On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 11:38:31 AM UTC-7, Steve Koerner wrote:
So then, we all agree that the NAA is a required middle man. Being a required middle man that doesn't have to do much is a comfy place to be. It's a position likely to be defended vigorously.

The theory of bureaucracy states that when no one questions the system, a bureaucrat's fee increases until someone finally does. The original poster is on the right track to question the system. I applaud the effort to the extent that it gets followed through.

I'm guessing the NAA doesn't have a good understanding of any economic principles of pricing like simple elasticity of demand, cross elasticity, bundled pricing and market segmentation. I can think of a dozen pricing models to $50/year, 14 days in advance - which may be as punitive an approach as one can imagine. Alternative approaches could easily make users more satisfied AND earn the NAA more money. Bureaucratic monopolists, however, hardly ever think about how to make more money by making people more satisfied.

No national/international record flying for me. I hope the NAA is making good use of the $450 or so they collect every year.

9B