|
Without wishing to put more fuel on the fire (I don't
know what basis Mark based his comments on) BUT SSA is not like GFA, US glider
pilots don't have to be members of SSA.
John
Roakes analysis (which I linked to in an earlier email) shows a decline of 31424
to 29390 from 1992 to 2003 (estimates, see note)
Note:
"There has always been
difficulty attempting to get factual figures from the USA. Soaring pilots do not
have to be a member of the SSA. I have established that the FAA only
recorded gliding pilots with medicals over past years, their statisticians
believing this to be the prime requisite for a soaring pilot.
(Incorrect). Their statisticians have just realised their error, so for
the first time we are able to record an accurate figure for USA. We have
applied a world average percentage (+ and -) to all previous USA figures
to achieve a more representative count for that country. The new figures
reveal that SSA represents less than 50% of soaring pilots in the U.S.A."
So
while SSA membership is up since 2003 (and all strength to them), it appears US
_glider pilot numbers_ have decreased about 7% in the 10 years
previous.
And while you ask, Australian membership, from Johns
numbers, fell from 3661 to 2606 (nearly 30%!!) in the same period
92-03. I just checked the GFA website membership list and as of tonight
there are 2547, so only a comparatively small _loss_ over the last 2 years but
it shows our membership is still not growing, "dynamically" or
otherwise.
In purely pilot numbers the US figures are not good and
they have lost more (in absolute terms), but our losses have been from
a smaller base and have
been catastrophic.
Regards
SWK
Early December Mark Newton wrote:
" (2) gliding activity in
the US is declining a hell of a lot faster than it is in Australia, so I'm not
sure that it's a good idea to emulate whatever it is that they're
doing. ".
As a member of the SSA I have just received their
note that advised the following:
The only other big news from last week is that we closed the
membership books for November and thus, now know what our 2005 member number
is (drum roll please.) We ended the year with 12,740 members, up from 12,434
in 2004, which was up from 12,122 at the end of 2003. This makes the second
consecutive year of membership growth for the SSA (for those that may be
wondering, the membership year here at SSA is considered to be from December
1 st to November 30, due to a large number of Chapters that
renew in December). While this number, 12,740, is somewhat below the target
established two years ago by the Strategic Planning Committee, I am
nevertheless pleased from the standpoint that we have now proven that we can
sustain a program of membership growth. I think there are more soaring
enthusiasts out there that we can convince to join us in the SSA. If you know
of any, please help us sign them up. There is strength in numbers.
Mark - Do you therefore
mean that their membership growth is not growing as dynamically as ours?
What growth do they need not to be in decline in your view ..... or are
you just saying that they just aren't as active, like flying less or doing
less miles?
Does anyone know what
our Membership figures & trends have been for the past 2
-3 years
Regards
Geoff
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 11:23
AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] The Future
of Gliding Part 2
mark king wrote:
> One recent article in the
magazine asks the question re is there a large
> pool of pilots out
there current and possible who want to fly for
> recreational
purposes as distinct from competition or long distance
>
flights?
I think the population of people like that is
understated. Terry Cubley
is promoting the sports side of gliding
quite a bit, but only about 2% of
GFA members seem to front-up to
competitions, so I reckon his priorities
are a tad misguided there.
I think the other 98% of GFA members are
more interested in the social
and recreational aspects of gliding than
its sporting
side.
(frankly I couldn't care less about competitions myself, but
that doesn't
mean I don't lend every possible encouragement to those in
my club who do)
> What I am suggesting is that if GFA is to
significantly grow the glider
> pilot market it needs to do a lot
more then provide some assistance to
> clubs. I am saying it needs to
be out there leading the way, doing the
> work itself on the
frontline of gaining members. To do that you need
> additional
funding and I suggest a front line "shopfront" to put gliding
> on
the public's map of cool things to do.
The GFA isn't set up to do
that. The GFA is, more than anything else,
a regulator. Yes,
it does have other functions, but they're largely
subservient to its
regulatory role.
