FUD at Flight Options

[Hobbes]

You didn't answer the question.

Why are there so few fractionals if it is a successful business model, and why aren't the existing ones just overflowing with cash and record profits? For the amount of aircraft NJ has, the profit is pretty meager by corporate standards. And the rest are pretty much getting by. Do you really believe union intervention is going to help the industry?

Even the Wizard of Oz broke things down to the most simplistic issues. Magic wasn't needed in that fantasy movie was it? Unions won't create the magic you think they will. Be careful what you ask for...

Let's see, why are there so few fractionals? Could it be that there are only so many entities in the market for a fractional share of a business jet? Some economies of scale do make it so that there needs to be a certain threshold of owners/fractional shares at a given company for it to make sense, henceforth, the market only bears a certain number of fractionals.

Fractional ownership in other segments has sprung up and flourished, such as in small single engine airplane programs using Cirrus aircraft, etc.

The union WILL make the fractional pilot career in the business jet segment a viable career instead of the "stepping stone" position that MS has publicly stated he thinks it should be. NetJets has shown us that very clearly. Even before the 2005 contract they were unionized for YEARS (a decade or more? I am not sure) and it seems to not have destroyed their business plan or careers as they are still flourishing MANY years into being a union shop. Of course, you wouldn't see that, because to you, fractionals did not exist prior to 2005.

Oh yeah, we don't drink kool aid champ. We stand together and demand what is right. Big difference.

 

[B19 Flyer]

B19 has spoken!!!

Fractionals did not exist until 2005.

It must be true because B19 SAID SO!!!


Hey all, if you weren't working for a frac before 2005, what were you working for?

B19, your arrogance is staggering. :nuts:

You were working for a Part 91 operator that didn't have any rest rules, operating standards or maintenance.

There were no structured rules for training, flight operations, no rest rules, no maintenance rules.

Your ignorance of the regulations shocks me. You want a union because they will help things to be "safer" but ignore that DOT and FAA regulations were instituted because it was a free for all.

Tell me... (I know you can't)

Why did the DOT and FAA regulate fractional operators and increase the cost of operations by tenfold if it was perfectly safe?

 

[Fozzy]

You didn't answer the question.

Why are there so few fractionals if it is a successful business model, and why aren't the existing ones just overflowing with cash and record profits? For the amount of aircraft NJ has, the profit is pretty meager by corporate standards. And the rest are pretty much getting by. Do you really believe union intervention is going to help the industry?

Even the Wizard of Oz broke things down to the most simplistic issues. Magic wasn't needed in that fantasy movie was it? Unions won't create the magic you think they will. Be careful what you ask for...

So many things to answer.

First, do you really know how much money NJA makes? Sorry, I don't buy this argument. Management in negotiations never shows a ton of cash coming in. And where do you get the idea our profits are "meager"? Seriously, what are you basing that on?

How many fracs do you want out there? 10? 50? There is only so much flying to be done. I think 3 big players and another 3-5 small players is pretty good. Another off the wall weak point.
Next

As far as the Union helping the "industry". Well, that can come after the Union helps the pilots! Seems to be working at NJA.

 

[Fozzy]

Why did the DOT and FAA regulate fractional operators and increase the cost of operations by tenfold if it was perfectly safe?

Bob,
I never said that, and not sure who did. The fracs needed 91K in a bad way! It was not safe the way things were done. Personally, the feds never go far enough when it comes to aviation. As we know the pilots don't pull the strings.
Union contracts almost always have rules that exceed the FAR's, making the industry safer. (There is one for ya, making the industry better!)

 

[Whoosh!]

Bob, you are the third biggest reason Flight Options is going to eventually fail and dissolve. Right behind sh1thead and Baboo. Just keep fighting your employees... you'll eventually show everybody and come out on top, right? Wrong.

 

[realityman]

All, it's important to keep some things in perspective.
Can anyone tell me how many fatal accidents there have been in the fractional industry? Bueller? Anyone?

