AVweb shining a big 'ole light on AOPA finances

SteveC

"Laconic"
Staff member
From AVwebBiz:

Revenue Down, Salaries Up At AOPA

While the aviation industry in general suffered massive layoffs and pay rollbacks in 2009, AOPA's top managers got an overall 14.5 percent pay increase, according to the association's IRS filings. In addition, an AVweb review of AOPA's publicly available tax returns revealed that the association's expenses increased by 25 percent in 2009, with association expenses exceeding revenues by about $5.1 million. To cover its rising expenses in part, the association recently raised its membership dues from $39 to $45, an increase of more than 15 percent.

On the salary side, compensation of current officers, directors, trustees and key employees was reported at $4,838,086 in 2009, up from $3,957,000 reported in 2008, a 22-percent increase in top management expenditures. However, some of the increase is due to AOPA president Craig Fuller's first full year of salary. He worked only a partial year in 2008. The combined increase for AOPA's top executives was 14.5 percent, including payouts to outgoing AOPA president Phil Boyer in 2008 and 2009 of $1,549,245 and $1,859,539 respectively.

The pay increases came as revenue declined substantially in 2009 and operating expenses jumped. Revenue from membership dues took a slight hit in 2009, but AOPA spokesman Chris Dancy said most of the revenue loss was due to reduced advertising sales.

Dancy told AVweb the association has a defined process for establishing employee compensation in which the salaries of employees in other sectors are periodically surveyed. "Specifically, compensation is established by an independent Board of Trustees using the survey data which is benchmarked against similarly qualified employees in comparable positions in similarly situated organizations," Dancy said.

However, AOPA's executive percentage increases were larger than both the federal government and industry in general, according to Business and Legal Reports, which found that about 39 percent of companies are making downward adjustments in salaries, while others are freezing salaries or offering merit and cost of living increases in the 1- to 3-percent range.

Meanwhile, total salary costs for other workers at the association -- whether through attrition or rollbacks -- were reduced by about 12 percent. AOPA didn't respond to our query about specifics on staff head count. AVweb's analysis of the IRS filings and financial data posted on AOPA's website raised a number questions that we posed to AOPA via e-mail, seeking additional detail. Although the association pointed us to additional web data, concise answers weren't provided. Click here to see our questions and AOPA's answers (PDF). We requested an interview with Craig Fuller or another AOPA official, but the association didn't respond.

Full disclosure: The AOPA Air Safety Institute (Air Safety Foundation) is a current AVweb advertiser and AVweb's parent company, Belvoir Media Group, is a former AOPA preferred partner under an agreement that expired in July of 2009.

Dancy said the IRS forms we reviewed provide data only on the non-profit side of AOPA. The organization owns three taxable entities: the AOPA Service Corporation, AOPA Membership Publications Inc., and the AOPA Insurance Agency. AVweb confined its examination to the AOPA return and is in the process of evaluating IRS filings for the AOPA Air Safety Foundation and the AOPA Foundation Inc.

AOPA has substantial assets -- both in real property and securities. According to the forms we reviewed, net assets increased significantly during 2009, from $79 million to $98 million, which includes approximately $9.5 million in financial derivatives defined as "alternative investments."

Dancy offered a different view of the asset picture and said it's in line with other associations. "Overall, AOPA's reserves increased from $61 to $75 million in 2009, primarily due to the stock market recovery of 2008 losses," Dancy said. "Most associations maintain financial reserves that equate to approximately 125 percent of annual expense on average. AOPA's equals 120 percent."

The consolidated statement shows revenue down substantially across the board but it also notes an increase in lobbying efforts, part of which Dancy attributed to the creation of the General Aviation Serves America campaign and AOPA's role in the fight against user fees.

One of the largest expense increases we noted was the association's annual exposition, now called AOPA Summit. In 2008, the association spent $1.087 million for this show, but in 2009, it spent more than twice as much, $2.85 million. Other substantially higher costs involved lobbying ($1 million) and print, mail, postage and premium costs.

Although these have declined in the publishing industry in general, AOPA spent 32 percent more in 2009 than in 2008. AOPA also spent an extra $1.4 million (19 percent more) on promotions aimed at retaining memberships and subscriptions in its various programs and publications. One thing did remain the same from 2008 to 2009. Administration costs ($5.4 million) were virtually identical in both years.

Specifically, the association listed these top managers and salaries for 2009: Craig Fuller, President: $582,484; Roger Myers, VP/CFO: $372,307 (11 percent increase); Harvey Cohen, VP/CDO: $351,776 (8 percent increase); Andrew Cebula, VP/Government Affairs: $398,780 (16 percent increase); Diana Roberts, Director, Planned Giving: $330,709 (55 percent decrease); Greg Pecaro, VP Regional Affairs: $169,361 (12 percent increase).

Other managers listed on the 2009 filings but who didn't appear in the 2008 filing included Lorraine Howerton, VP Legal Affairs: $230,274; Steve Shaffer, VP/CIO, $178,557; Craig Spence, CP, Operations and International: $202,762; Timothy Fortune, Senior VP HR: $214,969.

copyright © 2010 AVweb.com / Belvoir Media Group
 
I felt like $40 a year was too much for a magazine about $300,000 airplanes. Especially when they gave me a monthly call asking for more. I never felt like AOPA did a whole lot for the average flyer. So I stopped my membership. I feel like organizations like the EAA do so much more to keep flying safe, fun, accessible and affordable for the average person, not just the guy flying $300K piston singles. I think topic has bee hashed out before though.
 
