EAA cuts

[bcollinsmn]

I understand EAA cut 20-30 people from its staff today, including the people who layed out the builder and EAA newsletters, as well as the senior editor of the Sport Aviation Magazine.

Wondering if someone from the EAA can tell us what's going on? Was there a cutback in funding and revenue? Is this a strategic realignment and, if so, what is the new strategy.

Was also particularly sorry to see Fareed Guyot, who has been a big help with EAA Radio over the years, as one of the victoms.

[bcollinsmn]

I've "talked" (via email) to Dick Knapinski and others inside the EAA and stuck some information about who's coming and who's going on my blog (http://rvnewsletter.blogspot.com/2012/01/big-cuts-at-eaa.html). Sounds like the head of Young Eagles is gone, though I don't know if that means the end of the program or what.

Here's the official news release:

EAA MOVES TO STRENGTHEN ORGANIZATION FOR CONTINUED GROWTH

EAA AVIATION CENTER, OSHKOSH, Wis. — (Jan. 12, 2012) — EAA President/CEO Rod Hightower today announced changes that will allow the 170,000-member organization to better fulfill its mission to grow participation in aviation. EAA is strengthening and reshaping the organization to capture the opportunities within its long-term strategic plan. As a result, the organization will be adding important capabilities, and aligning its resources with strategic priorities.

“This will strengthen our organization in several key areas to more effectively meet the needs of our members, donors and aviators,” Hightower said. “We’ve made these moves after spending the past year reviewing EAA’s operations to best align them with the organization’s goals, and listening to many EAA members and supporters regarding the most valued areas of EAA.”

The changes include the addition of new positions, transfers of responsibilities, and the elimination of some positions. There are also senior leadership changes as well, including:

Jeff Skiles – Vice President, Chapters and Youth Education. Skiles is already well known as one of the famed “Miracle on the Hudson” pilots and for the past two years as Young Eagles co-chairman. He brings a wealth of aviation experience and passion to this new role as EAA strengthens and expands its global Chapter network and industry-leading Youth Education initiatives and programs.

Chad Jensen – Manager of EAA’s Homebuilders Community. Jensen brings extensive homebuilding experience and aviation skills to this important role as EAA increases its knowledge and information capabilities for Homebuilders and the amateur-built segment of aviation. He will have extensive involvement with Flight Advisors, Tech Counselors and the passionate community of builders.

Heidi Strand of Blue Door Consulting in Oshkosh will lead EAA Marketing on an interim basis while EAA completes a search for a Vice President of Marketing. Strand will lead EAA’s brand and marketing capabilities and also be responsible for EAA digital media properties and strategy.

Vice President, AirVenture. This newly created role will lead the world’s premier aviation event to continued growth and importance as the preeminent general aviation marketplace.

“Much thought and collaboration has been invested in the reshaping process to make EAA a stronger organization, better equipped to lead aviation and welcome the next generation of aviators,” Hightower said.

About EAA

EAA embodies the spirit of aviation through the world’s most engaged community of aviation enthusiasts. EAA’s 170,000 members and 1,000 local chapters enjoy the fun and camaraderie of sharing their passion for flying, building and restoring recreational aircraft. For more information on EAA and its programs, call 800-JOIN-EAA (800-564-6322) or go to www.eaa.org (http://www.eaa.org/). For continual news updates, connect with www.twitter.com/EAAupdate (http://www.twitter.com/EAAupdate).

[Mike Switzer]

Well, this looks promising


Yep, Chad has been here for a while, but now he’s moving the homebuilt community to the senior leadership table – giving the builders a direct voice at the table.

[Chad Jensen]

Was a rough day at EAA today...The Young Eagles/Eagle Flight Programs are not going away, but will fall under Jeff Skiles now. Steve Buss and Ron Wagner are still here (as is Sue Lurvey).

I am very happy about the move to the senior leadership team to bring the homebuilders voice the direct line. I will also be providing the seat for Warbirds, IAC, and Vintage.

[Kyle Boatright]

I will also be providing the seat for Warbirds, IAC, and Vintage.

Chad, can you explain the quoted statement?

Also, Bob Collins asked what the driver was behind this dramatic reorganization. Is anyone going to address that question?

Finally, I'm sorry for anyone who lost their job in the reorganization. I hate to see that happen.

[Chad Jensen]

Sure thing Kyle, adding four people to the leadership team is too much, Rod selected me to be the channel to the table for the divisions, along with my area of homebuilding. I think the answer to your question about what the driver was is addressed by Rod in the communications release above.

[Kyle Boatright]

Sure thing Kyle, adding four people to the leadership team is too much, Rod selected me to be the channel to the table for the divisions, along with my area of homebuilding. I think the answer to your question about what the driver was is addressed by Rod in the communications release above.

Thanks Chad.

It worries me that the core divisions of the EAA only have one seat at the leadership table, whereas the bureaucracy has the rest.

Rod's communication says "to better fulfill its <The EAA's> mission to grow participation in aviation." Honestly, that statement sounds good in a press release, but what does it really mean? How does the EAA define participaton? Also, is that really the EAA's mission? Is there a published mission statement? I've tried several searches using Google and the search function on the EAA website, and haven't gotten a whiff of one.

[Chad Jensen]

The executive directors of the divisions have never reported directly to EAA, they each have their own boards and are a part of EAA through an agreement. Each seat at the leadership table needs to be there for their specific area within the organization. I represent the communities together.

[Chad Jensen]

Oh, the official mission statement at EAA is "To Grow Participation in Aviation".

[hydroguy2]

keep up the good work Chad.........you're all we got

[RV8505]

It is unfortunate for those involved and I hope they quikly find new employment. However, I belive that it will actually streamline things and allow better communicaton within the organazation. I take it as a positive move on the behalf of EAA to effeciently utilize our assets to help preserve the organization that we all love.

[dewi8095]

The news release doesn't indicate where the personnel cuts came from or what percentage of total personnel the loss represents. The cuts must have come from administrative, maintenance and service areas.

It looks like a case of worker bees being fired to hire three new VPs. Surely a difficult day for those who were let go.

Don

[Chad Jensen]

I don't think we can release the names of those that left for their own privacy, but I'm sure they will be known with some time. I can assure you your "case" is not the case.

[Bill Berson]

Oh, the official mission statement at EAA is "To Grow Participation in Aviation".

Sooo... this is the new mission statement?

The old mission statement was discussed a few weeks ago in the Sport Aviation thread and was available at that time on the website.
The old mission did not include factory new aircraft marketing.

[martymayes]

Sooo... this is the new mission statement?

The old mission statement was discussed a few weeks ago in the Sport Aviation thread and was available at that time on the website.
The old mission did not include factory new aircraft marketing.


All was good until someone brought that up........now we know who the troublemaker is....lol.

[danielfindling]

Change is never easy. I am both sad (for those no longer a part of EAA and who contributed to its greatness) and excited to see if EAA becomes a better organization. As with any entity, the buck falls on management. EAA has a new leader in Rod Hightower, who has recently made bold choices to which he either deserves credit or responsibility. We will see where the journey takes us. I look forward to a stronger and healthier EAA.

Daniel Findling

[Dave Stadt]

Change is good. As one that has been on both sides of the desk I can tell you those affected will survive and usually end up in an equal to or better position. There was no doubt Rod was going to make changes. That is why new management is brought into an organization. I do think Adam will be missed.

"To grow participation in aviation" is certainly evident as a goal to anyone that has attended AirVenture or has been exposed to the numerous EAA programs. Growing aviation must be a top priority and what difference does it make if that growth comes through a homebuilt, warbird, vintage, antique, ultralight, aerobatic, helicopter or factory new aircraft.

Below is from the EAA web site and describes in a nutshell where EAA came from and what it is now:

"EAA was founded in 1953 by a group of individuals in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, who were interested in building their own airplanes. Through the decades, the organization expanded its mission to include antiques, classics, warbirds, aerobatic aircraft, ultralights, helicopters, and contemporary manufactured aircraft."

[RV8505]

South Maintenance has been spared. Those are some hard working peolpe over there that keep all of our stuff going ! :thumbsup:

[Wiltzius]

Few of my friends where on the cutting side. Sad to see them go. Not sure what will happen to their departments in the long run. Will be interesting to see what Mac will do with whats left of the photo and video staff now.

[FlyingRon]

Was a rough day at EAA today...The Young Eagles/Eagle Flight Programs are not going away, but will fall under Jeff Skiles now. Steve Buss and Ron Wagner are still here (as is Sue Lurvey).


So is the Flying mag article wrong. They have Steve Buss on the chopping block.

[MEdwards]

Will be interesting to see what Mac will do with whats left of the photo and video staff now.
My guess is he'll send them out to photo the bizjets he'll test fly and review for "Sport" Aviation.

[Dan Grunloh]

The news release doesn't indicate where the personnel cuts came from or what percentage of total personnel the loss represents. The cuts must have come from administrative, maintenance and service areas.

It looks like a case of worker bees being fired to hire three new VPs. Surely a difficult day for those who were let go.

Don

News reports indicate the entire e-publication staff has been cut except for one news writer.

[Kyle Boatright]

My guess is he'll send them out to photo the bizjets he'll test fly and review for "Sport" Aviation.

