Estes-Cox by the numbers

[Carl@Semroc]

Many thanks to Barry for giving us such insight into the model rocket business. Semroc is one of the small model rocket manufacturers that is always curious about the "real world" of the business beyond the very modest sales that we are able to generate.

We have followed with great interest the pending release of the Estes-Cox retro designs and have wondered how much they would impact the total market and in particular the amount that Estes-Cox is producing. Barry said "when I sell I have to have 100,000 units to make a product interesting to us.” I estimated the selling price of the 39 new Classics kits (the Phoenix Bird was repeated) and the 10 new Wal-Mart kits to be roughly $17.75 each (49 kits at a total of $890 for one of each). Assuming Estes-Cox has already ordered enough to be "interesting", that means there are about 4,900,000 new kits in the pipeline at a gross sales value of $89 million dollars. Other companies doing business with China in the hobby industry have told me the "magic number" of 10 is used as a multiplier to get the selling price from the cost of goods received from China. That would mean Estes-Cox has already invested $8.9 million in the new line, if that number is valid. Assuming each customer buys two of the kits, that means over two million customers are required to consume these new kits.

Since they all have balsa parts, I just had to estimate how long it would take us to produce that kind of volume. The 49 kits require a total of 68 balsa parts since some have couplers and reducers, in addition to nose cones. That means 6,800,000 balsa parts are required. Our two machines can produce a total of about 900 pieces of comparable size in a 12 hour day. That means we would have to keep both machines busy 7500 days to make enough parts for the initial orders of these kits! That works out to be about 29 years! At 62 years old, I might not live to see that many balsa parts turned. That is impressive!

Barry also said that "we have spent almost 800,000 dollars in testing-destroyed over 2,400,000 dollars in non compliant product and over 500,000 in rework where we could do it to get product into compliance." That is an impressive amount of money. At about $4K per SKU, that is about 200 different products to test. And Estes-Cox destroyed more product last year than we would probably sell in the rest of my working life!

We had been trying to estimate the size of the market, but since Estes-Cox IS basically the market, it was good to hear Barry's estimate that "we are about 15 to 30 times as large as Estes best years in the 70’s " A former Estes employee told me that there were about 380 employees in the early 70's and they had gross sales of about $10 million per year. That would mean Estes-Cox is between about $150 million and $300 million in gross sales per year now. That is also very impressive!

All of these facts have answered my three unasked questions that are answered with questions:

Q. "Where was Estes-Cox when the BATFE threatened the industry with their illegal regulation?"
A. When you are a $150 million a year company, why get involved in a fight when you are not directly involved that could spill over and destroy your company just by coming to the competition's aid? No brainer. If I was smart, I would probably feel the same way.

Q. "Why does Estes-Cox avoid NAR events, advertising in LAUNCH magazine, and appearing regularly at public outings?"
A. When your market involves millions of individual customers, why waste time and resources on hundreds? Also, a no brainer. Fortunately, those hundreds are our customers!

Q. "Why did Estes-Cox shut down their forum and refuse (until lately) to participate on the public model rocketry forums?"
A. See the last answer. There are less than a thousand active participants on YORF and TRF of which just hundreds are Estes-Cox customers. Why care what they think? This is also a no brainer. You cannot reach the millions on a forum. The few on the forums want a diverse, niche product line with just hundreds of potential sales on any given product. Again, that is great for Semroc, but a waste of time for a giant.

I have a better understanding of the market now and just how tiny we are in relation to Estes-Cox. I had estimated that we were about 1/100th the size of Estes-Cox. Now it is clear that we are probably not even 1/1000th their size. That is humbling for me, but the good news is that there is much room for growth!

And Barry, if you come to a national event or are ever in central North Carolina, I will buy you dinner. Thanks for what you have done to grow the industry. Best wishes on your retirement.

[mperdue]

Carl,

Thanks for your summary. I've also been mulling the numbers around and have generated similar questions. The answers are staggering.

On a related front...

Q. Who is buying the existing Estes rockets?

Q. Where are they flying them?

Q. What can we do to find these people and get them more involved with the hobby?

Q. How do we find the educators using rockets and get them involved (or get involved with what they are doing)?

I can't answer those questions but it'd be very good for the hobby if someone can figure it all out.

Mario

[CPMcGraw]

Carl,

Thanks for your summary. I've also been mulling the numbers around and have generated similar questions. The answers are staggering.

On a related front...

Q. Who is buying the existing Estes rockets?

Q. Where are they flying them?

Q. What can we do to find these people and get them more involved with the hobby?

Q. How do we find the educators using rockets and get them involved (or get involved with what they are doing)?

I can't answer those questions but it'd be very good for the hobby if someone can figure it all out.

Mario

Mario,

I'm in an area where the only available flying field is a schoolyard, and my only opportunities to fly are on the weekends (during the school year), and in the summer break periods. My observation about who buys rocketry items is limited to what I see in WM, and the occasional visits I make to the local Hobbytown USA, Michaels and Hobby Lobby stores. The engines that disappear first (WM sales) are always the A and B classes, with the C class consistently remaining in large numbers. The variety of engines at the other places is good, but it is offset by the very high prices ($8 something for a pack of A and B engines!) being charged for them. The volume of kits on the pegs at the HT, HL, and M stores varies from "dwindling" to "good", but again, offset by the prices. When I shop for kits, it's usually when the coupons are available for big discounts.

You'd think the internet would be a big help in spreading the message about rocketry, but it does seem to be grouped into narrow niches. It's like a specialty hobby within a specialty hobby.

[Jerry Irvine]

I concur with Carl.

Technically all you would have to do to compete with Estes is enter their distribution channel successfully. I suspect the traditional hobby distributors would likely pick you up, then shortly afterward overwhelm your production capacity. Having actually sold through that channel myself, one can make it work with a markup of "only" 7:1, but 10:1 buys apartments all over the world. :)

I share your dinner offer and throw in a week at a lakefront mountain resort in California. Barry seems to have an affinity for travel.

The biggest single problem on model rocketry retail merchandising is inventory control. If there was a way to compel rapid restocking and shelf count increase of the most popular SKU's, gross sales would rise substantially.

Just Jerry

[Rocket Doctor]

Do you think that Barry is going to give actual facts and figures on the company sales, I don't think so.

The pricing for the WM kits average around $10.00.

And you also know that the price of black powder has gone up and there are only a couple domestic manufacturers of black powder still around.

To spread the word around about model rockets should be done through the current NAR sectiions, 4H , Scouts, Civil air Patrol and the like.

The biggest problem being, there is a lack of launch fields, and, for those still available, many restrictions. I have gone through this many times, the school board says that atheletic fields are for SPORTS, and everything else is secondary. I also had councilmen state that model rockets are dangerous, that you would need the fire department standing by and the police as well. The key to this is EDUCATION. In this case, the mayor stepped in and said that wasn't so and we got to use the field.

There is an element in this country that feels that model rockets are NASA type rockets and that any launch is a laucnh out of Cape Kennedy. When they hear rocket, thay equate it to a Saturn V.

Also, we are in such a society that if you look cross eyed at someone, they want to sue you. It doesn't take much to file a suit, which, many companies could not afford. It's easier to pay off the plantiff then to defend your company (and I'm not talkig about Estes).

The only ones who make out here are trial lawyers.

It just gets tougher and tougher in todays society to go forward when you have so much going against you.

What about gas powered airplanes, many municipalities ban gas powered planes, or, flying at all. Noise , pollution, what happens if one crashed LITIGATION.

And, many site owner require a million dollar insurance policy inorder to use their property .

It certainly isn't like it use to be back in the 60's and 70's, they were great times, not only for the products/kits and sanity.

When Estes is sold, I'm sure the "observations" will continue. Let's hope that the new owner is looking out for the consumeers , time will tell.

[bob jablonski]

Thanks for crunching the numbers. Boy that total makes me feel Starlight is about as big as a gnat on a hippo's........compared to them.
Mr. Bob
See you in a few weeks in WI.

[Bravo52]

I think Carl's assumptions are flawed. There are two possibilities with regard to the reasoning. First, that the numbers provided by Barry are intentionally misleading in order to not give the competition any insight (no matter how little) into the business. Or second, being intentionally misused to represent something not intended.
From my perspective, it's both. I liken the former to something along the lines of me asking Carl how much money he takes out of SEMROC a year. That would include everything from "expenses” to a traditional salary. The response might be something ranging from I make a comfortable living to my personal tax return says my gross income was one-hundred sixty four thousand. My guess is Carl would respond with the former........ I know I would.

Estes is arguably a successful company. Which leads me to believe the actions taken by its leadership are valid as long as they are legal. I just can't seem to reconcile the position people seem to have taken over the fact that Estes is a "for profit" company. I don't think Estes is in the habit of ripping people off. Certainly they have overstated their intentions with respect to announcing new kits and then delivering them on time (if at all). That tends to make the few a little angry and that drive towards the second point above.

Now from all I've read, SEMROC has had a few pointed conversations with Estes on copyrights and what not, but I would say that really has more to do with protecting potential income (on both parts) than personality. No, I think it has more to do with the old "David vs. Goliath" scenario. I believe that is a great motivator and many smaller companies turn into big ones for that very reason.

I can't argue with the math in Carl's post. The arithmetic is spot on. As far as "Facts" go, I'm a little suspect. I think Carl is being overly generous even if it what was quoted by Barry. Although it does remind me of a Brady Bunch episode.

So for me, I'll still spend my money with both companies because I like SEMROC's products, quality and customer service, however, I still like many of Estes' older kits and I really like the motors they produce.

