TRIP HAMMER wrote: Which is far different from your so-called "Guideline". And what I know is that the FY07/08 AFA budget as approved by the BoD is neither a guideline, a good faith estimate, or any other plan that can be used to fulfill the needs of the AFA financially.

Note below, the accepted definition for what a budget is and what it represents. Note too how what you define as a budget, is far, far, from resembling what a budget is expected to be and do. Note especially, the section I have underlined for your viewing pleasure.

"Budget (from French bougette) generally refers to a list of all planned expenses and revenues "

"Corporate budget:

The budget of a company is compiled annually. A finished budget usually requires considerable effort and can be seen as a financial plan for the new financial year.
If the actual numbers delivered through the financial year turn out to be close to the budget, this will demonstrate that the company understands their business and has been successfully driving it in the direction they had planned. On the other hand, if the actuals diverge wildly from the budget, this sends out an 'out of control' signalIf what was presented to the BoD and interested onlookers at the Annual meeting is an example of what passes for knowledgeable (with regard to budgetary concerns), then you have chosen poorly(Mr. Miller presently excepted).

Now, do you intend to answer any of the questions(dare I say, charges) I posed a short while ago?

Rick

Rick,

Sorry you feel that you need to voice your concernes for all the world to see. I thought you wanted what was best for the AFA? This sounds like you want what is best for "Rick". Unless we make an effort, the AFA web sight will never get off the ground. Try it, you may like it.

Dick Fanguy wrote: I am posting my concerns where, demonstrably, a large group of AFA members comes to read and interact. Something that demonstrably does not happen on the AFA web site. That the leadership would like to control access to discourse because it sometimes makes them uncomfortable or exposes their incompetence, gives me the impression that they would like this to be an Orwellian nightmare, rather than a free democratic group of people.Demonstrably so. Hiding behind a firewall is no way to accomplish that task.How can you possibly draw that conclusion? Unless of course you mean that what is best for Rick is best for the AFA membership. In which case, you are correct.In case you have somehow missed it, I have been one of the few and regular correspondents on the AFA web site. Further, I visit that web site at least once, and usually twice a day and I'm sorry and disillusioned to report that nothing has changed.

Face it Dick, etal, horseshoes.com is the number 1 recognized and accepted meeting place for farriers on the internet. The leadership of the AFA needs to wake up to that fact and figure out how to use that information to their advantage. And never forget that nothing said over at the AFA web site is sacrosanct. It will find its way into the public domain, one way or another. The task for the AFA leadership is to make sure the information gets out in a timely and accurate manner. But we already know that. We've had the discussions about communication and transparency for what seems like ages. And its like trying to walk forward into the teeth of a gale force wind.

Now, I will grant you that you personally have tried to make some small inroads into the problem, but what is needed is a superhighway, not a country lane. And trying to dictate where the flow of information will or should occur, is disingenuous and not at all like the Dick Fanguy I know.
Which causes another thought provoking can of worms to be opened. At least , by me.

Rick

(for the record, at 8:15am today, I visited the AFA members only section of the AFA website. According to the information posted there these are the "totals" I found:

Topics: 189
Posts: 1179
Registered members: 225

Thats an average of 5.2 posts/registered member; 6.2 posts/topic. Not exactly a compelling set of numbers or a reason to expend much effort posting over at that location.

By the way Dick, In reviewing the stats for posting on the AFA members only website, I find that I am not only in the top 15 group of posters, but in fact am in the top 3 at this time. So, in fact, I have already heeded your advice . To wit: " Try it". Unfortunately, I've liked it about as much as I like chugging cod liver oil.

When you add to that that the site is not "user friendly" you can, I hope, begin to understand some of the reasons why most prefer to avoid the AFA website like the plague. Now I know that you've stated that there is "website change in the wind" . Well, until that happens I think it is rather foolish to expect very many to navigate those shoal filed waters. As the advertising campaign once said, "Where's the beef"? Or, "Show me the money!"

Rick,

Once again, I don't disagree with your opinion of the web sight. You are right, but it is what we have right now. Improvements will take a little time. In the mean time, give us a break and try using it some. You are a lot better with computers than I and I can get on it.

Not trying to start a fight, but I am trying to change an image. I might not be your choice to sit and drink a beer with, but I bet we could get a lot done if we work together. Disagreeing with you can be fun some times.

Just want to say that "BARON" rules! He has set up this fantastic site and sits back and monitors so that we don't get 'spammed' and lets the flow of info run amuck!
All of us that shoe horses for a living and call ourselves Farriers owe him big time! The AFA should THANK him for all the publicity that this site gives the AFA! Heck for the truth to be known ,the AFJ site kicks the AFA sites donkey also and they are way behind this site! Everyone remember to say "Thanks to Baron" . I do, Thank you Baron! Gary Hill

Dick Fanguy wrote: I sit and drink a beer with you anytime. Hell, I'll even buy. No doubt. Yeah, but its those other times that really get some seeing red and thinking how good I'd look dead.......