I felt like $40 a year was too much for a magazine about $300,000 airplanes. Especially when they gave me a monthly call asking for more. I never felt like AOPA did a whole lot for the average flyer. So I stopped my membership. I feel like organizations like the EAA do so much more to keep flying safe, fun, accessible and affordable for the average person, not just the guy flying $300K piston singles. I think topic has bee hashed out before though.

I don't know, 40 bucks is awfully cheap to have someone inside the beltway who is for the little guys in aviation. Do I think they are overpaid, probably, but that said, until there is a substantial alternative, with the same political power, AOPA will keep my money.
 
I want to know how much the spend on postage. I know I'm sent more than $40/yr in "mail" from them.
 
I love the multi-million dollar payouts to the guys in the top spots. I wonder how many safety studies, advocacy events, and other pro-GA activities those could have funded. I second the comment about the EAA- AOPA is getting too big for its britches.
 
:yeahthat:

The idea alone of having a legal agent on retainer is worth it. Plus between the magazines, postcards, and junk mail they send you never again need to buy toilet paper.
But you don't have to actually be a member to get that ;)
 
I'm all about transparency, but I think AOPA is worth every dime I spend on dues.

Love 'em or hate 'em, they are really the few remaining defenses we have protecting what's left of general aviation from the NIMBY's, politicians and liability attorneys.
 
I love the multi-million dollar payouts to the guys in the top spots. I wonder how many safety studies, advocacy events, and other pro-GA activities those could have funded. I second the comment about the EAA- AOPA is getting too big for its britches.

I don't see any multi-million dollar payouts unless I'm reading it wrong. I see 1.8 million for the top spot. That is a little more than most advocacy groups pay their top executives, I'll admit, though I will say that dollar for dollar AOPA gives a lot more benefit to its members... seeing as how GA would have been killed in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and on 9/12/2001 without AOPA.
 
I'm all about transparency, but I think AOPA is worth every dime I spend on dues.

Love 'em or hate 'em, they are really the few remaining defenses we have protecting what's left of general aviation from the NIMBY's, politicians and liability attorneys.

:yeahthat:

There are already too few organizations looking out for us.
 
I'm all about transparency, but I think AOPA is worth every dime I spend on dues.

Love 'em or hate 'em, they are really the few remaining defenses we have protecting what's left of general aviation from the NIMBY's, politicians and liability attorneys.
Agreed. To me that's the bottom line. Yes, some at the top are way overpaid. And yes, they spend entirely too much money on cold-calling and postage begging for more $. BUT, we need that voice in DC.

And They'll stop bugging you if you call them and tell then not to call or send requests for money. I've gotten very, very little from them in the last 2 years or so.
 
I think some people may have not seen what general aviation was before the 1990's.

Back in the 70's and 80's, an average guy could afford to buy an airplane and the question, overall at the time, was "New or used?" rather than "Where the hell can't I rent, and is 1/12 of a share too much?"

America thinks GA is a bunch of rich folks playing with toys.

DC thinks it's a great target for taxes and fees.

(Some) attorneys take the tack that if there was just a laser-sighted fuel gauge, the poor guy who planned to fly 6.5 hours with 46 gallons of fuel would have survived, so let's sue Cessna for $89 billion...

ALPA's not going to protect GA.

Congress isn't going to protect GA.

I'm not sure the EAA is involved in DC at all.

Pretty much the only thing that's standing up for our ability (well, 'option' to most of us) to hop in a Piper cub, fly to Ajo, AZ for that $100 hamburger is AOPA.
 
I think it's an absolute shame on AVweb to write such a report. All of AOPA's finances are made public. If someone is interested they can go look at it for themselves. I feel like AVweb is attacking one of their few allies in an industry/sector with so many enemies. These guys should get paid more money! It must be so difficult to defend something thought by most to be rich peoples toys in this economic environment. It's $40 dollars a YEAR not a month!

They thought about closing my local airport many years ago Phil Boyer personally flew down there to talk to the mayor. I think that is fantastic
 
I think some people may have not seen what general aviation was before the 1990's.

Back in the 70's and 80's, an average guy could afford to buy an airplane and the question, overall at the time, was "New or used?" rather than "Where the hell can't I rent, and is 1/12 of a share too much?"

America thinks GA is a bunch of rich folks playing with toys.

DC thinks it's a great target for taxes and fees.

(Some) attorneys take the tack that if there was just a laser-sighted fuel gauge, the poor guy who planned to fly 6.5 hours with 46 gallons of fuel would have survived, so let's sue Cessna for $89 billion...

ALPA's not going to protect GA.

Congress isn't going to protect GA.

I'm not sure the EAA is involved in DC at all.

Pretty much the only thing that's standing up for our ability (well, 'option' to most of us) to hop in a Piper cub, fly to Ajo, AZ for that $100 hamburger is AOPA.


Wow who is this man with all those facts in an intelligently written post! Someone should make him in charge of the board!

Here's another +1 for AOPA. I think they do a fantastic job, especially with the work they've done with the GA caucus.
 
Back
Top