Club rules: ownership vs. scheduling rights

Andrew Gideon wrote:

I posted here recently that the club to which I belong in Northern NJ:

http://flyingclub.org

has some memberships available. Through an odd chain of reasoning (and
searching the 'net for comparable clubs), I came upon what I found to be an
interesting thought. But is it "good" interesting or "bad" interesting?

I'm curious if any clubs use anything like this, or if it is a completely
foolish idea.

The scheduling policy we're currently using involves 4 points. A booking of
up to four hours costs a point; a booking over four hours (up to the
two-week limit) costs two points. So a member can have four short bookings
scheduled, two long bookings scheduled, or two short and one long bookings
scheduled.

This is pretty basic, works well, and schedulemaster supports it.

Club members are also owners, having an equity stake (which is returned when
one leaves).

So here's my thought: Do some clubs have similar rules, but with the option
to "purchase" additional points by purchasing additional equity?

- Andrew

We (the Westchester Flying Club, www.wfc-hpn.org) also have rules
limiting reservations, as I'm sure every other flying club in the world
does. Our work differently than yours do, but we're "one member, one
vote", and "one member, one quota". I don't think the idea that a
member could purchase more quota would go over very well with us.

Scheduling is a rather contentious issue. We've had members almost
total airplanes and had less said about it than if somebody violates our
scheduling quota rules.

But, you say that what you've got works well for you. Given that it
works (which I define as keeping members from engaging in fist-fights at
meetings), I think you would be foolish to change anything.