ANA raises dues

One of the key pieces of reference material during the board discussion was
worked up by the staff, showing that direct costs of a membership are over $28
a year, This does not include any of the overhead - staff, equipment, building,
etc. We have been subsidizing junior memberships "forever" but we were told
that we're actually spending about $50 a year on each YN. We are also losing
money on the Life Members, hence the raises. The initiation fee is being
dropped as part of the overall plan.
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club. The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

We are also losing money on the Life Members, hence the raises.

I know I paid about 20X the annual rate for the life membership.
As a result, the ANA set itself up with a long-term liability,
much like a annuity or defined benefit plan, to provide services.
I guess I could resign or die to save the ANA money.

Best Regards, Bob Johnson

Directories
---------------------------------------------------
GOLDSHEET Mining http://www.goldsheetlinks.com
COINSHEET Numismatic http://www.coinsheetlinks.com
OILSHEET Energy http://www.oilsheetlinks.com
---------------------------------------------------

On 23 Oct 2004 16:21:46 GMT, AnswerMan2 wrote:

As noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who
don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

Well the ANA didn't like my idea of allowing members to choose
alternatives to the Numismatist in an area of their specialty. How about
if the ANA could then offer specialized publications in addtion to the
Numismatist, perhaps at a reduced price. I am pretty sure most sub
speciality publishers would be thrilled to offer ANA members discounted
prices.
The otehr approach would be for the ANA to accept the loss of specialists
and concentrate on constantly churning out more new members than ones
which are lost by attribution.

The only reason for being a part of any organization, from citizenship in
the U.S. to membership in ANA, is to gain access to services one couldn't
provide for himself. Citizenship grants us access to national defense, for
example, while ANA membership gives us access to the library's holdings.
Unfortunately, the magazine is the most conspicuous benefit of membership,
and the one that lighter-weight members equate with the 36 bucks. If I had
an answer to the membership growth issue, I would run for ANA president, but
I don't, so I won't.

"AnswerMan2" wrote in message
...

One of the key pieces of reference material during the board discussion
was
worked up by the staff, showing that direct costs of a membership are over
$28
a year, This does not include any of the overhead - staff, equipment,
building,
etc. We have been subsidizing junior memberships "forever" but we were
told
that we're actually spending about $50 a year on each YN. We are also
losing
money on the Life Members, hence the raises. The initiation fee is being
dropped as part of the overall plan.
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club. The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always
open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As
noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who
don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

"AnswerMan2" wrote in message
...
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club. The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always
open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As
noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who
don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor


I am somewhat of a specialized collector and I had my doubts about
staying a member for the last couple of years. After requesting
material from the ANA library several times that I wasn't likely to find
elsewhere
and receiving it promptly; I am sold! I would do the Life member bit if I
could afford it!

Dale

With the greatest respect for Mr. Herbert, the major problem is that
the ANA is staffed by non-numismatists. They don't understand what
makes us tick. Cippoletti, Gregory they have no passion & no fire.
Bob Leuver was an excellent example of a damp squibb (who ran off
anybody on the staff who gave a damn about coins). When you lose the
J.P. Martins and the Bob Hoges, you've lost the future.

Bob Olson

(AnswerMan2) wrote in message ...
One of the key pieces of reference material during the board discussion was
worked up by the staff, showing that direct costs of a membership are over $28
a year, This does not include any of the overhead - staff, equipment, building,
etc. We have been subsidizing junior memberships "forever" but we were told
that we're actually spending about $50 a year on each YN. We are also losing
money on the Life Members, hence the raises. The initiation fee is being
dropped as part of the overall plan.
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club. The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

Well the ANA didn't like my idea of allowing members to choose
alternatives to the Numismatist in an area of their specialty. How about if
the ANA could then offer specialized publications in addtion to the
Numismatist, perhaps at a reduced price. I am pretty sure most sub speciality
publishers would be thrilled to offer ANA members discounted prices.
The otehr approach would be for the ANA to accept the loss of specialists and
concentrate on constantly churning out more new members than ones
which are lost by attribution.

