I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.

I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
information.

1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
indirect operating costs?

2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like the
Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short of
looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?

3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet RVSM
certification?

4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?

TIA,
Ed

nobody wrote:

> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
> both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> information.
>
> 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> indirect operating costs?
>
> 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like the
> Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short of
> looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
> an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
> 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet RVSM
> certification?
>
> 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
> TIA,
> Ed
>
>

You might try to contact the flight department of a local corporation or
two. They may or may not be willing to share cost data. Also, a local
charter operator might be of assistance. I'm not that familiar with the
NBAA, but they might have something as well.


Matt

A good pilot alone will take up half of your 80-120K, you will most
likely need two.
Michelle

nobody wrote:

>I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
>I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
>versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
>both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
>spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
>products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
>information.
>
>1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
>indirect operating costs?
>
>2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like the
>Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short of
>looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
>an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
>3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
>need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet RVSM
>certification?
>
>4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
>TIA,
>Ed
>
>
>
>

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 08:08:09 GMT, "nobody" > wrote:

>
>
>I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.

>I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
>versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
>both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers.

Me either, but I do know enough to say that outright ownership is
going to be impossible for $100k/year, especially if opportunity cost
or loan payments are considered. The loan payment on most jets will
approach $100k/year. Throw in a hangar rent, insurance, and a
corporate pilot (or two), and you will have hit $100k without going
anywhere. You could probably leaseback the jet to the local
charter/FBO operation to help defray the fixed costs, but I have a
hard time believing a jet leaseback can make it financially feasible.

Charter will be expensive too, but then again, so are the airlines if
the trips are last minute and to out of the way destinations. It is
easy to spend $1000/ticket. If you are flying 3-6 people via $1000
airline tickets, givent the time savings and flexibility involved, a
charter may make sense instead.

>2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like the
>Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short of
>looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
>an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
>3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
>need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet RVSM
>certification?

Many of the older jets use fuel inefficient engines that will increase
hourly fuel costs. Also, many older jets are so loud that they are
limited in terms of when & what airports they can use. One other
consideration is runway length. If you are flying to out of the way
destinations, a 350 kt Citation (which requires less than 3500ft of
runway) may be much quicker door-door than a 500kt Lear that requires
5000+ ft runways.

Ops figures for several of the Citation series can be found at:
http://www.risingup.com

Last, I would spend some time at this website - NBAA has published
many articles that address your situation and your questions.
http://web.nbaa.org/public/about/library/

-Nathan

NBAA?

And accountant that specializes in aviation?

Matt,

My company is in the business of doing those kinds of studies. One
thing I can say with confidence is there is no way you can own a jet
cheaper than taking the airlines. When people or companies decide to
get their own aircraft, it is some of the same reasons you own your
own car. Public transportation is certainly cheaper.

Ego - I always wanted my own (The Jones's deal)
My own space
Point to point transportation
Can't get there from here
Fits my lifestyle

Can it be cheaper? - never. I don't get involved with small older
jets, but budget about $1M a year to operate a larger one.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Blanche wrote:
>
> NBAA?

National Business Aircraft Association.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 08:08:09 GMT, "nobody" >
wrote:

>Our company spends 80K - 120K
>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.


Just from what I know about operating/owning small aircraft, and the
charter business, you're doing pretty well right now, and any other
alternative will be significantly more expensive.

My .02.
z

nobody wrote:
> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.

If you're goal is purely to save money on airfare, you WILL not succeed in most
circumstances.

You will need to factor in all the other things like ground connections if you
fly to places without scheduled air service regularly, and the time your employees
spend down due to the inherent time overheads in flying commercially.

Michelle P wrote:
> A good pilot alone will take up half of your 80-120K, you will most
> likely need two.
>
Which is why the fractional ownership stuff comes with fractional pilots
as well :-0

contact NBAA, National Business Aircraft Assoc

BT

"nobody" > wrote in message
om...
>
>
> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
> 120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
> asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
> both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> information.
>
> 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> indirect operating costs?
>
> 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
> the
> Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short
> of
> looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
> an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
> 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
> RVSM
> certification?
>
> 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
> TIA,
> Ed
>
>

There is no way to financially justify the cost of an airplane and flight crew.
IMHO it can only be justified where the costs involved are outweighed by the
convenience and speed with which various corporate "entities" can be whisked
from Hither to Yon. When a good portion of the company business is dependent
upon company brass/sales/support people getting to customer sites quickly
and often then it is just factored into the "cost of doing business".

