Changes to the field; increased fees ?

[Michael]

I have been considering several members' requests to expand the size of the TEMAC field. Everyone I have spoken to has given positive feedback.

Please consider:

1. This year, for the first time, our grass-cutting fees will go up, based on the current size of the field.

2. If we expand the field, our annual rent will increase.

3. If we expand the field, our grass-cutting fees will increase.

4. I have committed to minor field improvements already, namely more gravel for the driveway, and rolling the flight area.

5. Membership is down. We now stand at about 40 to 45 members; down from our high of 60. It is still trickling in (3 renewals this week, and I expect more as weather improves), but the recession may have affected a few members.


If you read this post, please respond. It is very important.

Are you willing to pay more for your membership? Perhaps $15 to $20 more per year?

I see nothing wrong with leaving things the way they are; we don't need the most perfect field possible; it's pretty good the way it is.

Michael

[Andy Hoffer]

I can afford the additional $20 per year, but I would recommend maintaining the current field size and just make the improvements noted above by Michael (rolling the flight area; adding gravel on the driveway). We have an excellent facility that seems to meet most members' needs.  I don't think it is prudent to consider expansion until we have a sustained membership base and revenue to support the added cost.  Our membership fees are reasonable, and keeping them that way encourages continued participation. I would not want to see people being discouraged by fees going beyond a psychological barrier.  

The decline in membership is a concern and needs to be examined more fully in the context of maintaining the viability of TEMAC.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Andy Hoffer

[salvix]

quote:Originally posted by Andy Hoffer

I can afford the additional $20 per year, but I would recommend maintaining the current field size and just make the improvements noted above by Michael (rolling the flight area; adding gravel on the driveway). We have an excellent facility that seems to meet most members' needs.  I don't think it is prudent to consider expansion until we have a sustained membership base and revenue to support the added cost.  Our membership fees are reasonable, and keeping them that way encourages continued participation. I would not want to see people being discouraged by fees going beyond a psychological barrier.  

The decline in membership is a concern and needs to be examined more fully in the context of maintaining the viability of TEMAC.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Andy Hoffer

Ditto.

+1 on keeping the field this size and improving the driveway/parking area, which may lead to a longer flying season.

Sergio

[thehaze]

Michael,

I'd have to agree with the first two posts. Our priority should be improving the existing field by working on the driveway and the parking area.

I'm a little unclear as to why the field size is an issue. Perhaps one or more of the members who are interested in this could explain why this is something we should be looking at?

Declining membership is a another discussion altogether and perhaps worthy of a post all on it's own.

Mike

[Leo]

I agree with all the comments, leave the field as is.
However one suggestions is to have all members pay the annual fee in January, if later add 10 or 15 dollars for late payment.


Leo

[Papa]

Ok I'll play 'Devils Advocate' The longer landing area would be most useful for students. How many of you had to make abrupt turns to avoid running off the end of the runway? Many members area getting into bigger, multi motored and expensive models (ala Colin Moses). It would be nice to have room for a stretched landing rather than overshoot and go around.

What I would like to see happen is:

Take the patch at the north end, 120' x 120' and move it to the south end. this would leave the total area the same but give us 120' more pit area and parking. I see this as a 'safety' issue as it gives us an extra 120' away from the new power lines. Now the power lines may not come into play for the experienced flyer but for the ones like me it would be an extra cushion I would appreciate.

In addition add another 100' to the south end to make the overall length 420'. It would give us a dedicated Heli area at either the north end or the south end. Lots of pit area and parking for future growth.

Membership: We need to become less passive in our membership and recruitment activities. We need to go to sources of membership and encourage new and existing flyers to try electric and TEMAC. One thing would be nice to offer them the best flying field around with lots of length for gliders and big models to land.

Fees: In return for a longer field and improved drive way I think higher fees are acceptable but the key is more membership numbers.

Jack Higgins.

[pmackenzie]

I agree with Jack.[]

Farther from the road for increased safety and a flatter runway (north end is a hill right now) would both be good ideas.
If it would mean higher fees, then perhaps we need some rough numbers to be able to make a more informed decision. But another $15 to $20 would not be a deal breaker for me.

Pat MacKenzie

[MarcV]

Although I'd be willing to pay more for a better field, there will be some who won't.  Most likely those who visit very infrequently or are members at a different club.  Also new members might be put off by a higher fee.  So we need to consider the fact that a fee increase might not result in much more money.

Maybe we need a plan to "sell" a fee increase by demonstrating that we are a first class club.  Or that we have (or will have) a dedicated heli pad area?  How about making the increase more of a donation, with peer pressure (Michael pressure?) for those who don't make the donation but show up each week.  Or maybe try to attract members of other clubs with a discounted membership for those who are interested in flying electric in addition to their regular "wet" planes.

