Update to new tech manual?

[planesmaker]

Just read Enews from RAAus which said ' We’ve got an update for you on the Technical manual which is being well received by our members. '

 

Maybe I am a bit thick, but reading on I could not see anything they have updated!

 

 

[Yenn]

You are getting the same message as I am. The RAAus leaders are very good at twisting the meaning of words, so that they sound good but say nothing.

 

Now they are going to put 3000copies of the magazine on the newsstands, but can't find a way to give us all free copies. That was all an experiment to get as many sales as possible, keep crowing about how many are happy to pay, but provide little service.

 

 

[kasper]

See that's where RAAus admin is deficient as I no longer get enews - I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on being vindictive.

 

See as I said when the constitution was passed with really big operational issues I said I would force the association to address the impossibility of forcing electronic communication under the constitution so I refused to accept electronic comms for anything under the constitution . . . now they refuse to send anything to me by email even if its not under the constitution. . . but they also do not send me anything in paper that is not under the constitution directly so I'm intrigued as to how they think they are meeting the obligations under the CASA agreement on comms to all members.pilot certificate holders ...

 

Anywhy, what have I missed on enews?

 

 

[jetjr]

Visit the website

 

 

[Admin]

The biggest loss in the Magazine was the cost to put them into Newsagents compared to the return they got...that was when I was on the board. We have already lost 2/3rds of our reserved funds, the CEO is making deals behind our backs that could have brought in a higher cash return for RAAus than what he did, we are planning to run another deficit this year and on it goes...I am so sorry to keep on about things but I so much feel that it is just getting so so bad now, it truly is another Runciman/Tizzard era.

 

I have had emails from 2 recreational aviators in NZ who are telling me that RAAus is now the laughing stock over there and comes up in many conversations over there between aviators on how bad RAAus is compared to their set up...it's almost bringing tears to my eyes, the institution that I so dearly loved for many years.

 

When I said to the CEO Michael Linke "Please let me remind you that the CEO is there at the pleasure of the members", his reply was basically NO and cited the legal case "You may care to refer to ACCR v Commonwealth Bank, a recent court case that affirmed this fact".

 

 

 

[jetjr]

The magazine only still exists because of vocal members who demanded it remain despite costs. Now the costs are seen as too high.

 

The financial case to keep it going would have depended on certain minimum numbers of paid subs

 

Maybe an example of a compromised descision costing more than original waste it was to eliminate

 

As was said by plenty, without big changes (like stopping expensive costs like magazine) it will be hard to remain efficient and cost effective.

 

 

[kasper]

Jetjr I agree that hemorrhaging cash on the mag had to stop ... but it was the returns on newsagents that was killing the costs ... and if they wanted they could have reduced the number per year back to every other month. they could have done quite a bit and kept the mag.

 

And consider - the print run of the mag with the election materials - was that the lowest cost method of getting statements and voting papers out to members?

 

Why do a special print run for that to all members - was it just to get the election materials out or was it a way of reminding all those that chose not to pay a subscription just what they were missing and as such was it really advertising for the subscriptions?

 

RAAus management admit openly that sales of the printed mag are not covering the costs of the printed version of the mag ... and no matter how they try and upsell or spin that as a great success for the online they are just ignoring the fact that the poor mug members who do not get the printed mag are still paying the costs of printing the damn thing for those who do receive it ... more than a year after canning the printed mag as part of our general membership we are paying for it out of our general membership and not even getting it!

 

And if this post comes across as bitter and twisted - yep I am. Current management and board oversight of the RAAus is driving it into the ground faster every day and pretty much all pretense of being a member organization is shown to be illusory.

 

I am disgusted that an organization I have supported and been a member of for nearly 30 years is behaving towards its member and moving in the direction it is.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Is it big money, this magazine subsidy kasper? I didn't get the mag after you had to pay extra, until last month when I took up the offer in the "free" mag.

 

It seems to me, from a distance I admit, that the main cost imposts on RAAus are keeping CASA satisfied with nitpicking paperwork issues.

 

I reckon CASA are the real enemy, although I'm sure there are many good guys there. The main problem is that their brief to look after other people's safety with prohibitions and regulations is just crazy.

 

One of these days I'm going to just start ignoring all the BS and do my own thing. Yes I will need to divest my assets first and be prepared, at about 75, to be put in jail for "safety" infringements. I reckon jail would be bad for your health, but this is the point: CASA are only interested in your safety while flying.

