Pleasance out at AOPA

mcdewey said:
Here's their response to the members: https://www.aopa.org/landing-pages/open-letter-to-members

Here's the section about who they'd like as a new candidate:

So, how is this different than what Pleasance was doing? Unless there's an unstated requirement to be subservient to the out-of-touch board.
Click to expand...
I'll take the liberty (IMO) of decoding what's really needed from of a new leader, as published:

Build on AOPA’s strengths
Attract more revenue by establishing new low cost revenue streams to sell stuff and services to the membership (i.e., commissions / finder fees, etc.) for use of the association's membership list in order to market stuff to the membership)

Accelerate progress at the grassroots level
Figure out how to attract new blood to stop a decline in membership

Strengthen our voice with government and regulatory bodies
Actually seriously consider aggressively doing what most members joined and expected it was already happening in the first place

Improve operational performance
Stop operational inefficiencies and financial losses without ruffling the feathers within a business culture established during growth years

This leader will help grow our membership
Hopefully, if free to make tough choices like redirecting and investing operational funds into successful methods of attracting and keeping new blood

Attract a new generation of pilots
Tough mission to shore up membership decline when older members stopped flying, are dying off, financially strapped, and/or realizing they are not receiving much more than a slick turbine centric monthly magazine in return for their annual dues

Advance pilot training
Figure out how to take a young generation of kids, make them interested in flying, and somehow make it affordable for them to learn

Our next CEO also will work to preserve access to airspace
Yeah, earlier CEO's seemed to drop the ball on that one

Keep aviation safe
Every pilots wish

Protect general aviation airports nationwide
More wishes, but tough to do when FAA agreements to keep airports open due to accepting grand money can be broken

A clear passion for aviation and a commitment to supporting our dedicated staff
Supporting dedicated staff is tough when revenues fall, and upper management is unwilling to cut fat from their own friends, family, and trim high-paying jobs and benefits first, that would set an example to a staff that may already be getting financially squeezed in tough economic times for many
 
What a profoundly corrupt organization.
That open letter . . . so insulting. the issue isnt a transition is hard. or what aopa does. the issue is they fired a guy everyone loved and admired a few months after hiring him because it claimed he couldn’t do the job as a commuter when those were the terms he was hired under
 
I wasn't going to post this. I'm really trying to be a less cynical version of myself. But I just read that open letter. Sigh.

My take is that the board is a fixed set. That's based on looking at the bylaws, which they do post.

Section 2. Elections shall be by a majority of votes cast by members present in person or by proxy. The Board of Trustees shall designate a Nominating Committee of not less than two members. No person shall be a candidate for Trustee who has not been approved and recommended by the Nominating Committee.

Section 1. Each Trustee shall remain in office until he resigns or is retired at an election by the members. Any vacancy on the Board of Trustees shall be filled by the appointment of a new Trustee by a majority of the Trustees in office, effective until a replacement is elected.

Powers. All corporate powers shall be exercised under the authority of, and the business and affairs of this corporation shall be controlled by, a Board of not less than three Trustees

So the board appoints the people that approve the candidates who can be voted in by the members, and replacements are appointed by the board. There's not even a term. To me that means that voting is just meant to make people feel like they're doing something.

The more interesting thing to me were the financial statements. Being a non-profit (not for profit?) I think they have to post those. Anyway, since 2023 not only has membership been down, but the dues make up less than half the income. And part of their income is interest on their investments. I don't know, maybe it's normal for a club to have 100+ million in investments with 20 something million in dues? It leads me to believe that the purpose of membership is solely to establish the credibility of the organization.

It reads like a club of about 10 people that run things the way they want, supported by thousands. The problem, though, is that the organization is claiming to speak for the thousands, when there doesn't appear to be any mechanism to even suggest that the membership has any capability to influence, let alone direct, the actions of the organization. Maybe they're a benign and well meaning group? It could be. I let my membership lapse years ago, simply because I didn't like the tone of the then president, and I don't see any reason to re-up. They don't speak for me.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So can the members vote to retire the entire board of trustees without a nominated slate to replace them?
Click to expand...
I don't know. I did a cut and paste of a sample of the published bylaws that referenced elections from their website. The word "retire" only exists in that single sentence, nowhere else in on the page. Maybe only a portion of the bylaws were posted on the page, although it looked complete to me, or maybe that part of the phrase is a relic from a previous version of the bylaws before other parts were edited out.

