The HabForum

I'm not blogging over at sprocketeers.org but I do plan on attending meetings when I have time.

Just a few tidbits from the joint meeting of the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission Business and Executive Committees -

Finances look a lot better but still kinda scary. As of yesterday (after paying payroll) they had just over $120k in the bank account and the full credit line to back them up. Back in the black, but not out of trouble yet.
Registrations number continue to look stable so that will ensure a steady stream of money during the summer. I haven't heard them mention expanding airport service to Nashville and Birmingham for a while but I personally think it would help get more campers in as long as the cost is kept in check.

AC numbers still are a bit shaky which brought a discussion about the future of Aviation Challenge. Some committee members discussed if the camp is profitable and worth keeping. At the end of the discussion the committee asked the center accounting staff to split apart the numbers for AC and SC so that the board can take a closer look at what it costs to run AC.

No major news from Space Camp licensing. Although it wasn't mentioned in the meeting a quick review of court records shows the year long case around Space Camp Korea is still moving along. The attorneys for the former licensee filed a counterclaim that the center never provided materials promised in the original contract. The center has asked the court to dismiss the counterclaim. Both parties have upcoming deadlines to backup their statements. I've asked for the current amount being spent on legal fees and Tim Hall danced around it and only provided me the numbers for previous years. At the end of FY 2014 the center had spent over $240k on legal fees alone. A quick review of the chart of financial accounts given out yesterday does not show a specific line item for legal fees. I asked Tim identify which line item this expense falls under. In a recent internal audit the accounting firm dinged the center not entering legal fees into their accounting system in an efficient time-frame.

Another item not brought up in the meeting was the federal lawsuit from current and former employees for back pay that stems from a state audit stating that the center did not follow state policies for holidays and calculating longevity pay. I just checked that case and there has been no movement by the judge since mid January.

Thank you for posting an update. It is interesting to hear what goes on behind the scenes.

Thank you for the update.

What do you mean by airport service? Buses from those airports?

I am not surprised that they had to ask for AC/Space Camp cost figures. Day to day management should be having the accounting staff doing that already. IMHO, they should have specific costs for every activity. Otherwise, how do you properly price things? That's basic cost accounting. How many campers do you need at a camp to break even?

That $240K..is that FY2014 only or for the entire case? Either way, it's a lot of money to spend on a lawsuit unless there's tens or hundreds of millions involved.

No specific line item for legal fees? USSRC must have the same people doing their books as my HOA (who lists the pool's water, electric, phone, garbage, repairs, maintenance, replacement everywhere else but under pool so the pool appears cheap instead of the major luxury that it is..but I digress)

Wonder how much is at stake in the back pay lawsuit if USSRC loses?

Interesting stuff...

majtom7 wrote:What do you mean by airport service? Buses from those airports?

A few months ago commission members were briefed on some of the issues that keep the price of attending camp high. One of the main factors was the fact that Huntsville fares are very high and no real access to low-cost carriers. Representatives from the center said that they were looking at either Nashville or Birmingham (Southwest Airlines) as a possible place to setup an airport services group (in those cities) that would help kids on and off the aircraft on time. Never heard anything else about it but I think it would be a great idea especially in Nashville where there are more direct flights to west coast cities.

majtom7 wrote:I am not surprised that they had to ask for AC/Space Camp cost figures. Day to day management should be having the accounting staff doing that already. IMHO, they should have specific costs for every activity. Otherwise, how do you properly price things? That's basic cost accounting. How many campers do you need at a camp to break even?

As for AC vs SC money - I think a few of the board members were surprised that the numbers were lumped together. I wouldn't think the costs are horrible but it will be interesting to see what it takes to keep AC open. A few years ago the Visions and Plans Committee of the U.S. Space and Rocket Center pitched around a few ideas like turning the area into a water park similar to the Evergreen Wings and Waves waterpark in Oregon. Check out the pictures below - would be a unique place for sure and could help build year-round revenue which would really help the center's bottom line each year.

majtom7 wrote:That $240K..is that FY2014 only or for the entire case? Either way, it's a lot of money to spend on a lawsuit unless there's tens or hundreds of millions involved.

