question for Mark Bundick

I just received my renewal notice for NAR. Dues are up to $62 from $47 last year. Exactly what am I getting for my extra $15? (a 32% increase, in case your calculator isn't handy).

Also, what guarantee can you give me that pending legislation won't render your organization pointless and unnecessary.

I'd rather not waste my $62.

Thanks

Reply to
NaCl
Loading thread data ...

I seriously doubt that I will pay for a 32% increase.

tim

Reply to
tim

Thirded even !!

Reply to
Wizard

The opportunity to have a BoT that votes for a dues increase?

Given the litigation and the prospective damage to a non-profit of deficit spending (ala TRA), it was probably a prudent move. When I renew I will renew for 2 years again just to support the cause even if they lower it again post lawsuit (if the unthinkable happens and NAR is awarded costs).

It might cut a swath right off of NAR rocketry based on NAR's words and deeds. However NAR will always have "little weenie rockets" to fall back on.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

They musta just changed it. I just sent in my membership about 10 days ago, and it was $47.00.

Joe Michel

Reply to
J.A. Michel

Word is that it was voted on at NARAM (board meeting?) and that we are not hearing from Mark because he is out of town.

Other NAR BOD members posted messages about this on the Yahoogroup for NAR Section officers. And they apologized for not giving more public notice. At least the on-line applications were updated right away.

I suspect that the best way to keep dues down (after winning the lawsuit) is to get more people to join. Lots more people. The NAR magazine does exist in the real world and it arrives in the mail in a timely manner. Insurance exists as well and is very useful for getting launch sites.

Reply to
Fred Shecter

I agree with all of that.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I don't think that some sort of explanation mailed (or even e-mailed) to all members is too much to ask.

Merely sending me the renewal form with the price increase and no explanation whatsoever is irritating.

formatting link

Reply to
NaCl

It would have been wise to include a notice with the new applications. At least those who already had paper applications in the mail were able to renew at the old rate.

I would guess that as soon ar Mark is back from his travel he will post a message here. I would also guess that 'real life' may have gotten in the way of a timely announcement. It is a volunteer org. after all.

Reply to
Fred Shecter

Most likely higher insurance premiums..

JD

Reply to
JDcluster

I can't say I'm enthusiastic about the increase, but, it's still cheaper than TRA, and still delivers more benefits. I would imagine the extensive legal battles have played a large part in the increase, as well as insurance premiums rising. David NAR#79313

Reply to
Dlogan

I repeat. Everything he touches turns to gold.

Thank God Mark was on vacation.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

If that is your arguement, nobody should renew but they should donate 3 times as much to the legal fund.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

If I were to guess I would think the major items IN ORDER were

  1. Liability insurance
  2. Postage
  3. Paper
  4. Litigation

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

The drop probably contributed to the sudden rise.

In hindsight it is not even much of an increase.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

You had me right until this nonsense:

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I think what many folks are concerned about, is not the fact that there was an increase, but that it wasn't announced. Even on the NAR_Section group on yahoo, which is for section officers and the NAR Board, word came not from the board, but from other forums!

When the insurance stuff came up a few years back and all NAR members became "insured", it was announced before hand. For folks with the optional insurance at that time, there was a rebate, which could be directed at the legal fund or extending membership - but all members were given the notice before hand. The decrease was due to the fact that the insurance company was no longer getting premiums for "x%" of the membership, but 100% (more people paying, therefore the amount per person paying could be reduced, but the insurance company would still get more!)

Again, I think the thing that has P.O.'ed some is that there was time to pass on this change to at least NAR Section officers, and possibly many more members (by way of RMR, ROL, etc.), before it was "discovered" by looking at the new forms on the NAR website. There was enough time to have the info changed on the NAR website, and a note here or at least to the NAR section officers was not too much to ask!

It's a matter of respect - and this shows a big lack in that area to members!

Reply to
Woody Miller

I'd be happy to give up the membership guidebook on renewals. While an excellent resource for some folk, I would prefer to see that moneys go elsewhere.

Joel. phx

Reply to
Joel Corwith

Would it make you feel better if I said I forgot to put a smiley there?

David Erbas-White

Reply to
David Erbas-White

Yes. I actually make a point to read your posts.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.