Letters to the Editor - 2003/02

Well Read
This is to let you know when I receive
my MA it gets read from the first page to the
last ads 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 AMAsanctioned,
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 statute, 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 the same 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
Model Aviation, 5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Letters to the Editor
Continued on page 180
February 2003 9
02sig1.QXD 11.21.02 2:53 pm Page 9