 

 

[jetjr]

Youre right, the magazine was a huge cost, we couldnt afford it, so it stops, end of story. A loss for sure. Reality is members werent and arent paying for it otherwise we wouldnt be going backwards. Problem is it didnt stop so nothing has changed except lots of memebers dont get magazine anymore. Bleeding continues. 100% driven by members. Another fail for populist management.

 

Email, mailouts for elections whatever..... had to become cheaper way to do things even if it means a less polished approach.

 

I and the non voting majority dont share your view on RAA. (If they did they would vote)

 

They have a more business like approach to operations, have (almost) made some hard descisions on magazine and Natfly.

 

Tech team are by far more informed and qualified. Left sorting out messes from previous crew. Its not their job to be mates with everyone and allow anything but to keep CASA happy so they leave us and our fragile exemptions alone.

 

Very few could last dealing with CASA hurdles daily let alone with maybe board and members pushing the other way.

 

It isnt the same business as 10 years ago let alone 30. It has to change.

 

To keep going with training, SMS, larger tech team, more legal help is going to cost more, much more.

 

Youve had ongoing problems but i thought you got what you wanted? Others might say it burned up lots of members money for one individuals issues. Ill bet there are dozens of these type problems and then we see complaints of slow progress and second rate documents being delivered.

 

Get a new version out there, identify problems, fix it and move on. CASA work the other way, years and millions wasted still no results

 

RAA has to keep trying to produce more with less and do quality work but it isnt easy id suggest. Keeping them on track is boards job.

 

Pissing off and picking holes in everything they do will see good people leave and yes things could get much worse.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Rod Birrell promised (if elected) to return a hard copy of the magazine to all members at an additional cost of $45pa. So that's the cost of producing the magazine for everyone - about $45,000 per year.

 

RAA was losing money on the magazine on the newsstands - more unsold than profit from sales, but it was thought it would be offset by the generation of new members and wider circulation for advertisers. In the end it was scrapped. Maybe the break-even point for printing makes the losses worthwhile.

 

 

[storchy neil]

Hold me bloody beer who elected the CEO Neil

 

 

[coljones]

Rod Birrell promised (if elected) to return a hard copy of the magazine to all members at an additional cost of $45pa. So that's the cost of producing the magazine for everyone - about $45,000 per year.RAA was losing money on the magazine on the newsstands - more unsold than profit from sales, but it was thought it would be offset by the generation of new members and wider circulation for advertisers. In the end it was scrapped. Maybe the break-even point for printing makes the losses worthwhile.

$400,000

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

My maths was off there ... $450,000pa. There are 8,500 pilot members (RAA only quote pilot numbers as membership statistics now) and over 1,000 Non-Flying members plus magazine only subscribers (libraries, aviation bodies, interested people). Which I figure takes it up around 10,000 entitled to a magazine. 2,100 now subscribe to the printed magazine - about $189,000 in subscriptions. From the pleading for subscribers, that doesn't appear to be covering costs.

 

I took the meaning of the "update for you on the Technical Manual" to be the reminder that the old V.3 is still in force, but transitioning to V.4 soon. So get your things done before the deadline. Mr FV has been reading V.4 and has remarked that there isn't much in there for 19 registered.

 

Sue

 

 

[Yenn]

What caused the problems that RAAus has with CASA? As far as I know it was non compliance with the CASA requirements, such as registering aircraft which were not legally registerable. Who should be responsible for this? Surely it is the CEO who is responsible for the day to day running of the show. The board are responsible for the oversight and planning and therefore responsible for hiring and firing the CEO. Posssibly the baord were remiss in not overseeing and firing the CEO, but that board has been superceeded several times since the event.

 

Now we want a board that will get the show back on the road and look after the members best interests. I don't know if the present board is doing that. I havn't seen the minutes af any meetings since the 2015 AGM. Maybe I am not looking in the correct places.

 

 

[Admin]

I have been told under the table that CASA has lost all confidence in RAAus and the Monke/Linke regime which maybe nudge nudge wink wink is the reason why they are doing things that they are. I personally think that when Monke and Linke go RAAus can start rebuilding their relationship with CASA. However we have seen this happen twice now which could be why CASA are looking and supporting alternatives. We have lost the word "Member" from "Membership" and will be just left with a "Ship"

 

 

[Yenn]

You could well be right Ian. My reading between the lines of what was said at the weekend certainly didn't dispel that idea.

 

I don't know where the CEO stands with CASA, and the board has a couple of unknowns as far as CASA is concerned I would assume. If what you say is correct The organisation needs a brain replant and then what would happen.

