Some Owners Have Gripes too (And Sympathy for Crews)

[magoo112]

Yes, yes, yes!!! Again, I have been amazed in the corporate world at how charter, fractional and management companies go overboard for the worst customers; yet ignore their high-quality bread-and-butter, low-maintenance customers. Then again, I suppose those with sucker-shaped mouths always drift towards the slime on the bottom...

Thank you! I see junkets all the time for operators trying to entice people to buy a share in a jet. They make overblown simplified promises and spend millions on ad campaigns to bring in “penny pincher” owners who will complain about service and treat the crews as if they were slaves. I think that there should probably be some more owner input given to how crews are compensated. I know that it wouldnt burn a hole in my pocket to have higher operating costs to help out the guy in the front seat charged with keeping me alive. You are also right that that the only time I EVER got a concession from either operator was by screaming. Well guess what, I did not sign on so that I could have another headache in my life but the opposite. I don't like to yell. If thats who operators are looking for as customers, then I was in the wrong game.

Thankfully now I charter from an operator who knows me, gets me the same plane, and takes responsibility for screwups (which are less prevalent when there arent 50 people meddling on 1 task).

As to the promises made by frac jet operators that their planes are "mansions in the sky." They need to get off their high horse. It's a damn plane. If I wanted a home in the air, I'd put wings on my house. I'm in this game for the convenience of Private Jet travel only. Not for hearing promises which cant be met and dealing with headaches I dont need. By appealing to people who want 5 star meals in the air, you are dealing with people who should probably own their own plane and who have way too unrealistic reservations. After all, most people flying in a G-V won't end up next to the toilet when they dine at Balthazar.

 

[Cautious Belly]

Wow! Maybe a FracJet manager will read your post and give us all $200K raises!!

 

[Diesel]

Interesting that you were owning a GIV that wasn't even in contract negotiations and the pilots were being blamed. They are non union on the Gwhiz stuff.

While I think what you say is dead on most owners don't have your view and I can't even prove you are an owner much like you can't prove I'm a pilot.

Your points are dead on but hey it's the internet everyone is right!

 

[cjdriver]

What did we have to do? Put them in the aisle. The FA on that flight found this rather amusing, but I did not.

Wow, never let them put anything in the aisle, your life may depend on it.

 

[magoo112]

Interesting that you were owning a GIV that wasn't even in contract negotiations and the pilots were being blamed. They are non union on the Gwhiz stuff.

Well, when owners read the WSJ and see the words "union" and "NetJets" in the same article, they automatically assume the worst. Do I love the idea of a union? No. But it is at times necessary. Pilot demands weren’t unreasonable and owners, unlike commercial passenger, are willing to pay to give the pilots what they want. More and more corporations are moving to a frac strategy as corporate flight departments have become incredibly unpopular as of late. It was management’s failed business strategy of always depending on new customers to generate profit which caused the NetJets muckup in the first place. Customer service, trying to use scare tactics, were playing to the lowest common denominator. It worked. I had dinner with who just invested in a share of a GV thought the glory days of private jet travel were over and it was a push to Delta Airlines misery. Customer service and management was under the assumption that passengers were going to “storm the cockpit” and scare a pilot out of demanding more money.

While I think what you say is dead on most owners don't have your view and I can't even prove you are an owner much like you can't prove I'm a pilot.

Well although you may not think I am a (former) owner, you should know that my view is more prevalent than you would believe on the owner side. It doesn't matter to use, we think you guys deserve what the market demands. Obviously NetJets caving ultimately was a tacit admission that their customers would be most unhappy if their holidays and meetings were ruined by massive charter substitutions followed by a rapid sell-off of shares.

Yes, this is the internet. No, I don't always agree with pilots. But when a company such as NetJets, FlexJet, or FLOPS asserts that we (owners) own the jet and the "company" works for us, then we demand results. Otherwise, just as if we owned the plane free and clear, we can change who manages our planes for us.

I'll go a step further, although management and the call centers will attempt to pretend as if they don’t work for owners and only the pilots do, management is ultimately responsible for the collective. If they want to piss us off, go ahead--but be prepared to run a bevy of ad campaigns to replace formerly satisfied customers.

