[NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Matthew Frederick
mjfrederick at cox.net
Mon Apr 30 17:07:03 AKDT 2007
OK, this will probably sound crazy at first, but I think this idea has merit. In order to help defray the costs of the NATS why not have a $5 "competition fee" tacked on to the AMA dues for anyone who plans participating in an AMA sanctioned competition? Not for all sanctioned events, just competitions. The AMA could then put a "competition eligible" tag on the AMA cards of those allowed to compete. I compare this to a "lab fee" that universities charge students for taking lab-based classes to defray the equipment costs. In comparison to the money I spend in a year on pattern equipment $5 would be nothing. This way the entire competition community is helping to fund the NATS even though they won't all go, and the "sport" pilots won't be able to complain about anything that is done at the NATS. I'm willing to wager 5,000 people would pay the $5 fee to compete at local contests in order to keep the NATS open to all who want to compete. I know I would, and I've never even made it to the Nats because I've never really had a good opportunity to go. Just thinking out loud. I'll probably think differently in 10 minutes.
Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Lachowski
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
To add to this. We need hard numbers. How many entrants does it take on a given day or event for the AMA to break even on cost. Just maybe some events don't pay their fair share as compared to others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jlachow at hotmail.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:40:58 -0400
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Well if the Nats are in the red then there is a need to increase the number of attendees and/or increase the entry fee not the number of days. Wasn't this years entry fee increased?<g> Maybe all the SIGS need to encourage more of their people to attend or lose it. There was a time when pattern had over 150 plus attendees. There are some events that only have a handful of people involved. Maybe some of those small events need to be discontinued as part of the Nats.
Tony, how much is in the red anyway? hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of dollars?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tony at radiosouthrc.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:09:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Ok.. .you asked for a need… here it is..
The Executive Council is always pressed by sport fliers as to why funds should be spent on less than 1% of the membership to allow for a site for a Nats, as well as the staff support and equipment support required to run these events. The Nats takes up 6 weeks of prime flying time for Muncie. Other groups would like to use that time for events as well. The Nats operates in the red every year.
So, if we reduced the number of days required to have a Nats, that would reduce costs as well. How do we reduce the number of days required to run the pattern Nats? Do we just increase the entry fee to take care of all of the costs so the sport fliers can then be told that the competition pilots “pay their own way”? Do we (the EC) just ignore them and hope they go away?
I am a BIG fan of competition and the Nats. However, I can tell all of you that many on the EC don’t give a rat’s behind about competition or the Nats. I am trying to represent competition and how important it has been in the past and will be in the future.
So, how does NSRCA handle it if we get cut to a 2-day even for the Pattern Nats?
Tony Stillman, President
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hester
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:37 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
ok, then one more:
if it ain't broke, why fix it? Is there some underlying problem that we aren't aware of? I'm just not seeing the need I guess. if it were a vote, I'd definitely vote NOT to have to qualify for the Nats.
-Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Stillman
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
John:
I realize that this is a different approach and that there are lots of opinions. That is all I am asking for…
Tony Stillman, President
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Ferrell
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:32 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Flame suit on, cannons loaded and ready...
If you really want a good answer, ask the guys who are competing at Muncie this year.
If you want to justify a position already decided, survey the population that will give you the answer you want!
No offense intended.
Why would you want to curtail the most successful segment of the Nats? Without the Nats, there is little point in maintaining Muncie.
(BTW, considering the source, I think you are shopping for ammunition rather than an argument!)
John Ferrell W8CCW
"Life is easier if you learn to plow
around the stumps"
http://DixieNC.US
----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Stillman
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Buddy:
As I said at the beginning of this discussion thread, I am involved with a total NATS review. We are talking about all of the NATS, nothing is too sacred to be up for discussion.
One question I always had is why it the NATS an open event? Most all sports NATIONAL championships require you to qualify. With so many people complaining that the AMA NATS is 6-weeks long, this was brought up as a way to shorten the event. It also would elevate the status of the NATS. I don’t see how this would reduce participation at the local level. It may actually increase it!
Keep in mind that this is just DISCUSSION!!! Don’t get all bent out of shape because we are talking about it.
Tony Stillman, President
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of BUDDYonRC at aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 6:56 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
I have a question
Why all of a sudden are you talking about special requirements needed for
Nat's entry.
My take on this, is if this is done we will reduce participation. I may be wrong but if I am not how is this going to help pattern and the NSRCA?
I think it will be the first step toward a further reduction in membership and a step toward an all professional Nat's
Second question
Tony are you pushing this idea for real?
Buddy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's free at AOL.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger Get it now!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070501/e3be4df6/attachment.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list