Talk me out of renewing my AOPA membership

[Rockymountain]

AOPA is one of the few organizations fighting for our flight freedoms. Fly outside the US and you can see what a difference there is. There are tremendous pressures on all fronts from developers, green minded individuals and groups, government, airlines, home owners on and on to get rid of pesky valueless, noisy, entitled GA. I also note that some think AOPA just represents the kerosene burners, I don't think that is true. I fly both, but the reality is that the kerosene burners keep the lights on for many FBO's and airports. Keeping the lights on helps all of us, even those running MoGas. an oil burner taking 500 gallons of highly marked up jet A can make the difference in an FBO making payroll and not. Support AOPA, support EAA and every GA positive group, because every year there are going to be people lobbying hard to restrict GA.

 

[Salty]

Would you give up an hour of flying a year on the off chance they actually do something to help? I take the gamble.

 

[Pinecone]

People claim that AOPA is an advocate for us.

Not everything that AOPA advocates is a positive for us.

Something you thing they are on the wrong side of, someone else thinks is correct. And vice versa.

Can't please everyone.

But have you made your opinions known to them?

 

[Pinecone]

Would you give up an hour of flying a year on the off chance they actually do something to help? I take the gamble.

Heck, 30 minutes of flying these days.

Less if you own a plane.

 

[MichiPilot]

I support them solely to fund Mark Baker's every week trips to Florida and Big Sky Country. They sold many of the planes and now just reimburse him for his own use....good gig for Mark.

 

[flyingron]

Never have I ever heard from anybody at AOPA about inquiries. Even the guys I personally know there.

EAA on the other hand, I've been able to email before people even heard of email at AOPA. A few years ago I emailed a bunch of people at EAA and got calls back from Pelton's secretary, Michael Goulian (head of the IAC), and Connie Bowlin (head of WOA).

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Con? Well, they don't need your money.

Baker pays himself $1.5M/year. The investment cash hoard, built from unnecessarily high member dues, is now over $100M. They could shut the place down and live off the hoard for the rest of their lives. Said another way, they could make a cash payment of $200 to every single member and still have more money than they need.

This. Here is their 2020 IRS Form 990:
https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/...2020_AOPA_Form-990_Public-Inspection-Copy.pdf

They have never explained or justified the need for that huge pile of cash, interestingly of which $23M is listed as being in Caribbean and Central America accounts.

Their non-dues revenue is about equal to their dues revenue. You can reverse calculate from the numbers that they have about 280,000 members. This is down from over 400,000. If their primary purpose is advocacy, they should lower the dues amount, substantially, to increase membership. If they want to justify those high salaries (and benefits) for an advocacy organization with severely declining membership numbers, they should be showing that they are investing more in the future growth of the organization and showing fiscal discipline with the member's dues and cash reserves.

After George Braly's generous words towards AOPA I was tempted to rejoin, but I can't look at these financials and say that this organization is efficiently doing what it can and should to promote GA.

 

[Todd82]

View attachment 110879

I'd be more impressed with that if it was in Dayton and included ramp access to the Museum

 

[OneCharlieTango]

This. Here is their 2020 IRS Form 990:
https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/...2020_AOPA_Form-990_Public-Inspection-Copy.pdf

They have never explained or justified the need for that huge pile of cash, interestingly of which $23M is listed as being in Caribbean and Central America accounts.

Their non-dues revenue is about equal to their dues revenue. You can reverse calculate from the numbers that they have about 280,000 members. This is down from over 400,000. If their primary purpose is advocacy, they should lower the dues amount, substantially, to increase membership. If they want to justify those high salaries (and benefits) for an advocacy organization with severely declining membership numbers, they should be showing that they are investing more in the future growth of the organization and showing fiscal discipline with the member's dues and cash reserves.

After George Braly's generous words towards AOPA I was tempted to rejoin, but I can't look at these financials and say that this organization is efficiently doing what it can and should to promote GA.

What should Mark Baker get paid? How low would they have to go to make you happy?

How much cash should they have on hand, and where should they stash their assets?

And how low would the dues have to be to make you happy?

AOPA haters always say things like “too much” this and that, but they never offer any suggestions as to too much by how much.