I suspect that widespread acceptance and
understanding of that reality
would end the somewhat boring and
repetitive "why can't the GFA do XXX"
debates lots of people seem to
have.
The way gliding in Australia is structured puts the clubs on
the front-line.
To grow gliding we need the clubs to grow. To grow
the clubs we need the
club members to put in the hard yards needed to
make it happen; But lots
of the club members have been around for
long enough that they feel like
they've done their bit, and the new
members have spent so long being supported
by the old ones that they
don't understand that there is a bit that needs
doing.
So as the
early 21st century waxes-on, we've seen the OFITTHs all starting
to get
to the age where they start giving-up and withdrawing, and the
people my
age are too busy enjoying themselves in the air to put in hard-time
on
the ground to grow the sport.
That'll change. We're in a
transition phase we've never needed to face
before. We'll get
through it eventually.
I spoke to someone from a Northern SA club
over dinner in the Waikerie
pub one night -- His club has been in decline
for years, and I said, "You
have a town with a population of 25,000 right
next door. Why can't
you recruit from there? You only need a
handful of new members to make
the club sustainable...!"
His
response was something like, "I've done my bit. I don't care
anymore.
If the club folds that's ok with me, as long as I can still fly
somewhere
I'll be happy." And now he's a member at Waikerie, over
250km away, even
though he has a club on its last legs ten minutes drive
away from his house.
That club will die (if it hasn't already).
I
wonder how much of the stasis of the GFA is driven by that
mindset.
> GFA could either set up one or more social enterprises
to fund
> worthwhile activities to increase memberships or it could
combine the 2
> eg run a centre that makes money and attracts new
members.
$400,000 for an airfield-sized paddock close-ish to a
city; Another
$100,000 for structures like hangars, bar,
accommodation; $500,000 on a
shiny new fleet and an old
Pawnee...
Easily a million dollars in start-up costs to do what
you're proposing,
which would completely wipe out GFA's cash
reserve. And if it doesn't
make enough money to pay its employees'
wages, and turns into a commercial
failure, what does it get us?
I
repeat what I said in my last message to you, Mark: If someone wants
to
sink money into a business like that, there's nothing stopping
them. But
the GFA is the wrong organization to do it. You
don't see CASA running
flying schools; You won't see GFA running a
professional gliding operation
either.
> Now before anyone
flames me and tells me this would send GFA broke I
> would ask that
people take the blinkers off and let all the ideas flow
> freely if
they are really interested in making gliding a growth sport.
You're
creating a false dichotomy, Mark: You're implying that anyone
who
doesn't agree with your idea isn't interested in making gliding a
growth
sport. Which is bullshit really, isn't it?
I think you'll find
that many people are interested in growing gliding,
even though they
can't see your idea working (many others aren't, and
there are lots in
the middle who just don't care either way).
Commercial gliding
ventures have been unsuccessfully attempted at various
places around
Australia already. The fact that the landscape isn't
dotted with
with in 2005 should tell you something about the quality of
their
outcomes. It's a model which simply doesn't work. Given a
choice
between a club and a professional op, Australians tend to choose
the club.
That alone should tell you that your personal preferences for
professional
uniformed instructors and shiny new-car-smell fleets aren't
universally
(or even widely) held.
I'm not interested in hearing
about how it works in the US, for two
reasons: (1) the US doesn't
have a club scene like we do, and that
changes the economic dynamics of
the system in some profound ways; and
(2) gliding activity in the
US is declining a hell of a lot faster than
it is in Australia, so I'm
not sure that it's a good idea to emulate
whatever it is that they're
doing.
> The NFP sector in Australia and the USA is the fastest
growing sector of
> the economy,
Right, you've lost me
here. I simply will not believe that statement
unless you're able
to show some independent research to back it up.
Furthermore, the
dot-com boom should have taught us all that "fastest growing"
isn't a
useful metric. Going from zero in the bank to one dollar in
the
bank is INFINITE GROWTH! but not actually interesting.
> so
how come GFA is content with no growth? We are becoming
>
increasingly richer as a society and looking for places to spend our
> leisure money,
We aren't getting richer as a society.
