Philosophical NRA question

Why is it, that the NRA can send me between five and ten pieces of junk mail every month, but doesn't have the resources to mail out award points earned at Camp Perry?

They think you should know its much better to Give than to Receive!   The real reason is, The NRA is a money machine the primary goal is to raise as much money as possible all other things are secondary.  There would not even be shooting events if they could figure out how to keep people joined up and feeding the machine.

Just follow the money.  The junk mail earns money, your award points costs money.

Without the NRA, as irritating as they seem on our little issues, we would be throwing rocks. 

Competitions dept at NRA is a legacy obligation from years gone by, that if it had to stand on its own finances, would not exist.  

The Nationals are a huge money pit, and Denny is being pressured to cut expenses in every possible way. That results in silly stuff cooked up by office staff.
 
Throwing rocks, at some time in the not too distant socialist future, will come to the attention of the EPA and several other Federal agencies and the inevitable will happen.

Blsi2600 wrote:
The Nationals are a huge money pit, and Denny is being pressured to cut expenses in every possible way. That results in silly stuff cooked up by office staff.

I understand precisely what you are saying, but I have to wonder if anyone has done a cost benefit analysis on the amount of money the NRA spends on bulk mailing. 

If anything is a legacy, it is snail mail, and the computer illiterate octogenarian donors who actually read the stuff are dying off quickly.  

As far as the Nationals being a money pit, I will believe that, when someone lays out a spread sheet with the NRA borne costs of the National matches, with detailed line items.  

I have heard, but can't confirm, that the Ohio guard charges astronomical rental fees for target system, and bench storage at Camp Perry.  


If this is true, someone with some contracting experience needs to renegotiate this mess, or move the National matches.  

I get the feeling that the entire volunteer system, and all the associated expenses of housing them was a temporary fix put in place many many years ago, when the Army stopped supporting the matches.  


Because the NRA's attention has been focused on the huge revenue they pull in, they seem to have lost track of the best way to manage the out go.

+1 Blsi2600

As much as we piss and moan about the NRA the alternative is scary. I'm afraid without them protecting 2A, having a CCW (if even allowed) would consist of 6 shooters only and you must keep your bullet in your shirt pocket.

On the competition side of things the NRA doesn't appear to do much for "Precision Pistol", but it does a ton for range development and youth shooting sports. Our state org. (MRRA) is very diligent about getting all the NRA money available to us. Some States leave thousand of dollars on the table every year.

If it would take raising the NRA match fee a couple of bucks to get better awards I'd be for it - but only if the money stayed in our sport.

- Dave

And yet the NRA compromised on the GCA of 1968, they compromised on the Machine Gun ban in 1986, they compromised in their support of people like Orin Hatch, McConnel and others. They support B and C  rated candidates against firm supporters of the second amendment. 

Gun rights is very IMPORTANT, but competitions fulfills the NRA's original intent of teaching Americans how to shoot. 

This year, nationals seemed to run smoother, to me. That was a positive. But their customers are already unhappy from the drama of last spring. That goes for the Bullseye and Highpower shooters and now my understanding is some new changes to Silhouette that came from Waples Mill rather than the committees. Doing things like that is WASTING  good will that they can't afford to waste.

I agree with jmdavis, Perry did seem to run a little better this year.  We didn't seem to be rushed as much to score, change targets or to move from the long to short line.

I'm a Life Member of the NRA and overall support their activities, especially with regard to the 2nd Amendment.  However, they could use an update of their website.  The website could do a better job supporting all members and clubs.

I always try to stop by on Sunday to see if I've happened into any points.

And yet, despite their warning, those times in the past that I failed to pick any up, they appeared in my mailbox.

Of course, I wouldn't count on it...

Ed Hall wrote:I always try to stop by on Sunday to see if I've happened into any points.

And yet, despite their warning, those times in the past that I failed to pick any up, they appeared in my mailbox.

Of course, I wouldn't count on it...

I am hoping you are correct Ed.  I don't think threatening people with a policy you have no intention of enforcing, is good PR.

The NRAILA and the NRA Competitions Division are two completely separate departments that do not share resources... i.e. match fees and other match/sponsor related funds are what the NRA Competitions Division rely on for operational costs.

+1 jmdavis

On the GCA of 1968 I think the NRA managed through a very difficult situation, after all it was a gun purchased by mail order from the NRA that was used to kill Kennedy. The holes had to be plugged like no felons, mentally disturbed, etc. When the dust settled we ended up with laws that we could live with. The FFL system was put in control and interstate purchases were still allowed. During those debates they made sure the serial numbers of the guns we own didn't get into a federal database.

- Dave

bdutton wrote:The NRAILA and the NRA Competitions Division are two completely separate departments that do not share resources... i.e. match fees and other match/sponsor related funds are what the NRA Competitions Division rely on for operational costs.

I don't know about you, but I have never donated to the NRAILA, I am however a life member of the NRA.  

If the competition division gets no money from General revenues, while the NRAILA does, I see a significant problem right there.  


