There is an old newspaper maxim that is probably outdated in the age of instant published reaction to any topic. We used to say that for every letter to the editor that we got, there were at least 1,000 readers who shared the view expressed. A phone call to the editor was worth about 100.
By those standards the quantifiable reaction to the firing of AOPA CEO Darren Pleasance six weeks ago is a veritable tsunami of discontent. But in an age of instant access to any number of forums to make one’s opinion known, I can’t get too excited by the practical impact of his abrupt departure. Although it dominated aviation news cycles for a couple of weeks and filled up forums with sometimes hyperbolic foretelling of doom for the organization, the actual numbers are a little underwhelming.
According to my sources only about 2,000 members actually quit and about 6,000 took back their voting proxies. That’s about 1% and 3% respectively. In fairness, there was mixed messaging about quitting the organization that reduced that total.
There were plenty of people advocating quitting as a way of sending a message to a comfortably tone-deaf board of trustees that the rabble has been roused. There were just as many others who advocated hanging on to the membership but pulling the proxy on the basis that reducing membership is counterproductive. That’s probably for the best, given the plummeting membership numbers. At the current rate of attrition, about 5% a year from what I can glean from published data, most organizations would have declared a five-alarm emergency. That’s not even the worst part. The business itself loses millions of dollars a year.
So why does all seem calm and serene in Frederick? It all depends on how you do math and the variables you assign. And that’s where I think Pleasance ran afoul of the conservative board.
You see, despite shipping its customers (the members) overboard at a furious rate along with massive reductions in income from advertising and credit card sponsorship and a general malaise through most of its profit centers, AOPA remains fabulously wealthy. Depending on the calculation method, AOPA has at least $150 million in investments and they regularly return $10-$15 million in dividends and stock sale profits to the organization. Indeed most of the current board members are money managers, so the AOPA portfolio is well looked after.
The investment income more than covers the business losses so there are no sleepless nights about making payroll ($14 million in 2024 with an average yearly paycheck of $83,000 for the 177 employees) or keeping the lights on in more than $30 million worth of real estate. At least for now.
But at least some of the board members look at those numbers and hit the panic button. A business that can’t meet its day-to-day expenses is unsustainable regardless of how much money falls in its lap from other sources. To them, the only job is to turn that around and there are only two ways to do that: Raise more money or cut expenses. In their minds, they’d already tried new ways to do the same old business and it didn’t work. Cuts had to be made. I believe that’s what Trustee Charlie Lynch meant when he told a crowd at the Buckeye event in Arizona last month that the new CEO would need a sense of “urgency.”
Pleasance understands the math and business realities but apparently viewed the seemingly heaven-sent investment windfall as a temporary reprieve from those realities and, more importantly, a source to fund reshaping AOPA to meet modern economic and communications realities. He hit the road as essentially a one-man PR campaign, and job one was to stop the bleeding. It’s enormously expensive to attract new customers, but keeping existing clients (members) is mostly a matter of checking in with them from time to time to make sure you’re fulfilling their needs.
Pleasance was made for that role. He’s an airplane nut and will talk all day about them. That immediately put him at the same level as 98% of members. His nonstop charm offensive showed some early results, and the number of membership cancellations fell by 70% in his first year. The outpouring of support for him after his departure is a direct result of that outreach. Members liked him a lot and by extension their affection for AOPA was starting to grow.
When he was shown the door, members felt betrayed and turned on the organization. He never got to implement his plans to promote AOPA to younger pilots, so we’ll never know if that and other initiatives could have actually started to grow the organization again. I’m afraid that will be part of his legacy. Those who cared enough to cancel their membership or withdraw proxies, write letters, or get on the phone will always be lamenting that lost opportunity.
But another part of that legacy will be a restructuring of the organization through a shakeup of the board and the adoption of some new bylaws. That should all be ready for the May 12 annual board meeting, which is open to paid-up members. The board and senior staff should be working all out to blunt the confrontation expected from angry members who will show up at Frederick for the meeting spoiling for a fight. They’ll be looking for change and won’t be satisfied with anything else.
But I think the course is already set for AOPA. At the top of the agenda will be selection of a new CEO who will implement the cuts that will be necessary to make those columns of figures line up. They may stumble onto a genius who can cut costs and grow the organization at the same time, but I wouldn’t count on that. Saving that kind of money means shedding a ton of payroll. It tends to dampen the enthusiasm around the office.
