Doug_Davis

Can someone give me the back story on this? How is a guy who according to the news, has been training for two years and has 30 jumps only cleared to belly fly? Was he that bad of a student?

Sounds awesome. Just a tip. Maybe advertise things like this further out than two weeks before the date? So those of us from out of town or with kids can make arrangements to attend? Most people with one or the other or both, need about two months to plan things like this out.

Picture has been removed from their website it seems.

Endowments used to have restrictions on how much could be spent annually but no longer. Under the current law, New York Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (USPA was incorporated in NY if memory serves), the board is responsible for determine what a "prudent" amount is to spend each year. Generally restrictions on how money can spent come from estate gifts or wills with specific guidelines on how the giver wished the money to be used.

Firstly thats why you dont dump all your money into one single investment product such as a money market account. Dow Jones Industrial Average rate of return: 40 years 6.7% 50 years 5.8% S&P 500 40 years 6.5% 50 years 6.2% Nasdaq Composite (only has a 30 year or so history since founding in 1971) 30 years 9.5% I am not an investment expert though, just someone with lots of board and consulting experience so wont get into a debate on the specifics of this. Suffice it to say, again, that every major national nonprofit and university uses an endowment trust so its certainly a worthwhile endeavor for long term financial solvency. Secondly, no the pool would not being going up or down as you alluded to. Why? Because any LTM lump sum payments would be put together with other estate gifts, wills or such large donations to create and finance the initial pool. So its not just LTM payments creating the initial trust. In that way, in the immediate near term future, yes annual payments from normal members would offset the costs of LTM members allowing time for the endowment to grow. As to your last question.... If they started with an initial pool of 100 LTM's so $100k initial pool. And an additional 1 LTM joined every month for a total of 12 a year (2 more than your question but allow me that for ease in math). Not counting any other large gifts, estate donations or money from wills. At 6% annual rate of return in an index fund with no overhead management fees in 40 years they would have an endowment fund worth: $2.9 million dollars. In 80 years it would be $35.8 million dollars (interest compounded monthly), with inflation averaging 2% annually would still give you about $7.11 million in today's buying power which is still pretty decent spending money. So yes I would say its worth it. All of which ignores how they are managing to lose so much money per member on the monthly periodical. Thats the craziest thing if true.

Im not insulting you, but you arent getting how compound interest works. When a trust or nonprofit sets up an endowment the money from charitable donations, estates/wills, life time member lump sum payments, etc all go into it and with the annual interest compounding and it quickly grows into a sizable cushion. It would be an ideal way for them to eventually move to self insuring if they so chose. Its why nearly every large national nonprofit and most universities and everyone else uses endowments. Its not "my idea", its fairly standard practice in the nonprofit world. Additionally the ACA used to run their own magazine for members as well. There is no way the USPA should be losing $25 per member annually on every magazine subscription. If they are then either their advertising revenues arent in line with their production costs; or they are paying to much for printing, staff or some other overhead cost. Why do you think most other print magazines only charge $8-20 in subscription fees these days? You are covering production and mailing costs, and then the magazine is making its money on advertising revenues. So if the USPA is LOSING $25 per member on the magazine then something is seriously wrong. This isnt rocket science. Their are organizations out there like the Center for Nonprofit Excellence (https://www.cnpe.org/) that could help the board and staff work through these issues and come up with a better stratgeic long term financial plan.

Happens all the time with the military. Either guys who never served but watched a few to many movies or guys who did serve but were cooks and dont think thats worth admitting to. Best story about that was back in 1990, and I was stationed at Fort Lewis, WA with 2nd Ranger Batt. They arrested and threw the 1st Special Forces Group chaplain (a preacher for you nonmilitary guys)out of the army for wearing a Special Forces tab he wasnt authorized and a few other medals. He kept claiming he had been an enlisted team guy and then became a chaplain and officer. If it had been true he was authorized to wear the tab. But a few guys finally asked the right questions and found out he was full of crap. His defense was he didnt think the team guys would respect him without one. I see the same thing happen with nearly every guy I meet over 60 who claims to have been in Nam. They all claim to have been in SF during their service.