I do get the idea of making it intentionally difficult for a group of strangers to come in and take over an organization, I've been in clubs before and part of those boards, but those rules seem to make the trustees truly independent of the club.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So can the members vote to retire the entire board of trustees without a nominated slate to replace them?
Click to expand...
It doesn't sound like it. The only thing you can do is withhold your proxy, which doesn't accomplish much, beyond the message/symbolism
New board members need to be put forward by the nominating committee. Guess who is on the nominating committee (hint, it's the existing board)
There's no term limits, so no urgency to put forward new candidates anyways.
 
Hang 4 said:
It doesn't sound like it. The only thing you can do is withhold your proxy, which doesn't accomplish much, beyond the message/symbolism
New board members need to be put forward by the nominating committee. Guess who is on the nominating committee (hint, it's the existing board)
There's no term limits, so no urgency to put forward new candidates anyways.
Click to expand...
Seems like if it was possible, it would be a strong message to send… “we have enough votes to get rid of all of you, and we know there is no mechanism to replace you once you’re out. But we’d also rather see the organization die for lack of leadership than allow it to continue in the direction the current leadership is taking it.”
 
Dave Theisen said:
Latest word is that they have hired a PR firm to help with damage control. Certainly not the way I want my membership fees spent. Member since 1993. Just cancelled my auto renewal and sent an email to Jim Hauslein.
Click to expand...
Wow. Just wow. They screwed up removing someone doing exactly what the new “posting” is looking for. And now covering up. I look forward to the May election.

(deleted rather sarcastic words before posting)
 
Half Fast said:
The stated reason they canned Pleasance is that he wasn’t present at HQ enough. Amusingly, they don’t even mention that oh-so-essential item in their candidate criteria.

These BSers don’t even know how to BS very well
Click to expand...
Don't bs a bs'er
 
Dave Theisen said:
Latest word is that they have hired a PR firm to help with damage control. Certainly not the way I want my membership fees spent. Member since 1993. Just cancelled my auto renewal and sent an email to Jim Hauslein.
Click to expand...
crisis firm with 250k retainer
 
I’ve no strong feelings one way or another on this since I really don’t know or care to know how AOPA runs its business. Broadly speaking though, growing membership and attracting new pilots are synonymous; reading between the lines that means recruiting new members from the college 141 programs since that’s where the volume of pilot training is at. As for advancing pilot training, that’s a bland statement. AOPA can’t make it cheaper and EAA effectively owns the MOSAIC space, so other than engaging type clubs to standardize a transition syllabus, I don’t see what they can do. The glaringly obvious omission is PAFI/Eagle/lead free avgas flavor du jour.

I think it’s not unreasonable AOPA sees its target market owner pilot is the part 91 commercial owners/operators that Flying is targeting. I don’t know whether I’ll renew or not, kind of depends if our insurance broker says the industry isn’t giving us a discount that’s worth more than the cost.
 
TCABM said:
I’ve no strong feelings one way or another on this since I really don’t know or care to know how AOPA runs its business. Broadly speaking though, growing membership and attracting new pilots are synonymous; reading between the lines that means recruiting new members from the college 141 programs since that’s where the volume of pilot training is at. As for advancing pilot training, that’s a bland statement. AOPA can’t make it cheaper and EAA effectively owns the MOSAIC space, so other than engaging type clubs to standardize a transition syllabus, I don’t see what they can do. The glaringly obvious omission is PAFI/Eagle/lead free avgas flavor du jour.

I think it’s not unreasonable AOPA sees its target market owner pilot is the part 91 commercial owners/operators that Flying is targeting. I don’t know whether I’ll renew or not, kind of depends if our insurance broker says the industry isn’t giving us a discount that’s worth more than the cost.
Click to expand...
From a business perspective, you may be right. The question is whether AOPA is a business or an organization that's out to do what's best for the majority of its members. Seems to me they have overlooked the grass roots segments for a couple of decades. The ADSB debacle where they didn't even put up a fight or fight to prohibit it from being used as a primary enforcement tool OR as a billing tool was criminal. It was a rounding error to the bizjet fleet, but a real problem for the guy trying to stretch his budget to own/operate a C-150.
 
kyleb said:
From a business perspective, you may be right. The question is whether AOPA is a business or an organization that's out to do what's best for the majority of its members...
Click to expand...
It can be both, but if the business side isn’t running effectively, the advocacy will end since that takes money.