As for Pleasance, I wouldn’t worry too much about him. In the six weeks since his firing, he’s had a full slate of speaking engagements and personal appearances and probably has a list of job offers as long as his arm. But his short tenure at the top of what is, for now, the most important GA group in the world has set his course, too. Whatever he does will involve aviation at a very high level and that, I think, is a positive thing for aviation.
Thanks Russ, keep up the reports.
I wonder how many members cancelled their autopay. It wouldn’t get counted as a cancellation, but from an accounting perspective, it certainly represents a potential future cancellation.
Good point. I both pulled my proxy and canceled my auto pay to send a message. For now, I see dropping my membership as counterproductive, but we’ll see.
I cancelled mine and plan to let my 47 year membership lapse team it expires in July. I sent two emails to the chairman and got crickets in return. That is simply unacceptable.
Well said, Russ. Thank you for your outstanding reporting!
Good analysis here: https://www.saveaopa.org
I think the numbers who are just running out the clock on their membership, such as yours truly, will tell the tale. One might as well maintain access for the remainder of the year that is already paid in full. I’ve logged in twice since re-joining about 4 months back and don’t see what I missed when I was gone.
If the print magazine is the root cause of the revenue loss, this has been going on for as long as the WWW has existed! See news reports of troubled magazines and newspapers, as well as the windfalls at Google and FaceBook for online advertising. Most of the old-line flying magazines have gone through this.
AOPA ads value as long as they maintain their reputation and quality of information, something often missing in the rabble of flying information.
“But at least some of the board members look at those numbers and hit the panic button. A business that can’t meet its day-to-day expenses is unsustainable regardless of how much money falls in its lap from other sources.”
I’m a little confused about this line. Before that, you showed that AOPA was rolling in the dough. Income is income after all and if they can payout $15 M in dividends, they are still a profitable company, even day to day. At the least would it be better to say that the profit margins are shrinking and that is where the “panic” comes from?
I am very close to retirement having worked in the IT industry for 47 years. Along that path I would experience companies that would have this thinking “Well if we cut staff, the company will grow”. Almost to all, that thinking failed.
Cutting employees may save you quick labor dollars, but you lose a wealth of established experience. Fire 100 and hire 25 and what you get are 25 people who will cost the company more in training and lack of direct experience (but oh well, that is soft money). Cut employees and morale falls which impacts productivity which will eventually impact profit. One company I worked for cut 80% of their development staff with the idea that they could shift coding over to East Indian contractors. SAVINGS!!!
Within 4 months, the returned code was so bad that the remaining programmers could not fix it fast enough so a buggy version was released. Customers complained, company lost customers, company lost reputation and finally, the company hired back most of the fired programmers…as contractors now at twice what they paid before but the damage was done.
All I get from AOPAs move is a small group of greedy f&*ks who didn’t like a popular CEO, felt threatened by him so tossed him over board. Years ago I was an AOPA member, and honestly, I never really saw any benefit, so dropping memebership today, I cannot imagine is a real loss to pilots.
About 40 years ago Mercer Consulting of NYC ran a series of ads in the Wall Street journal with the repeated tagline “You Can’t Shrink Your Way to Greatness.” Cutting costs and staff to save money or make the numbers work makes no sense if there is not a plan to reinvest those savings to grow the business.
Pick your favorite business aphorism on growth. I’ll pick a Woody Allen line from Annie Hall “A relationship, I think, is, is like a shark, you know? It has to constantly move forward or it dies. And I think what we got on our hands is a dead shark.”
I hope we don’t have a shark on our hands.
Darren-with-the-apt-surname will be fine. He’s one of us, by which I mean, “a Aircraft Pilot and Owner”. AOPA’s loss is of someone who had a chance to bring that hide-bound organization back to relevance to the majority of pilots and owners. The name reveals their priority.
I’m afraid nothing short of a Board chistka will fix it.
AOPA has some significant issues and I hope they can get their act together in at timely fashion.
As badly as this has been handled, we still need them.
