USPA election candidate opinions

[tombuch 0]

Quote

They take this data and determine how much planned profit they will realize.
They then adjust their retail prices to ensure that they will make at least the expected profit.
If there is an expected expense of $400 for the GM program that money isn't coming out of the end year bottom line.
That $400 is is coming out of the customers pockets , pennies at a time.

The Myth of the GM program is that GMs pay any dues.
The fact is that GMs only *collect* dues and pass it on to USPA.

"Treetop"

Right. No question about it...the customer pays either way. But if USPA costs are collected exclusively through individual membership fees then WE pay it all. If some of the USPA costs are passed along to GM dropzones they are spread among all the customers, and most of those are students. When a GM builds an expense into his profit/loss statement it is at least partially covered by the student business.

My position is to share the costs among all the users of USPA services, and that includes dropzones and students. The Group Membership fee is a good way to spread those costs.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[PhreeZone 20]

A better way to spread the costs is to charge on a per student basis from the year before. Toss out 300 students pay something like $150, toss out 1000 students pay $500. with a min fee of 150 a year. Have the DZ's that are using the resources of the USPA the most (ISP, etc) pay the most for it then. I know of 2 DZ's that alone would more then make up the difference of the smaller DZ's that have a larger plane.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[buzzfink 5]

<<<>>>

The problem with that is who verifies how many students? Many airports now have what's called a percentage lease. They pay a base amount and a % of their gross income. The Airport has an auditor that audits the business every year to verify the amounts reported are correct. USPA could not economically do this.


Buzz

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Posting flamebait instead of answers to reasonable questions will get you nowhere. Would you please post your unedited statement or even just a specific example of how your statement was edited?

Without it, I am just going to have to assume that you are lying to us about your statement being illegally altered by the USPA.

Quote

> And MrTree was on DZ.COM yesterday pushing this issue but ignored repeated request to post the 'original' version for comparision.
>

Sure did! If you'd like to see the original copy I suggest you contact CNeedels@USPA.org . He has it.

Well, Indyz. Someone else has made note of his refusal to post it on dz.com. People asked him to post it here. No one asked him to post it elsewhere so that we could look it up. That was always clear to everyne. The "Sure Did" response? I think that answers any questions you may have.

[quade 4]

Quote

If you 'll reference those meeting minutes you will see that compromise as a passed motion.

Could you do us a favor and not make us go looking for them? Could you just copy and paste the URL that you might already be looking at?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

If you 'll reference those meeting minutes you will see that compromise as a passed motion.

Could you do us a favor and not make us go looking for them? Could you just copy and paste the URL that you might already be looking at?

Bwaaahaaaa. Pretty funny.

Rule of Politics -1-
If you wish to sway public opinion in your favor when discussing an issue whose facts may not be in your favor, offer to support any investigation into the facts while actually hindering any such investigation.
For reference, call Sen Ted Kennedy.

[wildblue 7]

Paul -

He can't figure out the quote tags, you expect him to figure out what the "url" button does down there??!

Quick lesson for those of you (seemingly) just joining us for the purpose of this discussion.

1. Copy the relevant text that you are specifically replying to (if you still don't know how to copy and paste, ask your 7 year old son, daughter, nephew, etc)

2. Click the little box that says 'quote' right below the box you're typing in

3. Paste text obtained from step 1

4. Click the same box below the window you're typing it, you'll notice the text in the box is now '/quote' - it has to know that's the end of the quoted material

5. Type your response.

This can be used many times in one post. Advanced users will start to type {quote} and {/quote} instead of using the buttons (replacing the "} {" with "] [")

it's like incest - you're substituting convenience for quality

[quade 4]

Oh, I don't expect him to know how to do any of the mark-up stuff or any of the kind of wonky stuff -we- do, but he's already demonstrated he knows how to copy and paste, so I figured he -could- at least do that for us.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Oh, I don't expect him to know how to do any of the mark-up stuff or any of the kind of wonky stuff -we- do, but he's already demonstrated he knows how to copy and paste, so I figured he -could- at least do that for us.

Oh, yeah. He knows. But he doesn't seem interested. We already requested his original statement about 42 trillion times and that hasn't appeared, despite the "I sure did". I guess the "Ask Questions" doesn't mean an answer is forthcoming.

[quade 4]

Quote

. . . already requested his original statement about 42 trillion times and that hasn't appeared . . .

Really? I hadn't noticed.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

If you 'll reference those meeting minutes you will see that compromise as a passed motion.

Could you do us a favor and not make us go looking for them? Could you just copy and paste the URL that you might already be looking at?

