Why is no one else forming a CBO? - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Aug 10, 2017, 12:25 AM
Registered User
JohnsPop's Avatar
Question

Why is no one else forming a CBO?


To anyone's knowledge, is any person or group considering forming a CBO as defined by the FAA to provide leadership to modellers if the FAA says you *have* to belong to a CBO to fly model airplanes? The only thing I care about is insurance as a supplement to my homeowner's, but it's not necessary. I don't need NATS, museums, etc, etc. And please don't tell me to start a CBO. I know nothing about anything like that. What I can say is I will not be *forced* to be a member of the AMA to fly model airplanes. If I remain a member, it will be my decision and not because I was forced by their efforts in Washington.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Aug 10, 2017, 05:04 AM
Registered User
The biggest obstacle to forming a CBO is flying sites, a new CBO would need to charter sites
to be of any value to it's members. Right now the AMA has a monopoly in that area and would
likely not allow another CBO's members to fly at their sites. It could take years for enough
sites to form that would be independent of current sites to make a new CBO a viable
option.

Although it may be possible for some current AMA sites to charter with a new CBO
I think the AMA would try to stop that and make the the sites either charter with
one or the other.
Last edited by ira d; Aug 10, 2017 at 05:20 AM.
Aug 10, 2017, 05:54 AM
Registered User
I think there are several reasons for it. First and foremost I believe is everyone is in a wait and see mode. No one knows what exactly is going to happen with the FAA and registration.

When the time comes I think we could see one of the full size organizations step up for the job. The EAA, AOPA or one of the others. One of them already offers insurance for commercial drones.

I do not believe the AMA has any hold over flying fields. To start with, should a second or even third CBO come along, any field sponsored by a government entity of any type would have to allow the new CBO to use the field. Otherwise they would have a law suit on their hands which would probably result in the total loss of the field. Private property, the use would be up to the land owner. Only in the rare instances where a club owns it's flying site might you find an exclusive hold by the AMA. And I doubt all of them would stand fast.

Back when the Sport Flyers Association was active, many clubs voted to allow either membership. To the point where the AMA threatened to pull club charters. A number of clubs dared them to do it. The AMA needs to face the fact that their insurance and contests are the only real draw there is for a club or individual to be affiliated with them. And for clubs it's only the insurance. Provide a better coverage for a similar cost and you will see clubs switching teams. Individuals who wish to compete can stay AMA. Those who don't can stay, change sides or, go somewhere else like their homeowners.

It's going to be interesting to watch. And short of the government mandating the AMA in law, I don't see how the AMA can come out of this in a better position. I think the AMAs days are numbered.
Aug 10, 2017, 07:09 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ira d
The biggest obstacle to forming a CBO is flying sites, a new CBO would need to charter sites
to be of any value to it's members. Right now the AMA has a monopoly in that area and would
likely not allow another CBO's members to fly at their sites. It could take years for enough
sites to form that would be independent of current sites to make a new CBO a viable
option.

Although it may be possible for some current AMA sites to charter with a new CBO
I think the AMA would try to stop that and make the the sites either charter with
one or the other.
The AMA charters clubs not sites. they have ZERO input on sites. They "suggest" layouts nothing more. As far as another CBO who knows what the future holds remember though we modelers are a very small group.

Mike
Aug 10, 2017, 07:43 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by ira d
The biggest obstacle to forming a CBO is flying sites, a new CBO would need to charter sites
to be of any value to it's members. Right now the AMA has a monopoly in that area and would
likely not allow another CBO's members to fly at their sites. It could take years for enough
sites to form that would be independent of current sites to make a new CBO a viable
option.

Although it may be possible for some current AMA sites to charter with a new CBO
I think the AMA would try to stop that and make the the sites either charter with
one or the other.
Most of the people not joining the AMA don't use flying sites. So I can see a CBO starting without a flying site. But it would be mostly M/R's and small electrics.
Aug 10, 2017, 09:06 AM
Multirotors are models too!
I am going to take an unpopular route with this reply. I think other CBOs may be a bad idea, and let me explain. There is strength in numbers. If you start fracturing the modelers/fliers that want to belong to a CBO into several smaller CBOs, each one of those smaller CBOs will have less lobbying power in congress, not that we have a lot with only the AMA. I highly doubt any CBO is going to reach the size and status of the AMA, and by jumping ship to other CBOs our voice to congress just gets smaller. make no mistake, the AMA needs some house cleaning, that is where we should place our efforts.....
Aug 10, 2017, 09:16 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty105
I am going to take an unpopular route with this reply. I think other CBOs may be a bad idea, and let me explain. There is strength in numbers. If you start fracturing the modelers/fliers that want to belong to a CBO into several smaller CBOs, each one of those smaller CBOs will have less lobbying power in congress, not that we have a lot with only the AMA. I highly doubt any CBO is going to reach the size and status of the AMA, and by jumping ship to other CBOs our voice to congress just gets smaller. make no mistake, the AMA needs some house cleaning, that is where we should place our efforts.....
Good point but when the organization that modelers have supported for over 80 years abandons their core group and stops being transparent this opens the door for others to step in.