I don't know who you contacted at the ANA with your suggestion, so I can't
comment on that, but it is an interesting idea, worthy of some discussion. My
immediate reaction is that one likely drawback would be additional staff time
needed to handle application for the other publication. The staff is operating
at about 110 percent of capacity now.
We have been working hard on new members and the current membership (without
the non-renewals) is just over the 32,000 mark, the highest figure in a number
of years, so the membership department is doing their job very well. I wish
that all ANA or potential ANA members would make an effort to visit
headquarters, both to see the museum and most of all the enthusiasm the staff
exhibits.
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor
P.S. It is not illegal - or against the rules - for anyone to pay the
membership for someone else, or for a club. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

On 23 Oct 2004 23:42:14 GMT, AnswerMan2 wrote:

Well the ANA didn't like my idea of allowing members to choose
alternatives to the Numismatist in an area of their specialty. How
about if
the ANA could then offer specialized publications in addtion to the
Numismatist, perhaps at a reduced price. I am pretty sure most sub
speciality
publishers would be thrilled to offer ANA members discounted prices.
The otehr approach would be for the ANA to accept the loss of
specialists and
concentrate on constantly churning out more new members than ones
which are lost by attribution.

I don't know who you contacted at the ANA with your suggestion, so I
can't
comment on that, but it is an interesting idea, worthy of some
discussion. My
immediate reaction is that one likely drawback would be additional staff
time
needed to handle application for the other publication. The staff is
operating
at about 110 percent of capacity now.
We have been working hard on new members and the current membership
(without
the non-renewals) is just over the 32,000 mark, the highest figure in a
number
of years, so the membership department is doing their job very well. I
wish
that all ANA or potential ANA members would make an effort to visit
headquarters, both to see the museum and most of all the enthusiasm the
staff
exhibits.
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

I had initially suggested making the Celator an optional periodical choice
in lieu of the Numismatist. The reaction was mainly one that they
couldn't single out a single sub-group because then all the speciality
clubs would want to have that option as well. In then light of the fact
that specialists are most likely to leave, one wonders what would be so
bad about speciality club's periodicals being offered as well. The
governors I spoke with also seemed to think that the Numismatist was a
must for all members as it was the only method of comunication with the
membership. But again, if the member chooses not to receive the magazine,
what's the harm.

"AnswerMan2" wrote in message
...

One of the key pieces of reference material during the board discussion
was
worked up by the staff, showing that direct costs of a membership are over
$28
a year, This does not include any of the overhead - staff, equipment,
building,
etc. We have been subsidizing junior memberships "forever" but we were
told
that we're actually spending about $50 a year on each YN. We are also
losing
money on the Life Members, hence the raises. The initiation fee is being
dropped as part of the overall plan.
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club. The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always
open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As
noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who
don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

One thing that I think the ANA should do is to get seriously involved in
advocating collectors' rights. Very few coin collectors seem to understand
that their right to collect coins without being disturbed by the government
is now in real jeapordy. The ANA leadership knows better, or ought to know
better. A battle is now underway that may last for years, and at the end it
could become very burdensome, even impractical, to collect anything that is
over 100 years old including coins and postage stamps.

The battle front is now largely being defended by collectors of ancient
coins, whose right to import these coins into the USA is presently being
threatened by legislation based on the 1970 UNESCO Convention. These
uncompensated volunteers are battling the leadership of the American
Institute of Archaeology, Ricardo Elia, Lord Renfrew and their minions whose
unstated long term goal is to prevent private ownership of any kind of
antiquity, even including things like Civil War relics. These anticollecting
zealots want access to all antiquities to be controlled by archaeologists
and cultural ministries. Their policies and actions strongly suggest that if
coin collecting and stamp collecting are seriously impacted in the process,
they either don't care or might even welcome that.

Coin collectors are now joining together to combat these pernicious schemes
under the banner of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). Anyone
interested can learn more about this group at http://accg.us/ . Why isn't
the ANA doing something about this problem? What issue can possibly be more
important for collectors than preserving their right to collect? A tiny
fraction of the budget and manpower that the ANA now manages would make a
huge difference in this struggle.

Something even more dangerous than the import restriction legislation based
on the UNESCO convention is lurking in the wings. The 1995 UNIDROIT
convention provides that the governments of foreign countries may seize any
item of "cultural property" (coins and stamps over 100 years old for
example) which originated in their country unless the collector or
institution that owns it can trace its provenance back to an export permit
or fifty years. Moreover, if appropriate efforts to determine provenance
were not made, then the item is subject to seizure without compensation.
Provenance investigations to UNIDROIT standards are now being conducted by
museums for artwork acquisitions and are reportedly averaging 40
curator-hours each. Imagine the difficulties facing a collector who has many
thousands of coins or stamps, no clues as to the ultimate origin of most of
them and no idea as to where to start in documenting their provenance.