My snarky side says "Why have a photography staff? Gulfstream, TBM, etc. have their own photographers and a vast library of stock photos to provide for advertorial articles they ghost write for the magazine."

But I only think those things, I never write them.

[wa6ilt]

News reports indicate the entire e-publication staff has been cut except for one news writer.

This is the part that really doesn't make sense to me. E-publishing is the big thing these days and I don't see getting rid of these people. My only guess is that they are going to outsource that work.

[Mike Switzer]

This is the part that really doesn't make sense to me. E-publishing is the big thing these days and I don't see getting rid of these people. My only guess is that they are going to outsource that work.

The way printing works these days they have to make that content anyway for the press, print it for the people (like me) that want a paper copy & release a pdf for those that want it electronically. The print ready files are easily converted into pdf.

[Eric Witherspoon]

The way printing works these days they have to make that content anyway for the press, print it for the people (like me) that want a paper copy & release a pdf for those that want it electronically. The print ready files are easily converted into pdf.

Not for the Experimenter - that is/was non-printed only. Not for the weekly email blasts w/ the latest updates, extracts from these very forums & the like. Not having weekly updates takes us back to "you only hear about something when it's over a month old" and "you only hear about what fits in the printed version" - in large part company press releases.

From the events of this week, I can't say where all that goes, but it doesn't sound good. I for one thought those were great products for keeping us feeling connected and giving us something of value well beyond other mere "magazine subscriptions" I get.

[Chad Jensen]

All of the e-pubs will go on as they have. Pat and I will take care of Experimenter content as we have, and copy edit will go thru pubs, then it will be distributed thru the new digital channel. Experimenter has 27,500 subscribers, and all of the e-newsletters are highly rated, they will continue.

[mattmutz]

Am I the only one that thinks that a massive cut like this is a sign of bad leadership at EAA HQ? Perhaps not Rod's, but maybe Tom's? Obviously somebody went wrong somewhere. I can't see a reason to make a big change like this now unless a big mistake was made in the past.

[martymayes]

Am I the only one that thinks that a massive cut like this is a sign of bad leadership at EAA HQ? Perhaps not Rod's, but maybe Tom's? Obviously somebody went wrong somewhere. I can't see a reason to make a big change like this now unless a big mistake was made in the past.

No, difference in philosphy is all it takes.

[Dan Grunloh]

I can't see a reason to make a big change like this now unless a big mistake was made in the past.

OR a series of small decisions that were correct at the time but now limit progress. There's no question the websites need a complete makeover and that digital technologies are changing very fast. Do they hire in new full time help for that work knowing it will change again in a few years or send the work out to experts that can keep up? Pat Panzera has posted elsewhere that the specialty newsletters may become downloadable PDF's with hyperlinks (and perhaps embedded audio and video) which would be a good thing. I don't understand the loss of the photo and video capabilities but would welcome AirVenture videos that had more airplanes in them instead of mostly celebrity interviews (crossing my fingers). I really liked Adam Smith and feel his departure is a big loss for EAA.

[Hangar10]

I really liked Adam Smith and feel his departure is a big loss for EAA.

Several in our neck of the woods share the same sentiment.

[Antique Tower]

Same here. Can't be a good thing.

[McGyver]

Was a rough day at EAA today...The Young Eagles/Eagle Flight Programs are not going away, but will fall under Jeff Skiles now. Steve Buss and Ron Wagner are still here (as is Sue Lurvey).



Chad... Update this, please?

[homebuiltairplane]

So... Would anyone like to comment on the fact that Rod was advocating for pay raise for himself and the VP's to help them feel better about make these hard decisions.

[Jim Hann]

I really liked Adam Smith and feel his departure is a big loss for EAA.
I echo this sentiment. Adam spoke to Chapter 32 at our Christmas Banquet a few years back, Janet even flew him down! He is a wonderful gent and I wish him well in whatever he does next.

Jim

[Chad Jensen]

Chad... Update this, please?The only update to that post would be that Steve did decide to leave EAA on his own on Friday morning. I didn't know he had left until he had already left the building, so I didn't have a chance to talk to him.
So... Would anyone like to comment on the fact that Rod was advocating for pay raise for himself and the VP's to help them feel better about make these hard decisions.Source?

[Floatsflyer]

Am I the only one that thinks that a massive cut like this is a sign of bad leadership at EAA HQ? Perhaps not Rod's, but maybe Tom's? Obviously somebody went wrong somewhere. I can't see a reason to make a big change like this now unless a big mistake was made in the past.


This downsizing, rightsizing, mass layoffs-take your pick- is not about "bad leadership", it clearly is about new leadership. Although EAA and the Foundation are NFP's, they are operated and managed like any other $multi-million corporation so when Hightower agreed to come on board, one of two scenarios likely occurred:

1. Hightower accepted the position on the condition that he could take a year or so to review the Association and Foundation and make changes and deploy resources as he saw fit; or

2. As a condition of being offered the position, Hightower was told by TP that his mandate included making major operational/organizational changes which would include substantial staff downsizing wthin a year or so of starting. After 40+ years, TP did not want to be responsible for staff cuts and therefore look like and be the bad guy.

[wa6ilt]

Is it true that peope were pink slipped and had to immediately leave the building? That seems extreme to me for this kind of organization. It's not like EAA is a nuke plant or other high security operation. I've always thought this was a very shabby way of treating loyal employees.

[hydroguy2]

it appears the rumor mill has reached Critical Mass. Hopefully it can be shutdown before full meltdown

[Bill]

it appears the rumor mill has reached Critical Mass.

Rumor mills operate at a level that is inversely proportional to the factual information that has been released by the cognizant authorities. I expect the equivalent of a helium flash shortly.

[Floatsflyer]

Is it true that peope were pink slipped and had to immediately leave the building? That seems extreme to me for this kind of organization. It's not like EAA is a nuke plant or other high securityhttp://www.harvardready.com/ operation. I've always thought this was a very shabby way of treating loyal employees.


This is not at all unusual in cases like this where large layoffs are involved, in fact it's standard operating procedure. Yes, it may appear shabby, insensitive and cruel but it's done as much for the safety and security of the recently departed as it is for the company as well as to keep the disruption and distraction to a minimum inside the building. At the end of the day, it won't matter how it was handled, as in a few short hours, the morale of the staff left behind will suck big time!

What's more important is that those layed off were treated fairly and respectfully with severence packages. I don't know the employment standards laws in Wisconsin, but local laws notwithstanding, the rule of thumb for "good" companies is one month for every year of service. This is prudently done to avoid or minimize the spectre of far more costly wrongful dismissal lawsuits.

As someone who has personally witnessed a large layoff and been the victim of another, one observation has remained: For whom is this devastating event worse for, the ones let go or the ones left behind?

[Chris In Marshfield]

I concur, Floats,

I've also been the victim of one and observer of another. No fun for anyone, but pretty standard practice. In addition to the items noted in your first paragraph, it also (mostly) protects intellectual property from post-event sabotage. Not that there are folks who would do that kind of thing...

~Chris

[Frank Giger]

I am ignorant to the particulars of the why and the who, but it's the Internet, so....

To those who left, godspeed and hopes that it's a window to something even more fulfilling and prosperous.

To those who remain, a few corporate motivators:

Work smarter, not harder! Prioritize and streamline if you feel task saturated.

Diversity is the lifeblood of the organization! You're not doing two jobs for the pay of one, you're diversifying your skill set!

Employees are our greatest asset! However, it's a play on words, so no sitting on yours, or we'll throw you out on it.

Shift yourparadigm to embrace the core values and direction of the organization. No, we don't know what that means, either, but it's on slide number six of the presentation we paid nine hundred dollars to sit through.

[McGyver]

Employees are our greatest asset! However, it's a play on words, so no sitting on yours, or we'll throw you out on it.

Shift yourparadigm to embrace the core values and direction of the organization. No, we don't know what that means, either, but it's on slide number six of the presentation we paid nine hundred dollars to sit through.

That last line is probably the most realistic motivational statement I have ever seen!! THAT aught to be on a poster... or a T-shirt!! Now to find an appropriate picture to go along with it!

[mattmutz]

Although EAA and the Foundation are NFP's, they are operated and managed like any other $multi-million corporation

I'm pretty sure the Foundation doesn't exist anymore - I remember that being a big effort to remove any reference to the foundation from buildings, aircraft, print, etc.

And, make no mistake. EAA is "not for profit" only under State of Wisconsin law, which says their shall be no dividend distributed among shareholders. In every other sense, they are all about the dollar. Certain financial information is public record under State of Wisconsin law... and EAA writes out a lot of obnoxiously large checks to consultants and pay their "leaders" a lot of money.

[rosiejerryrosie]

I know that this is just one man's experience, but, being laid off the last time was the best thing anyone has ever done for me. I went out on my own and earned three times as much money by working half as many hours.... It is NOT the end of the world and companies, if they are to survive, need to reorganize to keep up with changing times...

[Rick Rademacher]

When all organizations reach critical mass, they must take on the attributes of a large business, corporation. Their thinking and actions must reflect this mentality. Eventually, they are absorbed or merge with other businesses to survive and prosper. In looking at EAA and AOPA, maybe it’s time for a non-hostile takeover. If you look at the strength and weaknesses of the two organizations, it might just be a perfect match.

EAA has the greatest aircraft convention in the world while the AOPA convention is tiny in comparison. I am sure some corporate jets could be parked on the EAA grounds for the convention.