You can explain it away like the Easter bunny makes the decisions as to how the revenues are allocated, but someone somewhere decides how to fund the various operations.   Your explanation lets no one off the hook.

Dave maybe you are right. But I remember reading in 1976 and 1980 issues of the Rifleman, that the NRA was making it a priority to overturn the 1968 GCA. Also, I never knew that the NRA sold any Carcanos (though I do have an NRA 1903). 

The funny thing is that when we had all of those loose laws, when kids could literally go to the hardware store and buy a gun or order them by mail, we also had the lowest murder rates of the 20th Century. Only now are we getting back to those early 1960's levels. 

But many serial numbers are in a database. It was reported a few years ago that the ATF was putting the records of closed FFL's into an online db.

ShaumannK wrote:Because the NRA's attention has been focused on the huge revenue they pull in, they seem to have lost track of the best way to manage the out go.

If the competition division gets no money from General revenues, while the NRAILA does, I see a significant problem right there.  


You can explain it away like the Easter bunny makes the decisions as to how the revenues are allocated, but someone somewhere decides how to fund the various operations.   Your explanation lets no one off the hook.

I thought that these points spoke volumes.

The source of a lot of our disappointment with our NRA revolves around the complete lack of transparency regarding revenue.

I totally understand how and why many of the financial dealings of NRA can't be made completely public, but there needs to be more ability for the general membership to see balance sheets for certain programs, and I believe competitions is one of those.

If NRA would only allow members to help with competitions to find efficiencies and to make effective program recommendations, I think that there would be a lot less grumbling--and maybe some additional growth in the sport and in general membership as a result.

I was able to pick up about 2/3 of my points but when I went out there on a monday to pull rifle targets for the club I'm in the window had closed early..... The most frustrating thing for me is trying to get any information from them. The people in the window 10 ft away from the points window couldn't tell me the hours of the points window. After 45 minutes on the phone (3 separate phone calls) I gave up on getting any information.....I'd be happy if they just used them to renew my membership but apparently they are just gone.

Schaumannk wrote:

Blsi2600 wrote:
The Nationals are a huge money pit, and Denny is being pressured to cut expenses in every possible way. That results in silly stuff cooked up by office staff.

I understand precisely what you are saying, but I have to wonder if anyone has done a cost benefit analysis on the amount of money the NRA spends on bulk mailing. 

If anything is a legacy, it is snail mail, and the computer illiterate octogenarian donors who actually read the stuff are dying off quickly.  

As far as the Nationals being a money pit, I will believe that, when someone lays out a spread sheet with the NRA borne costs of the National matches, with detailed line items.  

I have heard, but can't confirm, that the Ohio guard charges astronomical rental fees for target system, and bench storage at Camp Perry.  


If this is true, someone with some contracting experience needs to renegotiate this mess, or move the National matches.  

I get the feeling that the entire volunteer system, and all the associated expenses of housing them was a temporary fix put in place many many years ago, when the Army stopped supporting the matches.  


Because the NRA's attention has been focused on the huge revenue they pull in, they seem to have lost track of the best way to manage the out go.

Denny Willing addressed the issue of bulk mailings a few years ago on this list. IIRC, he said that the mailings get a response of one contribution for every 3 letters mailed out. He said that if it didn't get that kind of response, they wouldn't do it. I know that if one is irritated with the mailings, one can ask to be removed from the mailing list. It takes a few weeks for them to process the request, but it reduces the amount of NRA mailings considerably. Denny also addressed the issue of the cost of the national matches to the NRA. I don't remember the specific amount, but it is very considerable. I think that if the amount was highly publicized among the general membership, there might be a big hue and cry to eliminate funding. Many NRA members consider competitive shooters (a small minority of NRA members) to be prima donnas, whiners and chronic complainers. There is an NRA Competitive Shooting Endowment that was kicked off with, IIRC, a million dollar gift years ago. If one wants to contribute to it, I believe that this is the link: https://www.nra.org/rof/give.aspx

A lot of what you are claiming has the appearance of smoke and mirrors. BEMike.  

The fact the the NRA claims a response rate of one in three is a false metric.  

We don't know who is doing the counting and numbers can be fudged.  


The true measure of the effectiveness of bulk mailing, is actual funds raised, after all of the expenses of both the bulk mailing and the people manning the phones, and processing the responses have been paid.  


It isn't enough to keep the hamster wheel in motion for the benefit of the employees in the advertising division of the NRA.  


Furthermore,   I doubt if anyone is going to raise a stink about the cost of the National matches when they see the millions spent on the NRAILA.  

I know that the CMP must cover a significant fraction of the costs at Camp Perry, and until the costs borne directly by the NRA become public knowledge,  I will assume that absolutely nothing that you claim, about the expense of the national matches, and other NRA programs can be verified.  

The CMP has been claiming for years that the are funded completely by donations (and their sales) which is the biggest lie around.  