Rick

Just a update on the membership numbers:

4-27-07 Total Reg. and Life time members 3,021

5-1-07 Total Reg. and Life time members 3,184

This gives us 163 new members and members that have come back to the AFA. I think we are doing something right. I hope this trend continues.

I keep seeing about life time membership. but cannot find it where I have been looking.
How much does it cost and is different there a price for seniors ?

Where haven't I been looking ?

Perhaps I just need to call the home office to find out.

Bruce,

A Life Member is a member of the AFA that is 65 year old or older and had 10 years or more of continues membership. I will become a life member in 3 years if I don't check out.

Dick Fanguy on 4/27/07 at 2:00 PM wrote:
Dick Fanguy on 5/2/07 at 8:34 PM wrote: Dick,

Thank you for posting these numbers. However, my original question was how many Lifetime and Regular members because those are the voting members of the AFA.

1st, On 4/27/07 you gave us numbers that totaled 3,031 but that included 148 non-voting Student Members so the answer to my question should have been 2873.

2nd On 5/2/07 you post that the AFA had 3,021 Lifetime and Regular members as of 4/27/07, yet in your original post on 4/27/07 your total was 3031 including Student Members.

3rd In your 5/2/07 post you are now stating that the AFA has 3,184 Lifetime and Regular members.

Given these facts I have some questions.

Why has the number of lifetime and regular members jumped so much from the 4/27/07 total or are you still including Student members but not listing them and if you are including student members can you post the corrected breakdown with all three categories listed?

If in fact you are including the Student Members in the 5/2/07 number will you provide the break out with Student Members listed separately or in the alternative will you get numbers that accurately reflect just Lifetime and Regular Members?
Dick Fanguy on 5/2/07 at 8:34 PM wrote: If this is all in lifetime and regular members and based upon accurate numbers, congratulations. However, if this is based upon student memberships I’d say the jury is still out but that the trend is a guardedly positive one. But for me to say anything at all I’d like to know that I am looking at accurate numbers and so far they leave to many questions open.

So to restate my original question: What is the current count of lifetime and regular members and what was the count at the close of convention?

Ron,

You are right. I did not take out the student members. I'm sorry for this error. The fact still remains that people are joining up in larger numbers than we have seen in the past. The glass is half full

Dick Fanguy wrote: No problem, please make whatever adjustments that you need to make and repost your counts.
Dick Fanguy wrote: Contrary to the picture your comment would appear to paint, I am not making or assigning any positive or negative value to this data.

I am simply asking you to respond with accurate data that answers the questions that have been asked without bothering to try to put political spin on it. If the data points at a positive trend that will be self evident. It will be just as evident if the data points to a negative trend. But the data are what the data are and that is all they are and no amount of commentary can change that.

Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
Bettering all of farriery is a fine goal but there are a lot of good causes I could donate time or money to that would probably rate a lot higher on my list of charities.

As a former memeber, I don't belong to the AFA because I believe it's focus is all wrong for a trade association.

Since I took over the Guild membership list I have discovered that 6 of our members are deceased, two have retired, and 11 have moved without giving us or the AFA or the American Farriers Journal a forwarding address.
The total number of farriers who have become Guild members to date is 133. When I sent out my first news letter last year we had 30 paid members. Now we have 53 paid members. Six of them are new members who have joined in the past year.

Over half of our members are not current in their dues. We got 17 members to pay their dues just by sending our a news letter telling them that their dues were expired.

I could probably get most of the rest of the inactive members to pay their dues by calling them on the phone and bugging them about it.

Far as I can tell, most of our members become inactive by forgetting to write a check and drop it in the mail. 'nuther words it is not a deliberate choice.

We can't rule out the idea that the AFA active membership numbers rise and fall in similar fashion. The 19 Guild members what we lost due to death, retirement, or "unknown" were also AFA members lost.

You can start playing with those numbers and using percentages to show growth and atrition trends. I've got a great book that describes exactly how to do this. The title or the book is "the dictionary of (bull*s h i t)" by Nick Webb.

tbloomer wrote: One major difference is that the AFA does send out renewal notices.

Another major difference is that anyone can become or remain a member of the AFA. The membership requirements for the Guild are quite different, so trying to compare the two does not work. It might be more equitable if the AFA and the BWFA memberships, new and renewal, etc, were compared.I think that is/has been required procurement and reading for the AFA leadership.