[foose4string]

The numbers are staggering. I already knew how we were a strong minority when it came to sales, but I didn't realize how small. While we may seem insignificant in terms of direct volume, I think we have a large influence on model rocketry as a whole. He is not directly reaching millions by speaking to a forum, but we are his disciples, so to speak. As long as he has champions for the name and product, then he is indirectly reaching potential customers. Carl, you know how this works. You've implemented some of this yourself(with good service, product, pricing, and forum participation). It seems to work and helps the hobby grow and promotes name recognition(half the battle). Granted, many people who have never flown a rocket know who and what Estes is. The product recognition is strong, but most recognize Estes as a hobby supplier first, toy manufacturer second. This may be rapidly changing, but for now, dad or grandad goes into WM and sees the Estes name in the toy section and thinks about the old days of rocketry....days when this was still viewed as a hobby. So, they buy a RTF or starter kit trying to recapture the magic and hopefully introduce to a new generation at the same time. And, how many people are flying rockets that never frequent forums, or care to participate with NAR, or organized club? We happen to be the die hards, but how many are casual builders and flyers? There have to be LOTS.



I had someone ask a few week ago where to buy Estes kits motors for his scout troop. He had no idea to look in the toy section at WM and Toys R Us. I told him about those places, but also mentioned a hobby store that I like( one of the very few left). He went to the hobby store because he knew the selection would be greater there(and I knew the WM selection was slim a the time). Sure, I could have pointed him to the Quest website, told him about Semroc .com, Fliskits, etc. But he needed motors at that point and needed them in short order. Estes, Estes, Estes. Boils down to product recognition and placement. Barry and Co. can take most of the credit for that. As well they should, but they are expanding on what has already been established....which is us.

[foose4string]

I also want to add...

Whoever makes the motors is King. That is what makes this hobby(and the RTF "toys") go. Literally. Estes makes great motor. While, I'm glad to see Quest taking a more aggressive approach with supplying motors, they still have a loooong way to go.

So, if Semroc produces motors at some point at competitive pricing and quality(we can worry about volume later :D ), it substantially levels the playing field. Like Quest, you'd still be playing catch up, but that is a huge step as a model rocketry co. and a strong card to be playing.

[dwmzmm]

When I helped Estes at the Makers Faire in Austin several years ago, several of the Estes
corporate staff there assured me that Estes makes tons of sales at Wal - Mart alone. I talked at length the bring backs of the classics, and was told they're in the works and were
forthcoming, but, of course, couldn't be told specifics.

Reading through the Q & A with Barry, and following the various postings of many analysis
of what many perceive Barry's thoughts, has been very educational and interesting, to say
the least. The next few years should be very interesting for all of us.....

[shockwaveriderz]

Carl, some responses inline to your questions.

All of these facts have answered my three unasked questions that are answered with questions:

Q. "Where was Estes-Cox when the BATFE threatened the industry with their illegal regulation?"
A. When you are a $150 million a year company, why get involved in a fight when you are not directly involved that could spill over and destroy your company just by coming to the competition's aid? No brainer. If I was smart, I would probably feel the same way.


Carl, I think you may have mis-spoke there. The BATFE never threatened the model rocketry industry in any way that I am aware. HPR is not model rocketry. Never has , never will. It irritates me greatly that people miss this semantic point when talking about rocketry.


If the BATFE were to ban HPR tomorrow, it would not effect model rocketry in way.

Model Rocketry is not a gateway drug to HPR fo 99.9% of the Estes market.



During the BATFE epsiode, I talked in private to various people who were in the model rocketry biz and asked why they didn't support the NAR-TRA BATFE lawsuit and their collective response was, "we don't have a dog in this fight".


Q. "Why does Estes-Cox avoid NAR events, advertising in LAUNCH magazine, and appearing regularly at public outings?"
A. When your market involves millions of individual customers, why waste time and resources on hundreds? Also, a no brainer. Fortunately, those hundreds are our customers!


My feeling on this is that Estes is well big enough to direct advertising and marketing resources towards their primary market, their mass market and their much smaller but vocal and fanatic hobbyist base. They just don't choose to do so.

Q. "Why did Estes-Cox shut down their forum and refuse (until lately) to participate on the public model rocketry forums?"
A. See the last answer. There are less than a thousand active participants on YORF and TRF of which just hundreds are Estes-Cox customers. Why care what they think? This is also a no brainer. You cannot reach the millions on a forum. The few on the forums want a diverse, niche product line with just hundreds of potential sales on any given product. Again, that is great for Semroc, but a waste of time for a giant.

Perhaps because it had degenerated into the kinds of forum BS that all these forums at some time tend to devolve into.


I used to be on a number of rocketry related forums: I now only post to two: YORF and RP because they seem to me to be the most mature. I do miss all the great rocketry info that was on TRF 1.0 before it was lost to future generations.

Now folks, I'm just saying what comes to mind. It might be right or wrong. YMMV

terry dean

[Jerry Irvine]

The BATFE never threatened the model rocketry industry in any way that I am aware.
Now folks, I'm just saying what comes to mind. It might be right or wrong. YMMV

terry dean

You are right, MMDV. And you are wrong.

One of the regulatory changes unintentionally made model rocketry illegal. ATF issued a letter ruling that was not their intention and put 27 CFR 555.141-a-10 out for comment later as the corrective measure. So for a couple of years all of model rocketry was operating in a stated non-enforecement zone.

Jerry

[georgegassaway]

I do miss all the great rocketry info that was on TRF 1.0 before it was lost to future generations.
Well, if you had been on TRF recently, you would would have seen the announcement that the TRF 1.0 files have been salvaged successfully. They will be posted as an access-only archive forum in a month or two.

As for Barry's total dismissal of the NAR, I think that come far more from personal issues by Barry than what has been good for Estes for 50+ years.

The NAR and Estes used to work together, a LOT. It was mutually beneficial. By the time Barry came in, so much of the hobby was on "autopilot" that Barry did not either know the history, or have any appreciation. Many times when Estes had a program that they needed "nearly free manpower for", they could contact NAR sections to help with some demos, or to build display rockets, "paying" in Estes Gift Certificates (though sometimes it was done for free). Or to help with schools, back when Estes had an actual Education department.

The NAR did things that ticked off Barry. Those things that the NAR did, was to work on the hobby as a whole and give all manufacturers the same opportunities, instead of doing what was always best for Estes Industries. Including things like helping to legalize HPR, which was not good for Estes Industries.

- George Gassaway

[shockwaveriderz]

Well, if you had been on TRF recently would would have seen the announcement that the TRF 1.0 files have been salvaged successfully. They will be posted as an access-only archive forum in a month or two.

As for Barry's total dismissal of the NAR, I think that come far more from personal issues by Barry than what has been good for Estes for 50+ years.

The NAR and Estes used to work together, a LOT. It was mutually beneficial. By the time Barry came in, so much of the hobby was on "autopilot" that Barry did not either know the history, or have any appreciation. Many times when Estes had a program that they needed "nearly free manpower for", they could contact NAR sections to help with some demos, or to build display rockets, "paying" in Estes Gift Certificates (though sometimes it was done for free). Or to help with schools, back when Estes had an actual Education department.

The NAR did things that ticked off Barry. Those things that the NAR did, was to work on the hobby as a whole and give all manufacturers the same opportunities, instead of doing what was always best for Estes Industries. Including things like helping to legalize HPR, which was not good for Estes Industries.

- George Gassaway




George, yes I can remember when the NAR and Estes were more or less joined at the hip....

I also know that the NAR-Estes "kit-stuffer" program was a very good way to get junior members into the NAR.



But I'm curious as to your thoughts on why you think legalizing HPR was not a good thing, or a bad thing for Estes.

Are we talking overall safety here? I can see where HPR with their much larger sizes and velocities could end up being a "kinetic kill vehicle", not intentionally per se, but just because the ejection charge failed. I think that LONG before we see a death from MR, we will see some serious accidents in HPR; now that might "taint" Estes products.

At some point in HPR, somebody is going to be standing in the wrong place......the odds increase as more people come into HPR and more people launch HPR.

I personally can't see HPR going 50 years without either a serious accident or even a death.

I guess that's why they call them Large and Dangerous Rocket Ships huh?

terry dean

[foose4string]

George, yes I can remember when the NAR and Estes were more or less joined at the hip....

I also know that the NAR-Estes "kit-stuffer" program was a very good way to get junior members into the NAR.



But I'm curious as to your thoughts on why you think legalizing HPR was not a good thing, or a bad thing for Estes.

Are we talking overall safety here? I can see where HPR with their much larger sizes and velocities could end up being a "kinetic kill vehicle", not intentionally per se, but just because the ejection charge failed. I think that LONG before we see a death from MR, we will see some serious accidents in HPR; now that might "taint" Estes products.

At some point in HPR, somebody is going to be standing in the wrong place......the odds increase as more people come into HPR and more people launch HPR.

I personally can't see HPR going 50 years without either a serious accident or even a death.

I guess that's why they call them Large and Dangerous Rocket Ships huh?

terry dean


There are a ton of hobbies which include risk, yet they are completely legal. Hunting, skydiving, mountain climbing, car racing, boating, etc. Certain safety margins are put in place, hopefully observed, but accidents happen. You can't save everyone from themselves.

Now, this isn't too say rocketry( no matter what form it takes, be it LPR or HPR) isn't above being picked on by the gov't. We are an easy target for gov't involvement, no question about that.