The company bean counters have to find a way to write it off, pass it on to
the customers, make it up with increased positive cash flow or take it out of
employees paychecks. Usually its a combination of all three.



nobody wrote:
> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
> both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> information.
>
> 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> indirect operating costs?
>
> 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like the
> Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short of
> looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
> an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
> 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet RVSM
> certification?
>
> 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
> TIA,
> Ed
>
>

>
> nobody wrote:
>
>>I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
>>120K
>>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
>>asked
>>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
>>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>>
>>I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
>>versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
>>both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
>>spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
>>products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
>>information.
>>
>>1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
>>indirect operating costs?
>>
>>2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
>>the
>>Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short
>>of
>>looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
>>an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>>
>>3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
>>need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
>>RVSM
>>certification?
>>
>>4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>>
>>TIA,
>>Ed
>>


1) There are some reports you can get Conklin and Decker I believe.

2) I would be really interested to hear what business you are in and how
your customers would find a good, non biased source. Short of consumer
goods, there really is no such thing. At any rate, do not bother. None of
those models will likely fit the needs you have described and save you
money. A jet's value is often a reflection of operating costs (much like
piston twins being cheaper than a similar single when old). Jets under a
million are often costly to operate, which is why they can be had so
cheaply.

3) Only your boss can answer that question. How cheap, slow, and light can
he go? If the same people are doing all the traveling, and they are willing
to become pilots, you could be in good shape with a couple Mooney's. OTOH,
many of the folks you need to move may be scared of anything with a prop.

4) Much of this is affected by risk. You can likely get a guy to manage and
fly the plane for 60 to 80, but you also will spend training money on him.
These costs are reflected in the C+D. He also will not be REALLY full time.
If your corporate culture will demand this guy fits in like the rest of the
mucks, you will end up paying more or having turnover.

Buying your own corporate jet will not save money from a cost only
perspective.

If you want something to take to your boss, talk to Western Airways at SGR
and talk to some of these card companies like Marquis. Get an idea of the
possibilities and lay out a trial plan with business objectives for the
trial. You want to determine if the benefits and savings in other areas
(time, ground travel, hotel, etc.) are worth further study in alternate
transportation methods. Experiment with a charter of a low cost plane and
one of the fractional use cards for the top guys to try out. If they want
to go forward after those trials it will likely be worthwhile to talk to a
consultant.

You will find that the lower cost an employ is, the better it is send them
comercial.

Also, if you are going from Houston to other large metro's at either coast,
its going to be hard to beat the regular carriers unless you can identify
ground time savings using specific airports on both ends. OTOH, if you want
to go from Houston to Shrevesport you might as well buy a plane.

Lastly, worry less about bias at first. If Cessna can't make it look good
to buy their plane, then why worry about their bias?

Don Hammer wrote:

> Matt,
>
> My company is in the business of doing those kinds of studies. One
> thing I can say with confidence is there is no way you can own a jet
> cheaper than taking the airlines. When people or companies decide to
> get their own aircraft, it is some of the same reasons you own your
> own car. Public transportation is certainly cheaper.
>
> Ego - I always wanted my own (The Jones's deal)
> My own space
> Point to point transportation
> Can't get there from here
> Fits my lifestyle
>
> Can it be cheaper? - never. I don't get involved with small older
> jets, but budget about $1M a year to operate a larger one.

I never said it would be cheaper, I was just providing some ideas for
him as to how to obtain representative costs.

Another big reason nowadays is security for corporate executives. And
if you consider the cost per hour of a CEO in the equation, then often a
corporate aircraft will save the company money compared to using public
transportation and the additional time that consumes. Keep in mind that
many CEO's make upwards of $1MM annually. If you figure 2,000 working
hours, that is $500/hour. If you add 4-6 hours to every trip for the
CEO to take an airline flight, that is a fair chunk of change. It may
still not make the corporate airplane more cost effective, but combined
with the other advantages you list above, it can make the decision much
more logical.

And if you use a fractional ownership program, it gets even better.


