Sport Pilot Magazine

[Guest Andys@coffs]

The biggest problem with the magazine current layout with going electronic is the editors are stuck doing the 2 page spread idea, it doesn't work online very well.

FT, I hope you email that thought through to the CEO, If he gets told that he will react to it, if he doesn't then he wont. Your not the first to say that but its a volume thing, the more it gets said by different folk the more he knows its a real issue.

 

Andy

 

 

[Birdseye]

And that will be the death of Ra-Aus Andy... kids don't have the money to go flying.

To take Andy's points a stage further. The accounts and P & L do not identify where the most of the income is actually spent. The major costs are employee related. To what purpose are the hourly costs of the employees being applied? How much is spent on membership services, how much on registration, how much on incident investigation etc. etc. I'd suggest a true breakdown of resources expenditure is required, as how else can you justify the financial prudence of the organisation? Let alone some claim for funding from CASA.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Andy you need to get the brains trust together and nut out a cohesive communications policy for the RAA, at the moment it seems a bit disjointed with the mag, the website, the portal, the facebook, this site and the email list.

 

 

[coljones]

In rereading I wanted a bit more clarity.....If you choose to continue the paper magazine you will forgo the $50 rebate (so up for the $50 increase in membership fees) plus you will pay the delta between what the magazine costs today per person and what it will cost in the future given that the total print runs will be smaller and therefore more expensive on a per mag basis (so $50 membership fee increase plus $X for the mag, where X has to be determined yet based on expected takeup)Snip snip snip

Thanks Andy for your candid input to the debate.

The issue was the lack of proper disclosure of a fee hike ($50). The announcement was bordering on obfuscation as it talked about saving money on the mag' rather than jacking up the underlying non-magazine related fee. I have never been afraid of a fee hike, if required and explained, and taking into account sensible policies on reserves and asset retention (some governments want to flog assets and to outsource) which we are yet to see. Was there a resolution or just a decision taken on this?

 

I do prefer paper. A lot of people are handling technology well but a lot of the small things are becoming lost because it is becoming complicated to find them because the search terms are complex. Search for "broke" when the article in question said "financially embarrassed" rather than "bankrupt" fx

 

You can fold a mag up into your pocket and read it outside without sunglare on the screen and batteries don't go flat. Despite anything else I am dubious about the imminent arrival of the paperless toilet.

 

Cheers

 

 

[dazza 38]

With this talk of either getting magazine electronically or cop another $50 increase, shows me that CASA should cough up some more cash.

 

It isn't exactly a level playing field when RAA pilots HAVE TO pay a yearly fee to fly a aircraft when GA pilots don't.

 

 

[puddles_7]

Hi Andy

 

If the magazine goes ahead as electronic only then I support the ideal of a revised layout. I currently subscribe to the online version of Australian Flying and I am so disappointed with the layout and difficulty navigating on anything other than a desktop computer that I am going back to the hardcopy once my subscription is up for renewal.

 

Cheers

 

Puddles_7

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

To take Andy's points a stage further. The accounts and P & L do not identify where the most of the income is actually spent. The major costs are employee related. To what purpose are the hourly costs of the employees being applied? How much is spent on membership services, how much on registration, how much on incident investigation etc. etc. I'd suggest a true breakdown of resources expenditure is required, as how else can you justify the financial prudence of the organisation? Let alone some claim for funding from CASA.

Your point is valid, and is being addressed. We will have a new chart of accounts as soon as the CEO completes that work AND the FY click over to the next, the only time to change so that we don't have to devise a method of reporting old and new is at the FY boundary.

 

The new chart of accounts will be based on cost centers and is capable of answering the question how much has it cost this FY to administer customer service X. In that way we can assure ourselves that any cross subsidisation that occurs is intentional and not just a historic precedent that carry's forward in perpetuity....