This isn't the airlines, we are willing to pay for service (read: convenience). We aren't willing to pay for airline-style BS. The flight crews are first rate, but management cannot maintain quality customer care.

More and more I know friends who enter into joint agreements where three or more people will jointly own a large, medium and small jet and have the plane managed. They allot time for use and compensate each other for extended use (or lease an additional plane). If the need for private aircraft travel is great enough, these plans are working quite well--with the added benefit of knowing the people who fly you and the plane you fly on.

I will say this though. Many owners do read this, just as many CEO’s read about what is said about them on Yahoo bulletin boards and chatrooms. I can assure people on here that management at the fracs read this. It makes the gold that was once a focus group look like pure drivel. If things got better, I’d go back. But I would need to see real change first.

 

[2EASYPilot]

More and more corporations are moving to a frac strategy as corporate flight departments have become incredibly unpopular as of late.


While I certainly appreciate your POV, I believe what is giving corporate aircraft ownership a black eye is the abuse of egocentic CEO's. My management does not believe in personal use of the aircraft, only business. Given we have a very high utilization rate the fractional model does not work for us. I know, we hired a consultant to do the numbers for us, in excess of a million more. Not a good option unless you merely are interested in keeping a low profile. What was pointed out to us was be careful of the fine print in fractional contracts, it will drive the costs right off the chart.
The best to you in your travels.

 

[Corona]

Yes, this is the internet. No, I don't always agree with pilots. But when a company such as NetJets, FlexJet, or FLOPS asserts that we (owners) own the jet and the "company" works for us, then we demand results. Otherwise, just as if we owned the plane free and clear, we can change who manages our planes for us.

I'll go a step further, although management and the call centers will attempt to pretend as if they don’t work for owners and only the pilots do, management is ultimately responsible for the collective. If they want to piss us off, go ahead--but be prepared to run a bevy of ad campaigns to replace formerly satisfied customers.

This isn't the airlines, we are willing to pay for service (read: convenience). We aren't willing to pay for airline-style BS. The flight crews are first rate, but management cannot maintain quality customer care.

I will say this though. Many owners do read this, just as many CEO’s read about what is said about them on Yahoo bulletin boards and chatrooms. I can assure people on here that management at the fracs read this. It makes the gold that was once a focus group look like pure drivel. If things got better, I’d go back. But I would need to see real change first.

OK magoo112; your posts have piqued my interest. I'm guessing that by what you've said here about owning corporate jets that you are successful in the business world.

Do you think you (or someone like you) could personally manage NJ (or Flex/Flt Options) and implement your suggested improvements while maintaining profitability and capacity for growth? This is a serious inquiry here; no flame intended...

C

 

[jetwash]

[COLOR=black
[COLOR=black]Well although you may not think I am a (former) owner, you should know that my view is more prevalent than you would believe on the owner side. /SIZE][/FONT]

After reading Magoo112's posts I have to say that he is for real.
The give away was that the posts were well thought out and the spelling and grammer were correct.:laugh:

How many pilots can write like that:0

 

[JustInfo]

Pffffffffft, Jetwash, that was fluid coming out my nose as I read your post! Now that was funny, thanks!

 

[magoo112]

OK magoo112; your posts have piqued my interest. I'm guessing that by what you've said here about owning corporate jets that you are successful in the business world. C

Well, I certainly thank you for your praise.
For some background, I actually am the CEO of a public company that does not have an extensive need for travel and cannot justify (although my employees may feel we should) owning a private aircraft. I feel shareholder responsibility is crucial; thus if I needed a jet, I would own one. If I have to charter a jet I will. However if I have to get to Tokyo, there are 7 flights per day from JFK-NRT that can carry me comfortably and luxuriously. If I need to go from JFK-LAX and am not on a set schedule, why should I have my company spend 70k to charter me a plane to get me there and satisfy my ego? The answer is, I don’t. On the other hand, if a mid-level employee is visiting Dahlonega, GA, Nashville, Waco, and other spots off the track of the commercial airline “Riviera” than he or she can charter a small jet to do their work in one day so he doesn’t miss four days of work.

