Growing the membership

[Scott Ducey]

[Zach Grant L1011jock]

[Scott Ducey]

[Kristin Winter]

[Ben Ayalon]

Scott

So when you say "two wrongs don't make a good", kindly explain how what I say is wrong?

There is a way to present things and talk with other people even if you disagree with their opinion. In my opinion you have failed. Even if you feel that Dick has mislead you, even if you think that the board has wasted your time you still need to address the issue in a civilised way. I have seen the draft of the SBM minutes that were sent to all tribe chiefs for approval. It seems that all (maybe one did not) agree with yours and Kristin’s thought that ICS must look forward into the issue of parts and airworthiness. Where the board did not agree with you is the way that it should be done and how it should be done. The board asked for more info, instead of doing it the toys flew out of the pram.

I don’t say that you are right and I don’t say that you are wrong. All I say that there is a way to address situations and disagreements.

Kristin

The backroom maneuvering that meant that the work Scott and I did was wasted from the beginning would have been an on going obstacle to progress.

I believe you that there were manoeuvring behind the scenes, you will always have it.


The only way to make it worthwhile for me is if our slate were the only candidates. I offered that option. The current officers did not take me up on it.

You knew from the beginning that this is not a viable offer that anyone will entertain. If you believe in what you say you need to convince other and stand up for elections. In this world nothing is given without an effort. In 2002 when we stood up to the ICS leadership we spent lots of time and effort. Bill Harris, JVB, Karl Hipp and more fought for it, it was not given. If to be honest with you, You, Scott, Jeff myself and other are probably a large vocal minority that demands the change in direction. I said it many times in the open and I will say it again, I think that the Flyer has no or very little value. I like it, it is nice to have but there is no much in it. To drop it all together, in my opinion is a mistake., we need to find a way how we can still have a magazine, hopefully a better one but for a lower price. To throw the baby with the bath water is not wise. I can’t see a fault if the board needs another 6 months or year to study the situation and see what can be done, UI don’t think that this is a reason to go all out with blazing guns.

You know that I told you that I will support you, you know that I agree with your views, you know that I come across airworthiness issues (real and un-real) but I think that the current attacks are pre matured. Time will say who was right and who was wrong.

Fly safe and thanks for you help and advice.

Ben

[Scott Ducey]

Ben, I am not really sure I can say anything more than what I have already said. I think we spelled out in great detail what our position was, and what was proposed. We presented a fairly open-ended outline that was put forth that way to elicit feedback from those present. The goal was to depart from the past approach, and craft a way forward. We dictated nothing. Yes we failed, as the answer was "no". No change in the mag, no change in the approach, and no alternative plan was suggested. The airworthiness committee was formed to merly delay any change or decision, but allowed ICS to point to something that would allow its members to believe something was being done. I think the whole thing is window dressing, however, I hope that I am wrong. I wasn't about to waste more time talking with a group of people who in my opinion do not want to change in an enviroment that needs change. The long sorted story has been presented in painstaking detail here and on Delphi, and I don't believe I can add anything further without saying the same thing over and over.

In my mind ICS is not interested in preserving the value and the future of the Comanche. Read what one of the Board members says in the Spring Board Meeting about the Comanches life span...

"Dave Fitzgerald said that not all new members are young. The numbers are unsustainable. This is a dying society but it will take about 15 years to die".

Let me ask you, if you were a 30 or 40 year old potential owner of a Comanche, would you be more inclined to buy a Comanche after reading this, or less inclined? We need a better vision than this.

Just my humble opinion. Sorry if you feel otherwise.

Best regards,

Scott Ducey

[Kristin Winter]

Ben,

Yes, there is always backroom maneuvering. But the rest let themselves be swayed by that and hence closed their minds before we even got on a plane. They let themselves be swayed not to a competing plan, but natterings of negativity by one whose idea of type support is to charm Piper into making parts. Fear of change won out over reason. The failure of leadership is staggering.

ICS has so tied itself into knots, and is such a prisoner of its own history, the effort to straighten it out would be staggering enough. Add to that the effort needed to win an election with the risk that we would only get part of the slate elected. I saw a very real chance that I might be elected President, and then be stuck with the same other officers. In that case, I would have just been wasting more time and money with no positive end in site. I asked myself why I should take the chance. I had no good answer, especially in light of the fact that the last attempt to reform ICS didn't last. You, Bill, Karl and others spend all that time and money for naught, yet you think we should do the same!?

