I'm a member of both AOPA (US) and AOPA (UK) and they are like chalk and cheese. In the US, they are communicative and know how to use the Internet to keep their membership informed about how necessary they are. In the UK, they are run by a paternalistic core, from a bygone era, supported by volunteers with an uncanny knack for killing of any enthusiasm for becoming a member and using their forums. I hope the new website improves their image, but with no change of ethos, they have every opportunity to blow it.
I have to agree with the above.
The magazine is too patronising - the last thing anybody wants to read after graduating from the generally pretty patronising UK PPL training machine.
The leadership is actually visible at most presentation/conferences I have been to, but usually in a reclined orientation and with eyes shut, presumably following a very good lunch.
I suppose it is just apathy... they got themselves into a vicious circle where UK pilots somehow got to think they are not represented, and it continues like that. It's a shame; there are about 20k UK pilots with valid medicals so they could have 20k members.
The AOPA forum on Flyer didn't get off the ground partly due to its aggressive moderation profile. It appears this has now been addressed, but the damage has been done.
US AOPA has a big budget which no European organisation could emulate but they do have skillful people there. Phil Boyer was, I believe, a broadcasting executive in his previous life and he knew how to go about it. I have met him (shortly before he retired) and in a presentation on GPS approaches etc where he totally casually and totally effectively crushed the assembled European officials, who could not wait to leave the room afterwards, before anybody could ask them to comment. It was a real spectacle
AOPA UK was there too, but gently snoozing, although to be fair it was quite warm.