Matt

I saw some interesting stuff at www.sentientjet.com. Looks like somewhere
between a charter and fractional. I think you pay an upfront fee, and they
schedule the charter for you, supposedly at a better rate.

I think they simply act as a dispatcher. It may or not be what you're
looking for.

Good luck.


"nobody" > wrote in message
om...
>
>
> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
> both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> information.
>
> 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> indirect operating costs?
>
> 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
the
> Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short
of
> looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
> an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
> 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
RVSM
> certification?
>
> 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
> TIA,
> Ed
>
>

On 12-Dec-2004, zatatime > wrote:

> Just from what I know about operating/owning small aircraft, and the
> charter business, you're doing pretty well right now, and any other
> alternative will be significantly more expensive.

There are undoubtedly some companies that actually reduce travel costs by
operating their own aircraft (or that use fractional ownership programs),
but that is not usually the issue. The two key factors that "sell" business
aviation are increased productivity of executives and key staff and
increased business opportunities that are enabled by substantially increased
travel flexibility.

I have experience with two examples. In one case, a wireless company can
centralize network engineering functions (and thereby saving huge amounts
annually) by being able to dispatch engineering teams (and their equipment)
as required to relatively small cities within a region. This would be
difficult to do using the airlines.

The other case is my own: Using my Arrow I have been able to schedule
meetings with clients that would have been tough to work out if I were
constrained by airline routes and schedules.

--
-Elliott Drucker

>
>I never said it would be cheaper, I was just providing some ideas for
>him as to how to obtain representative costs.

Companies like ours can provide him un-biased advise. We've been
doing very detailed aircraft studies for our clients for over 10
years. See www.le-aviation.com Quick and dirty numbers can be
obtained from companies such as www.conklindd.com and Pro Pilot
Magazine produces a planning guide once a year that can give you some
idea.

>Another big reason nowadays is security for corporate executives. And
>if you consider the cost per hour of a CEO in the equation, then often a
>corporate aircraft will save the company money compared to using public
>transportation and the additional time that consumes. Keep in mind that
> many CEO's make upwards of $1MM annually. If you figure 2,000 working
>hours, that is $500/hour. If you add 4-6 hours to every trip for the
>CEO to take an airline flight, that is a fair chunk of change. It may
>still not make the corporate airplane more cost effective, but combined
>with the other advantages you list above, it can make the decision much
>more logical.
>
>And if you use a fractional ownership program, it gets even better.
>
>
>Matt

Like I said, it's not a money issue, but others such as security like
you said, even though the security on commercial aircraft is better
than on corporate. You just know who your passengers are on the
corporate aircraft. Look at it any way you want, but money is never
the justification.

Think about it this way - You can't fly an aircraft at a direct
operation cost of $4,000 per hour or so and save money flying a $500
per hour person. Fractional's are somewhat better if you fly under
about 300 hours per year, but you still pay a substantial monthly
management fee and an occupied per-hour fee. An advantage to
fractional is you don't pay for deadheads on domestic flights.

The average corporate aircraft fly's about 360 hours per year with a
few upwards of 1000. Multiply that by the D.O.C.'s and the variable
costs and you can see it adds up fast. A guy that earns ONLY $1M per
year can't afford to play that game.

To all us poor people, the cost of something or what we can save may
be all-important, but to a corporation or the mega-wealthily, trust
me, it's a lot further down the list. These aircraft are generally
used for very good reasons, but saving money is not one of them.

Don


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Matt Whiting > writes:


>Another big reason nowadays is security for corporate executives. And
>if you consider the cost per hour of a CEO in the equation, then often a
>corporate aircraft will save the company money compared to using public
>transportation and the additional time that consumes. Kee

Beware the Key Man rules -- usually your insurance carrier {if not
common sense} restricts the # of PHB's traveling on a given flight.
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

Not looking for cheaper. We are hurting on point to point travel,
scheduling, long security delays, last minute changes, no advance purchase.
In our favor, much of our expense is billed directly back to the clients up
to a pre-determined amount.

