This will probably be a year where SLAS takes another look at the NOVA. What are we trying to accomplish with it? Are we reaching those goals? Does it need to be tweaked after all these years? The main problem with changing the NOVA in any way is that humans are resistant to change. Social scientists tell us that changing behavior or changing a habit is one of the most difficult things we do, and most people never do make those needed changes (loosing weight, quit smoking, etc). Personally, I would like to see our SLAS newsletter used as a marketing tool either to tell the public who we are and what we do, and to recruit new members. In its present form, it will do neither. No one other than us cares about the board and meeting minutes and probably many SLAS members don't even care. And the roster doesn't really belong in a newsletter. It belongs on-line where we login to get member information. Perhaps our meeting and board minutes could be placed in the member-only area on our site. I liked what Tom Sevcik did with the NOVA. It was human and enjoyable. But it took a ton of time, and a bunch of money to mail to SLAS members who wanted a paper copy. We simply cannot do a great newsletter if we have to continue to mail it. Unless we raise the dues, which is a possibility. Would anyone step up to the plate and do some human-interest stories? A get-to-know the members or how we got interested in astronomy. Stories of Bryce and Capitol Reef. Stories about local celebs like Dr. Stacy. That would be of interest and should be free to all who would like to check out our site. We don't need things in the NOVA that we can get from S&T. Some thoughts of mine about the NOVA... -A

My feeling is that NOVA is valuable and I do like it. When I suggested it should be available to the public, my thought was that it would serve as an example of the kind of companionship that is available with club membership. It would serve as a marketing tool not like S&T or Astronomy magazines, but just to give a feeling for what we do and what we're like. I don't think it should be repetitive in order to teach others what a lot of our members already know. My thought was that anyone interested enough in Utah astronomy to check out the club web site should be able to look at NOVA too. On the topic of personal information, I agree that should not be avalable for the general public. Finally, since this is a spout-off session, I want to say I agree with Ann that we should be looking strictly at an on-line edition. By now so many people have Internet connections that it shouldn't really be a problem. There's not much point in raising dues just to pay postage when the electronic version is readily available to anyone interested -- no matter how poor, in fact, because anyone can use the Internet at the local library. Thanks, Joe

Pursuant to this whole Nova and SLAS PR discussion, I'd like to point folks to the Wasatch Mountain Club (http://www.wasatchmountainclub.org). They have a much larger membership than SLAS and host many more activities than SLAS. So, as Chuck pointed out, maybe one day SLAS will be even bigger and more active than it is now. But I'd like to especially call attention to the WMC's newsletter, the Rambler, which is freely available to everyone, member or no, on their web site. It is a very impressive publication, many times bigger than Nova and complete with grundles of pictures and information about club activities and members. So how do they do it? Well, first they have paid advertising, which helps, but there's also their dues which are twice that of SLAS. But even that does not seem to be enough as I now see they have instituted a two tiered dues structure. You pay one amount if you agree to take the newsletter on line and another, higher, rate to have a paper copy printed and mailed to you. Speaking for me and not as the Nova editor, I'd really like to see SLAS go that same way. I'd rather we not continue to have 100% of the membership involuntarily subsidize the barely 20% who still ask for the paper copies. But considering that subsidy is currently only $2 per member per year I'm not sure I want to get into a big battle over it. FYI, cost to print and mail the current (Jan/Feb) issue worked out to a skosh over $1.17 per issue. As for what the newsletter should be used for, I'll agree with Ann, Chuck and Joe, that it should not try to compete with the likes of Sky and Telescope. Rather it should just report on SLAS related stuff. By "decree" of a long ago board vote, it only _needs_ to contain meeting minutes and a schedule of events. By tradition, announcements have also been included. I too, really liked much of the content of the Novas Tom Sevcik published. But I was bothered by the high cost. Were it not for the fact that a sizable portion of those costs were borne by Tom personally (many don't know that) SLAS's postage and printing account would have been even further in the red than it used to be (we're finishing this year with a surplus thanks, in large part, to so many switching away from paper copies). Possible solutions? I dare say none will be popular with all but here are my thoughts. 1) Set a date saying anyone joining or reinstating their expired membership after a certain date will not be offered the option of a paper copy. 2) Establish a WMC-like two tier system with those not wanting paper Novas paying one rate and those wanting paper copies paying the full, non-subsidized cost. 3) Publish two versions of the Nova: A paper copy paid for by only those who request it containing only the required minutes and schedule and an on-line version with minutes and schedule but also full of stuff of interest to SLAS members. I have some pretty serious reservations about trying to use any newsletter as a primary membership recruiting tool. To paraphrase the guy who SLAS hired to design the SLAS marketing brochure: "Keep it simple, short on text and long on flash." Of course, this may all settle itself in a few years. A quick look at the master roster shows that as time goes by, fewer and fewer new members are asking for paper. pw

My comment on the value of SLAS membership was meant to be a general question about our marketing approach. Whether or not to raise prices or lower costs are issues that every institution faces. In this case I favor raising prices. Also at issue is how to attract new members, finding new customers. It has the related question of how to keep them coming back, repeat business. I feel that SLAS does a poor job of retaining membership, not just old members but just getting new members to renew at their first year anniversary. We don't send out renewal notices and I think it is costing us a lot. I would favor dues high enough to cover the mailing and handling of membership renewal as well as a hard copy of Nova. My comments seem to have stepped on a sore spot within SLAS and for that I apologize. I also greatly admire Tom Sevcik. Some have money to give, some give of themselves. Tom gives both selflessly, and I wish we had more like him. DT __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

On 30 Dec 2006, at 10:47, daniel turner wrote:

We don't send out renewal notices and I think it is costing us a lot. Umm, actually that's not really the case. Everyone with an email address on file gets one reminder two to three weeks before their membership is about to expire and, if they allow their membership to lapse, a second reminder a month later.

I would favor dues high enough to cover the mailing and handling of membership renewal as well as a hard copy of Nova. Agreed. But, up to now, not enough people have voiced that opinion at meetings when the subject has been brought up. Maybe now that's going to change.

pw