The value disappeared and they do a terrible job of showing their advocacy efforts. I let it lapse last November but still get their junk mail and email notices.
 
SoonerAviator said:
The value disappeared and they do a terrible job of showing their advocacy efforts. I let it lapse last November but still get their junk mail and email notices.
Click to expand...

A well placed phone call will stop the junk mail and the renewal requests. I still get the digest email from their "AOPA Pilot Information Center" but there's usually not much to see there. I've watched the transition they have made over the years and decided to not be a partner in crime anymore ...
 
SoonerAviator said:
You'd think, but that's all that was claimed on the disclosure
Click to expand...

That is how most report hours for salaried staff. They are "paid to work 40 hours" but work what they need to work to do the job. Since they are not compensated specifically for those extra hours, there is no reporting of them.

I don't know of many, if any, supervisory people that work only 40 hours.
 
Daleandee said:
A well placed phone call will stop the junk mail and the renewal requests. I still get the digest email from their "AOPA Pilot Information Center" but there's usually not much to see there. I've watched the transition they have made over the years and decided to not be a partner in crime anymore ...
Click to expand...

What drives me nuts is junk mail about membership or to purchase something from groups I already belong to, or for a product that I already bought, FROM THEM.
 
I remember years ago thinking about this perhaps natural tendency to begrudge or be jealous of the high pay that CEO's and high level folks bring in...
Us people in the mid or lower levels often don't think of the sometime enormous stress that's on these folks, often 24/7
While I'm worried about paying my mortgage...they are (indirectly) worried about maybe thousands of employees being able to pay their mortgages and rents...
still, I think it's often that these folks have it better than they deserve...by a long shot
 
Brad W said:
I remember years ago thinking about this perhaps natural tendency to begrudge or be jealous of the high pay that CEO's and high level folks bring in...
Us people in the mid or lower levels often don't think of the sometime enormous stress that's on these folks, often 24/7
While I'm worried about paying my mortgage...they are (indirectly) worried about maybe thousands of employees being able to pay their mortgages and rents...
still, I think it's often that these folks have it better than they deserve...by a long shot
Click to expand...

I think you are giving some of them far too much credit... not all, but some
 
Bob Noel said:
I think you are giving some of them far too much credit... not all, but some
Click to expand...

100% agreed. The amount of CEOs at that level of pay who sit around worrying about thousands of employees on a weekly basis is probably so small as to be at the statistical-noise level. They spend their time worrying about strategic initiatives and how to drive more profit (as they should). They generally know they are only one public slip-up away from losing their 7-figure incomes, so if they are worried about somebody, it's themselves. I don't say that as saying they aren't deserving of high compensation, just that their motives and worries aren't markedly different from those employees at the mid-level. They just play cards at a table with higher limits.
 
Pinecone said:
That is how most report hours for salaried staff. They are "paid to work 40 hours" but work what they need to work to do the job. Since they are not compensated specifically for those extra hours, there is no reporting of them.

I don't know of many, if any, supervisory people that work only 40 hours.
Click to expand...

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek about what was on the disclosure, it just didn't come across that well I guess. No one in the tax/accounting department is having the executive staff add up their weekly working hours to enter on the required disclosures. They just put a standard amount and go on about their business unless there's a specific reason not to.
 
SoonerAviator said:
100% agreed. The amount of CEOs at that level of pay who sit around worrying about thousands of employees on a weekly basis is probably so small as to be at the statistical-noise level. They spend their time worrying about strategic initiatives and how to drive more profit (as they should). They generally know they are only one public slip-up away from losing their 7-figure incomes, so if they are worried about somebody, it's themselves. I don't say that as saying they aren't deserving of high compensation, just that their motives and worries aren't markedly different from those employees at the mid-level. They just play cards at a table with higher limits.
Click to expand...

The best book I've ever read about the difference a solid CEO can make was "American Icon" about Alan Mullaly's time at Ford. Really shows you what vision and leadership can do for a company on the brink of disaster and why these guys earn their pay. Very readable and if you are interested in the auto industry another plus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally and the book @ https://www.amazon.com/American-Icon-Mulally-Fight-Company/dp/0307886069
 
SoonerAviator said:
100% agreed. The amount of CEOs at that level of pay who sit around worrying about thousands of employees on a weekly basis is probably so small as to be at the statistical-noise level. They spend their time worrying about strategic initiatives and how to drive more profit (as they should). They generally know they are only one public slip-up away from losing their 7-figure incomes, so if they are worried about somebody, it's themselves. I don't say that as saying they aren't deserving of high compensation, just that their motives and worries aren't markedly different from those employees at the mid-level. They just play cards at a table with higher limits.
Click to expand...
I meant (and wrote) that to be INDIRECTLY worrying about those employees.
Of course they aren't worried about Bill or Nancy or Tom....
It's the pressure from lots of different angles basically to keep the company going strong (which enables Bill and Nancy and Tom to pay their rents...) while at the same time making the investors happy and the board happy and the union happy and so on.... and much of that is complete nonsense...but pressure none the less. Also worrying about stuff they can't really control but still the buck stops on their desk.... etc.

and as I said before. still, I think it's often that these folks have it better than they deserve...by a long shot
 
I won't quibble about the AOPA CEO salary; it's in the range of an approprite number.

What I will quibble about is whether Baker is doing a good enough job to earn it. The membership has been falling, dues have been increasing, benefits have been reduced, all while there's a huge surplus of cash. This is mismanagement. I think for the same salary we could have someone who would perform better.
 
Half Fast said:
I won't quibble about the AOPA CEO salary; it's in the range of an approprite number.

What I will quibble about is whether Baker is doing a good enough job to earn it. The membership has been falling, dues have been increasing, benefits have been reduced, all while there's a huge surplus of cash. This is mismanagement. I think for the same salary we could have someone who would perform better.
Click to expand...
I like this thinking. 1.5M to run a big org isn't like a ton of money, but, since their main success going forward is dues paying members, they do a poor job at looking at price sensitivity and that they keep raising it so much likely loses them more members than they make up in the higher fees.

They could offer a "digital only" subscription for $45-50 instead of $89 with magazine and while some would downgrade, you'd be able to sign up a whole bunch of pilots who don't want to pay 100, but would pay 50. I'd be shocked if they haven't done this reasearch, but I am surprised that the "cheap" option is $90 and that there's nothing lower except the student deal.
 
Why has no one during there 40 hour work week posted here? I removed my auto renewal and am on the fence i read the magazine in 5 minutes cover to cover not much content except the board’s editorials in the front of mag. I want to support an activity i love and do what i can to preserve and make it better for the future.
 
Jim K said:
They're starting to sweeten the pot

Except I neither need nor want a ballcap.
Click to expand...

I received the same offer but they can keep the hat, I don't want it. I'll probably renew but I wish they hadn't raised the dues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top