Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

When asking the GOV'T for Money, don't fly your Corporate Jet!!!!!

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
No, General,, I am staying on topic.

The reason these CEOs fly private is because of the terrible service and security that most of the airlines are providing. Period.

I am not going to debate whether these folks are worth the salaries and bonus they get, that is for their Board of Directors to figure out. But, if you are paying someone in the millions of dollars a year, you want that guy to be productive. A lot. One can easily be very productive on a private flight.
One simply cannot be productive on the airlines, with all the craziness that goes on.
I also will not play silly and throw in accidents and incidents as described above, because that could happen to any industry. I DID include the overflight, because that was just plain stupid. I suspect we both will agree on that.

Hung

You need to re-read the article that is the topic of this thread. If they are BEGGING for money, stay off corporate jets. It is common sense. If you are doing very well, and the board approves it, fly corporate all you want. Waste away if you need to. Whatever.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
You need to re-read the article that is the topic of this thread. If they are BEGGING for money, stay off corporate jets. It is common sense. If you are doing very well, and the board approves it, fly corporate all you want. Waste away if you need to. Whatever.


Bye Bye--General Lee

Yes In any job or business or any facet in life a few people will abuse or misuse

Yes private or corporate aviation is expensive. it is by no means a waste, its a savings. It is a hugh time savings. I would not want management of the companies im invested in to waste 2 or 3 days to travel to get a business meeting in. when it can be done in a day or less. a lot of meetings need to be done face to face

You will never see an airline adjust their schedule, so a company can get their management to a meeting so they can do business. In Business meetings pop up all the time, sometimes you just need to go with very little notice, the airlines can not acommadate this so now you would lose that business if it wasn't for corporate avaiation, if a company had to rely on airlines to get them there in time to make the deal a lot of business will be lost.

Corporate or private aviation flys on the clients or their companys schedule to meet their needs. "Airlines never do and never will"

Some people are just very short sighted
 
Last edited:
Am I missing something here? I didn't see anything in the article about the banks asking for more money. I was a meeting about what happened and why.

Since all money lent to the banks (most of them) was repaid with a huge profit to the government, I say give them some more. If these banks are making a profit now then it's only the business of the stockholders if they want to fly the corporate jet.
 
Why do you guys bother with this boob? His opinions mean nothing. A good debate is one thing. It's not possible with someone who's arrogance is surpased only by his ignorance.
 
You need to re-read the article that is the topic of this thread. If they are BEGGING for money, stay off corporate jets. It is common sense. If you are doing very well, and the board approves it, fly corporate all you want. Waste away if you need to. Whatever.


Bye Bye--General Lee
What % of your 401K was invested in Goldman Sachs last year?
"You NEED me on that plane. You WANT me on that plane."
 
Maybe if airline travel was reliable, safer, efficient, and a pleasant experience, maybe they would.

I can think of another large group of businesses who took money from the government to survive.....post 9/11.

The airlines are their own worst enemy.


It is not like the CEOs will have less security

By the way, how many people have tried to blow up their underwear on a corporate jet?? How many biz jets have been hijacked and flown into buildings?
 
Maybe if airline travel was reliable, safer, efficient, and a pleasant experience, maybe they would.

I can think of another large group of businesses who took money from the government to survive.....post 9/11.

The airlines are their own worst enemy.




By the way, how many people have tried to blow up their underwear on a corporate jet?? How many biz jets have been hijacked and flown into buildings?

How many people have tried nefarious acts on corporate planes? Good question, we don't know. Could a GIII hurt a building? You bet. That is why Congress and the TSA are looking into better security for that sector. Do you know every customer at a fractional? When people buy Marquis Cards, are they known well by Netjets employees? Anyone can buy one, and that makes it difficult. Are the passengers frisked or luggage checked? That may need to change. Don't think it couldn't happen to you. I love your over confidence. Until 9-11, we never had to really think about it on the airline side either.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
What % of your 401K was invested in Goldman Sachs last year?
"You NEED me on that plane. You WANT me on that plane."