 

WRT the question of CASA paying more...or less cause both arguments have been made, in this thread I believe,......CASA clearly identifies us as a "Self Administering Body" and they are the regulator. Claims that we are regulators are true within the context of our own organisation but are not true within the aviation context . Tech Manuals and Ops Manuals can not be issued until CASA has vetted them, and what they must contain in broad terms is defined by CASA so arguments that because we have those things that makes us a regulator are imho wrong. If we suggest that in any way we are regulators to CASA we are told in no uncertasin terms that is not the case! I know that to be fact!! The Police are not regulators, they are enforcers of state, or federal legislation and that is as close as we come to regulation as well.....

 

Suggestions that we should hit up CASA for more Money is not new and those that meet with the CASA seniors (CEO and President) have done that from time to time but so far without success. Its my opinion based on reports I see that CASA would prefer that the payments were reduced or eliminated. We haven't received our annual funding this year, but I was told yesterday by the CEO that the Deed of Arrangement has a continuation clause that says the Deed continues not for 1 year as I thought, but rather in perpetuity until a new one that kills off the old one is established. As such the funding is less certain in my mind than it was when I thought the deed lasted 1 year only.

 

Andy

 

 

[rankamateur]

Sounds a bit like other financial discussionsWe are in really deep s@&t and everyone wants the benefits without sacrificing anything

Digital copy is fine fine by me, savimg trees, postage and more timely issue and arrival.

 

Id assume more timely information inside due to faster production and deadlines

You forgot to write "I don't struggle along with low speed internet", but we got that bit anyway.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Make this available to any member who can't download the full version. That way we still get the vital info, letters to editor, etc. without the costs to both expensive downloads and the ridiculous time it takes to get them.

This approach would please me but may pull the rug out from under the advertising revenue once the advertisers get wind of it.

 

 

[Geoff13]

This approach would please me but may pull the rug out from under the advertising revenue once the advertisers get wind of it.

I think we are already on the path to losing advertising. The schools will be likely to drop out first. Why advertise training to members, they already know what they want and where most of the local schools are. The schools would have been targeting the newsagent sales to pick up new members.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

an electronic version of the magazine could be 3-4 times larger than the current layout, the current format is restricted by the Auspost size and weight limits and what you can stuff into a letterbox.

 

 

[ave8rr]

you spend 30-40 minutes a month online and you can read the mag in 15 minutes. is another 15 minutes going to hurt?

FT, unlike you we DONT have ADSL or the NBN so an extra 15 mins on line a month is not the issue. Think of your fellow country members in this debate. I would say they make up a big proportion of the membership.

 

 

[robinsm]

FolksThere will be much more on this subject over coming weeks, but the reality is:-

 

1) We are today operating to a deficit budget, where the budget was showing a shortfall of $500k per year. Actuals are better than that as the CEO shaves where he can.

 

2) There are 3 major expense areas in RAAus. 1) Staffing costs (the biggest single cost we have) 2) Insurance, where the major contributor is the pilot liability insurance, 3) The magazine. After that there is about $600k of other costs that don't fit into the top 3. So, to put the top 3 in context we are talking around $1.6m or thereabouts. ( I don't have the budget in front of me as I Write this so check these numbers yourself for accuracy...I'm pretty sure that quantum I provided is correct albeit with a bit of course rounding)

 

3) CASA drove the need within RAAus for a SMS, and those require staffing, That with registration issues and the restaffing/process work drove staffing numbers above previous year levels.

 

4) Despite 3) members have never been asked for 1c more in subscription costs to cover the additional staffing expenses because the board today believes we can address the deficit through a number of concurrent projects that we are running now, some of which will deliver savings in a short time frame and others over a longer period, but all are, in our opinion required for sustainability.

 

So, as someone previously suggested in this thread the reality of the magazine decision is to acknowledge that today, right now, there is nothing we can do to reduce the staffing levels to deal with the deficit, there is nothing we can do in the insurance space to deal with the deficit and equally there is not enough in the "all others" bucket to enable an 83% reduction to address the deficit.