[georgegassaway]

But I'm curious as to your thoughts on why you think legalizing HPR was not a good thing, or a bad thing for Estes.
What I said was, that legalizing HPR was not a good thing for Estes Industries. Or at least it was easy to see it as a threat to them at the time. It opened the door to an "alternative" market that would take away SOME of the Estes sales due to those who would either jump from M.R. to HPR, or at the least spend a good chunk of their "Estes money" on HPR.

I implied nothing about HPR safety. It is hard to tell to what extent someone in charge of a company like Estes would have had true 100% concern about the hobby of Model Rocketry if there was an HPR accident, versus an excuse made up to be against HPR so as to stifle competition.

Now in reality as it played out, HPR has led to more NAR sections, and more organized launches that do HPR. Which as a benefit means more model rocket flying too, whether by other family members flying models, or the fact that the more clubs and the more launches, the more new people you get to become involved... and some of those will stick around for years instead of the typical few months "fad" then move on.

So I am pretty darned sure that Estes has had more sales by riding the coat-tails of HPR for that reason alone, than if HPR had not become legalized and mainstream.

Also, even the Television shows that have shown HPR, have gotten more interest in the whole hobby, some with adults who flew models as kids who got into HPR, sometimes also getting their kids into flying models, and some who didn’t get into HPR but did try the M.R. end of the hobby.

- George Gassaway

[Jerry Irvine]

Estes Industries actively tried to kill HPR at every turn. Dane Boles personally told me that at a NFPA meeting in Houston. He was spearheading it.

Vern was also opposed to motors with visual effects.

The dissatisfaction by Estes of NAR was not so much regulatory as, it is of no consequence in the market, and its policies were not on a path to change that. I have been saying that too, for more than a decade. The fact that most people agree Bundick was a %^&* contributed to it and Barry is a hard nosed businessperson, some might call a $%^&&*.

HPR is on the path to a 50 year safety record. Even though TRA and NAR only got into it in 84-86, it has existed since about 1970. So in 2020 that will be 50 years. Most of the "incidents" I have personally seen or heard about were a direct result of the non-conventional range set-up TRA improperly mandates.

There is a certain tail wags the dog aspect to Carl's numbers so if you simply cut them in half you can't be too far off on the upside. For example he says 10:1 and I say from first hand Estes sources it is 7:1.

We have no idea how much "mis-information" Barry told us. I understand one of the posters here is in a position to know. I do know he said the right thing to give me comfort that Estes is here to stay.

Note well Barry's fixation on ORM-D Consumer Commodity approval.

Note my 1994 rmr posts about that:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.models.rockets/browse_thread/thread/b4f38075eba86882/cd325540024e892?hl=en&q=consumer+OR+commodity+ORM-D+Irvine+group:rec.models.rockets#0cd325540024e892

Jerry

[Gus]

Carl,

Very nice analysis.

I was the one who asked Barry about the relative size difference between Estes today and the 1970s. I was hoping his answer would put to bed once and for all the nonsense on these forums that a return to 1970s product and marketing would somehow improve Estes business. His answer revealed a very different reality than that supposed by many on these forums. I am very grateful he took the time to answer that additional question.

That Estes hobby-market business tripled as a result of the Walmart offerings is also an amazing piece of information. Even if the Walmart sales generate very little net income (which I doubt is the case), using that "loss leader" to triple the size of the hobby market suggests Estes cares way more about the hobby market than many here give them credit for.

What is particularly interesting to me is that while Estes model rocket sales have grown substantially over the last 30 years, participation in the NAR hasn't. Many here have equated the tiny size and stagnant growth of the NAR with a failure to grow the hobby. Barry's answers suggest that that isn't the case and it's certainly changed my perception of where the hobby stands vis a vis the NAR. Participation in launching model rockets (from Estes alone) has apparently grown a lot since the 1970's. And the proliferation of small hobby market model rocket manufacturers has grown as well. But the NAR hasn't grown commensurately. Why? I suspect that has less to do with Estes lack of participation with the NAR than it does with what the NAR offers the public.

I personally like what the NAR offers, and I participate. But maybe it's time I let go of the notion that how the NAR is doing is somehow a reflection of how the hobby as a whole is doing.

[Jerry Irvine]

What is particularly interesting to me is that while Estes model rocket sales have grown substantially over the last 30 years, participation in the NAR hasn't. Many here have equated the tiny size and stagnant growth of the NAR with a failure to grow the hobby. Barry's answers suggest that that isn't the case and it's certainly changed my perception of where the hobby stands vis a vis the NAR. Participation in launching model rockets (from Estes alone) has apparently grown a lot since the 1970's. And the proliferation of small hobby market model rocket manufacturers has grown as well. But the NAR hasn't grown commensurately. Why? I suspect that has less to do with Estes lack of participation with the NAR than it does with what the NAR offers the public.

I personally like what the NAR offers, and I participate. But maybe it's time I let go of the notion that how the NAR is doing is somehow a reflection of how the hobby as a whole is doing.

The NAR does or seems to discourage "lone ranger rocketry". Definitely and for sure in the HPR arena. Estes is all about lone ranger rocketry.

Estes is willing to accept the reality that most users are new and short term. NAR fixates on products and services for long timers, mostly "armchair rocketeers".

I have suggested several initiatives over the years to put a dent in that and all of them were DOA. Not one was even tried.

Jerry

[Sunward]

..... That would mean Estes-Cox is between about $150 million and $300 million in gross sales per year now....
Carl, you are dreaming.

Before layoffs, Estes had about 70 or so employees. Even at 250,000 in sales per employee, you would only be at about 17or so million a year in sales.

Even with your low number of 150, 70 employees would be doing over 2 million in sales per employee per year. (Not including overseas workers). Impossible. As a comparison, Hasbro (as per yahoo finance) did 5.92Billion with 29,000 employees. About $200,000 per employee.

Your logic fails because you assume they need to do 100,000 kits before it is worth while. First, no mention of how many years 100,000 kits need to be sold in. Second, you take his word for it.

[Jerry Irvine]

The last hard figure for gross sales I had was $40m.

I believe they do not count Chinese workers at all in any of the figures.

The cost shift era of globalization is winding down. It costs more to rent an office in Hong Kong or Shang Hai than New York.

If I had one wish, it would be for a company already in the hobby distribution channel such as AT or Quest, to co-op add smaller vendors to the flow.

Jerry

[Bravo52]

If I had one wish, it would be for a company already in the hobby distribution channel such as AT or Quest, to co-op add smaller vendors to the flow.


Very interesting idea. Hadn't really thought of that. Most of the mainliners want to just re-badge the product. It would work, up to a point. What do you do when the co-op'd product starts out-selling the main vendor??

[Jerry Irvine]

Very interesting idea. Hadn't really thought of that. Most of the mainliners want to just re-badge the product. It would work, up to a point. What do you do when the co-op'd product starts out-selling the main vendor??

The main vendor smiles all the way to the bank.

Besides that, a rising tide lifts all ships. Near as I can tell it takes a fat old man to realize that.

Jerry

[CPMcGraw]

The main vendor smiles all the way to the bank.

Besides that, a rising tide lifts all ships. Near as I can tell it takes a fat old man to realize that.

Jerry

Jerry,

If I'm understanding your concept here, it's basically that one vendor -- whichever one already has the equipment and the labor force -- acts as the manufacturer for themselves and a collection of the smaller design houses. They combine all of the purchases of resources to get the lowest price-per-unit, and do as much of the labor as needed to package up the products. Each house gets to keep its own "personality" and name brand, but all are sold to the distribution channel as if they were equally as large a name brand as the manufacturing group. The profit delivered to the smaller houses would be proportional to however much of the final work they provide themselves. The manufacturer group collects a percentage of the final profits and distributes the remainder to the smaller house.

Am I close to what you have in mind?

[Sunward]

.....If I'm understanding your concept here, it's basically that one vendor -- whichever one already has the equipment and the labor force -- acts as the manufacturer for themselves and a collection of the smaller design houses. They combine all of the purchases of resources to get the lowest price-per-unit, and do as much of the labor as needed to package up the products. Each house gets to keep its own "personality" and name brand, but all are sold to the distribution channel as if they were equally as large a name brand as the manufacturing group. The profit delivered to the smaller houses would be proportional to however much of the final work they provide themselves. The manufacturer group collects a percentage of the final profits and distributes the remainder to the smaller house.

Am I close to what you have in mind?
:chuckle: You are not serious? :chuckle:

[Jerry Irvine]

Jerry,

If I'm understanding your concept here, it's basically that one vendor -- whichever one already has the equipment and the labor force -- acts as the manufacturer for themselves and a collection of the smaller design houses. They combine all of the purchases of resources to get the lowest price-per-unit, and do as much of the labor as needed to package up the products. Each house gets to keep its own "personality" and name brand, but all are sold to the distribution channel as if they were equally as large a name brand as the manufacturing group. The profit delivered to the smaller houses would be proportional to however much of the final work they provide themselves. The manufacturer group collects a percentage of the final profits and distributes the remainder to the smaller house.

Am I close to what you have in mind?

Yes but I presume each brand would manufacture and package locally and ship en-masse to the distributor drop-ship style. (the publisher)

Here's 2 reasons why this would work.

1. 40/25/10 (zero labor to main)

2. The main sells motors.

3. See #2

4. 60% of kits are never built, under 15% of motors are never flown.

Jerry

[tbzep]

Participation in launching model rockets (from Estes alone) has apparently grown a lot since the 1970's. And the proliferation of small hobby market model rocket manufacturers has grown as well. But the NAR hasn't grown commensurately. Why? I suspect that has less to do with Estes lack of participation with the NAR than it does with what the NAR offers the public.