Mike
Aug 10, 2017, 10:08 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
Good point but when the organization that modelers have supported for over 80 years abandons their core group and stops being transparent this opens the door for others to step in.

Mike
Rusty is correct. I would suggest that we concentrate our efforts to "wake up" the AMA, and only look at potential disbandment as a last resort.

One alternative would be to have sub-CBO's under AMA. Make AMA the main Representitive to DC, and the smaller local CBO's would handle local matters.

Just a thought.

RStrowe
Aug 10, 2017, 10:43 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by RStrowe
Rusty is correct. I would suggest that we concentrate our efforts to "wake up" the AMA, and only look at potential disbandment as a last resort.

One alternative would be to have sub-CBO's under AMA. Make AMA the main Representitive to DC, and the smaller local CBO's would handle local matters.

Just a thought.

RStrowe
Ah but.....Free Market and COMPETITION is the path to higher quality. Be it a product or services or both. And until AMA HQ feels the real threat of competition, nothing the membership can do will alter their behavior. Sport Flyers demonstrated that very well!

To include leaving the AMA because the majority of the membership is sucking the insurance teat firmly convinced they must have that coverage. Hence, the majority will never leave no matter how bad things get.
Aug 10, 2017, 10:49 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RStrowe
Rusty is correct. I would suggest that we concentrate our efforts to "wake up" the AMA, and only look at potential disbandment as a last resort.

One alternative would be to have sub-CBO's under AMA. Make AMA the main Representitive to DC, and the smaller local CBO's would handle local matters.

Just a thought.

RStrowe
No ones calling for disbandment of the AMA just improvement. The good old boy and the "we've always done it that way" thinking has to go. This is a multi million dollar organization run like a high school bake sale. I'm inclined the think the H.S. bake sale is more transparent though.

Mike
Aug 10, 2017, 10:54 AM
Registered User
JohnsPop's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ira d
The biggest obstacle to forming a CBO is flying sites, a new CBO would need to charter sites
to be of any value to it's members.
Didn't think about that, but I think something could be worked out. Also, what about the TONS of people who fly on their own property or in some public area where it is allowed, but there is no formal "site" there?
Aug 10, 2017, 11:06 AM
Registered User
JohnsPop's Avatar
I agree that there is strength in numbers, but with the AMA in place, I don't think we'll ever know just how many numbers there are, unless you hit it with a broad brush, something like sales numbers, which I don't know how you'd compile. There are a LOT of modelers out there who will never join the AMA for a variety of reasons. They might join a new CBO who they thought honestly had their best interests at heart, which could make the AMA's 165,000 number pale. I'm still a member of the AMA, but I jumped ship a long time ago. And I can promise you, if Congress comes back and says that I *have* to be a member of the AMA to fly, that'll never happen no matter which direction I go. It's looking more and more like the AMA has become just another alligator in that "swamp" which is NEVER going to get drained. But I digress, I didn't start this thread to be just another "bash the AMA" thread. I truly think someone could do something that would help out. I think RCG and RCU are two of the best possibilities out there. I realize they might have to splinter off to meet the "non-profit" status or meet the "educational" focus as outlined by Congress, but I think if either of these sites started a non-profit offering insurance, they'd be in the driver's seat.
Aug 10, 2017, 11:24 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnsPop
Didn't think about that, but I think something could be worked out. Also, what about the TONS of people who fly on their own property or in some public area where it is allowed, but there is no formal "site" there?
I have a feeling that the majority of those individuals prefer to operate outside the membership of a CBO, which is why the AMA is so up in arms over this whole CBO thing.
Aug 10, 2017, 12:23 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
No ones calling for disbandment of the AMA just improvement. The good old boy and the "we've always done it that way" thinking has to go. This is a multi million dollar organization run like a high school bake sale. I'm inclined the think the H.S. bake sale is more transparent though.

Mike
Agree. 100%.

RStrowe
Aug 10, 2017, 12:32 PM
Registered User
GSXR1000's Avatar
There was a new one, but looks like the site folded...

http://www.dontflystupid.org

But you can read up on it here.

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...d-Organization


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion Horus Drones Harpy and Merlin.. why is no one talking about these? Akura2 Mini Multirotor Drones 3 Aug 13, 2016 09:38 PM
Discussion NEW CBO.....is forming!! tailskid2 Fuel Plane Talk 0 Jan 12, 2016 04:03 PM
Discussion This is why no one orders from bidproduct... NO MORE HANDLING CHARGES! boredom.is.me Scratchbuilt Indoor and Micro Models 30 Feb 24, 2012 08:57 PM
Discussion mSR sucks? (No one else notices?) kylewoody Micro Helis 10 May 09, 2010 08:37 AM
Yippee! Greatest Fomie, at 16.50! Why does no one else fly them? Spooly Foamies (Kits) 27 Aug 05, 2009 08:39 AM