 

Reality is that we need to raise membership costs by around $50 per member to cover the deficit while we wait for the longer term systems upgrade to deliver the efficiencies we need to actually be allowed to address staffing costs. The needed system upgrades are well on the way, with an expectation of Q4 delivery this year. They are not minor in scope, they are major undertakings

 

Today, whether you want a digital magazine or not, you cant have one, This decision fixes that and allows people to choose to incur the paper magazine expense or not, and allow for the costs associated by that decision to be borne by only by those that the expense relates to (User pays....Not the first time such an approach has and will be taken). For those that choose to accept a digital magazine only, then they will receive a $50 pa rebate. Those that choose (and its all about free choice) to continue with a paper magazine will have to pay the increased costs over todays costs as the fixed magazine printing costs are amortised across a smaller run volume.

 

Now I fully acknowledge that this decision will not please everyone, however I would ask if you think this is a crazy decision to identify an equivalent savings (circa $400k) that the board can replace this with. Board numbers and travel as suggested earlier are a start.....but fall a long way short of $400k..........

 

The numbers provided above are to illustrate the issue and quantum, but do not take , for example the $50 rebate and the $50 increase in member costs to be anything other than an example number. When we know the quantum's involved the real numbers will be struck, and it may be that all might have to pay an extra membership cost per year, with the amounts being smaller for those choosing to take an electronic copy of the mag, or, it might be that there might be a real reduction in costs for those that choose to discontinue the paper mag......

 

So, its fine to criticise , you all know I've done a fair bit of that over the years, but if you choose to do that then tell me how we are to address the deficit. As said we need $500k at least with the mag at this stage conceptually providing a major chunk of that. CASA has historically never reduced the RAAus Deed of Arrangement obligations, rather each year, or 2, they increase and that drives our cost base upwards....Continuing to fund the deficit from reserves hoping that things improve down track is not a strategy that I'm comfortable with, however I'm happy to hear your alternates.

 

Andy

 

BTW when we send you a digital copy of the magazine its then up to you what you do with it.....It can, as some of you have suggested, end up in the bit bucket (trash) or you might well choose to send it to all your mates, some of who might not be members of RAAus, and they in turn will send it who knows where......Your paper copy however can only be in one place at a time...... So it's not all negatives, there are positives that need to be considered as well in my opinion.

Andy, noone doubts there are problems, it just that we dont have the information from RAA Aus to make an informed decision. This seems to have cropped up suddenly so are we looking at:

 

1.. Previous incompetence that seemed to be addressed by a golden handshake that should never have taken place....

 

2..CASA playing fast and loose and loading expenses (they should have been asked to increase their funding to cover these as they imposed them)

 

3..updates of procedures/new systems..that cost much and produce little.

 

We have been told that everything was fine for many years so what changed...we increased our fees a couple of years ago, we hjave cancelled the flyin at easter, the magazine seems to be going west and you are now saying we may have to increase our fees again. How soon will this become a self fullfilling prophesy and have people leaving because of the increased costs and no returns.

 

Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just my 0.2 worth

 

 

[rhysmcc]

To take Andy's points a stage further. The accounts and P & L do not identify where the most of the income is actually spent. The major costs are employee related. To what purpose are the hourly costs of the employees being applied? How much is spent on membership services, how much on registration, how much on incident investigation etc. etc. I'd suggest a true breakdown of resources expenditure is required, as how else can you justify the financial prudence of the organisation? Let alone some claim for funding from CASA.

This has been asked a few times, the CEO indicated that it was coming and I'm hoping he'll share some the details at the GM.

 

I think we are going to find while the membership pay the majority of income, it will actually be aircraft registration and FTF that take up most of the expense (staffing).

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Andy, noone doubts there are problems, it just that we dont have the information from RAA Aus to make an informed decision. This seems to have cropped up suddenly so are we looking at:1.. Previous incompetence that seemed to be addressed by a golden handshake that should never have taken place....