Probably over 90% of Estes sized rockets are flown in back yards, football fields, baseball fields, soccer fields, etc. by just one, two, or maybe three people. Assuming they find out about the NAR (most probably never do), they either don't have a local club, or don't care to be involved with one. They don't see a need for NAR benefits, therefore the $62 seems astronomical. Even if they thought they might like the magazine, it would still be astronomical. Sure, $62 is a drop in the bucket compared to what some people spend on things now days, but most people buying rockets from WalMart wouldn't spend the extra money for the membership.

[Jerry Irvine]

Agreed. That's why I proposed the $9.95 "crippled membership", which for all practical purposes causes someone to pay you ten bucks to capture their name, in exchange for a magazine, a crippled membership and crippled benefits.

As for the concatenated brands, with drop shipping to distributors and gathered order process, that pretty much describes Amazon.com.

Dude, there used to be an entire company that sold shock cord mounts! I would settle for a $4.95 crippled NAR membership personally.

Jerry

[tbzep]

Agreed. That's why I proposed the $9.95 "crippled membership", which for all practical purposes causes someone to pay you ten bucks to capture their name, in exchange for a magazine, a crippled membership and crippled benefits.

As for the concatenated brands, with drop shipping to distributors and gathered order process, that pretty much describes Amazon.com.

Jerry

Growing up in the 70's, I had very limited money for rockets. Early on, I think I spent maybe $15-20 the whole year and only was able to fly once or twice a year out in the pasture. I would have liked the NAR membership and magazine, but I just couldn't afford it. I didn't need any of the benefits, so I never joined until I was in my 20's. If there had been a crippled version, just the magazine and a feeling of belonging to something for just a few dollars, I might have gone for it.

The crippled NAR membership number could begin with an asterisk or a letter to signify no benefits if the NAR wanted to do it. It might increase membership numbers, and increase magazine sales, but a considerable percentage of current members might switch and total membership income might even decrease.

[Jerry Irvine]

The crippled NAR membership number could begin with an asterisk or a letter to signify no benefits if the NAR wanted to do it. It might increase membership numbers, and increase magazine sales, but a considerable percentage of current members might switch and total membership income might even decrease.

I'm pretty sure NAR could afford to issue a real number (incenting you to renew it some day), ONE magazine, even if were a special annual "free membership issue", and the "right" to contact a local club by email at zero cost to anybody, and for only $0.02 more an invitation to a local launch where you can see "big ass rockets and motors flown"! :D

A 100% membership (3500) decrease from 12 issues to one on the magazine would barely be a blip in revenue compared to 1% of Estes customers sending money at $4.95 crippled and 5% renewal @$62.

Just "marketing" Jerry

Armchair rocketeers never cancel.

[dwmzmm]

I recall the NAR had far greater in membership back in the late 1960's/early 1970's largely
due to the fever pitch interest in the Moon Race; model rocketry and the NAR was a very
hot commodity then. We had far more Junior and Leader members over the Seniors, and I
guess the imaginations of the model rocketeers were in overdrive. I know those were the
reasons why I got into model rocketry and the NAR (when I found out about membership
with the organization and the benefits that came with it, especially the insurance and the
chance to compete with others). Companies like Estes and Centuri (among others, including
FSI) help promote the NAR in their catalogs and inserts that came with their kits. I'm sure
that kind of promotion helped, and it would be great if we could have those kinds of membership numbers today.

[tbzep]

Back to some discussion about Estes not including a small bit of NAR info in their kits...

Estes has a website and could add a NAR logo with link on their front page. Wouldn't cost them more than a few electrons. ;) The NAR is mentioned with the safety colde way down at the bottom of the Educator-safety/laws page, but there's no link to it.

BTW, to give equal opportunity/criticism, I just hopped over to Quest's website and didn't notice any reference to the NAR on the front end of their site either. I did find a link on the FAQ page that mentioned the Safety Code. Neither of the "big boys" seems to care much for pushing the NAR on their website or it would be more prominent on the front pages.

[Jerry Irvine]

Sadly, the way the NAR has been doing things for the last decade, they are but a dimming flicker in time and space.

There is a new sheriff in town.

Jerry

[Sunward]

...NAR on the front end of their site either. ....
I have, on the front page of Sunward's site, links to NAR, Triploi, CAR and some of the forums.

All instructions have a mention of NAR, CAR, and MAAC ( model aviation in Canada). Tripoli is not mentioned as none of the kits are high power.

[Ltvscout]

Sadly, the way the NAR has been doing things for the last decade, they are but a dimming flicker in time and space.

There is a new sheriff is town.
Ehhhh? Surely you're not referring to TRA?!?

[Jerry Irvine]

Either way it is under 4000 people WORLDWIDE.

:(

Jerry

How many millions is Estes in a year?

I know a girl that tells me size really does matter. Why is she telling me that? :confused:

[Carl@Semroc]

Do you think that Barry is going to give actual facts and figures on the company sales, I don't think so.You know him better than I do. Whether he posted actual facts or total fabrications is beyond the scope of my response. I interpreted the data that was supplied.
The pricing for the WM kits average around $10.00.My estimate was $13.00 average for the ten Wal-Mart kits. The pricing supplied by E-C on the first group of Classics due this spring was almost identical to our calculated pricing for the same kits. I priced the Wal-Mart kits the same way. If you are saying they are dropping the price structure from $13 to $10 average for the Wal-Mart group, I could believe that.

[Gus]

Carl,

I wouldn't be surprised if the number Barry quoted for "kits of interest" (100K) applied to Walmart kits. But I don't believe that number would apply to all kits, especially the high end kits like the Interceptor-E. I just have difficulty imagining a market that big for that kit at that price, great as the kit is.

I've been told by a retailer in the past that for the last run of the Saturn V, Estes was looking for upfront retailer commitments to make an initial run of 5000, which seems about right.

Carl, is there any semi-official hobby industry number of how many rocketry-selling hobby stores are left in the US and Canada?

[BEC]

Interesting this discussion of a "crippled membership" in the NAR. Such discussions have been going on for several years in model airplane circles with regard to the Academy of Model Aeronautics and its membership benefits (and cost, lower than an NAR membership) and "park flyers" - usually small and light, generally electric powered radio-controlled airplanes. A few of them (not very good ones) are Estes/Cox products. These have been the fastest growing segment of RC airplanes for several years now.

The result, after quite a bit of deliberating by the AMA, is the recently launched "Park Pilot" program. It has lesser benefits (lower insurance, a less-frequent magazine, no entry into sanctioned competitions). It has lots of proponents and lots of detractors on the forums. I don't have a good sense of how it's received by manufacturers and importers, or hobby shops - at least not yet. It's a little early to tell if it's working for the AMA, too.

The objective is similar - bring in to the AMA those who buy small, often ready to fly models that are flown in places besides organized (and insured by the AMA flying sites) so that when they "move up" to larger, more powerful (and less suitable for schoolyards and parks) airplanes.

It's been interesting to watch since I've always preferred relatively small airplanes and have preferred electric power for nearly 30 years. Now what I like is "mainstream" and available off the shelf. Maybe that's why the BAR bug has bit so hard these past few months - on to a different set of challenges.

I wonder how many Estes rockets sold at WalMart actually get flown at all. I have three and have flown them all (including modding a Rascal RTF to carry a How High altimeter with the aid of some parts from Semroc). But I'm not the target market - I'm Semroc's and Sunward's and Fliskit's and Starlight's and..... target market (or part of it - a BAR).

[Carl@Semroc]

Carl, I think you may have mis-spoke there. The BATFE never threatened the model rocketry industry in any way that I am aware. HPR is not model rocketry. Never has , never will. It irritates me greatly that people miss this semantic point when talking about rocketry. It is semantics. When I use the term model rocketry, I am referring to all hobby rocketry; low, mid, and high power. Aerotech is the best example of a model rocket company that spans all the spectrum from D and up. When the BATFE decided to illegally regulate APCP, they were threatening Aerotech's existence. They could not exist selling only low and mid power engines. The NAR and TRA, rightfully, went up against a governmental agency that had made a decision that was "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law" when they tried to illegally limit APCP. APCP was just a first step. An agency that can break the law and get away with it, is sooner or later possibly going to expand its scope and go after black powder. The D reloads are also APCP based and the BATFE out of their largesse did not go after them because of mass limits that they imposed, knowing that they could take away just as capriciously. We suported the NAR and TRA in the fight not because we were directly affected, but because if the government won, we might be next.

One very interesting sidelight of the lawsuit is the evolution of "Barry Powder." When the first patent application was filed on November 14, 2002 , it called for a blend of ammonium perchlorate and potassium perchlorate as the oxidizer. Just after it was filed, the BATFE came down hard against APCP, enforcing LEUP's and making life miserable for high power flyers. The writing was on the wall. The NAR and TRA suit was going nowhere and the BATFE made it clear that it was acting as if it was going to win. Estes-Cox refiled the patent application for "Barry Powder" on August 30, 2005 and removed ammonium perchlorate as an oxidizer. This had to be at the advice of the BATFE or a fear that the BATFE would win and "Barry Powder" would be classified as APCP and would not be legal even if the patent was ever awarded and production was started. With the burn rate exponent of potassium perchlorate based propellants, I do not personally think the removal of ammonium perchlorate from the formula was a step up in safety, but a bowing to the BATFE.

As it turns out, as a result of the lawsuit that Estes did not support, they can now produce a much better ammonium perchlorate based propellant (without potassium perchlorate) that is legal, but potassium perchlorate composite propellant is STILL on the explosives list! If Estes-Cox does ever go into production on low power APCP engines, they could be the biggest beneficiary of the NAR-TRA lawsuit without having paid a dime to support it.