 

The new alternative that is popping up seems to have the blessing of CASA and will not have the same problems that RAAus has, in that it is a company with directors and no membership, only clients. the company will provide a service which clients will pay for.

 

RAAus is a monopoly in that it gives out pilot certificates and registers aircraft, and to be able to fly those aircraft you have to be a paid up member. the new company will also register aircraft and pilots but there is no "association".

 

Having looked at posts elsewhere I see Rod Birrell who is a board member of RAAus has posted just about the same as my earlier post here. i wonder where he stands with CASA, also where does Eugene stand?

 

 

[nomadpete]

Just to help those who think canning the printed magazine was a mistake, I have heard from board members that the amount of "cash bleed" saved by this was approx $330,000 p.a.

 

Also, that the books are expected to head into the black by the end of this financial year.

 

It would be nice if the mockers could find it in their hearts to give credit for RAAus achieving this.

 

 

[terryc]

Just to help those who think canning the printed magazine was a mistake, I have heard from board members that the amount of "cash bleed" saved by this was approx $330,000 p.a.Also, that the books are expected to head into the black by the end of this financial year.

 

It would be nice if the mockers could find it in their hearts to give credit for RAAus achieving this.

your've got to be kidding or your've not been listening.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Just to help those who think canning the printed magazine was a mistake, I have heard from board members that the amount of "cash bleed" saved by this was approx $330,000 p.a.Also, that the books are expected to head into the black by the end of this financial year.

It would be nice if the mockers could find it in their hearts to give credit for RAAus achieving this.

So on the one hand we are hearing, on the grapevine, that RAA has in recent times lost two thirds of its assets, and on the other hand, on the grapevine, that they have been saving $330,000 per annum.

 

Credit should certainly be given where it's due; just a question of getting the facts.

 

 

[storchy neil]

Put it on table I bloody Well can how incompetent Raas have been from oct 2008 catch up with me at narromie Neil

 

 

[kasper]

Well we get the 2015-16 audited accounts before the AGM so many of the issues around 'how RAAus is going' will be cleared up next week

 

 

[01rmb]

Well we get the 2015-16 audited accounts before the AGM so many of the issues around 'how RAAus is going' will be cleared up next week

See members section https://members.raa.asn.au/storage/1-20160929-signed-financial-statements-2016-final.pdf

Cash down $376,856

 

Overall Equity down $227,535 Better than 2015 which was down $268,781 from previous year

 

Travel up $58,467

 

Member fees down $41,452

 

Nothing spent on airshow and courses

 

Increase of stock with $22,923 of merchandise

 

Intangibles up due to new software system $205,760

 

Losses due to magazine hidden somewhere in there

 

 

[kasper]

See members section https://members.raa.asn.au/storage/1-20160929-signed-financial-statements-2016-final.pdfCash down $376,856

 

Overall Equity down $227,535 Better than 2015 which was down $268,781 from previous year

 

Travel up $58,467

 

Member fees down $41,452

 

Nothing spent on airshow and courses

 

Increase of stock with $22,923 of merchandise

 

Intangibles up due to new software system $205,760

 

Losses due to magazine hidden somewhere in there

Well it will be fun to read WHEN IT ARRIVES IN HARD COPY THROUGH MY POST BOX ... which it MUST BEFORE THE AGM to meet the requirements of the Constitution ... lets see if the CEO to Board are reading this because the letter they SAY they sent by registered post last Tuesday has not been received yet ...

 

 

[Admin]

A couple of years ago we had over $2.2 million in the bank + $800k for the building + $200k other assets. Are you saying we have gone from $2.2 million down to only $375k...no that can't be true

 

 

[01rmb]

A couple of years ago we had over $2.2 million in the bank + $800k for the building + $200k other assets. Are you saying we have gone from $2.2 million down to only $375k...no that can't be true

Sorry - I may have misled you

The cash in the bank is now $920k, building $829k and other other misc assets incl plant, receivables and the new software $448k. The $377k cash down was the amount of cash that is no longer in the bank this year from the $1296k we had last year.

 

Not a good situation with the Current Assets worse off by $319k whilst Current Liabilities are worse off by $102k. With the Current Ratio dropping from 3.63 to 2.18 we are going backwards fast.

 

There is also a little matter of trade payables, accrued and other expenses that is $283k so if taken out of cash will be a big drop in cash reserves. This is $150k more than last year. Sneaky if done deliberately to hold up the cash number...