The EAA needs to add corporate aircraft to the mix of aircraft they represent and AOPA should add the experimental to their mix. With one organization representing everyone, we would only need to pay dues to one.

AOPA has their airport representatives and EAA has their chapters all of which could be combined for better coverage of the US.
The talents of the AOPA legislative lobbyists, being close to Washington, would enhance EAA efforts on that front. And, the EAA organization would expand the numbers of aircraft on the AOPA inventory.

The only issue I see with a merger of the two is the name although EAOAPAs, Every Aircraft Owner & All Pilots Associations does have a ring to it.

[Floatsflyer]

I'm pretty sure the Foundation doesn't exist anymore - I remember that being a big effort to remove any reference to the foundation from buildings, aircraft, print, etc.

And, make no mistake. EAA is "not for profit" only under State of Wisconsin law, which says their shall be no dividend distributed among shareholders. In every other sense, they are all about the dollar. Certain financial information is public record under State of Wisconsin law... and EAA writes out a lot of obnoxiously large checks to consultants and pay their "leaders" a lot of money.


Ahhh Matt, you're quite mistaken and misinformed. The Foundation not only exists, it is a critical component of the entire organization with respect to financials. It's the endowment. Just take a look at the current audited financial report publicly posted on the website for eveyone to read and fall asleep to. EAA pays no income tax...that's NFP plus all the other distinct legal and financial definitions. NFP does not mean that you can't make money or cut large cheques to consultants. Think American Cancer Society...or dare I say....The Vatican.

[martymayes]

In looking at EAA and AOPA, maybe it’s time for a non-hostile takeover.

They both insist they must grow their membership (from a rapidly shrinking pool of potential members) yet neither has proposed how they plan to do that.

[Tom Downey]

They both insist they must grow their membership (from a rapidly shrinking pool of potential members) yet neither has proposed how they plan to do that.

You might get 15 or 20 that aren't members of both.

[Bill Berson]

The membership has been reported to have grown from 165,000 to 170,000. If that is true, why the cuts?

Maybe the answer is so EAA can save up money to buy the new EAA corporate jet. (with discounts for marketing the jet in SPORT AVIATION, of course). The jet could be used for air to air photos and transportation to EAA events.
I am not joking here, this seems the only logical next step to becoming another AOPA.

[steveinindy]

EAA has their chapters all of which could be combined for better coverage of the US.

Personally, I'd vote for trying to consolidate EAA chapters in a given area before we try to combine EAA chapter and AOPA airport rep operations. The number of chapters in some areas (such as around Indianapolis; there are five chapters and a warbirds chapter within 25 miles of my house) are a bit ridiculous and often a lot of it boils down to personal disagreements between "leaderships" and/or basically the desire to be an EAA-bannered type club.

The biggest problem the EAA faces isn't the desire to be more inclusive. It's the divisive nature of some factions of our membership who seek to drive wedges between the various aspects of the hobby of aviation that will be the downfall of the Association if anything ever will be. These folks will parrot mindlessly and incessantly about how we need to support the EAA's mission of encouraging aviation in all its forms but will try to crucify anyone who isn't into their type of plane. To those folks who can't see past their own wants and desires to look at the bigger picture, I say good riddance. I hate to see the knowledge and experience of those folks leave the organization but we do not need the negative Chicken Little behavior every time something comes out that they don't like. Go form your own organization and continue to support GA in your own way. We need the numbers but we don't need the pessimism.

[Bob Meder]

The biggest problem the EAA faces isn't the desire to be more inclusive. It's the divisive nature of some factions of our membership who seek to drive wedges between the various aspects of the hobby of aviation that will be the downfall of the Association if anything ever will be. These folks will parrot mindlessly and incessantly about how we need to support the EAA's mission of encouraging aviation in all its forms but will try to crucify anyone who isn't into their type of plane. To those folks who can't see past their own wants and desires to look at the bigger picture, I say good riddance. I hate to see the knowledge and experience of those folks leave the organization but we do not need the negative Chicken Little behavior every time something comes out that they don't like. Go form your own organization and continue to support GA in your own way. We need the numbers but we don't need the pessimism. Absolutely on target, Steve. This is something I've said directly to Hightower.

And, from a personal standpoint, as someone that will never build an airplane but is a member of EAA, I'm frankly tired of feeling excluded by some members because I fly production aircraft. There's room for everyone; let us remember what Lincoln said about a house divided.

[Dana]

A few years back a bunch of us looked into forming an EAA ultralight chapter. We had an active group, the people, a place to meet, we were already putting on twice a year fly-ins. Contacted EAA, got the chapter package, looked it over... and really couldn't see anything EAA would do for a chapter that we weren't already doing ourselves (or didn't need).

Re EAA itself, like any organization it's subject to the Iron Law of Bureaucracy (from science fiction author Jerry Pournelle):


Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people:

First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

[Treetop_Flyer]

A few years back a bunch of us looked into forming an EAA ultralight chapter. We had an active group, the people, a place to meet, we were already putting on twice a year fly-ins. Contacted EAA, got the chapter package, looked it over... and really couldn't see anything EAA would do for a chapter that we weren't already doing ourselves (or didn't need).

So you had your own insurance to cover your fly-ins? If I may ask, what did that run you for the two events each year? I'd be interested to see how it compares to what the cost to be a chapter for EAA is.

[steveinindy]

There's room for everyone; let us remember what Lincoln said about a house divided.

Given the holiday, I'll give you one better: "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

[scottf]

Dana... I think after reading a few of these posts that you have absolute proof of the Iron Law.


A few years back a bunch of us looked into forming an EAA ultralight chapter. We had an active group, the people, a place to meet, we were already putting on twice a year fly-ins. Contacted EAA, got the chapter package, looked it over... and really couldn't see anything EAA would do for a chapter that we weren't already doing ourselves (or didn't need).

Re EAA itself, like any organization it's subject to the Iron Law of Bureaucracy (from science fiction author Jerry Pournelle):

[flyunleaded]

The membership has been reported to have grown from 165,000 to 170,000. If that is true, why the cuts?

> ...

EAA is not the most financially transparent organization. I'm not sure that membership is anywhere near 170000. If you look at the last financial report on the web 2010 here (http://issuu.com/eaahq/docs/eaa_annualreport2010?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Fl ayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true) on Page 25, and you take the "Membership dues and subscriptions" and divide by $40, the number is around 143000 members.

The key is to then look at the "Publishing and member services" numbers you see that EAA is bleeding money on membership.

It is clear that EAA makes their money on AirVenture and related items, like "Commissions and royalties" which is about branding and "Donations".

I believe that EAA should stop fooling their membership and just admit it, they are AirVenture, Inc. They are certainly not a homebuilder movement anymore.

[Kyle Boatright]

EAA is not the most financially transparent organization.

<<<snip>>>

I believe that EAA should stop fooling their membership and just admit it, they are AirVenture, Inc. They are certainly not a homebuilder movement anymore.

EAA has a long history of governance issues, which include the stacked process to be elected to the board of directors and a lack of financial transparency. Many members (including me) have ignored the issues, simply because they "bought" the organization's direction and apparent mission. Now that there has been a directional change, I think you'll see a call for better governance.

Also, whether EAA is indeed "Airventure, Inc" or not, leadership needs to clearly and concisely communicate the new direction and the reasons behind the change. Everyone who is paying attention can see that things have changed substantially. It is up to the leadership of the organization to effectively communicate the when, where, why, and how of the changes. The press releases so far have been a massive fail. EAA leadership has to realize that they can't send out sanitized corporate-speak releases to an enthusiast organization. People are passionate about the EAA and the smart ones see that EAA's direction has changed in a massive way, yet the leadership is largely saying "Nothing to see here, just a little housekeeping, move along... Nothing to see..."

It doesn't pass the sniff test. If members get the sense that the leadership isn't leveling with them, that'll be bad for the bottom line.


And don't get me wrong. I love the EAA and what it has and will continue to do for the enthusiast/pilot. However, I have serious concerns about the association's new direction.

[Bill]

EAA is not the most financially transparent organization. I'm not sure that membership is anywhere near 170000. If you look at the last financial report on the web 2010 here (http://issuu.com/eaahq/docs/eaa_annualreport2010?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Fl ayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true) on Page 25, and you take the "Membership dues and subscriptions" and divide by $40, the number is around 143000 members.


You can't do that. There are three classes of membership; individual @ $40, family @ $50, and life @ $975 (which I assume is prepaid and thus, for the most part, not included in the 2010 membership dues and subscriptions data). Since we have no way of knowing the proportion of each of the three cohorts in the EAA membership, it is impossible to use the presented data to estimate the total EAA membership.

What I did find interesting amongst the modest amount of data presented, is that on page 6 there is a statement that EAA membership grew by 7.1 percent in fiscal 2010, while at the same time, on page 10, membership dues and subscriptions income declined by about 0.3 percent during the same period.

[Frank Giger]

The AOPA and the EAA are complimentary but not redundant organizations, and we'd be at a sore loss if they combined.

While they work together on the bulk of issues, they also work at cross purposes from time to time. They also have some key differences in focus.

The AOPA is very good at protecting GA airports.
The EAA is very good at protecting what kinds of aircraft can fly to and from them, namely experimental ones.