[Carl@Semroc]

Carl,

I wouldn't be surprised if the number Barry quoted for "kits of interest" (100K) applied to Walmart kits. But I don't believe that number would apply to all kits, especially the high end kits like the Interceptor-E. I just have difficulty imagining a market that big for that kit at that price, great as the kit is.

I've been told by a retailer in the past that for the last run of the Saturn V, Estes was looking for upfront retailer commitments to make an initial run of 5000, which seems about right. There are several posts here questioning my reasoning (and mental well-being :D) concerning these numbers. I did not say that I believe them. I just ran my own processing on them so I could understand them a little better. They are just numbers and like any numbers given by a company, they have a purpose whether we know what it is or not. I have also received several private emails confirming OUR estimate of the size of Estes-Cox and the model rocket industry. I have not posted Semroc's estimates and will not post them, but they are not the same as Barry's. The fact that Barry has posted here three times and others affiliated with Estes-Cox have been posting, sort of belies some of the observations and conclusions that I made. This exercise was meant to be thought-provoking and discussion-generating. That part is working. There are some great ideas in these comments!

Carl, is there any semi-official hobby industry number of how many rocketry-selling hobby stores are left in the US and Canada?The last estimate we have is that there are about 4500 hobby-type stores in the US of which about 1500 actually sell model rockets. Some of these are specialty stores that just sell only one line, like R/C Cars or model trains or plastic models. Those 3000 or so will more than likely not sell model rockets. These numbers are about two years old, so are probably a little lower now.

[Mark II]

So many things in this thread to comment on... I'll limit this post to three, though.

First comment, regarding the (more or less) main issue. Many people have stated that Estes-Cox sells the vast majority of its rocketry products to the non-hobbyist or "casual" rocket flier. I'm certainly not disputing that claim, but if it is true, then where are they? With the kind of volume that E-C has, you would think that you would run across groups of kids or individuals launching their beginner rockets at least once in awhile, even if purely by chance. Yet in the five years since I became a BAR, I have never encountered this. Where are all these people, anyway? I have encountered this type of model rocket flier in the posts of fellow online forum members, but I have never see one in the wild. If mine turns out to be a typical experience, then how can so many people be so certain of who these "other" rocketry consumers are, and can describe their characteristics, motivations, level of knowledge, etc. with such consistency that it risks becoming a stereotype?

I happen to live within a stone's throw of the only decent rocket-launching field in my local area. It's small, but still, it's far better than any of the alternatives, and it is easily accessed and almost always available. (More on that in the next comment.) I go there often either to launch, to check on field conditions or to just enjoy the view. If there were any other model rocketeers around, even casual one-timers, I would have run into them at least a few times during hundreds of trips that I have taken to the field over the past five years, because that field would be a magnet for them. But it has never happened.

Second comment: It was asserted earlier in this thread, and it has been mentioned in other threads, that "model rocketry is declining" due to the closing off of suitable launch sites on public or municipal land out of concerns over liability and mistrust of rocketry and its adherents. I am not sure I buy that; I think that, if anything, model rocketry is as well accepted now by the general public and by officialdom as it has ever been. There was much more official and unofficial resistance to it in the 1960's and '70's than there is now. For the past five years I have done all of my local launches at my village school district's athletic fields. These fields are located behind the elementary school and include soccer and baseball fields, the high school's track and football field, and a popular and well-used playground. Yet no one, officially or unofficially, has ever uttered any objection to my use of the field for rocket launching. If anything, they seem to welcome it.

But things definitely are different now than when I launched rockets as a kid in the late '60's. It is not because suitable fields are being put off limits, it is because there are simply fewer of them. The culprit is urban and suburban sprawl, and the result is less and less open space due to rampant overdevelopment. When I was a kid, there were large vacant lots and fields and parks even in the middle of the city where we could play all day and where one could launch a model rocket without bothering anyone. Out in the suburbs, there was even more, just past the edge of one's development. All of that is gone now. The types of fields that are closed off to model rocketry now are the same ones that were closed off to it back then. But in many places now they are the only fields that are left.

Third comment: "Armchair rocketeers?" What the heck is that? :confused: I have never seen or even heard of such an animal until I read it in this thread. Please explain.

MarkII

[GuyNoir]

The fact that most people agree Bundick was a %^&*

Really? News to me. . .

Barry is a hard nosed businessperson

Which, in the end, is why I think he didn't "support" the NAR. The NAR was not a direct path to directly increasing Estes' primary market sales.

[mperdue]

First comment, regarding the (more or less) main issue. Many people have stated that Estes-Cox sells the vast majority of its rocketry products to the non-hobbyist or "casual" rocket flier. I'm certainly not disputing that claim, but if it is true, then where are they? With the kind of volume that E-C has, you would think that you would run across groups of kids or individuals launching their beginner rockets at least once in awhile, even if purely by chance. Yet in the five years since I became a BAR, I have never encountered this. Where are all these people, anyway? I have encountered this type of model rocket flier in the posts of fellow online forum members, but I have never see one in the wild. If mine turns out to be a typical experience, then how can so many people be so certain of who these "other" rocketry consumers are, and can describe their characteristics, motivations, level of knowledge, etc. with such consistency that it risks becoming a stereotype?

This was part of the point of my line of questioning. If there are as many people involved as has been claimed I would think we'd be seeing rockets flying everywhere - so where are all these new fliers? If they exist, we need to find them and try to bring them into the hobby.

Mario

[Rocket Doctor]

You know him better than I do. Whether he posted actual facts or total fabrications is beyond the scope of my response. I interpreted the data that was supplied.
My estimate was $13.00 average for the ten Wal-Mart kits. The pricing supplied by E-C on the first group of Classics due this spring was almost identical to our calculated pricing for the same kits. I priced the Wal-Mart kits the same way. If you are saying they are dropping the price structure from $13 to $10 average for the Wal-Mart group, I could believe that.

Estes or any other company is not going to post their ACTUAL income figures. I have no inside information. It only makes sense for Estes not to put down actual figures.

I will be posting the pricing of the Sustanables (WM kits) in another thread.These kits are NOT the Classic Series.

What I would like to see is an effort to bring more rocketeers into the flock.

As we both know, there were about a 1/3 non participation with the Golden Scout program. There were many states that were not represented with NAR sections.

I think one probem is with the $62 membership fee for Senior members, especially in these hard economic times. And, if you get a family membership, you only get one magazine and the price is only reduced by $12.

If every current rocketeer recruited just one new member, just think how many new members would join the flock.
Also, as I had mentioned previously, we need to EDUCATE those who think that model rockets are giant Saturn V's fling out of the Florida coast.

Getting back to your figures, do you think that Estes will be selling 100,,000 Saturn V kits, the last run was about 5,000 give or take .

Like I mentioned in the beginning, I have NO inside information on sale figures, but, it only makes sense that when you do the math, there would be far too many kits available and far few rocketeers to buy those kits.

There is plenty of room for all the manufacturers, from the mom and pop operation to the giants and those inbetween. We are a niche hobby, with many regulations to deal with, insurance issues and limited amount of lauch areas still available.

I really don't see the hobby going for another 50 years, way too many issues as mentioned above.

What one company doesn't supply, there are those who do. We , the hobbyist appreciate those companies that are still in the business and are still supplying materials for our hobby.

[georgegassaway]

The last estimate we have is that there are about 4500 hobby-type stores in the US of which about 1500 actually sell model rockets. Some of these are specialty stores that just sell only one line, like R/C Cars or model trains or plastic models. Those 3000 or so will more than likely not sell model rockets. These numbers are about two years old, so are probably a little lower now.
Well, THAT I find hard to believe. I can see that specific-hobby targeted shops like Trains only, or R/C cars only not having model rockets. But tat they represent 2/3 of the stores? No way. And I doubt it would even be 1/3.

Here in the Birmingham area, every general purpose hobby shop I have been to, that is still in business, carries model rockets (five of them that I have been to one way or another this year, and there are two more I have not been to that I know have rockets). The only one I can think of that I went to that did not have model rockets, was pretty much a model railroad shop, in the early 1980's, which is long gone (I went there to get some casting supplies and to get some model R.R. supplemental "bits" to add some detailing to a flying contest Plastic Model Conversion of a Pilgrim Observer).

Of course that is for Birmingham, not everywhere. In places near New York City, Chicago, and L.A., I could see more specialty shops being able to thrive, or at least these days, hang on, than in less populated areas. But then the super-big metro areas also have a ton of general hobby shops too.

Also, if you are working up numbers for Wal-Mart vs hobby shops, then where do the big Arts and Hobby chains like Hobby Lobby and Michael's fit into that? Almost a 3rd category. Unless those are among the 4500 stores, but when I think Hobby "Shop", I do not think of those. And even those usually carry model rockets.

And then keep in mind that in the mass merchandising "Wal-Mart" category, there is also Target and Toy R' Us. Though I do not know their current status, only that 2 years ago they had MR kits and engines.


The ironic thing is the closest Wal-Mart that I go to.... has not had rockets since sometime last summer. If Estes is HEAVILY invested into the Wal-Mart business model, what happens to Estes when/if Wal-Mart decides to drop model rockets? I will "assume" that Estes does not produce the Wal-Mart kits without contract-in-hand, so the question is not so much that Estes would be left high and dry with hundreds of thousands of Wal-Mart kits and engines. But instead, what if they lost Wal-Mart's business which has been a major pillar of the business the last 10-15 years? At the very least, that would be incentive for reversing the trend of the last few years of letting the conventional "hobby rocketry" side from withering

- George Gassaway

[tbzep]

First comment, regarding the (more or less) main issue. Many people have stated that Estes-Cox sells the vast majority of its rocketry products to the non-hobbyist or "casual" rocket flier. I'm certainly not disputing that claim, but if it is true, then where are they? With the kind of volume that E-C has, you would think that you would run across groups of kids or individuals launching their beginner rockets at least once in awhile, even if purely by chance. Yet in the five years since I became a BAR, I have never encountered this. Where are all these people, anyway?