2..CASA playing fast and loose and loading expenses (they should have been asked to increase their funding to cover these as they imposed them)

 

3..updates of procedures/new systems..that cost much and produce little.

 

We have been told that everything was fine for many years so what changed...we increased our fees a couple of years ago, we hjave cancelled the flyin at easter, the magazine seems to be going west and you are now saying we may have to increase our fees again. How soon will this become a self fullfilling prophesy and have people leaving because of the increased costs and no returns.

 

Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just my 0.2 worth

Ok....so to ask again....what exactly would you be proposing as an alternate? While its interesting to talk about how we got to where we are, its not at all relevant in addressing the issues of today, other than avoiding repetition if at all possible...so...how should we address the issues of today?

 

1) is historical

 

2) is historical, but likely to repeat

 

3) I don't understand exactly what you are referring to, are you talking about things we have underway now, or previously? If now how can you claim "produce little" if they aren't at the go live stage?

 

Andy

 

 

[fly_tornado]

FT, unlike you we DONT have ADSL or the NBN so an extra 15 mins on line a month is not the issue. Think of your fellow country members in this debate. I would say they make up a big proportion of the membership.

That's the price you pay for cheap housing, no neighbours and clean air.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Going back to the point earlier about sharing the digital version basically by forwarding on to others, I think that would be a good way of spreading the word and could potentially reach many many more people than the mag did in the newsagent. I have quiet a lot of 'contacts' that like planes but wouldn't buy plane mags but if they were to get a digital copy forwarded to them who knows where it would lead. I know it may be a loss of subscription but think of the extra coverage.

 

I personally like the paper copy and at this stage would be happy to pay that 50$ extra p/a to keep it but I also can see where a digital copy could be beneficial

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Magazines are dead, they have been on the way out for the last 15 years.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Going back to the point earlier about sharing the digital version basically by forwarding on to others, I think that would be a good way of spreading the word and could potentially reach many many more people than the mag did in the newsagent. I have quiet a lot of 'contacts' that like planes but wouldn't buy plane mags but if they were to get a digital copy forwarded to them who knows where it would lead. I know it may be a loss of subscription but think of the extra coverage.I personally like the paper copy and at this stage would be happy to pay that 50$ extra p/a to keep it but I also can see where a digital copy could be beneficial

Just remember its not either or, everyone will be provided the electronic copy.....If you pay to get the paper version you'll get that in addition, not instead of, because there is no incremental cost in sending out another electronic copy.....

 

 

[poteroo]

Magazines are dead, they have been on the way out for the last 15 years.

You are right in the majority of cases. However, it's to do with the demographic. I began a specialist agricultural newsletter in 1980, and grew it's numbers steadily until I onsold it in 2005. The new owners were thinking of going to an online version - but found resistance to the idea. They have retained the hard copy + no advertising concept, and increased the circulation by 20% or more, at a price 30% higher than 2005. What that informs me is that farmers want hard copy - for a number of reasons. I'd say these pretty much align with pilots.

 

If RAAus go to digital, then they need to make a full PDF copy of each months mag downloadable, free-of-charge, from the website. That is the only way that you can expect to use the magazine as 'advertising' intended for younger prospective pilots. That will mean that those who choose to remain on hard copy, (extra $50+?), are really funding the advertising for more members. Is this intended, or is it equitable? happy days,

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Another option is to ship the magazine as a DVD so the oldies can watch it on the telly or the computer, when they have power. Even that will work out much cheaper than paper and allow the use of multimedia.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I don't know about a DVD for every month but a DVD once a year with some footage from various flyins would be awesome:thumb up:

 

A PDF mag might be ok but I need pictures:nerd:

 

I'm sure advertisers would enjoy a digital version that could be freely shared:yes: That would reach a lot larger audience.