FY14 legal fees included two cases (that I know of). The first being the Space Camp Korea lawsuit that has been going on for over a year. The second is the employee lawsuit but it doesn't seem as intense. I suspect that the Korea lawsuit was the majority of those fees. 2 million total is on the line at this point. 1 million from the original licensee and another 1 million from the new licensee. There is a very good chance that the new licensee could attempt to recover their fee if the project doesn't begin soon. They had wanted the camp/museum complex to be up and running in time for the 2018 Olympic Games being held nearby. Worst case scenario for the center is that the old licensee wins the case AND the new licensee pulls out of the project. That would leave the center potentially holding the bill for $2 million PLUS legal fees. However, if the center wins the case and the licensee continues with the project - the center could get several million dollars in equipment and royalty fees.

majtom7 wrote:No specific line item for legal fees? USSRC must have the same people doing their books as my HOA (who lists the pool's water, electric, phone, garbage, repairs, maintenance, replacement everywhere else but under pool so the pool appears cheap instead of the major luxury that it is..but I digress)

I haven't looked back recently but I seem to remember that two CFOs ago they actually did have it listed as a major line item. It more than likely has a specific line item buried deep in one of the expense categories. I will say this the new CFO they have is pretty [darn] awesome. He had great charts that were easy to understand and he also demonstrated the ability to correctly forecast. Will be interesting to see what he forecasts during the next slow season and better yet if the management/board listens to his advice.

majtom7 wrote:Wonder how much is at stake in the back pay lawsuit if USSRC loses?

I heard a rough estimate of just over a million dollars. Naturally that doesn't take into account the forensic audit that would be required to get an exact number. If the center was smart they would just settle the case and be done with it. I will point out that they are still not observing all state holidays. Not sure if they have fixed the longevity pay issue as well. In theory those costs could be going up by the day.

WesL wrote: A few years ago the Visions and Plans Committee of the U.S. Space and Rocket Center pitched around a few ideas like turning the area into a water park similar to the Evergreen Wings and Waves waterpark in Oregon. Check out the pictures below - would be a unique place for sure and could help build year-round revenue which would really help the center's bottom line each year.

God, I hope not exactly like Evergreen. The place is drowning in red ink, being tied to the anchor of Evergreen airlift. They're slowly having to sell off their airplane collection - one at a time- to pay for stuff. The government got into it and some planes are being sold right out from underneath them, including their prized B-17 bomber.
I was just down there a couple of months ago to see the place while they still had the majority of their collection intact.
I get the overall concept of this water park (though I have zero use for one), but I hope to heck that USS&RC doesn't take any pages out of Evergreen's playbook!

p51 wrote:

WesL wrote: A few years ago the Visions and Plans Committee of the U.S. Space and Rocket Center pitched around a few ideas like turning the area into a water park similar to the Evergreen Wings and Waves waterpark in Oregon. Check out the pictures below - would be a unique place for sure and could help build year-round revenue which would really help the center's bottom line each year.

God, I hope not exactly like Evergreen. The place is drowning in red ink, being tied to the anchor of Evergreen airlift. They're slowly having to sell off their airplane collection - one at a time- to pay for stuff. The government got into it and some planes are being sold right out from underneath them, including their prized B-17 bomber.
I was just down there a couple of months ago to see the place while they still had the majority of their collection intact.
I get the overall concept of this water park (though I have zero use for one), but I hope to heck that USS&RC doesn't take any pages out of Evergreen's playbook!

That is very interesting information. At the time it was mentioned it was portrayed as a successful venue.

I would love to see pictures of their collection if you have any online.

WesL wrote:That is very interesting information. At the time it was mentioned it was portrayed as a successful venue.

Just Google, "Evergreen Museum bankrupt" or words to that end, and you'll get a bunch of stories on the woes of the place.

WesL wrote:I would love to see pictures of their collection if you have any online.

I don't have any shots of the water park as I didn't go there on my last visit (I live very close to an indoor water park and have never gone there, either) but I did get a bunch of photos. I haven't uploaded many of them, though...



And your truly, sitting in Howard Hughes's seat in the Spruce Goose itself:

And you can always can look at the photos of the museum here:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=spr ... ORM=HDRSC2

WesL wrote:I haven't looked back recently but I seem to remember that two CFOs ago they actually did have it listed as a major line item. It more than likely has a specific line item buried deep in one of the expense categories. I will say this the new CFO they have is pretty [darn] awesome. He had great charts that were easy to understand and he also demonstrated the ability to correctly forecast. Will be interesting to see what he forecasts during the next slow season and better yet if the management/board listens to his advice.

Thank you for all the additional detail. Has the CFO been in the job long? Maybe that's why no cost data... Costs are the one thing that they can control or contain but you need the right information. Variable, fixed, overhead, etc.

It would be nice if they could avoid shooting themselves in the foot.

majtom7 wrote:

WesL wrote:I haven't looked back recently but I seem to remember that two CFOs ago they actually did have it listed as a major line item. It more than likely has a specific line item buried deep in one of the expense categories. I will say this the new CFO they have is pretty [darn] awesome. He had great charts that were easy to understand and he also demonstrated the ability to correctly forecast. Will be interesting to see what he forecasts during the next slow season and better yet if the management/board listens to his advice.

Thank you for all the additional detail. Has the CFO been in the job long? Maybe that's why no cost data... Costs are the one thing that they can control or contain but you need the right information. Variable, fixed, overhead, etc.

The new guy has only been there for a few months. The one before him was there for around a year and the guy before that was there for over 20+ years.