Very few people have ever seen me fly a rocket. Of those that have, it's only because I traveled over 100 miles to do so. The folks that have seen me on this forum....DaveR and Barone down in Memphis and George Gassaway in Huntsville if he happened to look up from prepping one of his super cool projects. If you include HPR EX, somebody might have seen me fly back in the 90's and early 2000's. Distances traveled ranged from 120 to 600 miles one way.

Normally, I just walk out the back door into the pasture and fly. The only people seeing me do that are my family. 99% of my flights are on my own property. You city folks would never find me, much less see my rockets fly. I imagine the bulk of the WM purchases fly out of somebody's back yard, with a much smaller percentage in ball parks or school yards.

[Royatl]

Back to some discussion about Estes not including a small bit of NAR info in their kits...

Estes has a website and could add a NAR logo with link on their front page. Wouldn't cost them more than a few electrons. ;) The NAR is mentioned with the safety colde way down at the bottom of the Educator-safety/laws page, but there's no link to it.

BTW, to give equal opportunity/criticism, I just hopped over to Quest's website and didn't notice any reference to the NAR on the front end of their site either. I did find a link on the FAQ page that mentioned the Safety Code. Neither of the "big boys" seems to care much for pushing the NAR on their website or it would be more prominent on the front pages.

In slight defense of Estes, they have featured the NAR logo on every standard kit bag since 1996, even as they've dropped other association logos such as RCHTA. The current bags feature it prominently with the Estes logo on the back near the copyright statement. Of course, it would be more useful if it included "www.nar.org" with it, and there is no indication that NAR is a user organization, but at least the logo is displayed.

[Royatl]

Carl,

I wouldn't be surprised if the number Barry quoted for "kits of interest" (100K) applied to Walmart kits. But I don't believe that number would apply to all kits, especially the high end kits like the Interceptor-E. I just have difficulty imagining a market that big for that kit at that price, great as the kit is.

I've been told by a retailer in the past that for the last run of the Saturn V, Estes was looking for upfront retailer commitments to make an initial run of 5000, which seems about right.

Carl, is there any semi-official hobby industry number of how many rocketry-selling hobby stores are left in the US and Canada?


I always heard that the average Estes kit should sell at least 10k units a year to justify its continuation (not the only factor, but a major one). That was 10-15 years ago, so possibly the threshold has gone up since then. Obviously big ticket items like Saturn V or the NCR kits probably had a lower threshold (5000 Sat V kits was what I heard when they were released in 1999). The special release of Mars Snoopers in 1991 was 2500 units, so the 100k quoted by Barry was almost certainly for Walmart kits.

[Royatl]

This was part of the point of my line of questioning. If there are as many people involved as has been claimed I would think we'd be seeing rockets flying everywhere - so where are all these new fliers? If they exist, we need to find them and try to bring them into the hobby.

Mario

At the same time, I've NEVER seen anyone flying these oh-so-popular park flyer airplanes, so if I can't find *them* I really doubt I'd ever see a model rocket flyer.

As an aside, the last time I did see a family, by chance, out flying their rocket was in 1998. The next day I saw that said rocket, hanging from a power line above the street! It stayed there for about four months, the nose cone a little longer.

[Bill]

The last estimate we have is that there are about 4500 hobby-type stores in the US of which about 1500 actually sell model rockets. Some of these are specialty stores that just sell only one line, like R/C Cars or model trains or plastic models. Those 3000 or so will more than likely not sell model rockets. These numbers are about two years old, so are probably a little lower now.


A few years ago, I traveled quite a bit in the Southwest, South and Midwest regions of the country, shopping at many hobby stores as I went. From half to two-thirds of the ones I did visit carried rockets, though many only had a limited selection of Estes products. At the time, I was building up a hoard of C11-0 motors, so even those were fruitful. Truthfully though, I did not have that much time to work with, so I filtered out those which by their name obviously catered to only the train or R/C car or airplane markets. Unfortunately, I have seen some of the better stores close.

Some Michaels carry rockets, some do not. Most (all?) in California do not.

Most HobbyTown USAs do; a few did not.

A majority of the WalMarts carried rockets; a majority of the Targets did not (seasonal when they do).

I seldom buy by mail order, but those who know me know I do a lot of my buying in person. You Carl (Semroc), Jim (FlisKits), Ken (Performance), Bill (BMS), John (Red River), Don (Squirrelworks), Peter (Saturn Press), Wes (Dr Zooch), Andy (ASP) Tim (Apogee), Tom (Tango Papa) and the good folks at Q-Modeling have all gathered quite a few dead presidents from me over the years, mostly at national events.


Bill

[Bill]

First comment, regarding the (more or less) main issue. Many people have stated that Estes-Cox sells the vast majority of its rocketry products to the non-hobbyist or "casual" rocket flier. I'm certainly not disputing that claim, but if it is true, then where are they? With the kind of volume that E-C has, you would think that you would run across groups of kids or individuals launching their beginner rockets at least once in awhile, even if purely by chance. Yet in the five years since I became a BAR, I have never encountered this. Where are all these people, anyway? I have encountered this type of model rocket flier in the posts of fellow online forum members, but I have never see one in the wild. If mine turns out to be a typical experience, then how can so many people be so certain of who these "other" rocketry consumers are, and can describe their characteristics, motivations, level of knowledge, etc. with such consistency that it risks becoming a stereotype?


"Lone wolf" rocketry is apparently alive and well. Those of us in clubs have a slanted viewpoint since many of us do not fly at other than club events.

In many places, whether rocket flying is or is not allowed is not clearly posted. Many just assume that since rockets are allowed to be sold, they are legal to fly in the neighborhood schoolyard or park when others are not using it.

They go by the "fly until we are told we cannot" mentality. Because they are not out there that long, they are seldom caught by the authorities or seen by us.

Those of us in clubs, especially those in the leadership cannot operate that way, so we tend to see much fewer suitable flying sites because we need to be able to have a preplanned and publicized event. Hence the need to have prior approval from both the property owner and the AHJ.


Bill

[mperdue]

At the same time, I've NEVER seen anyone flying these oh-so-popular park flyer airplanes, so if I can't find *them* I really doubt I'd ever see a model rocket flyer.

As an aside, the last time I did see a family, by chance, out flying their rocket was in 1998. The next day I saw that said rocket, hanging from a power line above the street! It stayed there for about four months, the nose cone a little longer.
Which brings me to one of my other questions - what are you (you is being used generically so it doesn't mean you specifically) doing to find these people and try to bring them into the hobby? Have you visited local schools? Do you put fliers in the stores that sell rocketry products? There are certainly people flying rockets outside the local club events - tho I doubt that the numbers are 15 to 30 times the peak in the 70's - so what are people doing to reach them?

And before anyone asks - yes, I have done these things. I have formed a local club and visited schools. I've also visited scout and 4H groups and run make-n-take events. I print information for distribution in the stores that sell rockets. Those efforts along with the efforts of other ROCI members have brought us new members and help ensure that we can still fly at the AMA in Muncie.

[shockwaveriderz]

This was part of the point of my line of questioning. If there are as many people involved as has been claimed I would think we'd be seeing rockets flying everywhere - so where are all these new fliers? If they exist, we need to find them and try to bring them into the hobby.

Mario

mark II and Mario:

I think just because we don't see these one-timeres doesn't mean they don't exist. Evidently they do exist or E-C wouldn't be placing their product in 4,000 WM across the country.

I assume they are launching in small parks, school yards, backyards etc.....

I would also argue that they are already in the "hobby" even if its only for a fleeting time frame.

terry dean

[shockwaveriderz]

As it turns out, as a result of the lawsuit that Estes did not support, they can now produce a much better ammonium perchlorate based propellant (without potassium perchlorate) that is legal, but potassium perchlorate composite propellant is STILL on the explosives list! If Estes-Cox does ever go into production on low power APCP engines, they could be the biggest beneficiary of the NAR-TRA lawsuit without having paid a dime to support it.

I don't see how E-C will benefit as they will probably never made any motors over 62.5g and as such they are already exempt, regardless of what the propellant is. Even APCP was exempt up to 62.5g.

Also Quest didn't excatly support the lawsuit either.......or if they did it was under deep cover.


The only company that will benefit from the APCP ruling is AT and the 7 dwarfs;.

terry dean

[Gus]

Really? News to me. . .
.
:chuckle: :chuckle:

Mark,

Whether folks are members or not, I think most would agree the NAR is the public voice for the hobby.

Was it the impression of the NAR leadership that the hobby was growing, as Barry suggests?

Obviously it would be desirable, but is it necessary for the NAR membership to grow?

What are the pros and cons of a "limited" membership?

[Carl@Semroc]

Even APCP was exempt up to 62.5g. My point was that the 62.5g limit was established by an NRM and was an arbitrary amount based on Estes' largest engine at the time. They can attempt to set a new limit by rule making at any time. If they had won the lawsuit, they could possibly have been emboldened to set a different arbitrary limit lower than 62.5g.

I asked our agent about this when we were going over our LEMP and she said the 62.5g limit only applied to black powder and ammonium perchlorate. Other (in her words) exotic propellants were not covered by the exemption.