For domestic: The magazine is about $20-24 per year. Insurance is ~$12 per year. USPA Overhead (maintenance of SIM, SCM other docs etc, services to members (rating renewal etc)) makes up the most of the rest of the annual fee. About 2300 active LTM. New LTM for 2013: 129 New LTM for 2012: 98 44 yo median (all) Domestic: 50 yo median Foreign: 42 yo median I do not have #s on how the distribution looks like for how long the LTM have been LTM. But just looking at the median age, it does appear that domestic LTM are heavily weighted to long time jumpers. IOW, they have already passed their 'break-even' point and USPA is now incurring a loss for their membership. In recent years, foreigners have been the majority of LTM and many of them are in their 20s. Life expectancy was given as 79 for domestic and 72 for foreign. (I think those numbers are what were said, but I didn't write those down.) It actually, does not take very many LTM to create a deficit. I have an example that shows the calculations, but it's not ready for prime time. In a day or 3, I should have a graph of how annual dues & LTM fees have increased over the years. . ? As a former national board member for the American Canoe Association (paddling version of USPA), the only way this makes sense is if they are sticking the $1,000 LTM fee under a mattress. If they are putting it a long term investment trust returning an annual rate of approximately 6% that 1,000 grows to over $3,200 in 20 years. And over $10,000 in 40 years. So if they based this whole increase off of that thinking that the annual dues members are having to carry the costs of the LTM then they need a better investment adviser and someone to show the board what an endowment is. And if your claim is that the LTM fees need to go to paying bills (which you just alluded to in a prior post) then your staff is over spending, as the amounts you get from LTM cant be counted on on a yearly basis as a budget item nor should they go toward annual operating costs. Sounds like someone is pulling the wool over someone's eyes.

You are showing your newness to the sport here. UPT was until fairly recently known officially as The Uninsured Relative Workshop. My understanding is it helped to deflect lawsuits against them when they were a smaller company since potential plaintiffs realized right up front that there was no insurance money coming and they would get a limited settlement if any at all since there were no assets worth anything to claim. It is not possible in a lot of cases for skydiving companies without military contracts to even be able to get or afford liability insurance since a single claim would bankrupt the company. Skydiving is still an industry where even the largest companies in the world do not employ more than 100 people for the entire company. Some of the medium size companies only employ 15-20 people and see margins of only a couple of hundred thousand dollars a year. Skydiving is very much a niche industry where without a military contract its a fight from year to year to stay open and well above water. Also my understanding is that Strong had to declare bankruptcy in 2009 over the tandem student falling out of their harness since even if they had insurance it would not pay out at those claim rates and the settlement was worth more than their total assets were worth. http://www.chapter11blog.com/chapter11/2009/11/se-inc-dba-strong-enterprises-files-for-chapter-11.html S.E. Inc., doing business as Strong Enterprises, 11236 Satellite Blvd., Orlando. Filed: Nov. 16. Assets: $514,937. Liabilities: $1,445,517. Major creditors: Regions Bank, Birmingham, Ala., $998,285; Critchfield, Critchfield & Johnson Ltd., Wooster, Ohio, $113,512; Edward T. Strong, Orlando, $86,189. Creditors meeting: Not available. Here is a note from Strong back in 2006 from a fatality that their rig was in use on and all they had did was sell the rig and they still owed money: I know the history as I just said in the prior post. I carry a $5 million dollar aggregate policy for my business which will cover up to $2 million for any individual claim. We are paying in the neighborhood of $2.5k annually last time I looked. Thats for whitewater kayak instruction, which does involve youth as young as 12. Just placed a call to my carrier to see if they will carry me for skydiving instruction as well which Im sure they will. I will let you know what the cost of an annual policy is when they give me the quote. My point is most of the stuff in this thread involving insurance, getting it, reasons for not carrying it, costs of it, etc etc is pure conjecture and has no basis in fact.

Oh my God the stuff you guys will fall for. First he changed the name from Relative Workshop to Uninsured United Parachute Technologies. Secondly, the company has insurance. You can do a simple LexisNexis search. In the event of a lawsuit a company under Florida law has 30 days to provide proof of liability insurance. Lastly the rules against testimony involving liability insurance under federal and state rules of evidence are for the following reason: Attorneys were attempting to make the argument that simply having insurance meant you were acting in a negligent manner and thereby needed protection.

Are you kidding me Chuck? They really passed that? OMG this is ridiculous. Because some lawyer has convinced the BOD that waivers somehow have the magical power to prevent injured parties from filing lawsuits. They may provide a defense in the event of a suit, but you are still getting sued (with all the legal fees, bad press, investigations and such involved), and that's what they fail to understand. Minors have been getting certified to scuba dive for years. I got certified at 15 nearly 30 years ago. Yet their industry seems to thrive. Additionally, kids have been paddling Class 3 and above whitewater for years. I should know because I take students as young as 12 down whitewater rivers in kayaks every summer in my courses. My daughter isnt even two yet, and already has her own whitewater kayak. A gift from a close manufacturer friend of ours. They didnt make me sign a waiver. They make kayaks capable for class 5 (very advanced) whitewater for kids as young as 8. You have to accept the fact that as a businessperson operating in an extreme sports market, that eventually you will get sued by someone for something if you stick around long enough. Make sure you have a good waiver, a good attorney and good liability insurance. If you cant accept that you should probably go do something else...maybe be an accountant.

