May-July Volunteer

[RiverAux]

The latest issue of the Volunteer is available online at http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/news/civil_air_patrol_volunteer/index.cfm

Some thoughts:
I didn't notice last issue, but they replaced the CAP seal that was standing in for the "O" in Volunteer with that silly new symbol that is popping up everywhere.  Additional dilution of the branding we've had. 

There was an ad in the back of the magazine by the FLIR company that sort of implies that CAP is using it.  I'd heard that there was some sort of test going on.  Not sure if the company is trying to build up support by buying advertising in the Volunteer or what. 

Several "cadets made good" articles (of course). 

A decent article on SAR in RMR. 

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

That new seal makes it look like the publication is named Valunteer

[USADOD]

Perhaps i'm late, but I just recently notice I did not receive the Volunteer publication by mail anymore. Browsing through the issue mentioned above I noticed "The annual subscription rate is $25" which seems to imply it is no longer included in the CAP membership fee, is this correct?

To get off topic for a moment, the George W Bush Composite Squadron Unit Patch is pretty cool.

[SarDragon]

It is being published less often, so your perceptions may not have caught up to reality. The $25 sub rate is for non-members.

[USADOD]

It is being published less often, so your perceptions may not have caught up to reality. The $25 sub rate is for non-members.

Hmm, maybe I skipped that part.

[BrandonKea]

It is being published less often, so your perceptions may not have caught up to reality. The $25 sub rate is for non-members.

Hmm, maybe I skipped that part.

Make sure your info is current in e-Services. CAP Magazine Admin link on the left side should get you where you need to be.

[RADIOMAN015]

I'm a bit puzzled, May- Jul, means it is a quarterly publication? so the next one will be Aug-Oct, than Nov-Jan??  Or somewhere down the line it will be 4 times a year Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun, etc or will it get published based upon when the over whelmed National Hdqs PAO staff gets around to publishing it

Also it seems to me that the same articles that are appearing on the news website, are now being published in the magazine.  Shouldn't the magazine be something "unique" to the magazine only and not something already released?
RM

[RiverAux]

They've altered the publication schedule some this year due to financial issues.  It was announced ahead of time in PAO circles. 

CAP News Online is for breaking news.  Makes sense to me that some of those would get expanded to a full article for the magazine. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I agree that the new logo makes the name of the magazine read as "Valunteer," but I'd hope that after enough eyes in the PA directorate see that, it'll change back to something round.

That triangular logo is unnecessary and poorly permutates the CAP emblem. Plus, it's redundant to have "Civil Air Patrol" above it as well as in the logo.

Most military organizations place a lot of pride in their symbols, and they don't rejigger them. Seems it happens in CAP as much as we diddle with uniforms and aircraft tail markings. That logo was a solution to a problem we didn't have.

[JohnKachenmeister]

"Branding" is a good idea.  I run a business, and I have a brand name (The School of Armed Security) that is descriptive of my business function and a logo (A semi-auto pistol with an eyeline, with my business name above) that is both eye-catching and suggestive of the nature of my business.

I use this logo on my letterhead, business forms, advertising, and vehicle markings.  If I were to consider changing it, that would be a major business decision, and probably would be counter-productive.

Unfortunately, I think the people at NHQ have never run a business, and have zero idea of the importance of consistency in branding, and also have zero concept of the motivations of the bulk of our members.

We ALREADY WERE BRANDED, as the US Air Force Auxiliary, AKA the Civil Air Patrol.  We could piggy back on the favorable name recognition of the Air Force, AND market ourselves as a historic and honored aviation legend.  We had it all, and the morons at NHQ decided to come up with a stupid-looking and historically irrelevant new logo.

I don't know what they get for coming up with these dumb ideas, but they SHOULD get about 15 years.

By the way, I WAS going to call my business the "Armed Security School" until I realized what the initials would be!   

[jimmydeanno]

We ALREADY WERE BRANDED, as the US Air Force Auxiliary, AKA the Civil Air Patrol.

Is it really all that solid of a brand if you are "also known" as something else?

[JohnKachenmeister]

We ALREADY WERE BRANDED, as the US Air Force Auxiliary, AKA the Civil Air Patrol.

Is it really all that solid of a brand if you are "also known" as something else?

Yes.

[NIN]

We ALREADY WERE BRANDED, as the US Air Force Auxiliary, AKA the Civil Air Patrol.

Is it really all that solid of a brand if you are "also known" as something else?

Yes.

I believe his question was substantially rhetorical....

[BillB]

The $25 subscription fee was raided from $5 several years ago by the National Board. It applies to subscriptions members buy for copies for their school libraries etc.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

We ALREADY WERE BRANDED, as the US Air Force Auxiliary, AKA the Civil Air Patrol.

Nope, we already were branded as Civil Air Patrol, an organization granted legal status as the U.S. Air Force's auxiliary. Problem is, some of our members have turned the legal status into a secondary (and in some cases, primary) name for the organization.

So yes, we are the Air Force's auxiliary. But our name is Civil Air Patrol. A name change to match the Coast Guard Auxiliary is wishful thinking.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I am not sure when the change took place, but...

Ou seal used to read "Civil Air Patrol" on the top, and "Auxiliary of the United States Air Force" on the bottom in smaller letters.  Sometime in the late 70's or early 80's the seal was changed to read:  "United States Air Force Auxiliary" on the top, and "Civil Air Patrol" on the bottom.

I understand that marketing people call this "Joint branding" and is sometimes called "Referent Branding."  Sort of like:  "Mercury--another division of the Ford family of fine cars."

But if you guys think the new logo looks cool, go right ahead.  I'm not jumping on the bandwagon.  I think the entire re-branding of CAP as some sort of non-profit benevolent organization akin to the Salvation Army but without the religious message is a BIG mistake.

[Hawk200]

Nope, we already were branded as Civil Air Patrol, an organization granted legal status as the U.S. Air Force's auxiliary. Problem is, some of our members have turned the legal status into a secondary (and in some cases, primary) name for the organization.

So yes, we are the Air Force's auxiliary. But our name is Civil Air Patrol. A name change to match the Coast Guard Auxiliary is wishful thinking.

Thank you. Glad to know I'm not alone. So many folks don't seem to understand the difference between "who" and "what".

[jpizzo127]

Not that one more opinion matters, but i absolutely hate the new logo.

I don't understand what was wrong with the old one.

Why does CAP insist on trying to fix things that are not broke instead of the things that are?

[Major Carrales]

It is my conclusion that nothing NHQ ever does will curry favor with many of us, making topics like this all the more moot.

[Pumbaa]

But Sparky if nothing ever changes there will be no postings on CAPTalk!  Could you imagine how dead this place would be if there were no uniform change or logo change discussions?

NHQ does this so CAPTalk will thrive!