My guess would be a spike in members if a fee changes were made: decrease in costs and penalties to the players. What do you think?
My guess is whatever uptick in membership a decrease in fees might bring in is going to be more than offset by lost revenue.
Stats show 23,317 current members. Granted, there's probably some early 2014 renewals on that list.
7716 pros x $75 = $578,700
15601 ams x $50 = $780,050
Total membership revenue $1,358,750
So if we backed off on those membership fees say just $5 per am and $10 per pro we would get
7716 pros x $65 = $501,540 (-$77,160)
15601 ams x $45 = $702,045 (-$78,005)
Total membership revenue $1,203,585 (-$155,165)
You would need 1188 more pros, and 1734 more ams to become members just to break even on the existing numbers. Could that possibly happen? Sure. But there are fulfillment costs for each membership, so why would the PDGA want to make that much more work for themselves to get the same amount of money? They would have to see much more of an increase in membership than those numbers to make a decrease in price worthwhile.
You're also forgetting that there are thousands of people like myself who choose to "join" the PDGA on a pay as you go basis, by simply paying the $10 add on fee at each event we play. That's still revenue in the PDGA's coffers without the member fulfillment costs.