 

 

[ave8rr]

Another option is to ship the magazine as a DVD so the oldies can watch it on the telly or the computer, when they have power. Even that will work out much cheaper than paper and allow the use of multimedia.

That's a reasonable idea FT. Maybe three or four DVD's per year to cover all 11 issues of the mag.

 

 

[robinsm]

Ok....so to ask again....what exactly would you be proposing as an alternate? While its interesting to talk about how we got to where we are, its not at all relevant in addressing the issues of today, other than avoiding repetition if at all possible...so...how should we address the issues of today?1) is historical

2) is historical, but likely to repeat

 

3) I don't understand exactly what you are referring to, are you talking about things we have underway now, or previously? If now how can you claim "produce little" if they aren't at the go live stage?

 

Andy

Andy, it is pointless trying to propose a solution without access to all the facts and figures and a list of the plans already in place to solve this. (I have always worked on the basis that if there is a problem tell me about it but also propose a solution to complete the package." We have been kept in the dark with..."in camera privacy".. decisions for a long time and we assumed that all was right with the world. My point was that the apparant historical problems have contributed to the current mess. More power to the new CEO and his attempts to solve this and if there is pain then maybe that has to happen but there is an old expression that says "Its no use complaining when you are up to your a..se in alligators when you forgot to drain the swamp."

 

Apart from cancelling things like the Flyin at Temora, reducing the magazine circulation, upping fees, what else are they proposing? The members website is normally woefully out of date (I had to point out the Natfly 2015 planning that was only taken off recently etc.)

 

I love flying my aircraft, I want to be proud to belong to an organisation that allows me to do that and is perceived as a friendly, helpful organisation. I would like to see something in place to advertise our presence to the populace in general (how that is going to happen without the shopfront mag I dont know).

 

We elected the board to do these things and represent us. They do a sterling job and I personally am thankful for that.

 

I am not disparaging the board in any way, I am only asking for information and justification of decisions that affect my membership and the money I am paying to keep flying. I think thats reasonable?

 

 

[rhysmcc]

Going back to the point earlier about sharing the digital version basically by forwarding on to others, I think that would be a good way of spreading the word and could potentially reach many many more people than the mag did in the newsagent. I have quiet a lot of 'contacts' that like planes but wouldn't buy plane mags but if they were to get a digital copy forwarded to them who knows where it would lead. I know it may be a loss of subscription but think of the extra coverage.I personally like the paper copy and at this stage would be happy to pay that 50$ extra p/a to keep it but I also can see where a digital copy could be beneficial

 

Just remember its not either or, everyone will be provided the electronic copy.....If you pay to get the paper version you'll get that in addition, not instead of, because there is no incremental cost in sending out another electronic copy.....

The fact that there is no cost in sending out extra copies of the digital version should mean it shouldn't cost anything to subscribe to for non-members. The association can then use the wider audience to attract new members. I don't see any reason why a copy wouldn't be put on apple/android "new stand stores". The use of Facebook to "share" the link would also create a wider audience. We have an ageing membership, if we don't look at ways of attracting new members then our numbers will fall. Less members equals more cost per member.

 

Given the cash reserves and the likely budget savings we will see in the next couple of years after the less labour extensive renewal processes is implemented, surely some of the deficit could be absorbed instead of the "$50 membership increase", so that with the "magazine rebate" members will actually see fee reduction in real terms?

 

You are right in the majority of cases. However, it's to do with the demographic. I began a specialist agricultural newsletter in 1980, and grew it's numbers steadily until I onsold it in 2005. The new owners were thinking of going to an online version - but found resistance to the idea. They have retained the hard copy + no advertising concept, and increased the circulation by 20% or more, at a price 30% higher than 2005. What that informs me is that farmers want hard copy - for a number of reasons. I'd say these pretty much align with pilots.

Yet we've managed to use Electronic Flight Bags and download/access all the regulatory documents (AIP, CASRs and CARs).