 

[Todd82]

How much cash should they have on hand, and where should they stash their assets?

And how low would the dues have to be to make you happy?

After being gone for awhile I rejoined in early 2021 for VREF access. The "new member" promotional rate at the time was $49.

I'd renew at $49.

As for how much cash should they hoard, if they're banking that much money they have no excuse to be raising dues. See above comments about $49 for example.

 

[Lndwarrior]

If I had lots of disposable income I would still belong, but i don't. It came down to picking one and I chose EAA.

 

[WDD]

The guy should get as much as be can, and the foundation pay him as little as possible.

Subscriptions should be as much as most members would pay.

Me? Not seeing what I would get for that money.

 

[Racerx]

If members could vote some how in the direction of it as opposed to board members that are by and large out of touch with members...much like politicians. I really don't care to see that Baker got married.

I just think they could have got someone with more credentials. Like the EAA did with Jack Pelton.

Prior to his appointment at AOPA, Baker served in numerous senior executive roles, including chief operating officer at Scotts Miracle-Gro Company, president and CEO of outdoor outfitter Gander Mountain Company, and chief merchandizing officer and executive vice president for The Home Depot. Most recently, he served as CEO of Orchard Supply Hardware Stores Corp., a leading retailer of home improvement and garden products.

2 of those prior CEO positions have gone tango uniform.

 

[Dave Anderson]

Well, we still don’t have user fees, we still have a national airspace system that allows private and VFR flight (which were seriously threatened in the days following 9/11), I’m flying on BasicMed, and G100UL recently received fleet-wide approval.

But screw ‘em. I do something for $89/year that’s much more beneficial to GA than that. Besides, Mark Baker is not only wealthy, but short, and that makes me really mad. Oh, and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association shows the audacity to own a couple of AIRPLANES!!!

Love the humor hear, but you really think them owning an extra 300 is providing anything of value to the membership other than a few executives getting to take a joy ride on your $89. It's honestly a mixed bad with AOPA, they bring value but they do so often in a way that makes most GA pilots just roll their eyes and cringe.

 

[Dave Anderson]

My insurance gives me 10% discount for AOPA membership (AIG). That pretty much pays for it right there. Worth having a voice in DC. Cost of the overall org seems a bit over the top for what they do.

I get 10% from my EAA too.

 

[Dave Anderson]

While not perfect, and no organization is, they do things for GA.

Best is to be member of EAA and AOPA, so you can be counted twice for lobbying.

AOPA, "We represent XX pilots....."

EAA, "And we represent YY pilots......"

I don't think we were allowed to use chromosomes to represent people anymore

 

[Dave Anderson]

If members could vote some how in the direction of it as opposed to board members that are by and large out of touch with members...much like politicians. I really don't care to see that Baker got married.

I just think they could have got someone with more credentials. Like the EAA did with Jack Pelton.

Prior to his appointment at AOPA, Baker served in numerous senior executive roles, including chief operating officer at Scotts Miracle-Gro Company, president and CEO of outdoor outfitter Gander Mountain Company, and chief merchandizing officer and executive vice president for The Home Depot. Most recently, he served as CEO of Orchard Supply Hardware Stores Corp., a leading retailer of home improvement and garden products.

2 of those prior CEO positions have gone tango uniform.

This for me is my only real problem with AOPA, the cost isn't even remotely a factor for anyone that flies an aircraft, we glorify the $100 for crying out loud which is probably more like the $200 hamburger today. They are and continue to be too political and cater to a sub-set of GA. I just can't stand the political nonsense, although I realize they must navigate that space. I do enjoy some of the younger generations they are bringing to their media channels like Cayla which seems to have more of GA appeal.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

If AOPA had no aircraft, you can be sure the Negative Neds would then be complaining about our organization being 'out of touch' and 'not representative', lol.

 

[Todd82]

This for me is my only real problem with AOPA, the cost isn't even remotely a factor for anyone that flies an aircraft, we glorify the $100 for crying out loud which is probably more like the $200 hamburger today. They are and continue to be too political and cater to a sub-set of GA. I just can't stand the political nonsense, although I realize they must navigate that space. I do enjoy some of the younger generations they are bringing to their media channels like Cayla which seems to have more of GA appeal.

