jjonas
January 30, 2013, 1:51pm
21
gromicko:
It includes 1,928 (count as of just now) students and invisible members who either haven’t fulfilled their entrance requirements, intentionally made themselves invisible for various reasons (on vacation, injured, sick, on active duty, etc.), not licensed in a jurisdiction that has adopted licensing, or don’t offer inspection services to the general public (government inspectors, building managers, etc.)
So then that would be a YES to the Vendor question.
What is the breakdown numbers on Vendors?
jjonas
January 30, 2013, 3:28pm
23
gromicko:
9 vendors.
And how are they classified?
Are they still Gold, Silver, whatever? If so, what exactly does that mean?
Free or Paid memberships?
Full Members or Limited?
Restrictions?
Etc…
gromicko
January 30, 2013, 5:08pm
24
We don’t have any Gold, Silver stuff, we just made nine vendors members so they could comment in the members-only section of this message board. Dominic, Nathan, Ben Garrison, Russell Buchanan, Will Colton, etc. No restrictions on them.
gromicko
January 30, 2013, 5:08pm
25
Here is a live time chart of membership applications coming in: http://wdww.nachi.org/memberstats.htm
jburkeson1
January 30, 2013, 6:03pm
26
Nick,
You may want to make a provision to adjust the number based on market conditions, sort of like an index where if the market swung drastically you could adjust the number to meet the conditions. In other words, allowing more inspectors in when in a housing boom and restricting new members to a number much smaller than 10,000 during lean times… In any case if a cap is implemented the result will be the graying of NACHI.
:neutral:
jjonas
January 30, 2013, 6:25pm
27
jburkeson1:
Nick,
You may want to make a provision to adjust the number based on market conditions, sort of like an index where if the market swung drastically you could adjust the number to meet the conditions. In other words, allowing more inspectors in when in a housing boom and restricting new members to a number much smaller than 10,000 during lean times… In any case if a cap is implemented the result will be the graying of NACHI.
:neutral:
Joe… it’s all a marketing ploy, and will never be enacted. Just like in 2006/2007.
What’s the best way to get someone to want something? Say they can’t have it!!!
jjonas
January 30, 2013, 6:27pm
28
gromicko:
We don’t have any Gold, Silver stuff, we just made nine vendors members so they could comment in the members-only section of this message board. Dominic, Nathan, Ben Garrison, Russell Buchanan, Will Colton, etc. No restrictions on them.
Really???.. http://www.nachi.org/target.htm
[size=5][size=3]AFFILIATE
Inspection-industry vendors have been contacting me recently and asking me if there are ways that InterNACHI and its strategic partners (NACHI.TV , IAC2, Real Property Times, and Inspector’s Quarterly) can help them market their products and services to the entire inspection industry (not just InterNACHI members). In response, I’ve created some options that would cover our costs, provide a little left-over funds to support InterNACHI member projects, and still be considered high-value to vendors.
The free column is essentially what we have always offered vendors for free. Providing this free access to our members is almost unheard of in other trade associations of any industry, but we feel that members benefit by having all options available to them, and so this free access will continue.
The other three packages (Silver, Gold, and Platinum) are above and beyond what we’ve always offered vendors for free. All opportunities are a year long and subject to change. I encourage you to review them and give me a call at (720) 272-8578. Perhaps we can help each other while helping inspectors.
Nick Gromicko
From Welcome to the InterNACHI Affiliate Program - InterNACHI http://www.nachi.org/target.htm#ixzz2JU7du2NU
gromicko
January 30, 2013, 6:31pm
29
LOL. That’s what they said when I announced we were going to raise InterNACHI dues to $365.
They said it again when I announced we were going to raise InterNACHI dues to $499.
They also said it when I announced we were taking CMI’s application fee to $1,000.
They’re actually wrong on this one too because… It was already enacted back in 2008 (so you’re about 4 years late with your post :roll:) It’s just that we didn’t hit 10,000 (came close) in 2008 due to the real estate crash. It appears we’ll hit it this year.
jjonas
January 30, 2013, 6:40pm
30
gromicko:
LOL. That’s what they said when I announced we were going to raise InterNACHI dues to $365.
They said it again when I announced we were going to raise InterNACHI dues to $499.
They also said it when I announced we were taking CMI’s application fee to $1,000.
They’re actually wrong on this one too because… It has already been enacted (back in 2008.) It’s just that we didn’t hit 10,000 (came close) in 2008 due to the real estate crash. It appears we’ll hit it this year.
So… you really, really mean it this time? :mrgreen:
gromicko
January 30, 2013, 6:45pm
31
Yep. I really, really meant it when I said we were raising dues to $365 two years ago. We did it.
I really, really meant it when I said we were raising dues to $499 last year. We did it.
I really, really meant it when I said CMI application fees were going to $1,000. We really did raise it to $1,000.
And I really, really, meant it when I said in 2008 that membership is capped at 10,000. We really did cap it.
ccurrins
January 30, 2013, 9:56pm
32
jburkeson1:
Nick,
You may want to make a provision to adjust the number based on market conditions, sort of like an index where if the market swung drastically you could adjust the number to meet the conditions. In other words, allowing more inspectors in when in a housing boom and** restricting new members to a number much smaller **than 10,000 during lean times… In any case if a cap is implemented the result will be the graying of NACHI.
:neutral:
Especially in Florida, ey?
Data last updated on Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:49:15
Florida - 1,582
gromicko
January 30, 2013, 10:56pm
33
33 new members joined today: http://www.nachi.org/memberstats.htm This is getting ridiculous.
mauger
January 30, 2013, 11:36pm
34
jjonas:
Joe… it’s all a marketing ploy, and will never be enacted. Just like in 2006/2007.
What’s the best way to get someone to want something? Say they can’t have it!!!
saying it to folks who have it, then seems counter intuitive?
mauger
January 30, 2013, 11:38pm
35
gromicko:
Yep. I really, really meant it when I said we were raising dues to $365 two years ago. We did it.
I really, really meant it when I said we were raising dues to $499 last year. We did it.
I really, really meant it when I said CMI application fees were going to $1,000. We really did raise it to $1,000.
And I really, really, meant it when I said in 2008 that membership is capped at 10,000. We really did cap it.
you also said by the end of 2014, the fee (for new members) would be $1000/year. (or you were aiming at that)
Still the plan to try to make our membership somewhat exclusive then?
jjonas
January 31, 2013, 1:28am
36
Posted on a public thread, intended to get the trolls and non-member wanna-be’s to jump in!
gromicko
January 31, 2013, 1:54am
37
That’s the plan. Sort of like a Country Club.
cbottger
January 31, 2013, 5:00am
39
Can we have levels one, two and three or we all gona just be certified:p
gromicko
January 31, 2013, 5:11am
40
Uh… of course. If I posted the warning in the members-only section of this message board, only those (members) who don’t need the warning could see it.
How does that make any sense?
Members are already members.
