Originally Posted By: jferry
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
As NACHI has passed the 7,000 mark in members what are your thoughts on possibly establishing a numerical limit on the membership?
As NACHI has passed the 7,000 mark in members what are your thoughts on possibly establishing a numerical limit on the membership?
Originally Posted By: phinsperger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
This was discussed before. See http://www.nachi.org/bbsystem/viewtopic.php?t=6756
–
.
Paul Hinsperger
Hinsperger Inspection Services
Chairman - NACHI Awards Committee
Place your Award Nominations
here !
Originally Posted By: John Bowman
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I know two of us who are for a temporary (1 year) immediate cap.
Originally Posted By: chorne
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
what would be the reason for a cap on membership?
Originally Posted By: John Bowman
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| chorne wrote: |
| what would be the reason for a cap on membership? |
1. Administration of membership.
2. Program development.
3. Policies and Procedures formulation and implementation and strengthning.
4. Updates of current sites, etc.
5. Development of a strong adhesive group.
6. Uniqueness
7. Eliteness.
8. Avoiding the pitfalls of growing too quickly.
9. Strengthning our services to the current membership.
10. Etc.
The growth of NACHI is overwhelming the staff.
Originally Posted By: jbushart
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| chorne wrote: |
| what would be the reason for a cap on membership? |
One of the reasons (and IMO, the best reason) is to allow the infrastructure to catch up to the number of members it is presently required to support.
--
Home Inspection Services of Missouri
www.missourihomeinspection.com
"We're NACHI. Get over it."
www.monachi.org
Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I am for capping membership. Existing membership slots would go way up in value. Members could then sell their slots when they leave the industry. Their buyers would still have to fulfill all membership requirements but they would have to wait for a slot or buy a slot from an existing member. No one gets in until someone gets out. If we cap it at 8,000 and demand for NACHI membership goes to 12,000 or 13,000 (as I predict will happen over the next 18 months), a membership slot in NACHI could end up being worth many thousands of dollars.
There are other industries that cap membership: Liquor licenses, Country Clubs, Franchises, etc. The slot would then become an asset owned by each member that would grow in value.
With our dominance in marketing, there is no sense in flooding our markets. I love this idea.
--
Nick Gromicko
Founder
dues=79cents/day.
I much prefer email to private messages.
Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I say we issue one membership slot to every NACHI member in good standing, then cap membership. A member could then eventually sell his slot to someone wanting to join. The member could even auction it off to the highest bidder. The buyer would still have to fulfill all membership requirements.
Having a membership slot would be similar to owning stock in NACHI.
--
Nick Gromicko
Founder
dues=79cents/day.
I much prefer email to private messages.
Originally Posted By: chorne
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
John,
I think that your last statement sums up 1-9
and I understand your last statement.
I wasn’t trying to debate if it appeared that way!
thanks, Carla
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi to all,
wouldn't it make more sense to cap membership in various states, in some states we have great penetration while in others we have very few members per capita.
Regards
Gerry
--
Gerry Beaumont
NACHI Education Committee
e-mail : education@nachi.org
NACHI phone 484-429-5466
Inspection Depot Education
gbeaumont@inspectiondepot.com
"Education is a journey, not a destination"
Originally Posted By: rbennett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Nick and all
I DISAGREE
The true asset that we have is the MENTAL asset of new member (sort of a borg thing)
I would go for razing the dues a little which will
1. Give the needed $$ to beef up the staff a little
2. Keep adding new blood to the org. (our true strength)
Other thoughts
1. If we do not grow we go backwards
2. Some areas of the country and the world are not maxed out for membership
3. The more members the more buying power we have with vendors thus better deals
4. Larger web foot print is where we must continue to go
5. We do not want to burn out existing members and staff thus add
Just some of my thoughts
rlb
rlb
Originally Posted By: jbushart
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| gromicko wrote: |
| I say we issue one membership slot to every NACHI member in good standing, then cap membership. A member could then eventually sell his slot to someone wanting to join. The member could even auction it off to the highest bidder. The buyer would still have to fulfill all membership requirements.
Having a membership slot would be similar to owning stock in NACHI. |
Let's do this, today.
--
Home Inspection Services of Missouri
www.missourihomeinspection.com
"We're NACHI. Get over it."
www.monachi.org
Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Richard, all good points.
–
Nick Gromicko
Founder
dues=79cents/day.
I much prefer email to private messages.
Originally Posted By: rbennett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
No James
Lets look at the problems and see if we want to adopt an isolation policy and close our borders
This might be one of the best threads yet
What will be the effect on our profession??
What about the new inspector who will need our help and will undercut the market??
rlb
Originally Posted By: jbushart
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| rbennett wrote: |
| No James
Lets look at the problems and see if we want to adopt an isolation policy and close our borders This might be one of the best threads yet What will be the effect on our profession?? What about the new inspector who will need our help and will undercut the market?? rlb |
I think our message board will still be open to the pulic. At least, I have not read anything in this proposal that would indicate otherwise.
This "quest for cwedibility" that so many people who are critical of NACHI try to use to clobber us, from within and without, would be crushed.
Those who would prefer NACHI, but would be "doing time" with some other association waiting for their chance - might be able to help the industry by making their association more like ours.
Presently, I can be the president of an ASHI chapter and can be working my hind end off trying to crush NACHI while, in the meantime, I am paying my dues to NACHI to take advantage of all of the marketing opportunities.
I think it is time for NACHI to grow. Not necessarily in more thousands of members, but in strength and stature.
--
Home Inspection Services of Missouri
www.missourihomeinspection.com
"We're NACHI. Get over it."
www.monachi.org
Originally Posted By: rbennett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Ah James
You are back stroking a little -- this is good
Now -- WHAT are the problems LETS MAKE A LIST
rlb
Originally Posted By: bkelly1
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| jbushart wrote: | ||
I think our message board will still be open to the pulic. At least, I have not read anything in this proposal that would indicate otherwise. This "quest for cwedibility" that so many people who are critical of NACHI try to use to clobber us, from within and without, would be crushed. Those who would prefer NACHI, but would be "doing time" with some other association waiting for their chance - might be able to help the industry by making their association more like ours. Presently, I can be the president of an ASHI chapter and can be working my hind end off trying to crush NACHI while, in the meantime, I am paying my dues to NACHI to take advantage of all of the marketing opportunities. I think it is time for NACHI to grow. Not necessarily in more thousands of members, but in strength and stature. |
I am all for the quest for cwedibility. Capping membership would be like trying to limit competition through licensing. IMO. I am not sure you will ever be able to sell membeship for nachi for thousands.
Is there anything legally about capping membership within a tax exempt (not for profit) assocaition?
--
"Do, or do not. There is no 'try'." -Yoda (The empire Strikes Back)
Originally Posted By: rbennett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Joseph Ferry
You started this
rlb
Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I am for doing all of the things that John Bowman stated need to be done, and for continuing to build association membership.
Originally Posted By: jbushart
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| rbennett wrote: |
| Ah James
You are back stroking a little -- this is good Now -- WHAT are the problems LETS MAKE A LIST rlb |
Let me get real radical for a moment, Richard. I believe we should not only cap the membership, but require exclusive membership.
I'd like to see people forced to make a choice.
In my NACHI Chapter, I have a handful of guys who belong to ASHI. They hate ASHI and are members only because of the present state of mind of some of the real estate agencies in the bigger cities.
I believe that more emphasis should be placed upon enlightening the real estate agents. Dual membership, IMO, is a cop out.
How's that for radical? 
--
Home Inspection Services of Missouri
www.missourihomeinspection.com
"We're NACHI. Get over it."
www.monachi.org