"Don Hammer" > wrote in message
...
> Matt,
>
> My company is in the business of doing those kinds of studies. One
> thing I can say with confidence is there is no way you can own a jet
> cheaper than taking the airlines. When people or companies decide to
> get their own aircraft, it is some of the same reasons you own your
> own car. Public transportation is certainly cheaper.
>
> Ego - I always wanted my own (The Jones's deal)
> My own space
> Point to point transportation
> Can't get there from here
> Fits my lifestyle
>
> Can it be cheaper? - never. I don't get involved with small older
> jets, but budget about $1M a year to operate a larger one.
>
>
> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.usenet.com

We develop, market, sell, install and support a software package to fortune
250 companies. Salesmen, sales engineers and support staff travel to each
customer at least twice. It only takes 1 day to install our software and 1
day to train the trainers. Often due to scheduling and drive time from the
closest commercial airport, our installation techs can only install one
customer a week because they require an extra travel day on each end of the
trip. If each of my teams can dependably install two a week, I've doubled
my billing.

The short answer is hire more installation teams and fly them all
commercial. With that solution, I've increased my travel budget and my
payroll burden, decreased productivity and now I have twice the number of
people sitting on their thumbs in airport bars or watching a movie in a
hotel room because the last flight out of Podunk left at 4:15 and the next
one isn't scheduled until 4:15 tomorrow.

Ed


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Don Hammer wrote:
>
> > Matt,
> >
> > My company is in the business of doing those kinds of studies. One
> > thing I can say with confidence is there is no way you can own a jet
> > cheaper than taking the airlines. When people or companies decide to
> > get their own aircraft, it is some of the same reasons you own your
> > own car. Public transportation is certainly cheaper.
> >
> > Ego - I always wanted my own (The Jones's deal)
> > My own space
> > Point to point transportation
> > Can't get there from here
> > Fits my lifestyle
> >
> > Can it be cheaper? - never. I don't get involved with small older
> > jets, but budget about $1M a year to operate a larger one.
>
> I never said it would be cheaper, I was just providing some ideas for
> him as to how to obtain representative costs.
>
> Another big reason nowadays is security for corporate executives. And
> if you consider the cost per hour of a CEO in the equation, then often a
> corporate aircraft will save the company money compared to using public
> transportation and the additional time that consumes. Keep in mind that
> many CEO's make upwards of $1MM annually. If you figure 2,000 working
> hours, that is $500/hour. If you add 4-6 hours to every trip for the
> CEO to take an airline flight, that is a fair chunk of change. It may
> still not make the corporate airplane more cost effective, but combined
> with the other advantages you list above, it can make the decision much
> more logical.
>
> And if you use a fractional ownership program, it gets even better.
>
>
> Matt
>

Responses in-line
"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > nobody wrote:
> >
> >>I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
> >>120K
> >>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
> >>asked
> >>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> >>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
> >>
> >>I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a
jet
> >>versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
to
> >>both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> >>spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> >>products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> >>information.
> >>
> >>1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> >>indirect operating costs?
> >>
> >>2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
> >>the
> >>Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander.
Short
> >>of
> >>looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I
find
> >>an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
> >>
> >>3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be
in
> >>need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
> >>RVSM
> >>certification?
> >>
> >>4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
> >>
> >>TIA,
> >>Ed
> >>
>
>
> 1) There are some reports you can get Conklin and Decker I believe.

------------
Yeah, thanks, somebody mentioned that earlier. I've got their website and
I'll follow up this week.
------------
>
> 2) I would be really interested to hear what business you are in and how
> your customers would find a good, non biased source. Short of consumer
> goods, there really is no such thing. At any rate, do not bother. None
of
> those models will likely fit the needs you have described and save you
> money. A jet's value is often a reflection of operating costs (much like
> piston twins being cheaper than a similar single when old). Jets under a
> million are often costly to operate, which is why they can be had so
> cheaply.
>

------------
We develop, sell, install and support a suite of software packages for
fortune 250 companies. We give them the software for 60 days. If they like
it they buy it. If not the software quits working. Wonder where I can
borrow a Gulfstream V for 60 days for free so I can evaluate it?

We are a far cry from a "manufacturing" company but you can easily draw
an analogy to one. The idea behind establishing a flight department is to
increase our production capacity. Simply put, the faster we can get from
one customer to another, the more product we can install, the more income we
can realize. Currently, we can do about 5 installations, including
training, per month depending upon how much the customer chooses to
customize the installation. Reducing round trips by a day on both ends
reduces hotel, car, meals and fatigue. The team should be able to increase
to 8 or 9 installations a month (approx 2 per week) assuming our sales
department can keep them booked up like they do now.