[mycrofte]

Bill

I have always been a park rocketeer! When we were kids, several of us would take our stuff to the local school yard. It just happened to have a 100 acre field attached to it. And we would be there for hours launching everything we had.

Now, at 47, I carry on that proud tradition by using any and all farmers fields "until I'm told I cannot". There are plenty of neighbors, obviously not you, who see us out there on nice days. But we live on the edge of town, so not a lot of neighbors or drivers.

Living in Illinois, there are far more corn fields than there are open area parks to launch in. I can only hope I've inspired at least 1 person to do the same!

P.S. In all my years of field launching, I have never met a 'club member'. So, by some way of thinking, I have started to wonder if they exist...

[GuyNoir]

:chuckle: :chuckle:

Aside: The past President is amused! :D And obviously thanks you for your support!

Was it the impression of the NAR leadership that the hobby was growing, as Barry suggests?

What follows is my opinion only, and thus is worth whatever you paid to get it. And for the record, I am no longer involved in the policy and strategy making elements of NAR leadership.

IMHO, I don't think hobby rocketry is getting substantially bigger or smaller. There's a core business that I suspect is tied to population, i.e. some number of schools, youth groups, and the general public provide a market for starter kits and maybe one more kit or a pack of two of engines. 10% of that number buy a second kit, a second pack of engines. 10% of that number buy 3-6 kits, fly for more than a year, etc. Only a very small percentage of folks hang on after that. They hang out here and in other rocketry forums, and join the NAR and TRA.

Obviously it would be desirable, but is it necessary for the NAR membership to grow?

Smaller membership means smaller economic resources, and a smaller pool of volunteers from which to draw. These are not good things. Therefore, larger NAR membership would be good to have.

The key to making that happen, again IMHO, is to try to target the set of folks who are in the " buy 3-6 kits, fly for more than a year" pool. If someone can figure out a cost effective way to market to that pool, then I think the hobby associations can grow larger.

What are the pros and cons of a "limited" membership?

The pros are you can "increase" your membership, and these "limited" members could eventually convert into full membership.

The cons are "there's no good way to generate a service of value to these members on a cost effective basis", and if these limited members don't connect positively to the organization, they won't stick with the organization.

My $0.02; YMMV.

[GuyNoir]

In all my years of field launching, I have never met a 'club member'. So, by some way of thinking, I have started to wonder if they exist...

Well for four months a year, the Fox Valley Rocketeers (http://www.foxvalleyrocketeers.org) is out there flying in those same IL cornfields . . . ;)

[GuyNoir]

Also Quest didn't excatly support the lawsuit either.......or if they did it was under deep cover.

As long as the litigation was successfully concluded, why do any such questions like this matter?

I hope the readers of this (and other) forums will do the most effective and fun thing they can do to celebrate the end of this long saga.

GO FLY APCP ROCKET MOTORS!

Sheesh . . . .

[Gus]

The key to making that happen, again IMHO, is to try to target the set of folks who are in the " buy 3-6 kits, fly for more than a year" pool. If someone can figure out a cost effective way to market to that pool, then I think the hobby associations can grow larger.
Mark,

Thanks for your answers. Very interesting perspective.

As for targeting the select group you mention, I think we're extremely fortunate that folks like Carl and Jim are such big supporters of the NAR who seem to miss no opportunity to encourage membership. In this day and age, by the time someone gets to the 3 to 6 kits stage they've probably searched the web a bit and happened across one of those great vendors.

Also a tip of the hat to George Gassaway. I just built my Roachwerks LJII and George's only request to Gordy for letting him use George and Tom's drawings in the kit was that Gordy include a NAR application in the kit.

[Mark II]

mark II and Mario:

I think just because we don't see these one-timeres doesn't mean they don't exist. Evidently they do exist or E-C wouldn't be placing their product in 4,000 WM across the country.
I tried to make it clear that I was not doubting the existence of the "casual" flier. The point that I was trying to make was that we all talk like we know who they are, what their level of technical knowledge is, what they want and what motivates them. But do we? If I never see them, and you never see them, and the next poster on the forum never sees them, then how can any of us pretend that we know all about them? Yet this particular group of consumers of rocketry products has become a stereotype in countless discussions such as this one.

I assume they are launching in small parks, school yards, backyards etc.....
Those are the places where I launch my rockets, too. But I never run across anyone else there.

I would also argue that they are already in the "hobby" even if its only for a fleeting time frame.

terry dean
Agreed.

"Lone wolf" rocketry is apparently alive and well. Those of us in clubs have a slanted viewpoint since many of us do not fly at other than club events.
Oh, I know all about "lone wolf" rocketry. I have been a dedicated member of NAR since 2006, but all of the launches I made in the four years that I flew model rockets as a kid back in the '60's, all of the launches that I made in my first two years as a BAR before I joined the national association, and 99% of the launches that I have done since joining were and are all done alone, on my own, far away from any club launch field. My NAR section is located in a different region of the state than where I live; the club field is 130 miles from my home. In the three years that I have been a member, I have made it down to four, maybe five, club launches. In 2008, due to the spike in the price of gas, I didn't make it down to any of them. Although I am in my fourth year as a member of NAR, flying at organized club launches is still a very new, and very rare, experience for me.

In many places, whether rocket flying is or is not allowed is not clearly posted. Many just assume that since rockets are allowed to be sold, they are legal to fly in the neighborhood schoolyard or park when others are not using it.

They go by the "fly until we are told we cannot" mentality. Because they are not out there that long, they are seldom caught by the authorities or seen by us.
I don't have to worry about that. School district personnel, students and parents have witnessed all of my launches from the local school field. In fact, on several occasions, school employees have stopped on their way home to watch me launch my rockets; a couple of custodians even helped me try to retrieve one of my rockets from one of the trees near the school building. In over five years of flying there, no one has ever approached me or contacted me to express any concern at all about my use of the school athletic fields for my rocket launches, even though they have had ample opportunity to do so.

Those of us in clubs, especially those in the leadership cannot operate that way... Hence the need to have prior approval from both the property owner and the AHJ.


Bill
As a member of a club, I understand your position completely. Maintaining a good relationship with the owner of the field where my section holds its launches has always been a top priority for us. But the > 99% of my launches that are done as a "lone wolf" are hardly hit and run. The school field where I launch is a public place that is used by many people in my community, and all of my launches have had multiple witnesses. In fact, all of the lone wolf launches that I have made as a sport rocketeer have been done right out in the open, in plain sight, and nearly all have been witnessed by strangers, non-participants and passers-by. Yet no one has ever objected.

I have not seen any growing public animosity toward sport rocket fliers. What I have seen are fields that were readily available for sport launching in my youth have now been taken over by strip malls, big box stores and vacation-home developments. No wonder that gaining access to appropriate fields for launching is becoming such an issue. The number that are left has been dwindling for a long time, but it has done so especially in the last decade. Sport rocketry clubs are having to scramble to gain access to the few suitably large fields that are left. Many of these are in places where rocket launching has never been particularly welcome. Hence the perception that landowners are "turning against" model rocketry.

MarkII

[Mark II]

:chuckle: :chuckle:

Mark,

Whether folks are members or not, I think most would agree the NAR is the public voice for the hobby.

Was it the impression of the NAR leadership that the hobby was growing, as Barry suggests?

Obviously it would be desirable, but is it necessary for the NAR membership to grow?

What are the pros and cons of a "limited" membership?
Not trying to step in on GuyNoir's toes here, but Trip Barber addressed these questions in the NARCON 2009 Town Hall. Basically, NAR membership levels are holding steady from year to year. The national association gains a certain number of new members each year, and also loses about the same number of old members each year. While this is not great, it is better than the situation with some other hobby organizations like model railroading, whose membership is literally dying off. What I found startling was that the vast majority of NAR's membership is over 40 years old, and the average age of all members is around 50.

All of NAR's business is done by volunteers. There are several programs that NAR would like to provide that it simply has no volunteers to conduct. If NAR's membership were to grow, then the pool of people who were willing to volunteer to conduct programs for it would grow as well, and NAR could provide more programs or services. These were some of the other points that Mr. Barber made in the Town Hall.

MarkII

[Royatl]

Well for four months a year, the Fox Valley Rocketeers (http://www.foxvalleyrocketeers.org) is out there flying in those same IL cornfields . . . ;)

Eeeek! Only four months?

[mycrofte]

Well for four months a year, the Fox Valley Rocketeers (http://www.foxvalleyrocketeers.org) is out there flying in those same IL cornfields . . . ;)

We get a little more sunshine down here in Clark County. Enough to go launch today. Barely, since it was windy (and gusting). A little tilt on the launch pad and they all came back close to our launch site. Then again, we had a 10 year old for a recovery team. That comes in handy!

We ended up with a broken fin on her Pink Goblin and my Honest John shredded the shock cord. I think I'll change it back to good ol' fashioned rubber band.

I'm afraid you are a 'bit of a ways' for me to travel. I suppose there might be a club in Terre Haute, IN. But it's easier to just walk across the street into the cornfield...

[Bob Kaplow]

Eeeek! Only four months?

Well, we hibernate in the winter (Dec-Mar), and the farm fields are planted in the summer, so for Jun-Sep we fly elsewhere. For FVR that meant a drainage area that limited us to D motors, and anything that went very high probably got lost in the surrounding trees. But it looks like we now have access to a much larger field for the summer flying that will support G motor flights.

mycrofte, I don't know where you are, but downstate there is a club in Champaign that flies in Rantoul that might be closer to you than NIRA or FVR.