The AOPA would probably roll its eyes and give a soft Internet "meh" if experimental aircraft were suddenly eliminated; it's the EAA that sticks up for us.

Without an EAA system of guidelines, tech advisors for builders and adminstrative advisors for the FAA and NTSB the homebuilding community would be ripe for slaughter. We really do need someone to explain to the Honorable Gentleman from Big City in Congress that yes, there are people that actually build airplanes in their back yards and that yes, they are safe. And to remind them that owning an aircraft is not the sole providence of millionaires and corporations.

And to back that up with a demonstrated system of checks and balances with both advocacy for homebuilding and policing by cooperating with alphabet departments of government.

Everyone agrees that reasonable oversight and regulation of aviation - including amateur built aircraft - is prudent. What "reasonable" means is the debate, naturally, with the EAA doing a pretty damned good job of striking the right balance (everyone has a gripe!).

[Hangar10]

Chapter 10 (Tulsa, OK) held our first member meeting of the new year last night, right on the heels of this information. One of our more prominent and informed members took a few minutes to speak to those in attendance about the recent changes and also shared some insight as he knows several that were let go, as well as many who remain. The news of these events fell on a mostly surprised audience. Unfortunately, not everyone camps out on the EAA Forums the way some of us do, so most were unaware, which made for a lot of head scratching and questions to which we have very few answers. I heard a couple of people comment, "well, the goes EAA". Of course we hope that isn't the case... while we can't imagine that anything of the sort would be the intent, we are facing some new challenges at the beginning of this new year that were not on our radar. By that I mean to say... we've had a difficult time in the past trying to recruit and retain new members for a variety of reasons... now we have one more. The uncertainty that this information has created not only makes our newer members wonder if we are worth their time or effort, but it seems that some of the older crowd may also just throw up their hands.

We are a good and strong chapter, like many I've read about over the last few years. I've always felt fortunate to be a part of this group as we have a variety of people that really bring value and diverse skills to our organization. I'm fairly sure that we will continue on with the devoted members and volunteer support that we've seen in the past, but in order to retain the level of interest, or better yet, GROW that level of interest in order to carry on, we will require some direction and explanation of what it is that we stand for, and what it is that we are hoping to achieve. With the list of names of those that were let go starting to trickle out, and with the news that the B-17 and Tri-Motor tour stops have been cut dramatically, many are wondering what kind of shift we might be experiencing.

The member that shared information with us last night closed by saying that, “he is very concerned for our organization." I think that we all are, but all we can do is wait and see... unfortunately, this kind of "wait and see" environment makes it much more difficult to motivate people. Hopefully we will get back on course soon and be able to reinvigorate our members.

Having just read the letter from Rod that was distributed yesterday, I must say that while it doesn't answer all questions or concerns, it does at least seem that they may have our best interests in mind. Hard to tell at this point, but some of it sounds good, and I was glad to see that Paul was involved in this process. As the newsletter editor of our chapter, I'll be forwarding this letter to our membership tonight in order to keep them informed of what is transpiring. Our chapter will be holding our first pancake breakfast of the year this coming Saturday. I'm sure that these details will the talk of the day. Too bad in a way... we really should be talking about what events we want to plan for this spring. Hopefully this won't distract us too much in the coming weeks and months.

One last comment and I'll get off of here... I heard another member say, "If it weren't for bad press this year, EAA would have none at all." Now, I know that isn't exactly true, and I'm sure others do as well, but with all the discussion and debate over parking issues, magazine content and now this, it sure seems like a lot of people are upset. Several have stated that they will not be returning to Oshkosh... not what I (or other younger leaders) need to be hearing from the guys we look up to. What else will they not participate in? I just hope that we can turn this great organization around and rekindle the interest of those that worked hard for Paul’s vision in order to make it appealing to future generations, otherwise we have really got our work cut out for us.

[Dan Grunloh]

The membership has been reported to have grown from 165,000 to 170,000. If that is true, why the cuts?

Maybe the answer is so EAA can save up money to buy the new EAA corporate jet. (with discounts for marketing the jet in SPORT AVIATION, of course). The jet could be used for air to air photos and transportation to EAA events.
I am not joking here, this seems the only logical next step to becoming another AOPA.


These are not "cuts" and it has been stated that they weren't done to save money but for other reasons.

[Dan Grunloh]

EAA is not the most financially transparent organization. I'm not sure that membership is anywhere near 170000. If you look at the last financial report on the web 2010 here (http://issuu.com/eaahq/docs/eaa_annualreport2010?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Fl ayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true) on Page 25, and you take the "Membership dues and subscriptions" and divide by $40, the number is around 143000 members.

The key is to then look at the "Publishing and member services" numbers you see that EAA is bleeding money on membership.

It is clear that EAA makes their money on AirVenture and related items, like "Commissions and royalties" which is about branding and "Donations".

I believe that EAA should stop fooling their membership and just admit it, they are AirVenture, Inc. They are certainly not a homebuilder movement anymore.

EAA hasn't been strictly a homebuilt movement since about oh I don't know about 1978? Not since they began welcoming antiques, ultralights, warbirds etc. This was Paul's decision and it was the right one or by now it would be maybe 1/7 it's current size (at best). A little group of old timers talking about the good ole' days. Now the way it is once a year we all bring out a our best gear and have a big promotional event for "sport" aviation. AirVenture's importance is not that it brings in income for this non-profit org but that it's a big party that promotes all kinds of aviation to the public and it does it better than any magazine. Thank Paul for that. Lets see AOPA pull off something like this.

There is no need to put "donations" in quotes. These are sponsors of sport aviation and they along with the volunteers make it happen.

[Chad Jensen]

<snip>and with the news that the B-17 and Tri-Motor tour stops have been cut dramatically, many are wondering what kind of shift we might be experiencing. <snip>

Mark, I wanted to take this snippet out, and give you some info to pass along to the concerned members in your chapter. The B-17 tour is going to make fewer stops, but will make up for that in higher volume locations. That airplane is not the most economical thing to operate. ;) While it does a great job promoting EAA during it's stops, it just needs more volume.

The Ford schedule is still being fully developed, and I think people will be pleased when it's released.

I think we all want to see a lot of GOOD things from EAA in 2012. :cool:

[Jim Hann]

You can't do that. There are three classes of membership; individual @ $40, family @ $50, and life @ $975 (which I assume is prepaid and thus, for the most part, not included in the 2010 membership dues and subscriptions data). Since we have no way of knowing the proportion of each of the three cohorts in the EAA membership, it is impossible to use the presented data to estimate the total EAA membership.

What I did find interesting amongst the modest amount of data presented, is that on page 6 there is a statement that EAA membership grew by 7.1 percent in fiscal 2010, while at the same time, on page 10, membership dues and subscriptions income declined by about 0.3 percent during the same period.

Bill, I think you explained this already. I can see this happening easily and my family is part of the reason. I went from an individual membership ($40) to a family membership ($50) which means we pay ten dollars a head with my wife and three kids added in. Throw in some folks that went with the life membership in 2009 would swing it also if it is not amortized over multiple years.

Jim

[Bill Berson]

EAA hasn't been strictly a homebuilt movement since about oh I don't know about 1978? Not since they began welcoming antiques, ultralights, warbirds etc.

The current EAA Director of Publications has almost no experience with antiques, ultralights, warbirds etc. and his articles have been about business flying.

[Chad Jensen]

Bell 47, antique
T-6, Warbird
Great Lakes, Sport

He is trying folks...

Saying his articles are nothing but business isn't quite accurate.

[Hangar10]

Thanks again Chad!

[kscessnadriver]

Again, I'll say it. The problem EAA has is an age problem. Look at the active members of chapters, what age are they? Why is it that they are all older, while there are very, very few young people?

Its an age crisis, and this might be their way of trying to draw more people in.

[Dan Grunloh]

The current EAA Director of Publications has almost no experience with antiques, ultralights, warbirds etc. and his articles have been about business flying.

I get your point but hands up all veteran aviation magazine editors with experience in all those areas (not including the retiring acting director of pubs).

[smutny]

Bill, I think you explained this already. I can see this happening easily and my family is part of the reason. I went from an individual membership ($40) to a family membership ($50) which means we pay ten dollars a head with my wife and three kids added in. Throw in some folks that went with the life membership in 2009 would swing it also if it is not amortized over multiple years.
Jim

To add to this, I only pay $20/year, the only reason I'm a member is that I'm required to be in order to compete in the IAC. I chose the most basic option (not on the website, you have to call and request it) that does not include the magazine. No big problem now that they publish them online.

[steveinindy]

Again, I'll say it. The problem EAA has is an age problem. Look at the active members of chapters, what age are they? Why is it that they are all older, while there are very, very few young people?Its an age crisis, and this might be their way of trying to draw more people in.They do have a problem with that here. Im the youngest person that I have seen with any regularity at meetings that I have attended...and I am 31. Most of the members are in their late fifties or early sixties.

[flyunleaded]

> ...

There is no need to put "donations" in quotes. These are sponsors of sport aviation and they along with the volunteers make it happen.

The words that I put quotes was only to denote that they were the titles of the entries on the annual report, so that people could look at those entries and judge for themselves. Wasn't trying to single them out for any specific negative reason.

[tonycondon]

Again, I'll say it. The problem EAA has is an age problem. Look at the active members of chapters, what age are they? Why is it that they are all older, while there are very, very few young people?