Marc

[gordonbw]

I'll happily pay an extra $15-20 per year.  

Re broadening membership base -- from my recent Internet research and hobby store visits, it looks to me as though e-helis are greatly increasing in popularity.  Maybe a dedicated helicopter area would attract more heli-oriented members.



Gordon Braun-Woodbury
"How on earth do I land this thing?"

[Papa]

Here's another thought! Not to belittle the money but that's a side issue. People will pay for perceived value. What we need to do is develope the perceived value of a membership in TEMAC. Particularly for a newcomer to the hobby.

What are some of the values offered?

An excellent training program anchored around Clair Murray.
Minimum barriers or distractions for a student flyer.
A core of enthusiastic flyers who volunteer help all along the way.
A fun session at the field with friendly club members.
Understanding fellow flyers who fly circuits and look out for student pilots.
Model preparation assistance every step of the way.
No club politics.
Access to a very knowledgeable group of electric flyers and pioneers in the hobby.
People are proud to be a member of the club.

These are my personal 'value added' items I'm sure there are more but these could form the body of a brochure to hand out to newcomers or down load from the website.

Please add your ideas to the list or negatives if you have them.

Jack.

[Papa]

Following up on Gordon's comments. What would you Heli guys want in a dedicated heli pad or pads and where should they be located? Upwind or downwind? How far from spectators or vehicles.  

Jack.

[thehaze]

Increasing the cost of membership is not going to help our enrollment. And in fact may hurt us in the long run. Most of the new pilots entering into this hobby are starting out in park flyers. I know, because that's how I got into this. As you are all aware these people fly in parks and don't pay a cent to anyone to do it. Joining a club causes your costs to go way up when you consider the club dues and the MAAC membership. I distinctly recall having to explain to my home's CFO why I needed to spend this money to do something I was doing for free.

Expanding our membership would bring in the $ we need to improve the field and add the types of things (heli areas, better pits etc.) and the way to get the park flyer crowd to join the club is by showing them that this is a better way to enjoy the hobby. That's why I joined.

In my day job, I spend a lot of time preparing business cases for publicly funded projects and the number one mistake is adopting a "if you build it, they will come" philosophy. In our case we should find out if there is a sufficient pool of new members who want/ need a place to fly. Perhaps this season we adopt some new measures to test the waters here and see if anyone shows up. Some thoughts:

1. A heli only event. One night, open to anyone with MAAC.
2. Park Flyer events. Show these people that flying a a club field is superior to flying in fields and parks.
3. Improve the Club's visibility from the road. A lot of cars travel down Stouffville Rd and I'm pretty sure very few of them know what is going on a our field. A nice big sign with our web address might direct some eyes to our web site where we can educate them about our club.

After all this, we could prepare a business case for the entire club to vote on and decide if increasing our costs is going to deliver the value (from both the financial, and the quality of the flying experience) that we hope to achieve.

[MarcV]

In response to Jack's question about a heli pad:

It would be nice to have at least an area to take off, land, and hover without worrying about airplanes.  Then again, the hovering area need not be over our field.  As for how far from vehicles and spectators - the more the better.

But I wouldn't count on getting too many new heli pilot members as they can fly fine in their local park, and if they wanted to join a club, a heli club might be better where they can get more assistance and not play 2nd fiddle to fixed wing aircraft.

Marc

[terrabit]

quote:Originally posted by thehaze
3. Improve the Club's visibility from the road.

Great idea right there. A big sign would be minimal cost, and bring in some membership I'm sure. I didnt even know the field was here after 1 year of living in stouffville until I was told about it. I am almost sure I would have seen it much earlier had there been a simple sign out front. Maybe I should just pay attention more doh!
Also, I would be more than willing to pay an increased fee, but I would like to see a longer runway for my money. Not only would this allow me to fly larger and faster models, but the farmer planting corn on certain years might not be such a buzzkill.

[slo-poke]

Originally posted by Michael

I have been considering several members' requests to expand the size of the TEMAC field.

Michael , I'll also play devil's advocate.
Seems Lambert our sub lessor has decided to use a portion of the field that we originally agreed to lease . Are we still paying the same rent for the field now that he is using almost an acre of our club field .I think if you ask him to replace that portion of the field to extend the runway we aren't using any more land than we pay for already. This is clearly visible on the original and recent aerial shots on the TEMAC site. As to the extra fee to cut more grass, as I suggested years ago ,the club could buy a used riding mower and have club volunteers take turns ,like other clubs . At about $500 + expenses we would be well ahead of the curve. BTW what kind of money is the club spending on this service ?
Just a few thoughts ,,,
john

3. If we expand the field, our grass-cutting fees will increase.