We're buying shiny imported
consumer goods by going into debt.
Savings are at or near an all-time
low. National credit card debt
is ridiculous. The affluence of our
country is almost totally based
on the continued inflation of the
property market and artificially low
interest rates, which allow
people to borrow against equity and go into
ever-increasing amounts
of debt. Wage growth has almost all been
concentrated at the big-end
of town, with almost nothing over the last
ten years for middle-income
earners (and the small amount of growth
that's present in the stats
has largely been arrived at by redefining
what we mean when we say
"Middle-Income Earner").
As a society, at
a macroeconomic level we're becoming asset-rich,
cash-poor, and we're
having to work ever-harder to service the interest
on the debt we've used
to get there.
Any plans for the future growth of gliding (or, for
that matter, the
future growth of -anything-) need to accept that
reality. Assume
near-stagnant economic growth and make plans based
on that for the
forseeable future. Anything else is financially
irresponsible given
the environment we're in at the moment.
>
GFA should be out there getting more then its fair share
> of the
market. How come glider activity is far higher per head of
>
population in some European nations despite the far poorer weather and
> ATC issues?
Because they earn Euros and spend Euros to buy
their fleets. A glider
is cheaper to acquire, cheaper to
operate. The public image is so much
nicer because the climate
mitigates against horrible dust-bowl airfields
in the middle of
nowhere. The climate is more forgiving on their equipment
so it
lasts longer and can be amortized over longer timescales.
Other
forms of recreation are a lot more expensive than they are here
due
largely due to land costs (when you join a local soccer club
your
membership dues need to finance rent on the club's pitch and
clubrooms,
which are likely to be in prime city real-estate areas
and
valued in the millions -- so membership won't be cheap).
In
Australia we earn aussie dollars, but we have to buy gliders with
Euros
then import them, which means a new glider costs about as much as a
new
house, whereas in Europe it's more like the cost of a luxury car or
a
boat. That sets either the baseline cost or the baseline quality
of
facilities: We can either have new gliders which are too
expensive for
most people to fly (which is why commercial operations
fail), or old
cheap gliders which commercial ops wouldn't want to buy but
which clubs
are perfectly happy with. Those who are financially
well-endowed can
buy new gliders, but nobody except them will fly them
'til then sell them
20 years from now.
Again, these are the
realities of the situation, one of the constraints
on the
landscape. There's lots of room to move, lots of space for
imagination
and innovation, but if you sink money into an enterprise
which ignores
these foundations you'll just lose it, and that's
that. Gliding works
as a part of a larger economy and a larger
regulatory environment, and
they work together in this country to produce
gliding clubs made up out
of enthusiasts rather than gliding companies
made up out of professionals.
> One last point, GFA almost has a
monopoly over gliding and monopolies
> generally have the following
features; nil or low growth, lack of
> innovation if not outright
stifling of innovation, strong resistance to
> change, inability to
attract and keep the best staff, over priced
> products and services,
poor customer service. Does the GFA have some or
> most of these
features?
The GFA is a regulator. You're trying to liken it to
a provider of
products and services. The analogy doesn't
fit.
> I would love to see the GFA leading a dynamic and growing
glider
> movement but I can't see that happening with the current
strategies.
> Comments?
Leading a dynamic and growing glider
movement isn't the GFA's job.
What you're suggesting is akin to expecting
the South Australian
Chamber of Commerce to run a department store ("It's
commerce, isn't
it?").
The engine of growth is in the clubs.
The problem gliding in Australia
faces is that many of the clubs don't
care anymore, and are perfectly
happy to fold-up and die; And the
ones who aren't folding up and dying
often have unrealistic expectations
about what the GFA is supposed to do
to help them grow.
Solve
those problems, and gliding will start growing again.
-
mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I
tried an internal
modem,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
but it hurt when I
walked.
Mark Newton
----- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 ------------- Fax:
+61-8-82231777
-----
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring
mailing list
[email protected]
To
check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
|