Its an age crisis, and this might be their way of trying to draw more people in.

because young people need to pay college debt, houses, and kids and don't have money to build airplanes.

[Jon Ferguson]

In my lifetime the EAA has been populated older people. This is okay so long as young people step in as they get older. Flying has definitely gotten so expensive that only a choice few can participate.

My folks used to rent planes for $40 an hour(1980's). Nowadays you are lucky if you can find a rental for less than $100 an hour. We used to have EAA meetings, the works, I miss those times.

[Treetop_Flyer]

because young people need to pay college debt, houses, and kids and don't have money to build airplanes.

While this is probably true for many, there is certainly a large proportion that will still have enough disposable income to afford to fly...provided they have good jobs. With my group of friends, I've found that money usually isn't the issue. It's usually more along the lines of...

1) Spouse doesn't want them flying because...
a) Fear an accident will leave the other spouse alone, potentially with kids to raise, bills, etc.
b) Doesn't want the spouse spending the money on a "frivolous" pursuit.
c) Insert other reason here.

2) They have kids and just feel they don't have any time to devote to their own pursuits.

This is one of the main reasons my wife and I do not have kids and never will. We have a list of things we want to do during our lives and kids just don't fit in that equation. So instead, we'll give back to youth through programs like Young Eagles, Mentoring at local schools, and spoiling the heck out of our nieces and nephews. ;) Doing that still leaves us plenty of time to fly and have fun.

Now...what we need to do is attract families to EAA! That is something Paul has wanted all along and our chapter has really taken that to heart the past couple of years. We are actively recruiting families and encouraging the meetings and events to be family events. We've had a lot of success doing this and the meetings have been much more well attended in the past two years.

Remember the stool!

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5012/5535895935_ebb0750501_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tot-lug/5535895935/)
Paul's View of EAA (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tot-lug/5535895935/) by ToT-LUG (http://www.flickr.com/people/tot-lug/), on Flickr

Part of the "Social" leg is families. Paul stressed this when he spoke at the EAA Leaders Academy session I went to in 2011.

[Bill Greenwood]

Chad there perhaps a thousand of so EAA people who could write with knowledge, experience, and even expertise about a T-6, which is a very important airplane for it's history as an advanced military trainer and it's great service which still continues today. There are vets who trained in them, and guys who own them now and who fly airshows in them or teach in them.
So why have an article from a guy that knows so little about a T-6? It would be like me writing about Learjets, hey, I did have a half hour flight in one once,
He has experience and probably expertise in business type planes, and who be a good source of an article in Business Aviation or Flying or even AOPA. But that is not what our mag should focus on and not what most of our members are interested in reading about.
Nothing wrong with the TBM article, except it is just in the wrong magazine, wrong organization.
Notice that the TBM article is about twice as long as the T-6 one and sounds like the writer knows what he is talking about.
I could, of course be wrong about what our members want, maybe they can't wait for the latest turbine and jet news, and maybe I am just one of the few old fashioned ones around.
How to know for sure; take a poll of members in the next issue, include a mail in card, and let our members choose if they want to read more about a WW II Mustang, or the air conditioned business jet that Cessna calls a Mustang?

[steveinindy]

In my lifetime the EAA has been populated older people. This is okay so long as young people step in as they get older. Flying has definitely gotten so expensive that only a choice few can participate.My folks used to rent planes for $40 an hour(1980's). Nowadays you are lucky if you can find a rental for less than $100 an hour. We used to have EAA meetings, the works, I miss those times. The only problem with that idea is that it basically implies that folks as they get older naturally become interested in slower aircraft or rag wings or whatever you wanna call it. I don't believe that is the case. I believe it is more that those now in that age bracket (the older members) simply have a strong sense nostalgia for their youth and the aircraft that were popular at that time.

[Chad Jensen]

Chad there perhaps a thousand of so EAA people who could write with knowledge, experience, and even expertise about a T-6, which is a very important airplane for it's history as an advanced military trainer and it's great service which still continues today. There are vets who trained in them, and guys who own them now and who fly airshows in them or teach in them.
So why have an article from a guy that knows so little about a T-6?
That question contradicts what many people have been calling for. Why not get Mac to fly some Experimentals to get his perspective? I've heard that so many times in the last few months. A fresh perspective from someone with expertise in another area of flying. I can tell ya...the first time I got my hands on a Learjet, I was ECSTATIC about it, and couldn't stop talking about it. I think if I would have written an article about that experience, it would have been a good read.

I don't know what all Mac has flown as far as Warbirds, Vintage, or EAB's go, but new perspectives are usually an interesting read.



How to know for sure; take a poll of members in the next issue, include a mail in card, and let our members choose if they want to read more about a WW II Mustang, or the air conditioned business jet that Cessna calls a Mustang?

Every issue since April of 2008 has had a survey done on it, and what we are seeing now is a direct result of what our members are saying. Some of the choices have been great, some not so great, but that all depends on the individual preferences and opinions. Do I read every single article in Sport Aviation? Nope. Some of them don't interest me, and that's fine...I don't really care, because it does interest someone else, and I'd like to think they are enjoying the magazine as much as I do.

[steveinindy]

In my lifetime the EAA has been populated older people. This is okay so long as young people step in as they get older. Flying has definitely gotten so expensive that only a choice few can participate.My folks used to rent planes for $40 an hour(1980's). Nowadays you are lucky if you can find a rental for less than $100 an hour. We used to have EAA meetings, the works, I miss those times. The only problem with that idea is that it basically implies that folks as they get older naturally become interested in slower aircraft or rag wings or whatever you wanna call it. I don't believe that is the case. I believe it is more that those now in that age bracket (the older members) simply have a strong sense nostalgia for their youth and the aircraft that were popular at that time.

[martymayes]

This is one of the main reasons my wife and I do not have kids and never will. We have a list of things we want to do during our lives and kids just don't fit in that equation.

Wow, that can be considered somewhat selfish. What about families that don't fit that model?

[Bill Greenwood]

Chad, I am not so sure what you mean by "every issue since 2008 had a survey done on it". I am not aware of any such survey unless it was by someone at the top looking down.Maybe I missed something, I have only been a member for about 30 years.
What I have never seen and what I am asking is to have a poll of our members, let each member vote on what he/she wants to see the magazine and EAA focus on . The best way I could think of is to put a mail in card in the next issue. And no slanting the questions by the management. You could have a category for each division of EAA, and maybe a few specialty ones like Safety or novelty like the blimp. Just let it be a fair vote, and let the reader rank these in the order he wants. The top officials can always come up with some claim that such a vote would be too expensive, but if they do, I think it shows that they don't value imput from the member up.
Your Learjet experience was a little different than mine, I can't recall being impressed by much of it, but I was amazed that anyone would pay that much for a corporate passenger plane that you couldn't even stand up fully in and which didn't even have a real toilet.
As for writing about T-6 flying, do you think the guys from the Aeroshell team or the instructors at Warbird Adventures might have some good info to write about them?

[scottf]

Chad, my hats off to you guy. While I am shuddering at the direction that it appears things are going, I think you are doing a great job fielding comments here. While this has to take a ton of time on your part, I really appreciate the organization promptly and professionally commenting like you have been doing.

[Bill Greenwood]

Treetop, as great as flying and sport flying in particular is, it is not it the same category as having kids.
However, having kids is an enormous amount of work and requires more patience than one can imagine.
So if you don't want kids, don't have them.
And it is great that you help kids in Young Eagles or scouts, etc.

[Treetop_Flyer]

Wow, that can be considered somewhat selfish. What about families that don't fit that model?

Yes, it is selfish. But it's my choice not to have kids and it really doesn't matter to me what society thinks about that. There's no rule saying you have to have them.

But...

For the families that DO have kids, we as EAA-ers need to figure out how we can get them involved. That was my ultimate point...though after re-reading I didn't make it very clear in the initial post. :) If we can get the whole family involved and make it a family event, the spouse that isn't that interested often comes around. If we can make EAA a family event, social club, call it what you want...we can and will grow membership. Our chapter is seeing that firsthand.


Treetop, as great as flying and sport flying in particular is, it is not it the same category as having kids.
However, having kids is an enormous amount of work and requires more patience than one can imagine.
So if you don't want kids, don't have them.
And it is great that you help kids in Young Eagles or scouts, etc.

Thanks Bill. I've just never had the interest to have my own kids. My wife doesn't either. But we sure love Young Eagles and all the other activities we support. :) Everybody is different and I sure can appreciate the amount of work people have to put into kids. I really appreciate all my parents did for me.

[steveinindy]

Wow, that can be considered somewhat selfish. What about families that don't fit that model?Its odd because even as a parent I see nothing selfless about human spawning or dealing with the aftermath. Choosing not to have kids is a rational decision and one that is less selfish than forcing others to deal with your progeny who have at best even odds of being cute,smart, funny, talented or whatever other traits parents like to delude themselves into believing that their kids possess more than any other.

[Chad Jensen]

Chad, I am not so sure what you mean by "every issue since 2008 had a survey done on it". I am not aware of any such survey unless it was by someone at the top looking down.Maybe I missed something, I have only been a member for about 30 years.
This has been an electronic survey done thru email by random member draw for internal use for shaping the magazine content.