------------

> 3) Only your boss can answer that question. How cheap, slow, and light can
> he go? If the same people are doing all the traveling, and they are
willing
> to become pilots, you could be in good shape with a couple Mooney's.
OTOH,
> many of the folks you need to move may be scared of anything with a prop.
>

------------
I have a PA28-161 and have used it on several occasions to service accounts
in San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, Lufkin, Bartlesville, OK and Baton Rouge.
Those trips were less than spectacular because I assumed the role of one of
the specialists on the team and I still had my head in the cockpit when I
got to the client. My mind began to drift to weather and flight plans long
before the real work was done.

Speed is the value here. A slow expensive airplane will not pay for itself.
------------

> 4) Much of this is affected by risk. You can likely get a guy to manage
and
> fly the plane for 60 to 80, but you also will spend training money on him.
> These costs are reflected in the C+D. He also will not be REALLY full
time.
> If your corporate culture will demand this guy fits in like the rest of
the
> mucks, you will end up paying more or having turnover.

------------
Full time referring only to the idea that we are his/(her) first priority
and it may be on short notice.
------------

>
> Buying your own corporate jet will not save money from a cost only
> perspective.

------------
Understood and agreed. The only possible justification is the increased
efficiency of our installation teams.
------------

>
> If you want something to take to your boss, talk to Western Airways at SGR
> and talk to some of these card companies like Marquis. Get an idea of the
> possibilities and lay out a trial plan with business objectives for the
> trial. You want to determine if the benefits and savings in other areas
> (time, ground travel, hotel, etc.) are worth further study in alternate
> transportation methods. Experiment with a charter of a low cost plane and
> one of the fractional use cards for the top guys to try out. If they want
> to go forward after those trials it will likely be worthwhile to talk to a
> consultant.
>
------------
The cost here is the team concept. We have tried the one man wears all hats
routine and it fails miserably. When we go onsite, the bare minimum team
size is 2. Depending upon the customer, the relationship and the size of
the deal, there may be as many as 6 employees traveling to the same
customer.

I'll give western a call tomorrow. SGR is only about 10 min from the
office. That's another time savings.
------------

> You will find that the lower cost an employ is, the better it is send them
> comercial.
------------
See above: Multiple mid-level employees
------------
>
> Also, if you are going from Houston to other large metro's at either
coast,
> its going to be hard to beat the regular carriers unless you can identify
> ground time savings using specific airports on both ends. OTOH, if you
want
> to go from Houston to Shrevesport you might as well buy a plane.
>
------------
Thats the key. Just guessing but I would say that only 15 or 20 percent of
our customers lie within 50 miles of a commercial airport.
------------


> Lastly, worry less about bias at first. If Cessna can't make it look good
> to buy their plane, then why worry about their bias?
>
>
------------
Good point.
------------

"nobody" > wrote in message
. com...
>
> ------------
> We develop, sell, install and support a suite of software packages for
> fortune 250 companies. We give them the software for 60 days. If they
like
> it they buy it. If not the software quits working. Wonder where I can
> borrow a Gulfstream V for 60 days for free so I can evaluate it?
>
> We are a far cry from a "manufacturing" company but you can easily draw
> an analogy to one. The idea behind establishing a flight department is to
> increase our production capacity. Simply put, the faster we can get from
> one customer to another, the more product we can install, the more income
we
> can realize. Currently, we can do about 5 installations, including
> training, per month depending upon how much the customer chooses to
> customize the installation. Reducing round trips by a day on both ends
> reduces hotel, car, meals and fatigue. The team should be able to
increase
> to 8 or 9 installations a month (approx 2 per week) assuming our sales
> department can keep them booked up like they do now.
>

Sounds like you need to open a regional office or two. I don't know of any
companies that send their mid-level people around in jets all the time. Buy
them first-class tickets everywhere and let them stay in good hotels and
that will keep most people happy. Or hire younger people.

-cwk.

The regional office idea sounds pretty smart to me as well. You might want
to cover that with your boss.



