Yes !  Yes ! Yes!  David.

Christopher Mc Donnell.
(Arrow with long wings fella)


----- Original Message -----
From: "David Olsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 4 July 2002 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Pay it forward (was Re: [aus-soaring] Rec License)


> 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.
>



--
  * 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.

Reply via email to