What I have never seen and what I am asking is to have a poll of our members, let each member vote on what he/she wants to see the magazine and EAA focus on . The best way I could think of is to put a mail in card in the next issue. And no slanting the questions by the management. You could have a category for each division of EAA, and maybe a few specialty ones like Safety or novelty like the blimp. Just let it be a fair vote, and let the reader rank these in the order he wants. The top officials can always come up with some claim that such a vote would be too expensive, but if they do, I think it shows that they don't value imput from the member up.
The problem here, and I'm not saying it's a bad idea by any means, is the fact that if we sent out 150,000 cards (not all members get SA) for example, and we get even a conservative response rate of 20%, that's still 30,000 cards that someone is going to have to process and do data entry on. I believe this is the reason that each month, the electronic survey goes out to the random draw.


As for writing about T-6 flying, do you think the guys from the Aeroshell team or the instructors at Warbird Adventures might have some good info to write about them?
Absolutely! But like I said, a fresh perspective can still be interesting and entertaining.

[Chad Jensen]

Chad, my hats off to you guy. While I am shuddering at the direction that it appears things are going, I think you are doing a great job fielding comments here. While this has to take a ton of time on your part, I really appreciate the organization promptly and professionally commenting like you have been doing.
Thank you Scott! Being an integral part of the homebuilder community is something I've always enjoyed, even prior to coming on staff at EAA. It certainly takes some time, but it's important to be a part of it.

[kscessnadriver]

because young people need to pay college debt, houses, and kids and don't have money to build airplanes.

No they don't. If that's your position, you are clueless to what some people make straight out of college today. There are young people out there who would be involved. Heck, I don't even make a lot of money, but could afford to start building or buying right now if I wanted to, and I'm just over a year out of school.

[Sonex1517]

Again, I'll say it. The problem EAA has is an age problem. Look at the active members of chapters, what age are they? Why is it that they are all older, while there are very, very few young people?

Its an age crisis, and this might be their way of trying to draw more people in.

You hit this one on the head! Until this is openly discussed, and addressed, I don't think this is the last cuts or reductions we'll see, regardless of the reason....I went off on a rant about this last fall after visiting another EAA chapter....I'll leave it at that, but it is way past time to get this conversation started in the open.

Sorry for the thread hijack....

[Tom Downey]

Cost cutting, realignment, or what ever handle you put on it is natural in these tough times. I see no problems with that if it proves to be better for EAA. we will wait and see.

[Tlim486]

Having Joined EAA last year, with plans to build and fly my own airplane like many others of EAA, My heart goes out to the people that just got downsized, this appears to be a plague that has effected Corporate America, been thru it. I hope our Mr. Hightower believes none of what he hear's and half of what he see's guiding us forward. To many times in my experience it effects the wrong people. Godspeed

[vaflier]

Does anyone know if Adam Smith is still around, or was he downsized ?. Recently tried to contact him and have not received a response. I understand that if he is still there he may just be swamped with all the changes.

[homebuiltairplane]

In response to asking what my source was for stating that there was talk of giving pay raises to the VP's, what does it matter? My question is it true or not? If I say my source is Tinkerbell but it is true, IT IS STILL TRUE. So far no one has said IT IS NOT TRUE. I hope my source is wrong... I'd like to think that EAA isn't so obtuse as to not understand how it looks. I'd like to think EAA's executives are working for the members. But so far I'm not seeing ANYTHING to convince me.

[Dave Stadt]

Does anyone know if Adam Smith is still around, or was he downsized ?. Recently tried to contact him and have not received a response. I understand that if he is still there he may just be swamped with all the changes.

Adam resigned about the same time the reductions were made last Thursday.

[Frank Giger]

The reason there are a lot more sixty-something year olds at EAA meetings than there are 30 and 40 somethings is pretty simple:

There are more of them than their are of us. They don't call them "Baby Boomers" for nothing....and if you're in your mid forties, welcome to the demographic trough in US population.

[Chad Jensen]

In response to asking what my source was for stating that there was talk of giving pay raises to the VP's, what does it matter? My question is it true or not? If I say my source is Tinkerbell but it is true, IT IS STILL TRUE. So far no one has said IT IS NOT TRUE. I hope my source is wrong... I'd like to think that EAA isn't so obtuse as to not understand how it looks. I'd like to think EAA's executives are working for the members. But so far I'm not seeing ANYTHING to convince me.When you join a board at the time you did, and make your first post about questioning pay raises, it raises some eyebrows as to who you are since there is no signature or indication in your forum ID. I can say with some certainty that there is no one on this forum that knows the answer to your question. I certainly don't.

[steveinindy]

I think you're vastly oversimplifying the age demographics issue Frank.

[Buzz]

EAA is not the most financially transparent organization. I'm not sure that membership is anywhere near 170000. If you look at the last financial report on the web 2010 here (http://issuu.com/eaahq/docs/eaa_annualreport2010?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Flight%2Fl ayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true) on Page 25, and you take the "Membership dues and subscriptions" and divide by $40, the number is around 143000 members.

The key is to then look at the "Publishing and member services" numbers you see that EAA is bleeding money on membership.

It is clear that EAA makes their money on AirVenture and related items, like "Commissions and royalties" which is about branding and "Donations".

I believe that EAA should stop fooling their membership and just admit it, they are AirVenture, Inc. They are certainly not a homebuilder movement anymore.

Every religion has to have it's churches. Take away AirVenture, [with all it's limitations and worts] and the homebuilder movement will be a fraction of what it is.

One was never going to be able to run a decent organization on the $40 a year they collect from me and you.

[Buzz]

What I did find interesting amongst the modest amount of data presented, is that on page 6 there is a statement that EAA membership grew by 7.1 percent in fiscal 2010, while at the same time, on page 10, membership dues and subscriptions income declined by about 0.3 percent during the same period.

Are there Young Eagle "memberships" in that count? That could account for "members up, dues down".

[Dan Grunloh]

In response to asking what my source was for stating that there was talk of giving pay raises to the VP's, what does it matter? My question is it true or not? If I say my source is Tinkerbell but it is true, IT IS STILL TRUE. So far no one has said IT IS NOT TRUE. I hope my source is wrong... I'd like to think that EAA isn't so obtuse as to not understand how it looks. I'd like to think EAA's executives are working for the members. But so far I'm not seeing ANYTHING to convince me.

Excuse me sir (or madam) but the original announcement said the cuts were not done for economic or financial reasons but were for strategic reasons to position the organization to take advantage of opportunities for future growth.

[Dan Grunloh]

Does anyone know if Adam Smith is still around, or was he downsized ?. Recently tried to contact him and have not received a response. I understand that if he is still there he may just be swamped with all the changes.

If you are interested, Adam can still probably be contacted through his Facebook page

[Al Bormuth]

I would guess that some of the growth in memberships is due to the Young Eagles student memberships and the 6 month Trial memberships that Chapters can give to adults. I think both of these are good investments in the future "paid" membership in the organization and our chapters.

[Hangar10]

Are there Young Eagle "memberships" in that count? That could account for "members up, dues down".

Another count to consider are the trial members. While I'm not exactly sure how EAA accounts for these temporary memberships, I do know that trial members are assigned member numbers and granted full benefits. From the discussions I've had, it seems to me that they are indeed, full members and would probably be counted as such.

Our chapter gave out several of these trial memberships in 2010.

Edit: Ya just snuck that info in right ahead of me Al. Ha! I would have to agree with your assessment.

[Chad Jensen]

May want to edit your post for that second word there Mark...;)

[Hangar10]

Wow! Thanks Chad.

[rosiejerryrosie]

Ya know...If I was to consider resigning my membership in EAA, it would probably not be because of magazine content, or reorganization at the corporate level! It would probably be that I got tired of all the bitching that goes on about magazine content and the distrust of the leadership. But, I won't resign - I'll just not read all the negative comments.....:D

[Jim Hann]

But, I won't resign - I'll just not read all the negative comments.....:D:thumbsup: I'm with you Jerry!

[RV8505]

I belive the EAA is going to need all of the resurces it can spare at their disposal to defend our right to fly.. If you really think about it, the EAA needs to be run like a bussiness to positon itself to be able to defend a sport that we all hold dear. We need to increase our numbers and promote youth programs with a combination of voulunters, freindly corporations and a staff that effeciently manages our resources and donations. Year after year user fees are constanly proposed and the fight is not cheap.. Like it or not, we are all in this together and it requires a little tolarnce and understanding from everyone to secure our access to the sky.

My chapter has been working hard inviting local represenatives our our functions and I am pleased to announce I was replaced as Chapter president by a 24 year old.

[steveinindy]

Ya know...If I was to consider resigning my membership in EAA, it would probably not be because of magazine content, or reorganization at the corporate level! It would probably be that I got tired of all the bitching that goes on about magazine content and the distrust of the leadership. But, I won't resign - I'll just not read all the negative comments.....:D

Amen to that Jerry! I need to buy you lunch some time for saying exactly what I was thinking.

[vaflier]

I was emailed today by Adam Smith to let me know that he is no longer with the EAA. I have had the pleasure of dealing with him in regards to a problem at Oshkosh. I have respect for him, for his willingness to listen and for trying to help correct a problem. I was impressed that even after leaving the organisation he felt the need to respond to a member and still try to be of assistance. In my dealings with him his honesty, caring and true desire to be of help, have shown him to be a man of honor and integrity. My hat is off to you Adam and I wish you a very bright future. You have my thanks for your efforts.