At a surface level, I wonder if priorities are/were not aligned between a majority of the board and Pleasance. Having said that, AOPA has been rudderless since Haines left. He gave them plenty of notice, the transition was disruptive, and AOPA Live died because of that. Not a huge deal, but having AOPA speaking to members in a different format and cadence than the magazine was meeting some of the members where they wanted to be. Add to it McSpadden’s death, and loss of two great people seems to still be playing out.
 
TCABM said:
It can be both, but if the business side isn’t running effectively, the advocacy will end since that takes money.

At a surface level, I wonder if priorities are/were not aligned between a majority of the board and Pleasance. Having said that, AOPA has been rudderless since Haines left. He gave them plenty of notice, the transition was disruptive, and AOPA Live died because of that. Not a huge deal, but having AOPA speaking to members in a different format and cadence than the magazine was meeting some of the members where they wanted to be. Add to it McSpadden’s death, and loss of two great people seems to still be playing out.
Click to expand...

The AOPA has lots of money in its coffers, and only about a fourth or so of revenue comes from membership dues. Lots of members are frustrated and becoming PO’d. That sounds to me like the business side is receiving lots of care while the membership side isn’t, and that will be the death of the AOPA if it isn’t addressed.
 
Half Fast said:
The AOPA has lots of money in its coffers, and only about a fourth or so of revenue comes from membership dues. Lots of members are frustrated and becoming PO’d. That sounds to me like the business side is receiving lots of care while the membership side isn’t, and that will be the death of the AOPA if it isn’t addressed.
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt that and without digging deep in their public filings, their balance sheet may well be the result of a good investment manager aided by some HNW donations. From a risk perspective, if they self-insure, a lot of those funds are one crash away from liquidation.

The second part is recurring revenue, and that’s where membership dues probably play a huge role, as those usually pay the day to day expenses. if the board’s priority is member growth is for recurring revenue, that has nothing to do with advocacy.

Broadly, I go back to my previous statement that AOPA seems rudderless; on autopilot at best. Since the ADSB implementation date boogeyman has passed, and BasicMed and MOSAIC are done, there’s no big hairy aggressive goal left for advocacy. They could try working in lead free avgas, but it seems they’ve decided to take the Joe Friday approach and pass along just the facts.

So, is there an advocacy goal I’m missing?
 
Dave Theisen said:
Latest word is that they have hired a PR firm to help with damage control. Certainly not the way I want my membership fees spent. Member since 1993. Just cancelled my auto renewal and sent an email to Jim Hauslein.
Click to expand...
I’m debating. Waiting to see what happens. Been a member since 1975.
 
Hang 4 said:
It doesn't sound like it. The only thing you can do is withhold your proxy, which doesn't accomplish much, beyond the message/symbolism
New board members need to be put forward by the nominating committee. Guess who is on the nominating committee (hint, it's the existing board)
There's no term limits, so no urgency to put forward new candidates anyways.
Click to expand...
Not to mention you either attend the meeting in person, or send in a proxy. One thing I don’t remember is if the proxy has space for a write-in name, or are you just giving your vote to an existing board member to vote how he/she wants to.
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
Canceled my membership. I can’t remember the last time I opened the magazine or cared about anything they said in public.
Plus, the free Vref benefit is long gone.
Click to expand...

Also, earning points on AOPA (Bank of America) Visa credit cards ended years ago. Another benefit lost during the last decade or two. Death by a thousand little cuts....
 
Rick A said:
Also, earning points on AOPA (Bank of America) Visa credit cards ended years ago. Another benefit lost during the last decade or two. Death by a thousand little cuts....
Click to expand...
The red board went away too. Another service and engagement tool lost.
 
These things usually involve a female intern.

Just kidding!

But seriously, I question whether one organization can simultaneously pursue the interests of both grassroots owners and bizjet operators. Those interests just diverge too much, and sometimes oppose.

I have no enmity for AOPA, but decided long ago that EAA had far more to offer guys like me.

Paul P for the win.
 
No basis in facts, pure speculation on my part.
They hire a new CEO - new CEO goes out an engages with the membership, employees, regulators etc. After a while, Board asks "what are you hearing?"
New CEO makes a presentation with the plusses and minuses. Too many of the minuses are related to the Board itself and the issues it is and isn't engaging on. Board thinks, "that can't be right, let's fire his a$$ and get someone with better answers".