"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "nobody" > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> ------------
>> We develop, sell, install and support a suite of software packages for
>> fortune 250 companies. We give them the software for 60 days. If they
> like
>> it they buy it. If not the software quits working. Wonder where I can
>> borrow a Gulfstream V for 60 days for free so I can evaluate it?
>>
>> We are a far cry from a "manufacturing" company but you can easily
>> draw
>> an analogy to one. The idea behind establishing a flight department is
>> to
>> increase our production capacity. Simply put, the faster we can get from
>> one customer to another, the more product we can install, the more income
> we
>> can realize. Currently, we can do about 5 installations, including
>> training, per month depending upon how much the customer chooses to
>> customize the installation. Reducing round trips by a day on both ends
>> reduces hotel, car, meals and fatigue. The team should be able to
> increase
>> to 8 or 9 installations a month (approx 2 per week) assuming our sales
>> department can keep them booked up like they do now.
>>
>
> Sounds like you need to open a regional office or two. I don't know of any
> companies that send their mid-level people around in jets all the time.
> Buy
> them first-class tickets everywhere and let them stay in good hotels and
> that will keep most people happy. Or hire younger people.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

A bare bones jet like a CJ-2 will cost about $1200/hr to operate if you have
high utilization. Interest cost on the purchase will be about $350K/yr. If
you fly 400hrs/yr it will cost $830K/yr.

Old cheap jets will cost substantially more to operate but less to buy.
Basically, the higher your utilization, the more sense it makes to buy a
newer airplane with lower operating costs. Many of these older jets will
requre a fuel stop flying westbound between Houston and one of the coasts
particulary if you are going to the NE or NW. Without RVSM, none of the
older jets will be able to make the westbound legs without stopping..

I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private jet
to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor to
install the software?

Mike
MU-2


"nobody" > wrote in message
om...
>
>
> I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
> 120K
> annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
> asked
> me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly to
> both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> information.
>
> 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> indirect operating costs?
>
> 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
> the
> Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short
> of
> looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I find
> an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
>
> 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
> RVSM
> certification?
>
> 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
>
> TIA,
> Ed
>
>

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private jet
> to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor to
> install the software?

While I've not heard of private aircraft being used for this, sending company
personnel to do software installations is SOP for large systems or cases in
which security is a big issue. Contractors would be completely unsuitable for
this in all the cases with which I am familiar.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:44:32 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote:

>Can't you find a contractor to
>install the software?

I'll do it, and I'll bet it only takes me 2 weeks to learn the
software to be a good train the trainer too.

z
(serious offer from an out of work techie).

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:22:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>Contractors would be completely unsuitable for
>this in all the cases with which I am familiar.


I've seen it done, and worked on proprietary projects. You have to
sign a bunch of forms saying you won't steal the technology or compete
with them for 6 to 12 months, but most of it just re-enforces what
should be good ethical procedures anyway.

z

zatatime wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:22:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> > wrote:
>
> >Contractors would be completely unsuitable for
> >this in all the cases with which I am familiar.
>
> I've seen it done, and worked on proprietary projects. You have to
> sign a bunch of forms saying you won't steal the technology or compete
> with them for 6 to 12 months, but most of it just re-enforces what
> should be good ethical procedures anyway.

For the systems on which I used to work, no contractor could do it without
several days to several weeks of extensive training at corporate facilities.
That alone makes contracting with remotely based people for one-shot jobs
completely unsuitable. In some cases with which I'm familiar, a security
clearance is also required, but I would guess that isn't the case here.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

In fairness though, I can understand the attractiveness of a magical chariot
that miraculously doubles the productivity of your existing team as opposed
to all the risk and overhead that comes with a new office.

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> The regional office idea sounds pretty smart to me as well. You might want
> to cover that with your boss.
>
>
>
> "C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> >
> > Sounds like you need to open a regional office or two. I don't know of
any
> > companies that send their mid-level people around in jets all the time.
> > Buy
> > them first-class tickets everywhere and let them stay in good hotels and
> > that will keep most people happy. Or hire younger people.
> >

"nobody" > wrote in message
om...
> Not looking for cheaper. We are hurting on point to point travel,
> scheduling, long security delays, last minute changes, no advance
purchase.
> In our favor, much of our expense is billed directly back to the clients
up
> to a pre-determined amount.
>

Good luck getting client reimbursement if you're flying private. I'd be a
little concerned about how it appears to them- clients like to feel like
they're getting MIT Ph.Ds at the same price they pay for Mexican gardeners.
When the team shows up in a private jet it screams "money coming out the
wazoo" which makes me wonder whether you're charging me way too much for the
software. Even getting them to cover the equivalent of an airline ticket
might be touchy. Last IT consulting shop I was at, the clients screamed
bloody murder about covering any ticket over $300, even cross-country. It
may be worth it ultimately, but if you're billing $100k of travel to clients
now, that money might be out the door if you do get a plane.

