He said he was NOT a member. Then he said there was new "ownership" and asked if any of them were there. When no one responded he said something like "that says it all." Then he said something like " an organization that represents less than 20% of the industry is clearly ineffective and not worth being a member of."
I wish I had the exact words, but next he said something like he "knew of nothing of value from PPFA."
Coming from a top-dog industry leader, comments like that seem unnecessarily brutal to those of us who work hard to keep PPFA going and provide benefits, such as this forum, the CPF and MCPF programs, the competition program, the Guidelines books, and more. These things may have considerable value to some framers, but perhaps not to the majority of framers and certainly not to Mr. Goltz.
Jay Goltz's remarks surely alienated a small (
very small) percentage of the framers in the room, but the majority surely agreed with him. His negative opinion of PPFA is popular and - let's be honest - at least partially correct. PPFA should have been represented there, even if by only a conspicuous table or two of enthusiastic members, and a spokesperson should have been ready to stand up for PPFA at any opportunity in that open forum. In the bigger picture, our industry's only trade association has never reached "critical mass" of membership in all its years; PPFA has not managed to attract a majority, or even a large minority, of framers at any time. We can be angry with Jay Goltz for his slap-in-the-face commentary, but it would be difficult to fault his logic.
PPFA is like a small lifeboat in a big ocean. The association has helped a lot of framers over the years. Faithful members have been rowing against the tide since the beginning, and at times frantically bailing to stay afloat. Jay Goltz's negative remarks represent one more surge of angry surf to swamp this leaky little boat. It's "sink or swim" time again, my friends. Who will rescue PPFA this time?