Randy

[Bill]

I was emailed today by Adam Smith to let me know that he is no longer with the EAA. I have had the pleasure of dealing with him in regards to a problem at Oshkosh. I have respect for him, for his willingness to listen and for trying to help correct a problem. I was impressed that even after leaving the organisation he felt the need to respond to a member and still try to be of assistance. In my dealings with him his honesty, caring and true desire to be of help, have shown him to be a man of honor and integrity. My hat is off to you Adam and I wish you a very bright future. You have my thanks for your efforts.

Randy

When a "man of honor and integrity" finds it necessary to resign from an organization, you have to wonder what is going on. As a retired Air Force Officer, when I was on active duty I always had that option if I could not, in conscience, support my commanders, but it was one that would (and should) only be exercised in the most extreme of circumstances.

[martymayes]

When a "man of honor and integrity" finds it necessary to resign from an organization, you have to wonder what is going on. As a retired Air Force Officer, when I was on active duty I always had that option if I could not, in conscience, support my commanders, but it was one that would (and should) only be exercised in the most extreme of circumstances.


He may have gotten the resign or be terminated option. The aviation news outlets reported that one of those released "resigned under protest" which I take to mean the option was resign or be fired.

[steveinindy]

When a "man of honor and integrity" finds it necessary to resign from an organization, you have to wonder what is going on. As a retired Air Force Officer, when I was on active duty I always had that option if I could not, in conscience, support my commanders, but it was one that would (and should) only be exercised in the most extreme of circumstances.

Then you're one of the few good ones. I can count on both hands the number of folks- officer and enlisted- in the unit I spent most of my time in the Air Force whose word I would believe if they told me the sky was blue without first checking it out for myself.

[Turbomallard]

He may have gotten the resign or be terminated option. The aviation news outlets reported that one of those released "resigned under protest" which I take to mean the option was resign or be fired.

That is not correct. I won't speak for him here, that's not appropriate, but his departure was entirely his decision.

[Frank Giger]

I wouldn't read too much in any one person's leaving an organization, particularly if they've been there a long time.

I've been through some downsizing efforts, and for every five that get the axe or early retirement there's usually one that punches out for other reasons.

It does work as a catylst, though. Folks leave the organization, which leads to the kitchen table "what if" discussion. And sometimes that brings the realization that the assets are in place for retirement or another job opportunity.

I retired from the Army a couple years from the maximum allowable for my grade under similar circumstances - the base was closing and it looked like one more final move, this one as a geographical bachelor. The wife and I sat down, crunched the numbers, and I put my paperwork in after they turned out to be agreeable.

Some took it as a sign of protest over how the move was being handled with a new commander, others that I didn't want to train a new office, and some made up outrageous rumors that I fully enjoyed hearing (if only my life were that complex!), but none of it was true.

It was just time to do something else, and a time of change at work seemed like a good time to open up a new door to see what was on the other side. Change begets change.

[Chad Jensen]

I want to take a moment to thank everyone, regardless of how you feel about the changes, for being civil and thoughtful in your posts, emails, and phone calls. We have received A LOT of feedback from every form of communication available, and while there are those out there that have come up with some pretty outrageous theories as to the why, we are listening, and appreciate it. The majority of the feedback is that of a positive nature, or "I'm not sure, but it could be a good thing". Many have called Rod and Paul directly, and I invite you to do the same.

I got an email from a concerned Chapter president last night. I replied to him, included Rod's mobile number (listed on the letter that went out), and the two had a very nice chat a few moments later, and they may even have chance to meet up in person at Sebring today.

Even in a time of change that raises a lot of questions about the leadership and direction, the way the majority of EAA members handle what is put in front of them puts this organization at the top of the class. Thank you.:cool:

[Hangar10]

Good stuff Frank.

[Hal Bryan]

Thank you.:cool:

That goes double for me - I didn't sleep much toward the end of last week, and I was checking the forums pretty compulsively day and night. It's a credit to all of you that I didn't have to ask for any "course corrections" or send any polite reminders. Passion and civility can sometimes be mutually exclusive, but, as Chad said, among EAA members that just isn't the case!

[CarlOrton]

Thanks, Chad, and Hal, for all you contribute to these forums. How do you guys get anything else done? ;-)

I'd really like to see more participation in the forums from Rod, Mac, and others. (Charlie Becker does a pretty good job of it.) I realize that the higher up in the organization, the more demands on your time, but an occasional post reminds us that they are tuned-in to what's going on.

To his credit, Rod contributed a few times last year; since I don't look at EVERY forum, he may be more active in warbirds. I don't recall seeing anything from Mac. That's an observation, not a condemnation.

If the organization really does want to change to make it attractive to members/potential members who are younger than 50, social media cannot be ignored.

[Treetop_Flyer]

That goes double for me - I didn't sleep much toward the end of last week, and I was checking the forums pretty compulsively day and night. It's a credit to all of you that I didn't have to ask for any "course corrections" or send any polite reminders. Passion and civility can sometimes be mutually exclusive, but, as Chad said, among EAA members that just isn't the case!

I've noticed over the years in EAA that we can have passionate discussions and differing opinions, but at the end of the day we are all dedicated to the pursuit of aviation and that unites us no matter what side of the line our opinions may lie on. I think people in this organization do a better job than most about "agreeing to disagree" and then moving on to talking about the thing we're really here for...aviation. Thanks Chad, Hal, and the rest of the EAA staff for giving us the room to have our discussions, voice our opinions, and talk it all out. Six months from now this will all likely be behind us and we'll be enjoying a cold beverage under the wing at Oshkosh.

Here's an open invitation from Stacy and I to stop by N6929D's camp in Vintage at Airventure. Where the "ones" are always "cold". ;)

[Hal Bryan]

Here's an open invitation from Stacy and I to stop by N6929D's camp in Vintage at Airventure. Where the "ones" are always "cold". ;)

I'm there! (And by the way, the Tri-Pacer has always been my favorite "nosedragger" - I got some time years ago in N6121D, so your N-number in your sig always makes me do a double-take! :) )

[Floatsflyer]

Ya know...If I was to consider resigning my membership in EAA, it would probably not be because of magazine content, or reorganization at the corporate level! It would probably be that I got tired of all the bitching that goes on about magazine content and the distrust of the leadership. But, I won't resign - I'll just not read all the negative comments.....:D


Jerry, characterizing your interpretation of all that has been expressed here this past week as "bitching" and "negative comments" is painting all posters with the same broad brush stroke. That's a disservice and an insult to the membership who have legitimate concerns. It's also grossly unfair and narrow-minded.

Without critical thinking, dissenting and differing opinion, observation, healthy debate and a constructive exchange of dialogue , we will be left with the oligarchy dictates of those we entrust to shape and guide our present and future. EAA is a membership and volunteer driven organization. We don't work for our leadership. Our leadership serves at our pleasure.

In the absence of a plain English and detailed press release or continuing follow-up explaining the whats and whys such events occurred, we were blindsided, left in a state of confusion and thoroughly mystified by what had taken place. As a result, our leadership deserves this avalanche of vociferous concern, opinion and speculation. Never refrain from being critical. It keeps people honest!

Our leadership has a responsibility, moreso an obligation, to clearly tell us what has transpired, why it was necessary and what exactly is the vision for the future.

I don't blame Rod Hightower(likely in conjunction with the Director of Communications) for the language and tone of the original press release, full of obfuscation and corporate-speak). He can't help it--it's where he came from. I don't know Rod but I do know his resume. He's been a C-level guy for publicly traded Fortune 500 companies. That's how they talk/reveal or more aptly, don't reveal. But clearly, in this instance, he forgot who his stakeholders were and how to maximize EAA shareholder value. Hopefully, he's read the comments on this Forum or has been advised of them and now realizes that release and lack of informative follow-up was a misstep, a serious underestimation of the people he serves. And, he will now take the nessessary steps to correct the course.

The first step must be an absolute written in stone assurance that the raison d'etre of the organization-Homebuilders and their vested interests- will remain the cornerstone of whatever directional change is anticipated going forward. The second step must be the communication to the membership of clearly defined guidelines and expectations-a sectional route map if you will- that sets out how this directional change is to be achieved along with the expected results.

Thanks for reading and listening, much appreciated. Now, after the upheaval of this past week, I think we all need to relax with a heavy and timely dose of airplane diversion. Let's all go see "Red Tails" being released tomorrow. Then, let's all provide Rotten Tomato type reviews on Jon Ferguson's thread.

[Jim Herd]

Most of us have far too little information and expertise in organizational development to make valid comments on the organization changes at EAA. What this thread is missing is a focus on one very profound aspect of the changes. The new EAA mission statement - "Growing participation in aviation". This, my fellow members, is the over-arching profound challenge we all face! This is far more important than growing EAA membership or member servcies or the org chart, per se, because the relentless decline in G.A. over several decades is a trajectory with a chilling end game! Againts this backdrop, we must be careful we are not rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic when we get wrapped around the axle on lesser matters. It is to EAA's leadership's great credit that they have identified the central life-&-death issue we all face. The only peculiar part is why AOPA isn't out front on this.