My city operated airport abruptly announced by email on Friday evening that they’re terminating all hangar leases and had brought in a new FBO management company effective the end of March. In a nutshell we have the option of either accepting the terms & conditions of a new “permit” arrangement before April 1st or vacate at that time.
The costs & details of the new arrangement are just being disclosed. Initial indications are significant cost increases are incoming along with a monthly fuel minimum purchases etc.
I reached out over the weekend to the local AOPA contact and was pleased to hear their regional representative was already getting involved.
Bottom-line, despite their shortcomings we need an organization with some heft in trying times.
Roger – what part of the country? How many tenants/hangar leases are we talking about?
KSVR, the GA reliever airport in SLC, UT.
A bunch between T-hangars & tie-downs, but don’t know the exact #.
Do you have a pilot’s group? (Either for the area or just for that airport?)
Using Google Earth and Street View, it looks like a pretty vibrant GA field.
Do you know the airport manager? I am guessing you could get a copy of the agreement they penned with the new FBO. I am guessing there were all of the usual “public notices” about this happening, but maybe not.
I’ve learned the hard way that it takes time and effort to stay engaged. The norm seems to be that engagement only happens once there is a problem… and then it’s too late.
Thanks for the comments. Actually this came out of left field with a Friday evening email. Folks are just digesting the idea and discussing.
I’m not sure what the regs are like in your municipality, but I’d be shocked if there wasn’t any public notice. The thing is that, if nobody is paying attention, nobody is looking for those public notices.
At our airport they hired a firm to send out notices about the Master Plan Update. They sent the notices based on proximity to the airport. Only two hangar owners lived close enough to the airport to get the notices.
Good luck in your fight. You can drop me a line at http://www.gmgaa.org if you want to chat.
The airport Authority several years ago had previously bid the contract but received no quotes because it required a heavy investment of capital expenditure that would revert back to the city at the end of their contract. this time around the process was hinted at but not publicized.
I cancelled my auto-renew. I figure I’ll wait and see how I feel about the organization when my next renewal comes up. I bet many did the same. It’ll be interesting to see what membership is in a year.
I’m lukewarm on AOPA at the moment. It seems like EAA has been a more effective advocate for the things that matter most to me. If I stop renewing AOPA perhaps I’ll just give EAA more of my dollars.
I’m a 50+ year member of AOPA, and an EAA lifetime member. I will let my auto-renew go this year, but like John, I’m lukewarm on AOPA right now. I don’t care about jets, let’s hope they talk “little” planes more or maybe they don’t want us.
I think it can be a very useful organization but it needs to evolve with the needs and wants of its members. I have used its various services which worked well but is can do more to appeal the new flavor of pilot.
Good analysis. I don’t even have to read between the lines to see what you’re saying is that not a hell of a lot will change. The trade/advocacy organizations benefit from what I think of as enthusiasm capture. Members will put up with all manner of shortcomings because they believe the organization is protecting their passion. Some truth to that, but mainly the organization is looking out for its own interests first.
As for attracting new members, I’m not so sure. The media verse has expanded so much that people have a gusher of content coming at them, a lot of it very good. Maybe $90 a year for AOPA doesn’t look like much of a value when the place is sitting on a mountain of cash. My guess is newer pilots may be less enamored of the altruism of doing their part to support the industry.
As a cynical friend of mine says, why buy the cow when the you drink the milk?
” drink the milk … FOR FREE!” 😁
OMG ,,, the mail just came. Katie invited me to rejoin AND save $20 if I only sign up for auto-renewal … AND … they’ll throw in a free AOPA hat (I need another one) and give me a chance at the Aviat Husky.
Wow. Such a deal.
It’s time to take that “World’s Largest GA Organization” banner down and chenge it to ‘The 2nd largest …”
Great commentary Russ.
The US is a winner in losing. The US is a global representation of WWF wrestler. A WWF match is managing the personalities’s of the fighters, hyping both side’s capabilities, creating threats for glorification of the battle to come to satisfy each wrestler’s fan base filling the stands with fan division locally, and getting national/international betting based on all of the above. Millions are now participants in this “clash of the titans” financially and viscerally. The loser can be a winner, and the winner can be a loser. This “fight”, this match is managed from start to finish. The eventual outcome means very little. The money is made in the management of hubris. The money is made from the management of perception… which is the fan base’s reality.