-cwk.

>I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K - 120K
>annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he asked
>me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
>fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
>I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
>versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
>to
>both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
>spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
>products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
>information.


Houston is a well-served city by the airlines. Being in the middle of the
country, you've got good access by jet coast to coast if you're going to major
cities. Since you service Fotune 250 companies, I'd guess that most of your
destinations are well-served also.

It'll be tough to beat the time factor, even counting the inevitable standing
in line with the rabble at the airports. Jetliners are fast. There's not much
in the private sector that's as fast as a 737 and very little that's faster.

Costwise, you're not even going to get close unless compare first class
accomodations and demand luxury travel with a high-level of service. If you're
flying 6 big wigs around, that actually might not come out too bad.

Dispatch rate with the airlines is going to be impossible to match with your
own aircraft. So you'll still be buying tickets sometimes. That's another
reason to look into some sort of demand-based charter or fractional operation.

You could come out ahead if you do a lot of shorter trips, or if you frequently
travel between cities that do not have major airports. You may also do good if
you have to fly a lot of last-minute trips, since the airlines hit you the
hardest for short-notice travel.

One approach that might be interesting is to contact some of the charter and
fractional ownership operations and ask them to do some of the work for you and
come up with a number. Just start with all the flights you booked last year and
ask them to run a comparison, taking into consideration how far in advance you
scheduled.

The other side of the coin is insurance. Many corporate and life insurance
policies have exclusions for air travel on a non-scheduled operation.





--
Dr. Nuketopia
Sorry, no e-Mail.
Spam forgeries have resulted in thousands of faked bounces to my address.

Contractors are not an option. Typically our customers have highly
sophisticated IT departments with scores of skilled technicians. Our
product is an integrated software suite that is customized during the
installation to the customer requirements. The installation and
customization requires substantial knowledge in several areas. Our techs
usually go through about 4 months of telephone support performing tier 1, 2
and 3 support before going on the road. They are mentored on installations
by a senior engineer for 3-6 months before being sent to an installation
solo.

Ed

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> A bare bones jet like a CJ-2 will cost about $1200/hr to operate if you
have
> high utilization. Interest cost on the purchase will be about $350K/yr.
If
> you fly 400hrs/yr it will cost $830K/yr.
>
> Old cheap jets will cost substantially more to operate but less to buy.
> Basically, the higher your utilization, the more sense it makes to buy a
> newer airplane with lower operating costs. Many of these older jets will
> requre a fuel stop flying westbound between Houston and one of the coasts
> particulary if you are going to the NE or NW. Without RVSM, none of the
> older jets will be able to make the westbound legs without stopping..
>
> I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private
jet
> to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor
to
> install the software?
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
> "nobody" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> >
> > I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
> > 120K
> > annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
> > asked
> > me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> > fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
> >
> > I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a
jet
> > versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
to
> > both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> > spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> > products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> > information.
> >
> > 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> > indirect operating costs?
> >
> > 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
> > the
> > Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander.
Short
> > of
> > looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I
find
> > an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
> >
> > 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be
in
> > need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
> > RVSM
> > certification?
> >
> > 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
> >
> > TIA,
> > Ed
> >
> >
>
>

We have a few customers that require security clearances and US citizenship
but the reason we do the installs ourselves is the depth of knowledge
required to do the installation, customization and training.

Ed

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> zatatime wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:22:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >Contractors would be completely unsuitable for
> > >this in all the cases with which I am familiar.
> >
> > I've seen it done, and worked on proprietary projects. You have to
> > sign a bunch of forms saying you won't steal the technology or compete
> > with them for 6 to 12 months, but most of it just re-enforces what
> > should be good ethical procedures anyway.
>
> For the systems on which I used to work, no contractor could do it without
> several days to several weeks of extensive training at corporate
facilities.
> That alone makes contracting with remotely based people for one-shot jobs
> completely unsuitable. In some cases with which I'm familiar, a security
> clearance is also required, but I would guess that isn't the case here.
>
> George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble
enterprise.