Answer: None!!

Now, admittedly, Netjets itself has only recently exploded in growth (the past 10 or 12 years have been huge), and the other fractional players have been around for close to that same time frame. So we don't really have a 50 year history to look at. But even in just going back one decade, what other sector of aviation can boast the kinds of safety numbers the fractionals have put up? GenAv? 91? Charter? 121? 135? Military? Who has gone 10 years without a fatality? There's only one sector my friends. And while it may not be a huge testament to FAA rules, it says a lot about even the worst fractional's policies and the professionalism of the flight crews.

So the question is, with an absolutely stellar safety record, why the new 91K regs issued by the feds?

The answer can really come down to one name, and it's not Netjets. That name: Mark Fruchter.

Who is this guy? He was the owner of a charter company based in Reading, PA. He apparently thought that the fractionals had a huge advantage over the charter outfits because we were not 'encumbered' by the 135 regs and its restrictive policies like the charter outfits were. He led the charge in getting the FAA to examine the 'need' for new regs for the fractional outfits. He also became a vocal member of the F.O.R.C., the committee put together to help come up with the new regs for fractionals. He did all this to try to level the playing field between the incredibly successful fractionals and the charter outfits who were losing clients to the fractionals.

So long story short, the new 91K came about not because of ANY safety issues, it was all based on business and one man's crusade to restrict fractionals.

Anyone who believes otherwise simply hasn't looked at the incident and accident records for fractionals versus every other sector of aviation.

On another note, anyone who doesn't think that the rule of the majority is fair, needs to up and leave this country quickly. After all, if 2/3 of the people vote for a certain presidential candidate, where does that leave the other 1/3? Lots of examples of that kind of democracy in this country. So please keep in mind that if the majority of the pilots vote in a union, the minority will just have to live with it. Maybe it doesn't seem fair, but that's how this country operates. It also works that if the majority does NOT want a union, the minority will have to live with that too.

As some annoying person on this board said, pilots have choices these days. If a majority wants to fight for better conditions, the minority that doesn't want to fight can always find another job. At least, that's what I've been hearing from someone here.

 

[fischman]

You were working for a Part 91 operator that didn't have any rest rules, operating standards or maintenance.

There were no structured rules for training, flight operations, no rest rules, no maintenance rules.

Your ignorance of the regulations shocks me. You want a union because they will help things to be "safer" but ignore that DOT and FAA regulations were instituted because it was a free for all.

Tell me... (I know you can't)

Why did the DOT and FAA regulate fractional operators and increase the cost of operations by tenfold if it was perfectly safe?

Again, your lack of knowledge of the industry comes forth.

NetJets operates under 3 parts of the FAR's

91- usually used for ferry flights, or crew repositions.

91K- used for most NetJets owner trips.

135- as required, usually used for MarquisJet trips.

When it comes to Mx, the most restrictive trumps, therefore the airplanes have a progressive Mx cycle that meets or exceeds 135 requirements.

"Tell me... (I know you can't)

Why did the DOT and FAA regulate fractional operators and increase the cost of operations by tenfold if it was perfectly safe"

I guess ignorance was part of the lunch menu today B19? In all actuality, NetJets worked closely with the FAA to help write part 91K as we are the largest fractional operator, and are effected by it every day. Richard Santulli realized the writing on the wall, and is ADAMANT about our crews benefiting from the language of these regs, most specifically fatigue rules.

As an industry leader we in fact did have SOP's before 91K.

Again, I beg you, get off your high horse and do some research before looking like a fool. YOU ARE WRONG about this.

 

[dime line]

You didn't answer the question. B19

.

Why are there so few fractionals if it is a successful business model, and why aren't the existing ones just overflowing with cash and record profits? For the amount of aircraft NJ has, the profit is pretty meager by corporate standards. And the rest are pretty much getting by. Do you really believe union intervention is going to help the industry?