I like Cayla, followed her long before her new job at AOPA so this is in no ways a shot at her and major credit to her for getting a paying gig for doing what she was already doing.

But what does she add to AOPA to be worth a salary? She was already a "social media star" before them so she didn't need their promotion. Does someone instagramming flying a carbon cub around to fly ins in the Southeast really necessitate a salary? That might be a symptom of the AOPA disease. So who's next, Steveo for example?

 

[Dave Anderson]

I like Cayla, followed her long before her new job at AOPA so this is in no ways a shot at her and major credit to her for getting a paying gig for doing what she was already doing.

But what does she add to AOPA to be worth a salary? She was already a "social media star" before them so she didn't need their promotion.?

Maybe they do realize they are out of touch and this is their attempt.
I think the bottom line is everyone is somewhat frustrated for the general state of GA in the US! Is it better as Martin pointed out than most countries, sure. But it’s also not what it can be and maybe people wished AOPA would do more with their CASH COW! Nothing wrong with wanting your member organization to do more for members!!

 

[airdale]

What should Mark Baker get paid? How low would they have to go to make you happy?

He should get a market rate appropriate to running a second- or third tier nonprofit association. $1.5M looks quite high, especially in comparison to other AOPA salaries that are reported.

... where should they stash their assets?

Actually that's a fraught question. Generally a large amount of cash attracts malfeasance of one sort or another. Organization management just cannot keep their hands off the cash and they are besieged by an army of salespeople with bizarre investment ideas. Generally these are called "Alternative Investments" and in AOPA's case they comprise around 1/3 of the hoard. It's not clear whether the $23M listed as being in Caribbean and Central America accounts is part of the Alternatives or not, but those locations are not generally known as hotbeds for good investment opportunities. More, they tend to be hotbeds for questionable activity. Maybe AOPA owns a couple of nice resorts, though, that they must frequently visit on inspection trips?

How much cash should they have on hand, and where should they stash their assets? ... AOPA haters always say things like “too much” this and that, but they never offer any suggestions as to too much by how much.

Actually I once spent a long evening reviewing 990s for organizations large and small that seemed to be similar to AOPA or to have similar demands put on them. I was able to find just one organization that held reserve assets in an AOPA-like ratio to its income. It was a small organization of specialist doctors and from reading the 990 it appeared that the reserve was temporary, destined to pay for a new headquarters building. Looking at nonprofits that might be expected to need reserves to cover unpredictable needs, like the Red Cross, showed nothing like the hoarding that AOPA practices. NRA, which might experience peak-y needs for lobbying costs also showed nothing like the AOPA hoarding. I probably looked at 30-50 organizations in total and other than the doctors, found nothing even close to AOPAs hoarding.

To your question and based on my research, IMO the hoard is "too much" by at least a factor of five. 20% would mean they had about a year's dues on hand. That seems entirely adequate for an organizational ship financially sailing on very calm waters.

Anecdote: I met Baker at a conference one time. When I started to ask him about the hoard he responded by turning on his heel and quickly walking away.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

What should Mark Baker get paid? How low would they have to go to make you happy?

How much cash should they have on hand, and where should they stash their assets?

And how low would the dues have to be to make you happy?

AOPA haters always say things like “too much” this and that, but they never offer any suggestions as to too much by how much.

I would tend to agree that $49 is reasonable. It isn't about the $40 difference, it is about the justification for raising dues while reserves continued to increase substantially.

What is the possible economic catastrophe that AOPA would have to suffer to justify the ~$100M reserves? They can't spend it on political donations. What are they doing to help promote getting more controllers in the system? Yes, I know that takes years, but this is a situation that was visible on the horizon years ago. Consequences for GA? We are repeatedly being told that practice approaches aren't available over broad sections of Southern California. That has genuine impacts to IFR proficiency and safety.

Advocate to get rid of the prior-Class 3 requirement for BasicMed. I still don't see airplanes dropping out of the skies on a regular basis for medical reasons, and we have pilots that are flying under basic med that are 20 years passed their last FAA Class 3 medical exam. I have not seen any statistically valid reporting that there are more medically-induced accidents under BasicMed vs Class 3.