[mycrofte]

Yeah, they will be planting soon. So, I'll have to start looking for a new place to launch. There is a nice soccer field here but it is close to a main road. We decided our launches might cause a wreck out there.

[GuyNoir]

Eeeek! Only four months?

As a Virginia born and bred Southern gentleman, let me extend you a warm welcome to come on up here to Yankee land and see what December through March are like.

Why, this year, here in McHenry County, IL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McHenry_County,_IL) we had a MUCH milder winter than 2008. Only 55 inches of snow this year (vs. 78" in '08). An Atlanta boy like you won't have any trouble at all. (Aside: You CAN get good bourbon here. . . ) :D

[Doug Sams]

(Aside: You CAN get good bourbon here. . . ) :DBunny,

I can get good bourbon in Texas, too, and 0" of snow :)

Doug

http://www.everymilesamemory.com/Images%2010-30-07/Happy%20Hour%20Makers%20Mark.jpg

.

[Royatl]

As a Virginia born and bred Southern gentleman, let me extend you a warm welcome to come on up here to Yankee land and see what December through March are like.

Why, this year, here in McHenry County, IL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McHenry_County,_IL) we had a MUCH milder winter than 2008. Only 55 inches of snow this year (vs. 78" in '08). An Atlanta boy like you won't have any trouble at all. (Aside: You CAN get good bourbon here. . . ) :D

Oh, I understand what Dec through March are about. That is why you don't see me making plans to move up there any time soon, and why I haven't shown up to any of the past six or so NARCONs! I had it in my head many years ago to move to Montreal; fortunately an advance team of friends moved there and convinced me I wouldn't like it one bit (I think there it is November through 1/2 of May). Or maybe they just don't like me!

But you were saying you only got to fly four months out of twelve. Fortunately Bullet Bob explained the situ.

by the way, it did snow (a flurry or two) here a week ago! The next day it was 70, then the next it was 50 mph winds and robin egg sized hail. Just another typical Georgia April.

[mycrofte]

Yeah, I 'visited' Newfoundland while in the Airforce. I didn't care for seeing snow on the ground the first week of June.

Then again, I lived in Arizona for 2 years and didn't like it either.

[GuyNoir]

Bunny,

I can get good bourbon in Texas, too, and 0" of snow :)

Great picture.

I'm a Woodford Reserve or Knob Creek man, myself.

[GuyNoir]

The next day it was 70, then the next it was 50 mph winds and robin egg sized hail. Just another typical Georgia April.

Yes, but you have the dogwoods (which I dearly miss from Virginia. . .) :(

[georgegassaway]

Then again, I lived in Arizona for 2 years and didn't like it either.
I've never heard of anyone in Phoenix needing to shovel two feet of sunshine out of their driveway.....

(wow, has this thread drifted itself to death yet?)

- George Gassaway

[tbzep]

I've never heard of anyone in Phoenix needing to shovel two feet of sunshine out of their driveway.....

(wow, has this thread drifted itself to death yet?)

- George Gassaway

There probably aren't many rocket eating trees either. Maybe rocket eating tumbleweeds? :p

[bob jablonski]

Many thanks to Barry for giving us such insight into the model rocket business. Semroc is one of the small model rocket manufacturers that is always curious about the "real world" of the business beyond the very modest sales that we are able to generate.

We have followed with great interest the pending release of the Estes-Cox retro designs and have wondered how much they would impact the total market and in particular the amount that Estes-Cox is producing. Barry said "when I sell I have to have 100,000 units to make a product interesting to us.” I estimated the selling price of the 39 new Classics kits (the Phoenix Bird was repeated) and the 10 new Wal-Mart kits to be roughly $17.75 each (49 kits at a total of $890 for one of each). Assuming Estes-Cox has already ordered enough to be "interesting", that means there are about 4,900,000 new kits in the pipeline at a gross sales value of $89 million dollars. Other companies doing business with China in the hobby industry have told me the "magic number" of 10 is used as a multiplier to get the selling price from the cost of goods received from China. That would mean Estes-Cox has already invested $8.9 million in the new line, if that number is valid. Assuming each customer buys two of the kits, that means over two million customers are required to consume these new kits.

Since they all have balsa parts, I just had to estimate how long it would take us to produce that kind of volume. The 49 kits require a total of 68 balsa parts since some have couplers and reducers, in addition to nose cones. That means 6,800,000 balsa parts are required. Our two machines can produce a total of about 900 pieces of comparable size in a 12 hour day. That means we would have to keep both machines busy 7500 days to make enough parts for the initial orders of these kits! That works out to be about 29 years! At 62 years old, I might not live to see that many balsa parts turned. That is impressive!

Barry also said that "we have spent almost 800,000 dollars in testing-destroyed over 2,400,000 dollars in non compliant product and over 500,000 in rework where we could do it to get product into compliance." That is an impressive amount of money. At about $4K per SKU, that is about 200 different products to test. And Estes-Cox destroyed more product last year than we would probably sell in the rest of my working life!

We had been trying to estimate the size of the market, but since Estes-Cox IS basically the market, it was good to hear Barry's estimate that "we are about 15 to 30 times as large as Estes best years in the 70’s " A former Estes employee told me that there were about 380 employees in the early 70's and they had gross sales of about $10 million per year. That would mean Estes-Cox is between about $150 million and $300 million in gross sales per year now. That is also very impressive!

All of these facts have answered my three unasked questions that are answered with questions:

Q. "Where was Estes-Cox when the BATFE threatened the industry with their illegal regulation?"
A. When you are a $150 million a year company, why get involved in a fight when you are not directly involved that could spill over and destroy your company just by coming to the competition's aid? No brainer. If I was smart, I would probably feel the same way.

Q. "Why does Estes-Cox avoid NAR events, advertising in LAUNCH magazine, and appearing regularly at public outings?"
A. When your market involves millions of individual customers, why waste time and resources on hundreds? Also, a no brainer. Fortunately, those hundreds are our customers!

Q. "Why did Estes-Cox shut down their forum and refuse (until lately) to participate on the public model rocketry forums?"
A. See the last answer. There are less than a thousand active participants on YORF and TRF of which just hundreds are Estes-Cox customers. Why care what they think? This is also a no brainer. You cannot reach the millions on a forum. The few on the forums want a diverse, niche product line with just hundreds of potential sales on any given product. Again, that is great for Semroc, but a waste of time for a giant.

I have a better understanding of the market now and just how tiny we are in relation to Estes-Cox. I had estimated that we were about 1/100th the size of Estes-Cox. Now it is clear that we are probably not even 1/1000th their size. That is humbling for me, but the good news is that there is much room for growth!

And Barry, if you come to a national event or are ever in central North Carolina, I will buy you dinner. Thanks for what you have done to grow the industry. Best wishes on your retirement.
Berry never said 100,000 per year or five if it,s 100,000 per production life that could be alot less.
Mr. Bob
Starlight prince

[Royatl]

Yes, but you have the dogwoods (which I dearly miss from Virginia. . .) :(

In fact, the Dogwood festival is this weekend. http://www.dogwood.org/

[falingtrea]

There probably aren't many rocket eating trees either. Maybe rocket eating tumbleweeds? :p

No, but there is rocket eating Saguaro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saguaro). :) :D The spines do a real number on parachutes, I know from experience. :(

[Shreadvector]

No, but there is rocket eating Saguaro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saguaro). :) :D The spines do a real number on parachutes, I know from experience. :(

How about the Estes DUDE ??? :eek:

[georgegassaway]

There probably aren't many rocket eating trees either. Maybe rocket eating tumbleweeds? :p
Attached, the exception to prove the rule. Phoenix 2 years ago. School launch, more than 200 students built their own models to fly. Ed LaCroix and a few others helped them to fly them, and I just happened to be there for a week long trip to make it to a contest our team (including Ed) was flying. The launch site was a small park just the other side of the school yard fence. A few models made it into some trees (one in particular), and one model made it into the more humid feature of the park. A "fishing" pole was used for retrieval from both types..... (that is Ed with the pole). The only time I have seen someone use a fishing pole to get a rocket out of water.... and it happened in.... Phoenix!

- George Gassaway

[jadebox]

The numbers are staggering. I already knew how we were a strong minority when it came to sales, but I didn't realize how small. While we may seem insignificant in terms of direct volume, I think we have a large influence on model rocketry as a whole. He is not directly reaching millions by speaking to a forum, but we are his disciples, so to speak.

Although he made it sound like altruism in the Q&A, I hope Mr. Tunick realizes it's in the best interests of Estes to support us.

Each one of us is probably equal to 1000 of his other customers. We continue to buy his products over many years while most of "the others" buy a single starter kit and never buy anything else.

We are also the ones working to keep rocketry safe and legal so he has a market. We are the ones who support the NAR and local clubs. We are the ones who find places to launch and work with local authorites to ensure we are allowed to fly rockets.

-- Roger

[Carl@Semroc]

Each one of us is probably equal to 1000 of his other customers. Well said! We feel the same way.

[tbzep]

Attached, the exception to prove the rule. Phoenix 2 years ago. School launch, more than 200 students built their own models to fly. Ed LaCroix and a few others helped them to fly them, and I just happened to be there for a week long trip to make it to a contest our team (including Ed) was flying. The launch site was a small park just the other side of the school yard fence. A few models made it into some trees (one in particular), and one model made it into the more humid feature of the park. A "fishing" pole was used for retrieval from both types..... (that is Ed with the pole). The only time I have seen someone use a fishing pole to get a rocket out of water.... and it happened in.... Phoenix!

- George Gassaway

That's why I said there probably aren't "many". There's always an exception to the rule. :p