For personal travel, I will say I prefer the Private Aircraft as my family enjoys it and it’s convenient for our changing schedules and destinations. NEVER would I behave as a Tyco or an Enron CEO and have the shareholders of my company pay for a dog to be sent to NYC to be groomed and sent to us on a vacation in one day. Nor does my company pay for ANY personal travel. I feel sad this is not the norm, but I was raised to be honest. I feel such CEOs are irresponsible and their actions will (and usually do) lead to their downfall. Case in point, we acquired a company centered on one region of the USA (three states to be exact). All of their outfits were near major airports and their home office was near a hub for a major carrier. Yet somehow, through the magic of “creative accounting”, they were able to justify buying a G-III that was mainly used by the CEOs wife. Well, that plane was the first extravagant asset sold off.

Do you think you (or someone like you) could personally manage NJ (or Flex/Flt Options) and implement your suggested improvements while maintaining profitability and capacity for growth? This is a serious inquiry here; no flame intended...

I appreciate your answer. I am guessing you have/had a position at one of the fracs and feel as I do.
It is inevitable that someone with responsibility turns frac outfits around. One of the beauties of the concept is that ideally an owner should be able to logon to a website or pick up a phone and get a plane with no hassle. Sadly, this turns out not to be what occurs. The outfits have seemed to require owner input in managing the planes constantly. Further they don’t follow through on promises. Look, anyone who can afford a share is smart enough to realize that a Falcon 50 is NOT suitable replacement for a G-IV, nor is a vintage 601 for a 604. There is no recourse for an owner when he or she constantly gets charter replacements, even on trips booked in advance. The fracs have FAILED here. Don’t lie (which is what they are doing), don’t tell an owner that their plane will have range to go from TEB-EGE if you are assuming there is light baggage, two pax, and there are perfect conditions for flight, don’t make the customer mad. The more spent on these deals, the more angry an owner will be when he or she doesn’t get what is promised.

The “worse case” scenario for fracs is something they must not believe can happen. Pilots must be well rested, paid and happy. End of story. G-d forbid a plane crashes with Tiger Woods or a billionaire and his young family and it is due to pilot fatigue or getting a charter replacement with sub-standard pilots, owners will leave like rats on a ship. The only option would be to switch to a Marquis Card / charter model as there will be a surplus of aircraft. This can all be avoided.

How? RAISE the costs of entry, the operating costs, and the hourlies. SAY NO. Hey, if the plane can’t do something, it will be a pain for them and for me if I find out on my first vacation rather than hearing “Sorry Mr. xxx, this plane cant do that. We have another aircraft that may be better suited for yoru needs.” TELL the owners what goes on. I don’t want to find out from a pilot or the WSJ or an internet forum they are unhappy. If pilots have real concerns, there is an obvious solution. As management should ideally be managing my aircraft, they should tell me what goes on. There is currently NO TRANSPARENCY. There should be annual or quarterly reports (similar to a Berkshire Hathaway shareholder letter) with a “state of the program” letter. Maybe there should be a way for owners to vote on KEY ISSUES like pilot pay. We aren’t cheap, we know you guys have kids to put in school, kitchens to remodel, mouths to feed; I would be surprised if an owner couldn’t acknowledge this. In addition, if costs are only recouped by new owners entering the program, well then it is the frac’s responsibility to rectify the situation. Their lack of planning DOES BECOME my problem. Considering there are only so many people in the country able to buy a share or a card, it seems logical to raise fees for current owners. My co-op fees rise, my parking garage fees rise, hell, taxi fees rise. There is no reason why the people who manage our aircraft aren’t ensuring that in the event of a lack of new owners that fees can cover a good portion of payroll and bills. My co-op isn’t going to say that our only source of income will be new owners. It would be dumb (for lack of any better adjective). Why should fracs operate differently?

So the answer you are looking for is yes, I think I could do a better job. Would I desire to? No. Do I think that management at any of these outfits will do a thing until they either A.) Go bankrupt, B.) Suffer a fatigue related crash, or C.) Are crippled by a strike? No. It seems that there is a lack of communication and they will keep adding more owners to the deck of cards until it crumbles. But it can be done, and one of the three fracs will disappear and deal with a s***load of unhappy owners before the other two wake up and smell the Starbucks.