Letters to the Editor
Well Read
This is to let you know when I receive my Model Aviation (MA) it gets read from the first page to the last ad and all. Thanks to all for their great effort in keeping us all informed of the latest.
Walt Brooks Tigard, Oregon
A Different Experience
I just read Mike Hurley's RC Scale Aerobatics column in the November issue of Model Aviation. He has been following Chuck Hobart around as a newcomer to the sport and has a Q&A in the article. Chuck makes a most unfortunate comment regarding the unfriendly reception he received at a Pattern contest a few years back.
I don't believe that Mike intended to malign the NSRCA and I don't doubt Chuck's experience. I just found it sad that the NSRCA would get the negative press.
This past September I spent several hours as a visitor at the Milan, Michigan, Pattern contest to see what the sport is all about. I am considering joining the NSRCA and getting involved in Pattern competition. I don't think I have met a nicer group of people, especially when you consider that everyone was busy competing. Each and every person that I spoke with took the time to answer my questions in a friendly and thoughtful way. Even the contest director took time to talk with me in the middle of the contest and it wasn't just a five-minute chat. Based on my experience I have every intention of joining the NSRCA.
I hope the contrast of these two stories can be of some help to the organization.
Tom Shaw via E-mail
Corporate Integrity
Several years ago, you may recall, a U.S. corporation called Microsoft was found guilty of violating certain antitrust statutes because of a practice now referred to as bundling. Competing web browser companies claimed they were prevented from fairly competing for customers when Microsoft so totally integrated their own web browser with their Windows operating system that extraction and substitution was impractical.
This would not have been so significant had Microsoft not been so dominant in the market, but we all know they were.
Features of an Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA), a U.S. corporation, membership include coverage by their special insurance policy against liability for all model flying and the ability to participate in all AMA-sanctioned events, at which nonmembers are excluded. Virtually all events and contests in the nation are AMA-sanctioned, primarily because the liability issue necessitates insurance coverage and because of the complete lack of any alternative and recognized coverage plans.
The conclusion to be drawn is that AMA holds a dominant position with respect to most aspects of the aeromodeling community in this country.
As a condition of membership in the AMA, individuals are automatically subscribed to Model Aviation, the monthly, in-house publication of the AMA. It is not possible to obtain this membership without the magazine subscription, unless you are a family member of a household that otherwise "subscribes" with at least one other membership. Thus, in effect, the various valuable and necessary services available only from the AMA can be had only by subscribing to the magazine.
This statement both defines the monopolistic position of the AMA and the practice of bundling, perhaps even better than demonstrated by Microsoft itself. It certainly is more understandable to the American aeromodeler.
Total membership in AMA is listed at 170,000 on your website. So, what about the numbers? Well, your website states that 96% of all members get the magazine. The 4% who don't constitute family members who don't have to subscribe. The circulation in 2001 of the magazine is listed there as 138,000, excluding other sales. Compared to the other well-known model airplane magazines, this is more than double the subscription base of either Model Airplane News (63,000) or Radio Control Modeler (60,000–70,000). Would anyone fail to recognize this as a dominant position for Model Aviation?
The obvious question is whether this result would be obtained without bundling with AMA membership.
With the cost of an annual subscription at $24, this totals about $3.3 million gross subscriber income to the magazine assuming no fees paid to AMA itself. However, that $24 amounts to 40% of the total annual AMA dues, based on the newly increased dues of $58. Actually, last year's dues were $48, for which the subscription would represent 50%.
In this time of corporate misbehavior and public and governmental scrutiny, I have to ask if AMA really thinks their integrity is "in" and if they really choose to risk violation of federal statutes, especially in such a familiar and sensational context. After all, it wouldn't take a very bright lawyer to latch on to this issue with a class action in mind, the class size of 138,000 individuals, with the recent Microsoft case history.
Unfortunately, in this country, we have some very bright lawyers who also fly model airplanes.
The obvious and, perhaps, legal choice would be to make the subscription optional.
Victor Stuhr Seattle, Washington
First and foremost, the AMA has always served, and will continue to serve, its members in a fashion which will best benefit the membership as a whole. The AMA, its Executive Council (board of directors), committees, and staff all strive to make the AMA a wonderful experience for its members, who all presumably share a love for model aeronautics.
It is vital to remember that the AMA, unlike Microsoft, is a not-for-profit corporation, but is designated as a 501(c)(3) entity by the IRS. By its very existence the AMA seeks only to promote model aeronautics and to serve as a valuable resource for its membership.
While Mr. Stuhr classifies a subscription to Model Aviation as a "condition" of membership, the AMA intends such a subscription as a benefit to its members. It is not unusual for organizations to automatically subscribe and provide to its members a publication. For example, the United States Tennis Association automatically makes its members subscribers to its monthly publication.
Not recognized in Mr. Stuhr's analysis is perhaps the greatest benefit to the members: the savings to the members by being part of a larger group, especially in the insurance arena. Economically, AMA members, as a group, are able to reap these benefits at a much lower price than if the member attempts to obtain this same cover on his or her own.
By arbitrarily isolating one benefit and assigning a price to that benefit, Mr. Stuhr ignores the fact that by combining these benefits into one package for a great number of people, the members are receiving a great savings.
AMA Special Services Department
Sound Reduction
We seem to be expending a lot of effort on sound reduction for our aircraft but while I read page after page regarding the necessity of making our models quieter, I have seen very little on designing a muffler system.
Attending the Joe Nall event in May of this year I was shocked at how quiet some of the large 40% scale models were. I have no idea how they achieved such a remarkable sound reduction and assume it must have taken quite a bit of wizardry to achieve such a reduction. Right now, I fly a 3W and an FPE engine and they put out so much noise that it
(Continued on page 180)
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