[AJBrandt]

As past president of Chapter 1158, in West Bend, it is shocking and disappointing to find out about the cuts in corporate Oshkosh. Paul P. has said "EAA is about the people". Then who in upper level management thought it was a great idea to cut the people that have helped build this organization? You can't tell me it's for a lack of money or donations. We've been getting jabbed for years at the cost of attending Airventure for parking, food, and attendance. Just because we fly, not all of us have a multi-million dollar net worth. Chapter 1158 has threatened in the past to become AOPA Chapter 1, and I believe this conversation will be had once again at our next board meeting. I am completely disgusted at the lack of respect the top level of EAA has shown it's staff. I'm definately re-thinking on how I donate my time and efforts to this organization and spend my time at Airventure. Very disgusted and ticked off in West Bend.

[Chad Jensen]

AJ, I would invite you to call Rod. He is more than happy to talk to folks about the changes. I know he is traveling today from Sebring, but if you don't catch him, leave him a message. Seriously...he will listen and talk to you.

[steveinindy]

AJ, I would invite you to call Rod. He is more than happy to talk to folks about the changes. I know he is traveling today from Sebring, but if you don't catch him, leave him a message. Seriously...he will listen and talk to you.I would second this. Rod is one of the most open-minded and genuinely nice folks I have ever met. If the suggestion that I made to Chad a few days ago by PM gains any traction I really look forward to working with Chad and Rod to get it implemented to the benefit of the experimental community.

[KDoersom]

I know Rod too. Worked with him on his instrument rating. Always open minded and willing to listen. While some of the changes might not make sense to us at the time I'm sure there is a good reason. I trust Rod and his judgement to make the right decision.

[steveinindy]

I only met him when I was drooling over his plane last year. What's funny is I didn't know I was talking to the president of the EAA until someone addressed him by his last name to which he quickly responded that "It's Rod. No need to be all formal. What can I do for you?". He seems like the most reasonable, level headed and amiable guy I've ever met through EAA. Honestly, I like him more than either of the Pobereznys and that's saying a lot because I'd pretty much cut a kidney out of my own back for them.

[Turbomallard]

The video which was recently posted of Rod reading the statement he and Paul Poberezny prepared last week was shown at my chapter’s meeting last night without any judgmental preamble. Immediately after its conclusion, people in attendance looked slightly bewildered for several seconds, then someone said “gobbledygook.” Favorable comments were made that one of our chapter members, Chad Jensen, had been promoted and members were pleased that he is being recognized for his integrity and ability. The meeting then moved on to the next agenda item.

Later at break members raised the subject of the video and reorganization actions again. When they learned that EAA terminated the employment of almost 30 people (with approximately 15 to be replaced later), and that two resigned they were aghast and dismayed that this information was not mentioned in the statement Rod read. They asked “Why did this happen? What prompted this event, and why was this not mentioned?” They felt deceived, and began theorizing about what EAA management is truly doing. One person indicated that they would wait and withhold judgment about EAA’s actions because they did not have enough information to form an opinion; the opinions of the others were unanimously negative about the entire state of affairs.

Had details and information been available from EAA about the reasons for the dismissals, or about why it is necessary to “reshape the organization,” it may have been possible to put some of the speculation and feelings of distrust to rest (assuming the explanations were valid), but given the fact that EAA has only released two uninformative statements on the matter, both nearly identical, it was impossible to do that. Conversation then turned to the direction of the organization in general and Sport Aviation in particular. All present in the discussion unanimously stated their strong dislike over the change of direction of the magazine from a specialized publication into a near-copy of several other general aviation magazines. Members clearly indicated their disappointment (and more in some instances) that the publication today features fewer articles on traditional EAA subjects than it has previously. It was also noted, without dissent, that the articles on more traditional EAA subject matter which remain are shorter and shallower in depth than their predecessors, and lack desired levels of detail. Several people mentioned that they are obtaining much of their current homebuilding news and information from Kitplanes magazine, which features detailed articles in formats similar to what Sport Aviation used to have.

[Frank Giger]

Had details and information been available from EAA about the reasons for the dismissals, or about why it is necessary to “reshape the organization,” it may have been possible to put some of the speculation and feelings of distrust to rest (assuming the explanations were valid), but given the fact that EAA has only released two uninformative statements on the matter, both nearly identical, it was impossible to do that.

Whoa, that's not ever going to happen, and for good reasons.

Would you want your employer to put into the public domain why you, by name, was seperated from the company?

Would you tolerate your boss having your future employment discussed and voted on by the public?

Or would you sue the bejezus out of the company in general and your boss in particular with a very good chance of winning? I know I would.

We want it both ways, naturally. We want leadership at the top - someone to make decisions, some of them bold, and stand by them. We also want a manager who seeks consensus and implements only those things the majority approve of beforehand.

We want someone to provide direction to the organization that will ensure longevity and growth.

We want someone to maintain the status quo and not change anything.

We can't get both.

[steveinindy]

Frank....I could not have said it better myself.

[Turbomallard]

Whoa, that's not ever going to happen, and for good reasons.

Would you want your employer to put into the public domain why you, by name, was seperated from the company?

Would you tolerate your boss having your future employment discussed and voted on by the public?

Or would you sue the bejezus out of the company in general and your boss in particular with a very good chance of winning? I know I would.



As somebody who works with matters relating to personnel laws, I understand the limitations any employer faces in explaining personnel decisions based on matters such as performance. My concern lies with the adjustments in relation to functions of the organization.

For example, if the XYZ department was eliminated, or reduced, and personnel were reduced accordingly simply for that reason and having nothing to do with their job performance, I would be interested in knowing why the XYZ department got the axe. If the move was one that the membership believes was justified, then fine. But it is impossible for the membership to make such evaluations without information.

However, in the larger sense, what people were concerned about at my chapter meeting was the “reshape the organization" statement. There has been only very superficial information about what is being reshaped and why. I'm sure that if the FAA had put out a statement similar to the one we have received from EAA and nothing more, EAA would be asking for details and an explanation. The FAA reports to the public and people expect to be informed. Similarly EAA has a responsibility, I would argue, to provide its membership, for whom they are supposed to be working, to explain what reshaping the organization means and why it was done.

[CarlOrton]

Unless someone does something stupid (meaning exposing the organization to litigation), I don't think we'll ever know every little gory detail of what transpired. And, from me coming from a Fortune 100 company background, that's probably the way it *should* be.

I've had the honor of receiving personal letters from Paul P (unrelated to this issue). I steadfastly believe that he remains an active and vital part of EAA, and does not hesitate to fight for what he believes is right.

I've also had the pleasure to have personal conversations with Rod Hightower right after his introduction to the organization. From those first impressions, I saw a man who was passionate about all things EAA. I also saw a take-no-prisoners corporate guy who wanted answers. Unfiltered-by-layers-of-buracracy answers. And I mean both of those things in the most favorable light possible.

I don't personally know any of the folks who were released. Anything I say is purely speculation. But, as a relative newby (only a member for 7 years), I heard enough about organizational hurdles and/or personalities getting in the way of swift actions.

What we heard from the Hightower video was that he was cutting layers of the organization. From my corporate days, I view that as good. I had too many incidents where things I reported were "simplified" to no more than 4 bullets on a powerpoint slide, each bullet having no more than 8 syllables (and I'm not kidding). Sorry, there will be collateral damage from that. I also heard that all donor dollars would be directed toward the efforts they were intended - also a good thing. If I were a major donor, and I knew that only "X" percent of my donation made it to the cause I *thought* I was donating to because of too many spoons in the pot, I'd be pissed-off.

Things change. I'm no expert, but I've read enough demographic studies that show the younger generations have thoughts completely orthogonal to the "expected" norms. And that's not bad! Yeah, I hate having to participate in 37 social websites, but look at the flow of information that's been the result. We've had the same degree of change as every other generation - it's just happening at a faster pace, thanks to technology.

I've had so many of the more senior folks in my chapter (and I'm 57) tell me how they'll never go to another AirVenture because of corporate sponsorships. OK; I never participated in the good old days, but when I first set foot in Oshkosh in 2005, my mouth was agape when I realized that I was in utopia. As others have said, if I don't want to view the John Deere exhibit, I won't. But I do sincerely Thank them for helping pull off the event. And, yes, I bought a JD lawn tractor when the need arose.

Time will tell if it's all good or not, but I'm giving Rod and Paul the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[Sonex1517]

Great post Carl!

[Kyle Boatright]

Carl,

I think your post is excellent, but there are three issues in play, and regardless of whether Hightower is a stand up guy or not, they haven't been properly addressed.

- Communication. If the organization needs to change, it is the responsibility of the organization's leadership to explain that on the front end and sell it to the membership. The communication on all of this (directional changes, cut backs, etc) has been akin to the snippets a privately held organization might dribble out. That doesn't play in an enthusiast organization.

- New direction. The new direction is evident, but still has not been adequately explained. The most recent releases by EAA have been full of corporate mumble and have not addressed the issue in a forthright manner. This needs to change immediately.

- Reorganization at HQ. This one would arguably be the easiest to explain, and probably wouldn't have resulted in anything more than a minor hiccup, if the first two issues had been managed properly. They haven't, so many members question the reorganization.

Again, the EAA is a member based organization. You can't run it like a corporation. You have to communicate. To date, EAA has done a horrible job of that.