TCA Dues to increase - Your thoughts

Dear Anthony,

Please refer to the Informal Survey.....So far 42 are for it the increase, 4 have indicated that they will drop out, and 1 is undecided.

Mike Maurice

Well, that is about the 10% drop in membership they expected.  The increase to $50 does not bother me that much. 

Dear Anthony,

Correction make that 5 dropping out.

In case you are interested, the TCA does a great job in keeping us in touch with each other (through their mailings) and does a great job at York in Spring and Fall semiannual 3 day meets each year.

Mike Maurice

Had to happen. I stay in. Smaller membership but a lot of fixed costs spread over fewer people = higher dues.

Surprised that in this day and age you have to fill out an application form with check and send it via e-mail.  I think a back end database and linking the site with Paypal via some APIs would do the trick.

Next to my OGR subscription the best deal in the hobby.

Brad

The TCA has done a good job of documenting its financial position and its need for more revenue - hence the dues increase. The main cash need is for the museum - which, at least in my opinion, is a worthwhile endeavor. 

From my personal perspective, it leaves me undecided as to whether to continue my membership. I joined TCA primarily to attend York - but that was when I lived in Northern Virginia, a couple of hours' drive away from York. Since moving to Tucson, Arizona ten years ago I've been to York exactly once. I'm thinking about going again next April, in the context of a road trip East to visit old friends, but haven't made up my mind. Apart from York, what do I get from my membership? A warm fuzzy feeling for supporting the museum, a magazine that occasionally has an article of interest, access to some overpriced TCA products, a buy/sell board that doesn't get much traffic, and not much else. The nearest local chapter is three hours away in Phoenix and I'm not a fan of conventions of any kind. So, is it worth it? Maybe. I'll hang on for another year or two and then decide. 

A $15.00 increase in yearly dues amounts to a whopping  4 cents a day.  I figure I can handle that without too much of a dent in my standard of living.  No question about it, my continued membership in TCA is certainly worth 4 more pennies a day.

Had to happen sooner or later.  The TCA museum is a large structure to maintain and keep open.  Maybe they should consider a 'distant' membership for people that live west of the Mississippi and will probably not get to the museum ever and charge $35?   I am mainly a member so I can attend York and stay informed.  I do enjoy the Collector's Quarterly.  I will definitely continue. 

I'm with OKHIKER and as far as I'm concerned it's not an issue.

Reminds me of the way politicians keep nibbling tax increases up .1 percent at a time, and downplaying it by saying "it's only a penny for every 10 dollars you spend". Before you know it your sales taxes are headed for 9 percent and beyond.

Get real; this is a 30 percent increase no matter how you sweet talk it.

Aside from that, I'm still in!

Percentage wise it's a BIG increase. They know some of us use it for York and will pay. If not for York, I would be part of the 10%.

Jim

And so my fellow Americans............

No problem with it.

I don't like it, as the only reason I belong is for York. I think the TCA is way behind the times. But I will pay so I can go to York.

Whether the increase is 5% or 30%, dues increases for any type of membership tends to be unavoidable.   Operating costs tend to get higher, not lower.

30% may seem excessive, but based on what appears to a membership fee being relatively flat for many years it seems members had a relatively nice ride in the interim.  Maybe more subtle incremental increases would have provided less of a impact but there would have been complaints no doubt anyway.  It's all about the value you see in it.

I don't like it either. An increase in just one place isn't the problem. The price of everything has sky rocketed. My income is almost nothing. I have not been able to purchase any trains in the past three years, so this dues increase will kill my budget unless I cut back on a different expense. What I have decided  to do is to quit one of my other organizations instead.

Even though I can't buy any more trains, I still go to York to "get away from reality" and to visit with friends who I, otherwise, would never get to see. Besides that, my doctor insists that I go to York in order to maintain both my physical and mental health.