The only money they lost was due to possibly increased insurance rates. If they didnt have liability insurance and had to pay out of pocket then they are idiots. ^ This! There is NO SUCH THING as protection from a lawsuit. Not even waivers, not even with adults over 18. They can still retain an attorney and they can still haul you into court. While the potential for damages is significantly reduced in that case, you are still out the attorney's fees.

I dont agree with the new rule and Chuck's post is why. Seems silly to allow 16 year olds to drive on the highway at 90 mph or fly planes but not skydive.

Well I found out who was being referred to. Quite frankly I wish the community would out or expose more thieves/shady people of this sort as it might help clean up the business a bit. Im close to the DZ that DZO is now running. I dont support thieves and knowing what I do now, I know he wont ever be getting a dollar from me.

Let me be blunt. Your ex didnt punch him in the face, report him for larceny to the local police department, report him to Aerodyne, or all three of the above? If not why not? And if you dont mind being honest which DZ was this? If the DZO is still there I would want to know and be warned not to do business with them any more.

^ This is awesome!

It was an otter with a low door so I was crouched. Thats definitely one possibility but Iver never had that "standing up" feeling of faintness induce such a feeling, especially not nausea. I have experienced the symptoms you quoted above, especially having been in the army and having to have stood in change of command or award ceremonies for an hour or more. This was much more intense. Of course Im also much older that I was then. Good find though!

Interesting hypothesis. A little comforting to know I'm not the only one. Seems its happened to a few of us. So wonder if it would be worth a write up in a safety article in Parachutist to warn people about.

Nope. Dont do those anymore. I'm strictly a morning coffee guy.

So flew down to Deland this past weekend for a canopy course and to demo a Storm from PD. Friday and Saturday we didnt get in jumps in due to cloud cover. Sunday they managed to get 3 or 4 loads up I think, before showers and tornado called a halt to DZ ops. On my first jump of the day I was demoing the Storm. Did a hop and pop at 5k. I was lead jumper on second pass. Leaning out door watching prior pass with no problems. Green light came on, I scanned below me one final time and out I went. Caught relative air, gave it a two count and deployed my PC. The chute opened smoothly, although I do remember something smacking my right foot (d-bag) during deployment. As soon as I got under canopy my vision started going black at the edges and my stomach started doing flips (nausea). It was all I could do to shake it off and stay conscious. Made it to the ground and landed without incident. Although I stayed light headed for about an hour after the incident. I cant figure out what caused it. I didnt head strike anything that Im aware of. I had been pissing all morning and was hydrated. I ate breakfast. I hadnt been drinking the night before. My leg straps were snug but once under canopy I was able to adjust them into a seated position so not that tight. Any ideas? Other than my first jump at airborne school and getting shot at under canopy this jump definitely had me puckered up. The idea of passing out at 4.6k or so and ending up God knows where gave me the willies.

Im working hard toward them. But not there yet (looks left at his 37 jumps thus far).

All of which ignores the fact that according to everything I have read, ie Creswell and other locations, municipalities cant restrict or tax skydiving activities. Whether or not you think they should be able to is beside the point. There is also a lot to be said for not allowing others to restrict your legal rights.

My dad was an abusive drunk Irish asshole. Dont worry about the father who doesnt want your help anyway. Get some help for the kid before it wrecks his life.

Agreed. As I posted in another thread this past weekend. I had been looking at movign to Amelia Island Florida. I reached out to the owner of Skydive Amelia to see if he did fun jumps as his website didnt mention anything. He informed me that under the operating agreement with the city he "wasnt allowed to." Well I did some digging and they are a city owned but federally funded airport which means, based on the Creswell case and others if Im reading everything right, they cant be legally denied that usage. Again its his planes so if he doesnt want to deal with fun jumpers that his decision. But it appears more and more small municipalities are overstepping their legal jurisdiction in regulating airfield activities.

I see what you are saying. And they are trying to make the same land use zoning argument in Boulder. The key LEGAL difference is he isnt operating a business on the guys backyard/field. He is picking up jumpers who landed off as allowed under FAA and DOT regulations. He is operating his business from the airfield. Quite frankly I dont understand why the DZO ever attempted to get a zoning change or special use permit for the guy's backyard in the first place. Under FAA and DOT guidelines he didnt need one. It was that zoning hearing that allowed them to shut him down. So the only way forward is for him to file suit in federal court seeking an injunction against the county commission's denial of use, or to just keep letting people jump and see if the cops try and arrest someone (ie a test case).