What could they do with $100M, or even a fraction of that? 1) Reduce annual dues to increase membership numbers. 2) Resume having regional fly-ins and have them as more public events to encourage growth in GA. Do it at a subsidized cost to encourage participation.

What is Baker delivering for $1.5M (yes, I know that is total with benefits, etc)? Looking back at 2013, Craig Fuller was reported at $850K on the Form 990. That is an annualized increase of 6%. I don't go along with the analogies that compare AOPA to other corporations, because they are supposedly an advocacy organization. Their purpose is not (or should not be) maximizing revenues.

And then there was killing off the Red Board. Did it impact a lot of their members? No, but POA demonstrates (now that we got rid of the spin zone) that it is possible to have a valuable educational resource as a well run open forum for not a lot of cost, and with a relatively modest amount of moderator involvement. To me that move spoke to the limited vision of the organization, and that they weren't really interested in side activities that weren't revenue-focused.

 

[DFH65]

Ask yourself if the AOPA or NRA or any other ...A you can think of have any real interest in solving the problems they claim to fight? They all seem to have a bunch of fat cats at the top too.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Ask yourself if the AOPA or NRA or any other ...A you can think of have any real interest in solving the problems they claim to fight? They all seem to have a bunch of fat cats at the top too.

This is a key point. Other than true grass-routes advocacy organizations, accomplishing their mission eliminates or greatly reduces their need to exist. Pretty much why politicians rarely solve any real problems too.

 

[MBDiagMan]

The only reason I continue to renew AOPA is that they are my insurance source and will ad in the fee if I’m not a member.

 

[Wagondriver]

Mark truly loves aviation, and he could go work somewhere else and make far more than that.

it’s not perfect, but who else has any clout with the feds?

 

[Johnbo]

Free hat is nice. It is the best fitting hat I own

My AOPA renewal form arrived, with an offer for a free hat.

I generally think they're doing important work, and I enjoy the magazine.

I also belong to the EAA, and I feel like EAA might be doing as much or more good for piston GA. Not sure I feel the need to belong to both, and some of the moves AOPA has made over the last year have rubbed me the wrong way.

I'm leaning towards going ahead and cutting them a check for another year. The hate for AOPA here seems to boil over regularly, so here's the opportunity to talk me out of it.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

The only reason I continue to renew AOPA is that they are my insurance source and will ad in the fee if I’m not a member.

Have you checked with other insurance agents to see if their quote is even competitive?

 

[NordicDave]

Interesting data on the public Tax form... $23.7M in Central American & Caribbean banks, Assets owned Planes and Boats, $24M in annual membership fees.

Why to they own boats or have $that much cash invested off-shore?

 

[Dave Anderson]

Interesting data on the public Tax form... $23.7M in Central American & Caribbean banks, Assets owned Planes and Boats, $24M in annual membership fees.

Why to they own boats or have $that much cash invested off-shore?

Boats? Why would AOPA need boats? Let someone here justify that one. I personally don't care if they have that kinda cash on hand, I do care however when they raise dues (doesn't matter that they are insignificant) and that they constantly ask for $$ otherwise, it's an $89 free hat and maybe some advocacy when it means something to the big players.

If aopa would fight for more medical reform the way AOPA fought to kill 100LL despite not knowing the ultimate price for the little guy. Or let's say they fought for insurance reform for GA so that our rates don't sky rocket every time Boeing decides to put safety last in order to profit more, then I would pay $200 a year for AOPA The fact is, they don't

 

[MichiPilot]

Boats? Why would AOPA need boats? Let someone here justify that one. I personally don't care if they have that kinda cash on hand, I do care however when they raise dues (doesn't matter that they are insignificant) and that they constantly ask for $$ otherwise, it's an $89 free hat and maybe some advocacy when it means something to the big players.

If aopa would fight for more medical reform the way AOPA fought to kill 100LL despite not knowing the ultimate price for the little guy. Or let's say they fought for insurance reform for GA so that our rates don't sky rocket every time Boeing decides to put safety last in order to profit more, then I would pay $200 a year for AOPA The fact is, they don't

Because Mark likes boats. Go and look at the previous IRS filings...all about the reimbursement for Mark's toys.