I think it's unfair not to try to cut back on some of TCA's biggest expenses such as the museum and the quarterly magazine which could very well be issued in an on-line electronic version saving on a lot of postage. I know this isn't popular but I would close the museum. It has been sucking up money for many years now. How many times can one go there to see the collections,  which basically stay the same year after year?

Which, when it comes right down to it, is perhaps the very best reason for participating in the York Meet if/when the opportunity presents itself.  Even if I wasn't working with the magazine, I sure wouldn't be attending for the train-buying experience because those needs have already been more than satisfied.  It's just great to see friends from all over; most of whom I'm lucky to see once or twice a year.

I will stay in because the TCA is the only toy / model train group active down here in Southwest Tennessee, and yes there is York.

Is the increase justified? Not really. At our April Casey Jones Chapter TCA meet there was a request for donations to help close the TCA budget gap. I believe it was related to the cost of running the museum.  The museum is nice, I have been there a few times, but to tell the truth, when time is tight during York week the museum is the first item cut from the things to do list.

The issue of membership dropping is interesting. I feel it took way too long to liberalize our membership requirements. Remember, the other large train club  has had an open membership policy as far back as I can remember.  Did we wait too long to change membership requirements? 

I think there is a need to have a real accounting of revenue and expenses at TCA National HQ:

Do the conventions operate in the “red?

What is the profit margin on convention cars?

How efficiently is the nation headquarters office ran?

Is the museum efficiently ran?

And finally if the increase in dues did not take place, exactly what would we as members do without?

As stated above, it is only a few cents a day, but our TCA leadership should think long and hard about how the membership’s money is spent.

Thanks,

Richard

40% increase is huge. If they would have been a little smarter they would have increased a couple of dollars every other year. I'd be part of the 10% if it wasn't for York. LCCA much better club.

Were it not for York, this type of increase would be viewed as "over the top" by much more than 10% of the existing membership -- not to mention the dramatic effect it would have on curtailing new membership.

David

I am simply amazed at some of the stuff on this post. "40% increase is huge."

Yes it is. It's $15 friggin dollars. Not even 5 gallons of gas. A little bit more (or less) than lunch at McDonald's for 2 people. WOW, what a huge amount.

I am for better accountability and disclosure as to P&L on items. I've run a professional membership organization with 900 members. Lots of people whine. Very few volunteer, donate money or offer thoughtful suggestions.

Gerry

There's another large toy train club even remotely close to the TCA in terms of membership numbers?  I wasn't aware of that.

Not a problem. Worth every penny!

Peter

never mind

I will pay the increase but it might be time to offer a paperless membership and receive all materials via the internet. Another possible cost saving would be to combine both the Quarterly and the Headquarters News into one and cut mailing costs. I hard look at spending can usually save most operations up to 5% of costs. It is time the TCA looks at what it spends money on realistically and only support want the members use and not what a few feel is important.     Lenny J

I appreciate the explanation that came with the email.  My experience with private clubs and associations -- not TCA specifically -- is that often they are run by a small cadre of individuals who use the organization's resources to further their personal interests -- travel, business related interests, etc.  Thus, in cases where dues increases occur, I have seen where it is related to mismanagement and often what I would call ethically related abuses.  Thus, with TCA, what is more important to me than the additional charge is the sense that the increase is not simply related to ethical abuses or the club officers using the club to simply further their own personal interests.

Not to say this kind of thing cannot happen with TCA -- there may very well be things I don't know about -- but it is something the members of every private club should watch for carefully.

Guys - yes its a 40% increase, but as gmorlitz observed its only $15. In the next year,  I won't notice the lack of that $15, but I would notice not having the TCA publications and membership. 

What percentage of older TCA members are dying off?

That should contribute to raised fees. Less members to spread the cost around.

That would be one area I would take a hard look at.  Although I realize that ad revenue is gained through the HQ News, and that there's value to the Buy/Sell/Trade section for some members (probably increasingly few members thanks to the Internet), there may be viable ways to reduce publication and mailing costs.  Not knowing all the numbers, I can't really say, but it's probably something worth looking at.

