Lord knows much of what Ricci did in the past doesn't deserve to be defended. That said, some of what follows will read like I'm defending him. Just my opinion, take it or leave it.
It is certainly true that when Ricci and Rossi were summarily waltzed out the door, we were losing BIG $$$. The original business model failed at the point where share sales slowed significantly, compelling the company to make money on the operational side or at least not lose the vast dollar amounts we were hemorraging every month. This was a problem for all fractionals, not just FlOps. However, it was exacerbated here by our utilization of maintenance intensive, "previously enjoyed" aircraft as the core of the business model. The combining of the RTA and FlOps fleets was not handled well. Much of the schenanigans that went on with parts swapping, etc was not only unethical, but probably illegal.
But there was some genious in the original business model. By discounting fractional shares in the manner FlOps did, it opened up private jet access to a completely new tier of clients that were very reluctant to pay the high cost of admission being charged by NJA, Flex, et al. I think one would agree that once people of means get a taste of private jet access, it is addictive like crack. And the FlOps business model gave a lot more people a taste, if you will. So in that regard I see the original FlOps business model as being very good for the industry as a whole.
The other thing Ricci figured out was that he was going to sell "service", and that his pilots were the front line marketing people. Keeping the pilots happy was and (as MS knows but won't accept) is still important from a business standpoint. One need look no further than the NJA contract ratification and their subsequent business gains for confirmation of this philosophy.
Had Ricci been able to navigate the business through the tough times I believe he would have been successful at keeping the union out. He would have found a way to maintain his philosophy of keeping the pilots happy, therefore no union would be needed (again, HIS philosophy). But those days are gone as we're getting closer every day to our first contract. (I believe this is good thing)
The next CEO (and, there WILL be a next CEO) will have it much easier. The pilot labor issues will be resolved for a time and he will only have to manage the results of the bargaining agreement. In a perfect world, the cost of pilot labor will be an easy number for him to budget (although, we know that until they figure out how to properly schedule and follow the requirements of the contract they will spend a lot of needless $$ in OT and greivance payouts). This will leave him in a position with more time to find new and creative ways to expand the business, thereby increseasing the revenue stream. But frankly I don't think the person I just described is either MS or Ricci.