Zero. And I did well my 401K and other investments.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Looking at my profile, it is either DL, AA, or CAL. Who do you fly for?


Bye Bye--General Lee

He's afraid to id his employer, because of the awful example he sets for pilots. :puke:
There wasn't a dry eye in the FBO from where that GIII left.
I witnessed the pain and anguish at LAX when the news broke.
I'm at a loss of words for someone to stoop so low to try and instigate a small jet CR7 vs. corporate pilot argument.
Again, an awful example of an (alleged) pilot.
:puke:
 
Last edited:
You mentioned safety...and facts prove that your assertion is wrong.

A CEO is NOT safer flying on the airlines...FACT!

You have put faith in the tards that run and work TSA...love that confidence. They FAIL on a regular basis. You also allow your MX and ramp folks to bypass any sort of security...real smart there.
 
You mentioned safety...and facts prove that your assertion is wrong.

A CEO is NOT safer flying on the airlines...FACT!

You have put faith in the tards that run and work TSA...love that confidence. They FAIL on a regular basis. You also allow your MX and ramp folks to bypass any sort of security...real smart there.

The Gen will need a newspaper: USA Today, or supermarket tabloid: National Enquirer, article for reference. He'll then tie in a passive aggressive NJA management's gonna slash your jobs rant to support his inferiority complex .
 
He's afraid to id his employer, because of the awful example he sets for pilots. :puke:
There wasn't a dry eye in the FBO from where that GIII left.
I witnessed the pain and anguish at LAX when the news broke.
I'm at a loss of words for someone to stoop so low to try and instigate a small jet CR7 vs. corporate pilot argument.
Again, an awful example of an (alleged) pilot.
:puke:

One guy with an opinion can change your own opinion about a whole group of pilots? Wow, you really are a simpleton. Opecjet stated all pilots probably land on taxiways, and I stated then that corporate aviation has it's risks too, and risktakers. Time for you to understand people can have an opinion on ANYTHING. This is an anonymous opinion board. Also, why were there 15 pax on that GIII?


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
The Gen will need a newspaper: USA Today, or supermarket tabloid: National Enquirer, article for reference. He'll then tie in a passive aggressive NJA management's gonna slash your jobs rant to support his inferiority complex .

Yeah, Reuters or AP don't count........let me guess, you only listen to Glen Beck.....

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
You mentioned safety...and facts prove that your assertion is wrong.

A CEO is NOT safer flying on the airlines...FACT!

You have put faith in the tards that run and work TSA...love that confidence. They FAIL on a regular basis. You also allow your MX and ramp folks to bypass any sort of security...real smart there.

DJ AM (now dead) would have disagreed with that. (after the CAE accident)

And do FBO rampers go through security??? How about backround checks? Same on your side, buddy. There is NO checking ANY bags at your FBOs, which means the airlines probably catch MOST of the contraband, vs NONE at the FBOs. Have you ever told a customer he couldn't carry something onboard? Riiiiight. Talk about smart---you aren't. I hope that all changes soon. We can't be too safe out there you know....


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
He's afraid to id his employer, because of the awful example he sets for pilots. :puke:
There wasn't a dry eye in the FBO from where that GIII left.
I witnessed the pain and anguish at LAX when the news broke.
I'm at a loss of words for someone to stoop so low to try and instigate a small jet CR7 vs. corporate pilot argument.
Again, an awful example of an (alleged) pilot.
:puke:

He works for Delta.
 
One guy with an opinion can change your own opinion about a whole group of pilots? Wow, you really are a simpleton. Opecjet stated all pilots probably land on taxiways, and I stated then that corporate aviation has it's risks too, and risktakers. Time for you to understand people can have an opinion on ANYTHING. This is an anonymous opinion board. Also, why were there 15 pax on that GIII?


Bye Bye--General Lee
Or maybe you're afraid you couldn't handle the embarrassment of being identified?
Sorry there's a huge gap between playing Don't Ever Land There Again and bringing up the deaths of the ASE GIII pax.
Nope, not gonna whistle past the graveyard and joke about the TSA or fatal accidents and play who is safer.

Shame on you.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top