Again, no idea if that's what's going on, but I have seen that movie before. Had a starring role in one version of it.
 
Ed Haywood said:
But seriously, I question whether one organization can simultaneously pursue the interests of both grassroots owners and bizjet operators. Those interests just diverge too much, and sometimes oppose.
Click to expand...
I've kinda wondered about that, too. That's why I'm wondering if the membership numbers are just to gain legitimacy to an agenda that really only serves a few hundred people, not thousands. If the people who care about having their own jets have a bit of self-awareness, they'll perhaps realize that the average Joe, or really the representative for the average Joe, doesn't care if there are airports to land their private jet at.

The reason we have so much opportunity to fly around in little planes in this country, in my view, is because we have so many close to normal people doing it. The fewer people flying piston singles, the worse the environment is going to be for everyone. Maybe the board gets that, and are trying but not succeeding...but the organizational structure sure doesn't seem to support it.

Or, maybe I'm not cynical enough. Maybe it's not just the workings of the group that are setup to make people feel like they have a voice, maybe that is the actual point of the group. To provide a venue for people to feel like they're doing something to help general aviation for the average person, while they're really just joining the ride to support jets.

I'm kinda reminded of an outlook by a fellow before my time. More or less, he said he could respect the people that hated him more than those who said they sympathized with his cause, but encouraged him to be slower and more cautious. Too cold to fly today, so I'm typing.
 
Albany Tom said:
I've kinda wondered about that, too. That's why I'm wondering if the membership numbers are just to gain legitimacy to an agenda that really only serves a few hundred people, not thousands.
Click to expand...
I think there is at least a kernel of truth in this idea.
 
Doc Holliday said:
AOPA died years ago, no one has ever told them.
Click to expand...
Revenue
2002: 40M
2016: 48M
2024: 40M

Just a few quick data points since your comment got me curious. These are actual numbers so it will look a bit worse adjusted for inflation.
 
172andyou said:
Revenue
2002: 40M
2016: 48M
2024: 40M

Just a few quick data points since your comment got me curious. These are actual numbers so it will look a bit worse adjusted for inflation.
Click to expand...
2026 dollars:
2002: $66.1MM
2016: $59.3MM
2024: $42.3MM

I did this recently with my pay & was saddened to realize that I make what I made 25 years ago & have worse benefits, despite massive increases in title, education, and responsibility.
 
SkyHog said:
Lol. The first president in well over 10 years to bring me back because he had a vision that actually supported GA....

Guess it's time to cancel again
Click to expand...
LOL. Well you might want to see what his successor does before you pull that trigger.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
LOL. Well you might want to see what his successor does before you pull that trigger.
Click to expand...
Hah! Should I, though? I don't know the real story on his termination, but it is a clear sign to me that a CEO aligned with my thoughts for GA was not aligned to their beliefs...

I doubt that means we are getting another. I'm guessing we are getting Phil Boyer 2.0, and he was a liar and a subversive actor AGAINST general aviation.
 
SkyHog said:
I'm guessing we are getting Phil Boyer 2.0, and he was a liar and a subversive actor AGAINST general aviation.
Click to expand...
I can’t speak to that, but he was certainly an ******* the one time I saw him in person (as well as on the radio on the way in.)
 
Sent this today to Chairman of the Board

So you take a quarter of a MILLION Dollars of membership money (and obviously more since it is only a retainer) to CYA and generate a load of rubbish letter that is an insult to anyone with more than half a brain.

Oh wait! Since it is obvious that the cumulative amount of brain among the entire Board is less than half a normal human brain, you must think it was worth A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS (as a minimum) to write such a self serving piece of garbage.
 
Last edited:
X3 Skier said:
Sent this today to Chairman of the Board

So you take a quarter of a MILLION Dollars of membership money (and obviously more since it is only a retainer) to CYA and generate a load of rubbish letter that is an insult to anyone with more than half a brain.

Oh wait! Since it is obvious that the cumulative amount of brain among the entire Board is less than half a normal human brain, you must think it was worth A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS (as a minimum) to write such a self servicing piece of garbage.
Click to expand...
There’s the X3 Skier I used to know! :lol::lol:

PS- actually sounds more like that famous general who got fired whose name rhymes with vain!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top