Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

US AOPA - lessons for Europe?

Well, I think that AOPA mag has - not as much as Flying mag but still - gone downhill a lot in recent years. Maybe it's just five years ago I was more interested in the US GA scene than now. Maybe it's because I have since become more sceptic about GA magazines in general.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Picking up this old thread, with US AOPA having $53M income in 2013, 7 years later we have $51M. Not much of a drop, given the general decline in GA

Compare this with Europe. I reckon this exceeds the total income of all GA organisations in the rest of the universe by a factor of 10×.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

What’s most interesting to me about that is that only 43% comes from membership fees. Perhaps that’s the biggest lesson….that there are other revenue streams possible.

EIWT Weston, Ireland

I doubt their magazine makes money from advertising to cover its printing costs; magazines rarely seem to these days. I wonder what the $11M chunk is?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

It is one of my pet subjects.

AOPA UK and, to a lesser extent, AOPA Europe is a complete, and utter disaster, but worse, should be an embarrassment to the pilot community, but remains gamely supported by a hard core, largely with vested interests.

AOPA UK has a history of being unwilling to engage with any other GA organisation so has encouraged representation to become splintered and ineffective. I am told no one in Government considers AOPA UK to have any representative authority any longer, and even if some believe it does, is easily side lined and ignored.

On just about every important GA issue in recent times they have failed to step up when it mattered. The lists includes the IMC rating that subsequently became the IRR, but would have happily been killed off completely by AOPA UK until they eventually had to give in to the furious reaction of their own membership, the current debacle regarding GASCo, in which the CEO of AOPA UK has a vested interest sitting as he does on GASCo’s governance committee and its response to what was originally known as the IR light, which in the end had to be taken over by PPL IR which hasnt managed to do an especially good job either, but not entirely of their own making because they are even more inconsequential in terms of lobbying ability than AOPA UK.

AOPA UK in the form of their CEO Martin has a career chairman who has over stayed his welcome in the post for far too long, and should, whether he had been efffective or not, stoood down a very long time ago, to allow fresh blood to re-invigorate the operation, as well as its finances, which have detiorated year on year with willful disregard for any sembelance of corporate governance or accountability, never mind legal responsibility, given that AOPA UK is now in default for failing to file accounts, failing to file its annual statement and has had its application to be struck off refused. As teh career chairman he pays himself a very substantial salary and pension, and I can only assume, will continue to do so as long as the cash pot keeps going, which, at the resent rate, may presumably just about see him through to retirement, by which time there will be nothing left.

It is painful that the membership allow AOPA UK to carry on in the way its does, with abject disregard that AOPA UK now represents probably less than 10% of UK pilots (not that it ever reveals the true figure).

AOPA in the States undoubtedly faces challenges, but I have been a life long member and, in contrast, they have the respect of Federal and State Government, step up to the mark time and time again, and represent all that a representative organsisation should do (obvioulsy on the whole).

Compare this with Europe. I reckon this exceeds the total income of all GA organisations in the rest of the universe by a factor of 10×.

US $ 51m divided by 330m is roughly 150k per million.

NLF inn Norway has an income of US $ 1.3m. divide this by 5.4m and er get roughly 240k per million. Almost twice as much per citizen as the US. About half is membership fees.

The US also has EAA with probably a similar budget, if not more, but lots of Norwegian pilots are also member of the EAA.

It looks about the same total budget Norway vs US to me.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Fuji_Abound wrote:

AOPA UK has a history of being unwilling to engage with any other GA organisation so has encouraged representation to become splintered and ineffective.

Historically, the situation with AOPA Sweden has been the same. Possibly it is better today, but the membership is very small. The Royal Swedish Aeroclub which organises most aeroclubs in Sweden has about 9 times as many members as AOPA Sweden has.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

The FFA is th French organisation most join, though I cant tell you the numbers. This is because most aeroclubs are affiliated and they organise insurance for pilots and aeroclubs alike – in fact with many aeroclubs, you cant be a member without FFA membership!! They have also aligned and templated the “DTO” Rules & Regs for many aeroclubs. They organise a multitude of competitions and tours, many aimed at making flying affordable for young people. I would suggest the only drawback as mentioned elsewhere is that this makes GA firmly in the “Leisure & Sports” category for politicians as opposed to transport infrastructure.

Regards, SD..

I would suggest the only drawback as mentioned elsewhere is that this makes GA firmly in the “Leisure & Sports” category for politicians as opposed to transport infrastructure.

That depends upon the politicians. Do they see “leisure and sport” as a problem compared to the “filthy rich flying biz-jets”. I don’t think so. Besides, it rather apparent and obvious by now that 80-90% of CAT is simply “leisure” in any case (holidays etc) without even the “sport” in most cases. Nothing wrong with that, but trying to display CAT infrastructure as something more “important” than GA infrastructure is not going anyway today and in the future.

All GA (including UL) can use all the CAT infrastructure in Norway, so I’m not complaining. The reason for this is certainly not due AOPA though, but 100% NLF, a “leisure and sport” organisation.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Am I right that anybody can join an “AOPA” but only aeroclubs can join the French FFA?

In fact I wonder whether the whole “individual owner-pilot” versus “aeroclub renter” balance is very different in the US versus Europe. I’d say that it is blindingly obvious on even a cursory look at the US scene that this must be the case. Look at how many planes are flying there which are absolutely not “club” types. This ratio is likely to make a big difference to the pressure for a good level of representation of pilots. As I well know from my renting days, and from watching things since, renters (club members, if you like) tend to be relatively isolated from the nasty world outside. Even in a big club with say 100 members one can be substantially isolated, all the time there are planes sitting outside which you can rent and fly down the road.

The things which really un-isolate people are

  • becoming an owner;
  • doing a long trip across Europe

Then they wonder what the hell is going on out there, and might think hard about getting represented.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top