 

[Bob Noel]

Does AOPA actually own a boat (or boats), or is "Planes and Boats" simply a category?

 

[Jeff Oslick]

From what I remember, it discussions like this were one of the things that prompted AOPA to kill the Red Board. They didn't want to answer legitimate questions from the membership.

 

[NordicDave]

Does AOPA actually own a boat (or boats), or is "Planes and Boats" simply a category?

Actually awesome you asked that. There are 2 sections of the form where "Boats and Planes" are listed. A pre-printed "Boats and Planes" donations section, and an owned assets section which AOPA printed "Boats and Planes".

Are the boat(s) in the assets owned section the result of the donations or retained for leadership use? Unclear by the filing. Very likely donated boats yet to be flipped? Good question for them. I've asked them question like this in the past, and they could not care less. Crickets.

 

[Pinecone]

While all these issues are something to question, the real bottom line is, do they help us?

My professional organization is not as well run and shrinking in size and clout. A previous Executive Director did things like hold a conference in Singapore that at best would attract 200 - 300 attendees. HUGE waste of money.

But even so, they did some descent lobbying for the profession.

 

[SoonerAviator]

While all these issues are something to question, the real bottom line is, do they help us?

My professional organization is not as well run and shrinking in size and clout. A previous Executive Director did things like hold a conference in Singapore that at best would attract 200 - 300 attendees. HUGE waste of money.

But even so, they did some descent lobbying for the profession.

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.

 

[Jim K]

Watching the comments here with interest.

I don't mind them having a large cash reserve, as I'm sure they get some large gifts from some wealthy people, and that pile of cash should be able to throw enough return to pay for most of their operations. What does irritate me is dues increases when they have that much reserve.

In a vacuum, the salary of the top dogs doesn't seem that crazy for a large organization... it takes money to attract top talent, but again it does seem like a lot, especially when you compare it to what jack pelton takes as a salary after working the first several years for free. It seems like there are plenty of intelligent people who love aviation enough to do baker's job for a lot less money.

I was an NRA member for 20 years until it was revealed what a sleazebag LaPierre is, and then he managed to hold on to power in spite of the membership wanting him gone. That whole fiasco really gave me a distaste for these advocacy organizations.

Politics is a sleazy business with a lot of money being passed around. If we want to have a say, we need our own politicians with their own bags of cash, but there's a line between what's reasonable and what isn't. I wouldn't be surprised if aopa had a yacht in South Florida for the purposes of having "policy meetings" with congress critters. I'm just not sure if I want to be funding it.

After comparing the 990's for aopa and eaa, I'm thinking about sending the $89 to eaa instead.

 

[Daleandee]

After comparing the 990's for aopa and eaa, I'm thinking about sending the $89 to eaa instead.

I'm sure they would appreciate the generous donation. Currently the yearly dues are $40.00 ...

 

[Racerx]

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.

Exactly this. Look at the GAMI fuel project. We have heard NOTHING from AOPA other than saying we need to get the lead out and them getting behind EAGLE.

I know, GAMI joined eagle as well. And I know Braly said how supportive AOPA was. But it's incumbent on AOPA to relay the message that they're helping and/or being supportive. Maybe AOPA is doing a lot more than appears and maybe their PR department just pooped the bed.

I look at EAA and how they helped Dynon get their stuff into certified planes. EAA holds the STC. Has AOPA ever done anything remotely similar?

 

[crashton]

I am on basic med, I don’t pay user fees, hopefully I will be putting no-lead fuel in my airplane soon, my airport is still open, and I’ve taken a handful of free safety seminars recently. Oh, and I have expanded rights as a pilot thanks to Pilot Bill of Rights. Sounds like the annual dues I have paid to AOPA for the last 35 years are a good investment overall. It’s easy to criticize from the sidelines, so if someone doesn’t want to join AOPA that’s fine, but then explain how you would accomplish any of this yourself? Are you going to go to Washington to meet with your congressmen? Are you going to produce safety content? Are you going to work to expand the pilot population? After 75 years there are still only two major organizations representing GA. It’s because they are doing an effective job and both deserve our support.