The US’s GDP comes primarily from management of financial services. 79% from financial management, only 18% from manufacturing. Consequently, we produce very little. Our income comes from managing overseas labor who is producing most of what we consume. We are “winning” because we don’t necessarily care where something is produced, whose labor and manufacturing investment is being exploited, we just manage the capital of that exploitation now labeled “investing”. As long as the off shore producer accepts our capital, we can borrow and print all the capital we need, aiding in their perception our money is good, which becomes their reality. That reality feeds US taxpayer portfolio investment in financial services, becoming our reality, helping to sustain these perceptions that our money is endless, always good, because we are both militarily the most powerful, and the globe’s largest consumer. We are “winners” because there is a 3-4% dividend for those invested participants large or small over time. The current financial climate means very little because we are groomed for long haul expectations and eventual rewards.
AOPA is a small version of the US financial management. As others have pointed out, ” growth” is measured by reducing “overhead”. Not AOPA spending. Functional performance is measured quarterly, and finally at the end of the fiscal year. The AOPA is indeed financially wealthy, facilitating more total income than spending, therefore a “winner” by the board member’s perception, which is their reality. Matter’s little how that income is managed, as long as more that comes into the kitty than goes out. ROI…returns on investment is the bottom line. The articles, the coverage of trends by AOPA reflects that. Turbines, business jets, glass panels of immense capabilities and disproportionate costs, million dollar “backcountry” playtoys morphing into aerial SUV’s, splashing around in amphibious $100k Cubs and upward, and heroizing any and all military hardware/software including those who fly/manage them as patriotism. AOPA’s idea of a “flivver” is a Cessna 150/152 with a glass panel, $25k O-200 fresh overhaul or $35k reman O-235 selling for $80-$150k. Classics are Mark Baker’s concours Staggerwing. Warbirds are Rod Lewis’s Constellation. Flying destinations of wine and culture… which the attendant costs of getting there, staying there, glamping if in the backcountry, and getting home is $1k weekend is featured as the new normal for AOPA members. We have been groomed for this.
But there are cracks in the proverbial dam. Pleasance did a credible job in recognizing the status quo, implementing strategies in his attempt to slow this inevitable slow motion train wreck of financial management vs offering real GA aviation media production that genuinely meets many of us pilots and airplane owner’s needs. Needs of those who are not owner/flyers of the latest greatest fantastic plastic million dollar offerings including unrealistic destinations, crazy expensive goodies filling Gucci flight bags.
I agree with many others, the damage and fall out from us who will let our membership lapse will be consequences AOPA will not feel until next year. Considering the consequences our economy will suffer and we will experience for decisions being made this year, AOPA will have a significantly declining membership, and potentially be on the backside of the RIO financial power curve, this time next year.
Russ… I see a lot of Pleasance’s style and GA savvy… or maybe better said, Pleasance saw and mimicked your style and GA media busines savvy with your departure of AvWeb and building up AvBrief. The growth, aviation media coverage, the quality of the aviation coverage you have launched, manage, and continue to refine is a testimony of your clear sighted objectives, combined with hardworking tenacity. For me, a significant reason why I am still part of and want to remain in, general aviation. You have been and still are a moral builder for people like myself. TY for having the courage representing the middle class of aviation. Currently AOPA does not.
Cancelled my 38 year AOPA membership, renewed my 38 year EAA as a Lifer. I was sad to do so, but….
Given that most of us have annual memberships, there isn’t much reason to terminate membership early. So, the relatively small numbers don’t concern me much. My 47th year of membership expires in July and I don’t plan to renew. I suspect a number of others are doing the same so it may take a full 12 months to see how many really decide it is time to leave AOPA.
I am hoping to attend the annual meeting this year for the first time ever. It would be interesting to see what the board would do if 10,000 members showed up.
Question (and don’t shoot the messenger if I’m mistaken here):
General Aviation appears to be declining, because airplanes and rental time are even more fiercely expensive than they used to be. With that in mind, should AOPA expect to maintain the membership levels of, say, 40 years ago?
If you’re selling clutches and carburetors, you have to plan for a declining market. Would that also be true for AOPA memberships?
Nice job, Russ. I appreciate your perspective.
Fantastic article. Glad I found you over here just now. Thank you!