Even the Wizard of Oz broke things down to the most simplistic issues. Magic wasn't needed in that fantasy movie was it? Unions won't create the magic you think they will. Be careful what you ask for...

DUDE U NEVER ANSWER QUESTIONS

 

[B19 Flyer]

Again, your lack of knowledge of the industry comes forth.

NetJets operates under 3 parts of the FAR's

91- usually used for ferry flights, or crew repositions.

91K- used for most NetJets owner trips.

135- as required, usually used for MarquisJet trips.

When it comes to Mx, the most restrictive trumps, therefore the airplanes have a progressive Mx cycle that meets or exceeds 135 requirements.

"Tell me... (I know you can't)

Why did the DOT and FAA regulate fractional operators and increase the cost of operations by tenfold if it was perfectly safe"

I guess ignorance was part of the lunch menu today B19? In all actuality, NetJets worked closely with the FAA to help write part 91K as we are the largest fractional operator, and are effected by it every day. Richard Santulli realized the writing on the wall, and is ADAMANT about our crews benefiting from the language of these regs, most specifically fatigue rules.

As an industry leader we in fact did have SOP's before 91K.

Again, I beg you, get off your high horse and do some research before looking like a fool. YOU ARE WRONG about this.

No, I'm not wrong. You pretty much agreed with what I said. It needed to be regulated.

Why?

Because it was a free-for-all before February of 2005. In February of 2005, fractional ownership became expensive, thus, it's still an unproven business model using the current regs.

I'll stay on my high non-union horse thank you.

 

[B19 Flyer]

All, it's important to keep some things in perspective.
Can anyone tell me how many fatal accidents there have been in the fractional industry? Bueller? Anyone?

Answer: None!!

Now, admittedly, Netjets itself has only recently exploded in growth (the past 10 or 12 years have been huge), and the other fractional players have been around for close to that same time frame. So we don't really have a 50 year history to look at. But even in just going back one decade, what other sector of aviation can boast the kinds of safety numbers the fractionals have put up? GenAv? 91? Charter? 121? 135? Military? Who has gone 10 years without a fatality? There's only one sector my friends. And while it may not be a huge testament to FAA rules, it says a lot about even the worst fractional's policies and the professionalism of the flight crews.

So the question is, with an absolutely stellar safety record, why the new 91K regs issued by the feds?

The answer can really come down to one name, and it's not Netjets. That name: Mark Fruchter.

Who is this guy? He was the owner of a charter company based in Reading, PA. He apparently thought that the fractionals had a huge advantage over the charter outfits because we were not 'encumbered' by the 135 regs and its restrictive policies like the charter outfits were. He led the charge in getting the FAA to examine the 'need' for new regs for the fractional outfits. He also became a vocal member of the F.O.R.C., the committee put together to help come up with the new regs for fractionals. He did all this to try to level the playing field between the incredibly successful fractionals and the charter outfits who were losing clients to the fractionals.

So long story short, the new 91K came about not because of ANY safety issues, it was all based on business and one man's crusade to restrict fractionals.

Anyone who believes otherwise simply hasn't looked at the incident and accident records for fractionals versus every other sector of aviation.

On another note, anyone who doesn't think that the rule of the majority is fair, needs to up and leave this country quickly. After all, if 2/3 of the people vote for a certain presidential candidate, where does that leave the other 1/3? Lots of examples of that kind of democracy in this country. So please keep in mind that if the majority of the pilots vote in a union, the minority will just have to live with it. Maybe it doesn't seem fair, but that's how this country operates. It also works that if the majority does NOT want a union, the minority will have to live with that too.

As some annoying person on this board said, pilots have choices these days. If a majority wants to fight for better conditions, the minority that doesn't want to fight can always find another job. At least, that's what I've been hearing from someone here.

It appears as though you are qualifying safety in terms of fatalities. I wish it were that easy. I've seen the word "ignorance" thrown around a lot today.

You defined it best.