In truth, I didn't expect the current officers to resign. I hoped they would, but I didn't expect it. But my offer accomplished one other thing -- now they own it. Their incessant complaints about not having any help, also rings hollow when one considers the number of volunteers that they have chased off.

Most of the board probably believes that we need more type support, but will not change, even in the face of declining membership. It was said at the meeting that the magazine cannot last, yet everyone is afraid to make a move. Fear rules. Vision is lacking. Technical expertise on the board is woefully inadequate.

I am merely the last is a long line of members who has pointed to the lack of vision and leadership among those who control the society. So no, I did not expect the officers to resign, but I truly think that the current officer corp cannot save ICS. The did the society and their legacy a disservice by keeping the reins of power.

[kenhill]

Here is a Scoutmaster Minute that I used in one of our Troop Meetings. Perhaps you will find inspiration in it:

18. WINNING ISN'T EVERYTHING
Some years ago a hard-nosed coach said, "Winning isn't everything, but it sure beats whatever's second. " There's some truth in that. Everyone likes to win. Very few people enjoy losing.

The trouble is that in every type of competition, there must be losers as well as winners. That's true in sports. It's also true in life. You and every other human being find that sometimes you have to be a loser. Perhaps your sports team loses a game on an unlucky break. Or maybe you work hard in school but get low grades. Some people might say you're a loser.

Maybe so. But you don't have to stay a loser. The real difference between winners and losers is that a loss makes some people more determined to do better next time. In the long run they are the winners because they learn to profit by their defeats and mistakes.

No, winning isn't everything. We can learn from losses, too. Let's remember that in the years to come.

[Kristin Winter]

Ken,

Time will tell if there are any winners here. Maybe some members of the board won. But the question to be answered is did ICS win. Time will tell, but I see no evidence of it. Do you see ICS as the winner here?

I know that I have learned from my loss. I have learned not to play when the deck is stacked. I have learned that I need to find a new game where there is a chance of succeeding. It was an expensive lesson, but the message has finally gotten through my thick Norwegian skull.

[Scott Ducey]

Ken, I get what you are saying about winners and losers. Unfortunately, the truth is the real loser is our airplanes. Our stormscope and garmin weather say we are heading into a thunderstorm, and the board thinks our instruments are lying to us.

I have indeed learned from this experience.

Thanks for the note.

Best regards,

Scott Ducey

[kenhill]

Great. So the next step is developing a positive game plan to effect your change. It appears you have considerable positive contributions to be made to the Comanche airplane. The people that have been wronged by the current administration need to move on to an optimistic approach and plan B. The constant bashing is a major detraction to the positive cause and is starting to be a negative refection on the messenger and more than likely not result in change. You cannot effect change by being an outsider, you have to get inside and pick away at it. A compromise here and there is a start. Good luck.

[Scott Ducey]

hmmmm, i thought i already did that. i thought my contribution was indeed positive at the sbm. as far as everything thereafter, well that was just the truth. no, i am not interested i wasting more time on another ics endeavor, but thanks for the sage advice nevertheless.

best regards,

scott ducey

[Kristin Winter]

Ken,

Been there! Done That! Got the T-shirt!

Anyone who wants to step up to the plate . . . have at it.

[Ben Ayalon]

Ben, I am not really sure I can say anything more than what I have already said. I think we spelled out in great detail what our position was, and what was proposed. We presented a fairly open-ended outline that was put forth that way to elicit feedback from those present.

Yes, but you did not presented a way to finance your proposals. The only way that you suggested was to kill the Flyer, something that the board members think to be a mistake, at least at this point.

The goal was to depart from the past approach, and craft a way forward. Yes we failed, as the answer was "no". No change in the mag, no change in the approach, and no alternative plan was suggested.

I assume that when you say change of approach you mean to have a paid technical person that will be financed by closing the Flyer. As you know I was on Skype and had to drop out due to bad line therefore I could not vote or express an opinion on the matter. However, I am against closing the Flyer, I agree that it is mediocre in quality as the membership do not provide articles, regardless I like it. I think that we should look into a co-operation with another type club, share content and save on costs. These savings can be diverted towards technical issues.
Our discussion here made some board members to call and discuss the issues with me, one asked me a question that I did not have an answer and still don’t have one. He asked me why he or any other volunteer should invest as many unpaid hours as require while there is a guy that earns $80K? He values his expertise and believe that other volunteers value theirs and therefore might regard it as slap in the face and will either drop out or will demand to be paid as well. I had no answer and I know that you also don’t have one.