I just looked and can't find the Summer 01 or Winter 02 meeting minutes on USPA's webpage. It appears they're no longer available, however I know they were at one time, as I've referred to them several times in the past. I wonder why they've been taken down while other things from those timeframes remain?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

<<<>>>

The problem with that is who verifies how many students? Many airports now have what's called a percentage lease. They pay a base amount and a % of their gross income. The Airport has an auditor that audits the business every year to verify the amounts reported are correct. USPA could not economically do this.

Well the DZ's "pledged" to follow the BSR's and USPA thinks that is good enough, why can't each GM DZ "pledge" to accurately report the # of students/jumps, whatever for the previous year to determine dues?

Of course, I think the GM program should go away. If PIA or another organization took over the responsibilites that USPA GM program has, that would leave USPa seperate from DZ's and concerned w/ jumpers only. DZO's shouldn't notice any difference and when lobbying is required, USPA backs the PIA w/ numbers to protect our interests.

Hook

[billvon 2,998]

>and when lobbying is required, USPA backs the PIA w/ numbers
>to protect our interests.

Problem is that, since there are now two organizations with opposed interests (i.e. making money vs skydiving a lot for cheap) they will often differ on their inputs to the FAA. Just look at 120 vs 180 day repack cycles, age limits on tandems, etc. Up until now, the FAA has been pretty content to insert USPA content into the FAR's and AC's. That won't happen if there are two competing organizations with differing demands on the FAA.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

>and when lobbying is required, USPA backs the PIA w/ numbers
>to protect our interests.

Problem is that, since there are now two organizations with opposed interests (i.e. making money vs skydiving a lot for cheap) they will often differ on their inputs to the FAA. Just look at 120 vs 180 day repack cycles, age limits on tandems, etc. Up until now, the FAA has been pretty content to insert USPA content into the FAR's and AC's. That won't happen if there are two competing organizations with differing demands on the FAA.

But I thought the GM program's interests didn't compete w/ individual jumpers' interests.. I thought USPA was for the individual jumper and there wasn't a conflict of interest. That is what USPA tells me

So if there is a conflict of interest between the individual jumper and DZs. and USPA is in the middle, who wins out?

Hook

[gravitysurf808 0]

Quote

I just looked and can't find the Summer 01 or Winter 02 meeting minutes on USPA's webpage. It appears they're no longer available, however I know they were at one time, as I've referred to them several times in the past. I wonder why they've been taken down while other things from those timeframes remain?

Blues,
Dave

Pretty sure you can get them HERE.

[PhillyKev 0]

Cool! Somehow they were able to post those as .pdfs without charging extra for them, unlike some other documents.

[bodypilot90 0]

Tom if a "approved" dz aka group member has a death would it not be more likely the uspa would be sued. I believe so. Better each dz should stand on it's own safety history. WE do not need a dz like on Fandango (movie) I could be wrong but last year the only group member kicked out was for what? Anybody? Not paying it's dues!

[Cloudseeder 0]

Quote

Bwaaahaaaa. Pretty funny.

Rule of Politics -1-
If you wish to sway public opinion in your favor when discussing an issue whose facts may not be in your favor, offer to support any investigation into the facts while actually hindering any such investigation.

Yo' Mr. Happy,
I'm not hindering any investigation.
I 'm suprised that you have never educated yourself as to how to access the BOD minutes!
Here's a hint. Go to www.uspa.org , scroll down on the right to BOD, when that page opens click on board minutes.

I hope that helps.
"Treetop"

[billvon 2,998]

>But I thought the GM program's interests didn't compete w/
> individual jumpers' interests.. I thought USPA was for the individual
> jumper and there wasn't a conflict of interest. That is what USPA tells
> me.

There's often a conflict - if there wasn't we wouldn't need the FAA, or USPA, or S+TA's, or any regulation at all.

>So if there is a conflict of interest between the individual jumper and
> DZs. and USPA is in the middle, who wins out?

Depends on the issue. It gets debated by the BOD, and voted on - and I think, in general, that's the best way to resolve such disputes, via people we elected, people who are experts in various fields of skydiving and DZ operation. I think that's a lot better than being decided by an FAA administrator who used to fly, and who has never jumped.

Take an example - someone proposes a limit on canopy size i.e. you can't jump any loading over 2:1 unless you have a USPA swooper's license. A purely DZO organization might well support this, since it will reduce the number of fatalities they will see, and thus increase their ability to sell tandems ("that's right, we've never had a fatality!") and reduce lawsuity. Likewise, a pure fun-jumper organization would probably not. Now, if the entire board were to discuss this, I'm pretty sure it would get voted down resoundingly. But if both proposals went to the FAA for them to decide? Would they tend to stick with the DZO's who can 'prove' it will reduce fatalities? Or would they go along with the fun jumpers whose strongest argument seems to be 'let us kill ourselves if we want?'