More information on the UNIDROIT convention is available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Unidroit-L/ .

I urge the ANA leadership to take another look at the cultural property law
issue, and to realize that when cultural property laws do start to seriously
impede collectors, to the point that ANA members want something done about
the problem, it will be vastly more difficult to undo these laws at that
time than it would be to prevent their being enacted now. From my personal
involvement in the struggle, I am absolutely certain that the ANA commands
resources that, if deployed, would easily be able to defeat these
restrictive laws that threaten to destroy coin collecting.

Dave Welsh
Classical Coins
www.classicalcoins.com

Unidroit-L Listowner
ANA R-181265

"Dave Welsh" wrote in message
news:FnCed.71428$kz3.63350@fed1read02...
"AnswerMan2" wrote in message
...

One of the key pieces of reference material during the board discussion
was
worked up by the staff, showing that direct costs of a membership are
over
$28
a year, This does not include any of the overhead - staff, equipment,
building,
etc. We have been subsidizing junior memberships "forever" but we were
told
that we're actually spending about $50 a year on each YN. We are also
losing
money on the Life Members, hence the raises. The initiation fee is being
dropped as part of the overall plan.
Retention is in fact a major problem, as it is with almost every club.
The
membership department is directly addressing the problem. We are always
open to
any suggestions or ideas that might keep more members in the fold. As
noted in
the previous thread, the major problem is specialized collectors who
don't
find enough material on their specialty to warrant staying on as
members.
RCC dues are the same as an individual membership - $36,
Alan Herbert
ANA Governor

One thing that I think the ANA should do is to get seriously involved in
advocating collectors' rights. Very few coin collectors seem to understand
that their right to collect coins without being disturbed by the
government
is now in real jeapordy. The ANA leadership knows better, or ought to know
better. A battle is now underway that may last for years, and at the end
it
could become very burdensome, even impractical, to collect anything that
is
over 100 years old including coins and postage stamps.

The battle front is now largely being defended by collectors of ancient
coins, whose right to import these coins into the USA is presently being
threatened by legislation based on the 1970 UNESCO Convention. These
uncompensated volunteers are battling the leadership of the American
Institute of Archaeology, Ricardo Elia, Lord Renfrew and their minions
whose
unstated long term goal is to prevent private ownership of any kind of
antiquity, even including things like Civil War relics. These
anticollecting
zealots want access to all antiquities to be controlled by archaeologists
and cultural ministries. Their policies and actions strongly suggest that
if
coin collecting and stamp collecting are seriously impacted in the
process,
they either don't care or might even welcome that.

Coin collectors are now joining together to combat these pernicious
schemes
under the banner of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). Anyone
interested can learn more about this group at http://accg.us/ . Why isn't
the ANA doing something about this problem? What issue can possibly be
more
important for collectors than preserving their right to collect? A tiny
fraction of the budget and manpower that the ANA now manages would make a
huge difference in this struggle.

Something even more dangerous than the import restriction legislation
based
on the UNESCO convention is lurking in the wings. The 1995 UNIDROIT
convention provides that the governments of foreign countries may seize
any
item of "cultural property" (coins and stamps over 100 years old for
example) which originated in their country unless the collector or
institution that owns it can trace its provenance back to an export permit
or fifty years. Moreover, if appropriate efforts to determine provenance
were not made, then the item is subject to seizure without compensation.
Provenance investigations to UNIDROIT standards are now being conducted by
museums for artwork acquisitions and are reportedly averaging 40
curator-hours each. Imagine the difficulties facing a collector who has
many
thousands of coins or stamps, no clues as to the ultimate origin of most
of
them and no idea as to where to start in documenting their provenance.

More information on the UNIDROIT convention is available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Unidroit-L/ .

I urge the ANA leadership to take another look at the cultural property
law
issue, and to realize that when cultural property laws do start to
seriously
impede collectors, to the point that ANA members want something done about
the problem, it will be vastly more difficult to undo these laws at that
time than it would be to prevent their being enacted now. From my personal
involvement in the struggle, I am absolutely certain that the ANA commands
resources that, if deployed, would easily be able to defeat these
restrictive laws that threaten to destroy coin collecting.


It would seem to me that once a government authorizes, produces, and
releases coins for public use, those coins become monetary items for
posterity and the property of those people who use or accept them,
regardless of where in the world their travels take them. Individual coins
should not be unique cultural or art heritage objects that can be placed
under strict state controls after XX years.

Why is this view apparently so wrong?

Bruce