They receive at least 20 million a year in the form of a grant from the Federal government. ( Their donations don't even cover their yearly operational expenses.) The CMP financial documents are available on the Internet. ( Unlike the NRA's. )

Kate, 

I think that the $20 million is the estimated value of the M1's that they get for free and then sell, rather than actual cash money.

Along the lines of NRA and support of competitive shooting.....
Who else is 'impressed' with the way SSUSA has become less than useful?
Competition used to be a big deal for NRA, it was covered in detail in the 'Rifleman', heck it was why the 'Rifleman' existed! Reports on events, instructions on how to compete, articles on appropriate arms for competition (and how to improve them) as well as information on where to go in order to compete were very much the backbone of the publication. Then they moved competition to a separate but OK publication, then degraded that, then moved it on-line and now it appears to be more of a website (sell more advertising?) than a magazine.

You can argue the idea that competition is no longer a major factor to 'the average' (whomever that may be) NRA member but is that because interest went away or because they stopped covering and teaching about it and shooters are not even aware of it?

No argument from me that NRA is our 'best defense' from the politicians who would prefer us all to be unarmed. I have been a member for half a century and am currently (last I knew) at the 'Patron' level. I support what they are doing politically but wonder if in the long run 'we' are not shooting ourselves in the foot by increasingly ignoring the shooting sports side of firearms?

Bruce

jmdavis wrote:Kate, 

I think that the $20 million is the estimated value of the M1's that they get for free and then sell, rather than actual cash money.

I believe you are incorrect.    I have seen the financial spread sheets.   Grants are in cash.   And their sales revenue is maybe a million + a year.  (Selling 20 million worth of M1s a year,  is not only  hard to believe, but if they were, it would be reflected in their sales numbers). Their sales don't even cover the salaries, and overhead at Camp Perry and Anniston.  


They get away with claiming that they are not government funded because a grant is not a budget line item.  It is the deceptive way that the Feds give money to all sorts of organizations,  (just liked Planned Parenthood)

From the 2014 CMP Annual report, for what its worth, "During FY14, proceeds from the sale of government surplus rifles and ammunition fully funded all CMP programs, providing a substantial excess of revenue over expenses for our twelfth consecutive year. This excess is invested in CMP’s permanent endowment, providing funds to finance CMP programs in future years when the supply of government surplus rifles is exhausted."

jmdavis wrote:From the 2014 CMP Annual report, for what its worth, "During FY14, proceeds from the sale of government surplus rifles and ammunition fully funded all CMP programs, providing a substantial excess of revenue over expenses for our twelfth consecutive year. This excess is invested in CMP’s permanent endowment, providing funds to finance CMP programs in future years when the supply of government surplus rifles is exhausted."

When a Government Sponsered Enterprise, spun off from DOD and funded through sales of government donated equipment, donations, and over twenty million dollars of government grants a year, tells you "they made money" and transferred a lot of those grants into their endowment, I am not impressed by the smoke and mirrors.

Schaumannk wrote:A lot of what you are claiming has the appearance of smoke and mirrors. BEMike.  

The fact the the NRA claims a response rate of one in three is a false metric.  

We don't know who is doing the counting and numbers can be fudged.  


The true measure of the effectiveness of bulk mailing, is actual funds raised, after all of the expenses of both the bulk mailing and the people manning the phones, and processing the responses have been paid.  


It isn't enough to keep the hamster wheel in motion for the benefit of the employees in the advertising division of the NRA.  


Furthermore,   I doubt if anyone is going to raise a stink about the cost of the National matches when they see the millions spent on the NRAILA.  

I know that the CMP must cover a significant fraction of the costs at Camp Perry, and until the costs borne directly by the NRA become public knowledge,  I will assume that absolutely nothing that you claim, about the expense of the national matches, and other NRA programs can be verified.  

The CMP has been claiming for years that the are funded completely by donations (and their sales) which is the biggest lie around.  

They receive at least 20 million a year in the form of a grant from the Federal government. ( Their donations don't even cover their yearly operational expenses.) The CMP financial documents are available on the Internet. ( Unlike the NRA's. )

The fact is that Denny served on the Pistol Committee for many years before taking office. He has been involved in the inner workings of the NRA. I assume that you have similar experience and information to dispute his statements. Denny is not a close personal friend, but I have had dealings with him and I have no reason to doubt his veracity, sincerity and intelligence. He has been a friend of bullseye pistol shooters for decades and quite an accomplished bullseye pistol shooter himself. I suspect your speculation that the general membership would support the vast sum spent on the national matches if it became an issue is not on target. The NRA ILA spending has nothing to do with the money spent on the national matches. I think you may find that the vast majority of NRA members are paying dues to protect their 2A rights and couldn't care less about competitive shooters. Comparing the CMP and the NRA are like comparing apples and oranges.

Mike, 

What we have is the track record over the past year or two with regard to competitor meetings, the push to electronic targets, etc etc. That is enough to make people suspicious of decisions. This is particularly true when one hears from other shooting sports where the rules committees don't even know about the rule changes until they are articles in Shooting Sports USA. Does that sound familiar to the e-targets article last year???