[dogyks 0]

Quote

Quote

Depends on who you want on the board. You say in that post that you enjoy offending people and making things up, and some people may see that as a negative. That's why I posted the link, so people can decide for themselves.

Why do you think Treetop's offensive behavior is negative, while Winsor's hideous political incorrectness is ok?


I'm not sure precisely to what it is that you are referring, but I'm somewhat flattered by the idea of being hideously politically correct.

The objection I have to Don's online demeanor is that his stated intent is to offend. If that is the goal, I'd rather have him arguing for the opposition.

I don't claim to represent all recreational jumpers. Some people like regulation, and feel that an authority is being lax if the masses are given the benefit of the doubt. I don't think skydiving is for everybody, and think that modifying the sport to be "inclusive" serves the detriment of the sport more than the benefit of those included thereby.

I want to see lifesaving skills passed around freely and with enthusiasm. If the choice is between the free access to a safety skillset or the livelihood of safety professionals, I prefer freedom. For me, skydiving is a way of life, not a livelihood.

I haven't sent in my ballot yet, but I expect to vote for Don Jardine. He gets a lot more worked up about various issues than do I, but that may be a good thing. Donald Rumsfeld made some comment about employing paranoids to the effect that they are given to more false alarms, but they don't miss much.

I hope I can bring a little hideous political incorrectness to the table to balance out all the sweetness and light.


Blue skies,

Winsor

• Quote

[happythoughts 0]

"...while Winsor's hideous political incorrectness is ok?"

That one stumped me too. I always thought your comments were well thought out and didn't have a particular leaning. Mystified.

[dogyks 0]

Quote

Quote

As you probably know, most of the present board members make their living from skydiving.

Oh, I forgot, professional skydivers are evil minions of Satan. That totally slipped my mind. I obviously can't trust someone who loves skydiving a lot more than me, enough to sacrifice a high income and normal life, to do what's best for the sport.

No really. Sorry to be so evil, but I'm still waiting for someone to explain this to me.

I have nothing against the people who make a living in the sport, and am grateful to those who make my participation possible by their efforts.

Having said that, I think the point that you're missing here is that people whose livelihood is skydiving have an entirely different perspective than do those of us who live to skydive.

I understand how hard it is to make payroll and keep a million dollar airplane operating, and tandem mills and Level 401-k AFF programs can be the result. More than a few people have had their love of the sport turn into just another job, and that perspective has little to do with mine.

I don't begrudge someone who has put their economic well-being on the line the right to make a good living for their efforts. I do, however, wish to have some voice on the board to remind everyone that this is, in fact, a club.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[quade 4]

Quote

Donald Rumsfeld made some comment about employing paranoids to the effect that they are given to more false alarms, but they don't miss much.

Are you familiar with the mythology of Cassandra?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[tombuch 0]

Quote

I don't claim to represent all recreational jumpers. Some people like regulation, and feel that an authority is being lax if the masses are given the benefit of the doubt. I don't think skydiving is for everybody, and think that modifying the sport to be "inclusive" serves the detriment of the sport more than the benefit of those included thereby.

I want to see lifesaving skills passed around freely and with enthusiasm. If the choice is between the free access to a safety skillset or the livelihood of safety professionals, I prefer freedom. For me, skydiving is a way of life, not a livelihood.

I agree with you if "The Masses" means us, experienced skydivers. I don't agree if "The Masses" means students. We the the necessary knowledge to make informed choices and decisions, students don't.

I'm not suggesting that we over promote the sport or encourage every moron to skydive, but I do think we as a collective group need to make sure student programs are reasonably safe, and that the material is being properly presented.

As for experienced skydivers, let 'em rip. Hook yourself into the ground. Open at 700 feet. Wrap at a grand. Have fun! But please, don't hurt anybody else.

-tom buchanan

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[djan 0]

Winsor, I'm sitting here in snowy Colorado unable to jump and reading this thread. I was certainly puzzled by the hideously politically incorrect thing you did, which was not pointed out in any of the posts I avidly read, hoping to find out what it was! Now I know you don't know either. When you find out, could you please let us all know too?

P.S. I voted for you and was really pleased to see all these other people who think you're good BOD material. I'm hoping to be there too, but first people have to vote.

DJan Stewart
Boulder, Colorado
(hi billvon!)

Quote

DJan Stewart

• Quote