I learned a long time ago not to put too much faith in high level summary numbers. I hope the TCA will be publishing the detailed budget numbers in the National Headquarters news.

TCA painted themselves into a corner years ago when they offered life membership to a limited few and promised them their level of membership would be exclusive. Imagine being able to collect $400 - $500 over the years from a lot of people with plenty of income who were not around back when the original life memberships were offered. In the fat years of the 1990's there would have been a line at the door to buy life memberships. Imagine all that money in annuities or other financial funds starting to pay off about now....

How about the B.O.D. voting to re-open life memberships at say $400 each upgrade and include a free engraved brick at the museum?

I already have a rail at the museum.

I'll throw my two cents in also -

The increase does not really affect my pocketbook - I can afford it.

However, if you eliminate going to the museum and York, you must consider

if the publications and access to the on-line data are worth $50.00 yearly.

I think this might be the sticking point for many members - what is value received

based on the dues amount.  Long term, unless the museum becomes self sufficient

and publications become web-based, along with other cost saving measures, TCA will have

to continue raising dues every few years. 

Will those of us who make donations to the annual fund drives reduce that amount to reflect the increase in dues?

For me, the answer is no.  

Chris

I have long advocated implementing a new Life Member category for the TCA, BUT with a couple of very restrictive conditions (examples only):

1.  Member must be 65 years of age or older.  If offered to younger age groups, the fee would be much higher and based on a scale adjusted for age at time of application.

2.  Member must have a minimum of 10 consecutive years of prior TCA membership.

3.  Cost of Life Membership would be a minimum of $1,000 and preferably even higher, possibly paid in installments over 12-18 months.

I'm a Life Member of the NMRA.  That organization really screwed things up, as did the TCA, by offering Life Memberships at too early a date and for far too little money.  Now the NMRA is asking Life Members (a category that is no longer available and has not been available for years) to kick in, on a voluntary basis, extra $ to help defray the cost of providing the existing Life Members with a monthly copy of the NMRA magazine, etc.

Life membership should be a privilege that is available to those who truly support the organization, who want that option,  and who meet the requirements to hold that status.  Does it preclude some/many from partaking of the category?  Certainly it does, but there's sure nothing wrong with that.  Even in this entitlement society of ours, there should be some things that the majority are not necessarily entitled to unless they can fulfill certain criteria.

Lifetime memberships are a tricky proposition at best.  And it's largely for this reason that most types of "clubs" don't offer them anymore.  As the saying goes... the devil is always in the details, and a lot can happen over the course of a two, three or even four decades.

Take, for example, the airline frequent flyer lounges found in many large airports today.  Back when I traveled just about every day in the corporate world (1980's and 1990's), I can remember when a United Airlines Red Carpet Club membership was around $75 annually and a lifetime membership was $500.  Fast forward to today... guess what the ANNUAL membership fee is now?  Yep... a whopping $500 ANNUALLY!!!    Sure makes the $500 LIFETIME membership back in the mid- to late-1980's seem like one terrific bargain.

Same dynamics would apply in our little corner of the world as well.  But the big difference is our special interest group is a dwindling segment of the population -- almost by definition.  The concept of a "lifetime membership" is usually concocted to entice enthusiasts to plunk down a good chunk of $$$$ in one fell-swoop... and then the club would use/invest that money wisely.  So while limiting the lifetime membership to seniors would help mitigate the HUGE pricing dynamics that tend to happen over the course of 3 or 4 decades, I'm not exactly sure that it would "entice" anyone in their retirement years to plunk down what is essentially the current annual fee X their life expectancy anyway.  At that point, why not just pay annually?    OTOH, increasing annual dues without linking the increase to tangible benefits does nothing to increase membership of younger members. 

I don't have any "lifetime membership" silver bullet answers here... just thinking out loud a bit. 

David

Allen,

I am sure that lifetime membership could be arranged! For the super duper members as you have outlined.

Take care.

Mike Maurice