Not one board member that I talked with said that he was against extended tech support they just do not support the way that you wanted to implement it, actually some do work on the subject.

Let me ask you, if you were a 30 or 40 year old potential owner of a Comanche, would you be more inclined to buy a Comanche after reading this, or less inclined? We need a better vision than this.

You asked a question and I am obliged to answer.
No, I would not have bought a Comanche, if to be precise I would have not buy any Piper aircraft and this is not because what Dave said (after all he is correct, how many Comanches are being smashed every year?) it is because that during the years of aircraft ownership I have learned what a rubbish company Piper is. It is not just the Comanche that they have dumped they have dumped other aircraft too. Look at the Apache, the Aztec and I heard that even early Malibu and PA28s have parts issue problems. My next aircraft will not be a Piper, old or new or even LSA. It is shame as the Comanche is one of the finest aircraft to fly.

Kristin

but natterings of negativity by one whose idea of type support is to charm Piper into making parts.

Isn’t it what we want? If he succeed I will eat of his hand and polish his shoes on a daily basis. What is wrong with trying? Why are you so negative? Now there is a new company that takes over the parts issue so why not give it a chance? They might be interested, especially if ICS will arrange to buy X numbers of the first batch. I am for it, by trying you have 50% chance to succeed, by not it is 100% failure.

You, Bill, Karl and others spend all that time and money for naught, yet you think we should do the same!?

I don’t think that we have failed, we were not dealing with airworthiness issues, some were improved some not, I have never seen 100% success and I don’t think that many including any of the past US presidents can claim it.

I am still optimistic and believe that at the end we will find the way forward, it will take time, maybe longer than both of us want to see but it will happen.

Ben

[Scott Ducey]

Ben, I am not sure where you are getting your information. Kris and I presented a variety of options to the Board. One was eliminating the flyer, my personal choice, as it costs a lot, and provides very little. We could modify the frequency of the flyer, i.e. quarterly, every other month. We could modify the quality of the flyer from being a glossy, to moving towards electronic or newsletter, or a hybrid thereof. Having said this, the Boards answer was a resounding "NO". We didn't hear, "lets test your assumption, and poll the membership". All we heard was no. We were given the task of forming a committee to deal with airworthiness. However, what would be the point if we were dealing with closed minds? The board asked for us to provide a means by which we would finance our idea. We did. We also stress tested our assumptions, meaning if we lost 30% or 40% of our membership, what would that do to the economics? I think they were surprised that we did so much work and put so much thought into it, because in the end, they had no argument. They had NOTHING to say other than, 'you don't understand'...and "NO".

When I say we need to depart from the past, I mean that the current model as it stands. ICS is going to fail given the current set up. they are losing members, this will continue, they dump all their resources into a glossy magazine, whose only value is for an undetermined amount of members to reminisce about the old days. As far as how we deal with our current problems (which have been memorialized here and delphi), I am completely open to any ideas, be it a paid technical person OR another means. This is the ONLY idea that has been presented, however, if you have a better idea, I am all ears.

Kris and I did what everyone on the board told us to do. They said we are open to listening and discussing things with our members, come on down...you do not even need to be invited...we love our members...blah, blah, blah. They didn't listen, they have their own ideas, and the funny thing is, they didn't even offer up a counter argument. They just shook their heads and said we did not understand. They compared the Comanche to AOPA, and ABS. We are neither of these organizations. The marketing expert pointed to these organizations as a reference for a glossy magazine. He failed to point to others like the Aerostar support club, because they do not have a monthly magazine.

Ben, I could go on and on. The whole thing is a sham, right down to how they get people on the Board. I have no problem with helping others. However I am not going to waste my time.

As far as your comments about Piper, yes I agree with you on the kind of company they are and their lack of loyalty to the airplanes they build, even the ones that are currently being produced. I guess my point about Daves comment is, is this the message that we should be broadcasting to the ICS members and non members? The purpose of ICS should be to support the plane and keep it flying as long as possible, whether Piper is going to help or not. It is defeatist, and in my opinion not the kind of things a leader of ICS should be saying. But that is my opinion.

If you want to chat further about this, please feel free to email me privately or call me on the phone. I do not see the value of continuing this discussion, and the members have heard this for months now.

I have enough things to give my time to, this is not one of them. If you think you can make progress with these folks, all I can say is good luck.

Best regards,

Scott Ducey