My own experience and, if I may speak on behalf of members of the NQSC, is that a small club like ours benefits from not attracting large numbers of the T shirt brigade, we tend to encourage the "selling" of memberships rather than AEF's. To extend the sales metaphor we try to "qualify sales" to ensure that the people who are "invited" to the field, are those most likely to take up the sport.
How does this help? For a small club it means that the existing student/aircraft are not heavily taxed by "tyre kickers". The club aircraft are therefore available for students and post solo pilots. We endeavour where possible to have the students and post solo club pilots run their own show with the help of rostered instructors, while private owners fly their own aircraft without the need to spend heaps of time on the ground running the wire and such like. In exchange the private owners do much of the administrative and other work as well as pay for the club hangar via hangar rental. Granted it is not a perfect system and many post solo pilots work hard at the field and do lots of other work. We (the private owners) try very hard to ensure such members are given the maximum opportunity to fly and many private owners will also choose not to fly at all on particular days, giving all of their energies to maintenance issues or to operating the winch etc. In the end what we have is a system where students and early post solo pilots run their own operation at the field under the supervision of the duty instructor.. Owners provide instruction, DI training, airworthiness training, AEI, and other functions and get to fly pretty much as much as they can. Students and post solo pilots get to fly the two club aircraft as much as they can so long as they can make the operation efficient. This means that the keen new members are doing quite a bit of the drudgery but are rewarded with the flying they need, and the private owners get to fly unhindered but are providing much of the infrastructure required for the club to function. When growth is rapid (as it has been for us recently) all members are challenged a bit, but we all try very hard to maximise the flying opportunities for ALL. Private owners will give up their flying to maximise the flying for students and non-owners and then we'll try to organise a day where only private owners fly. Sometimes we man the winch for each other, and sometimes a hard working post solo non-owner will offer his time. I think for small operations, a true co-operative approach is essential. We all must be aware of the needs of the others and try our best to be fair and equitable. AEF's still occur but mostly with well qualified people. Special days are sometimes organised for less well qualified people, but the emphasis is always on attracting prospective new members. I have even gone to the extent of asking people if they want to fly just for the experience or if they are seriously considering taking up the sport. If they answer the the former, I direct them to another club, or arrange for them to come on a day when I know we will have a lot of AEF's. My own feeling is that small clubs should not focus on raising revenue via AEF's, but focus on giving maximum value to existing members. Newer members are keen and should be encouraged to participate in the running of the daily operation, sure many cannot afford the time to be at the field all day and will not choose gliding, a shame for the sport but no real loss to a small club. Look for those who will! Maybe some day your operation will be big enough and efficient enough to attract those people back, or they can learn to soar at a commercial operation. The ratios for selling our sport are not all that different to any other sales exercise, wasting your club resources getting as many AEF's as possible, is just that "wasteful." My own estimates are as follows Unqualified interest ( I have always wanted to try that) HUNDREDS of people Well why dont you here is how you can do it blah blah blah..... AEF's as a result 20 New members 1 Qualified ( I am really interested in learning to fly a glider) 10 AEF's as a result 5 New members 1 So you can fly 20 people and use all of your club resources, taking time away from those who have already paid and worked hard to be there and get NO MEMBERS or you can fly 5 and get a new member. These numbers may vary from place to place and from "salesperson" to "salesperson", but the principle is still the same. If yu are a small club, qualify your prospective new members and fly only those who you think are most likely to take up the sport, direct the rest to a commercial operation. David Olsen . ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Rundle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 1:34 PM Subject: Re: Pay it forward (was Re: [aus-soaring] Rec License) > John, > > > So as the burden of club > > obligations interferes with my enjoyment of a sport I love, I find I am > > casting about looking for alternatives to Gliding Club operations to enjoy > > the thrill of flying. > > You've put your finger on what I see as a problem (challange?) facing > gliding > clubs. After a while, running ropes and driving winches just becomes > like hard > labour. Especially when much of that labour is being given to students > of whom > a large proportion will not continue on in the sport. As clubs generally > try > to keep fees as low as possible to encourage new blood, the end result > of all > this activity is little or no financial benefit to the club, little or > no new > blood and a burnt out longer term membership. Clubs need to identify those > individuals that are in if for the long term and eliminate the "got the > t-shirt" > brigade. > > How? Buggered if I know, but here are some ideas. And for those critics > in the > wings, please remember that I'm not suggesting that all clubs should > adopt these > ideas, but that some clubs might be able to make a go of it, where they are > currently failing. Also, whilst my rantings on this list might lead many to > believe that I'm "anti-club" that is not in fact true. Clubs need to exist > because (most) individuals simply can't afford to run their own > airfield, and to > a lesser extent, their own aircraft. However, the politics that > invariably comes > with the club scene becomes destructive, and in todays recreational market, > where individual freedom rates highly, clubs are a major problem for > aviation > and gliding in particular because it relies on clubs the most. > > . Initial training in motor gliders allows the student to get lots of > circuits > and aerial work without the need for anyone else on the field (except the > instructor of course). The instructor can also focus on the student, and > flight > bookings are practical so that todays time harried recreator can > realistically > fit in some flying without being charged with family neglect. Downsides, > cost, > motor gliders are either new and expensive or old and rare. Possibility > of the > motor glider as the club tug on Sundays might help. Alternatively some > training > could be conducted in Ulight's, same benefits as a motorglider but > possibly less > expensive capital purchase. A common licencing system would help in this > regard. > Student might be put off by the engine bit, after all they wanted to > take up > gliding, but then others who enjoy all types of flying could see it as a > bonus. > The hourly rate might seem higher, but two half hour flights with > aero-tows, > 2 x $25 + $45/hr = $95. In the motor glider you'd get a whole lot more > circuits > in your hour and end up paying around the same amount with no pushing of > gliders > running of ropes, obligation to stay and help the next student. > > . Clubs have non-student days. Means that all the students turn up on > their day > and thus they run ropes etc for the other students when not flying, > rather than > one or two students turning up each flying day. Those that enjoy > teaching have > their time in the sun on those days leaving the solo pilots to have > their day > as well. Again, a licence/rating that allowed for operation without L2 > instructor > would make it a lot easier for a club to do this. > > . Clubs that don't train at all. At the moment, the GFA system means > each and > every club is required to have a training operation. The end result is > that only > the larger clubs have good training resources, the smaller clubs are > stretched > to provide the necessary equipment and personel, and it's central place > in the > club operation is off putting to qualified pilots. If clubs (and I'm > thinking > smaller clubs in particular) could operate without a training system, > and send > their students to other clubs/schools to be trained, then they might be > able to > focus on providing quality gliding hours to solo pilots, whilst the > training > club/schools might be more economically viable because of the increase in > students (as a result of the student population not being stretched > across 90 > clubs in Aus). Also the increased viability of the schools means that > pilots > that belong to non-training clubs have somewhere to go to get checks done. > A single check flight might be pricing event for these pilots but it's a > once > a year. Again requires a licencing system that allows a club to exist > *without* > an instructors panel. > > rgds > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > -- > * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list. > * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message > * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information. > -- * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list. * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.