You're correct that IAH and HOU both have a lot of operations. The
assumption that large companies are in large cities is incorrect. Try to
get a flight into Chapel Hill, NC. You have to go to Raleigh via Charlotte.
How about Tyco Electronics in Harrisburg, PA via CLE. Intel in Folsom takes
a flight to SFO then Sacramento but we usually drive a rental from SFO
because it is faster than making the connecting flight. BMW USA is a flight
to Atlanta and a 1.75 hr drive up past Marietta. Tyson foods is in
Springdale, AR. and so on.

Oh almost forgot to mention that we have to leave the office at 8:00 to make
an 11:00 flight and we're only 11 miles from the airport but its a 45 minute
drive, parking, check-in and security probe. We are 10 minutes from SGR and
15 minutes from IWS.

Insurance scares me the most. I can control the amount of debt we take on.
I can control the flight hours. I can choose an older less expensive jet or
a shiny new one. Insurance I have to take what I can get from the
underwriters and live with all the riders and waivers or pay through the
nose.

This isn't a cost a decision based on cheaper operation, it is a decision
about the improved productivity, better efficiency, better customer support,
more flexible installation scheduling. I'm sure that part of the decision
will also be based on the CEO's ego. Yes it will cost more than commercial,
that's a given. The whole thread was about how much more. I will soon have
a number from some fractional to tell me how much more this improvement will
cost us.

Ed


"nuke" > wrote in message
...
> >I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
120K
> >annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
asked
> >me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> >fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
> >
> >I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> >versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
> >to
> >both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> >spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> >products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> >information.
>
>
> Houston is a well-served city by the airlines. Being in the middle of the
> country, you've got good access by jet coast to coast if you're going to
major
> cities. Since you service Fotune 250 companies, I'd guess that most of
your
> destinations are well-served also.
>
> It'll be tough to beat the time factor, even counting the inevitable
standing
> in line with the rabble at the airports. Jetliners are fast. There's not
much
> in the private sector that's as fast as a 737 and very little that's
faster.
>
> Costwise, you're not even going to get close unless compare first class
> accomodations and demand luxury travel with a high-level of service. If
you're
> flying 6 big wigs around, that actually might not come out too bad.
>
> Dispatch rate with the airlines is going to be impossible to match with
your
> own aircraft. So you'll still be buying tickets sometimes. That's another
> reason to look into some sort of demand-based charter or fractional
operation.
>
> You could come out ahead if you do a lot of shorter trips, or if you
frequently
> travel between cities that do not have major airports. You may also do
good if
> you have to fly a lot of last-minute trips, since the airlines hit you the
> hardest for short-notice travel.
>
> One approach that might be interesting is to contact some of the charter
and
> fractional ownership operations and ask them to do some of the work for
you and
> come up with a number. Just start with all the flights you booked last
year and
> ask them to run a comparison, taking into consideration how far in advance
you
> scheduled.
>
> The other side of the coin is insurance. Many corporate and life insurance
> policies have exclusions for air travel on a non-scheduled operation.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Nuketopia
> Sorry, no e-Mail.
> Spam forgeries have resulted in thousands of faked bounces to my address.

I know what you're talking about. I was a road warrior for 7 years doing
SAP consulting. We're not the first contractor they've had in house. They
know what they're paying for airfare already. Typically, they pay
refundable Y fare rates. It's spelled out in the P.O. what we will expense
to the client and what the cap is.

I wonder how your clients knew how you flew. Most of my teams have enough
miles that they are traveling platinum elite status and almost without
exception, fly first class for the price of refundable coach. I'm not aware
that the clients have any idea that my teams are traveling first class. The
clients certainly haven't complained. If we went to private jet, I would
expect the same level of discretion from my team.

Ed

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "nobody" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Not looking for cheaper. We are hurting on point to point travel,
> > scheduling, long security delays, last minute changes, no advance
> purchase.
> > In our favor, much of our expense is billed directly back to the clients
> up
> > to a pre-determined amount.
> >
>
> Good luck getting client reimbursement if you're flying private. I'd be a
> little concerned about how it appears to them- clients like to feel like
> they're getting MIT Ph.Ds at the same price they pay for Mexican
gardeners.
> When the team shows up in a private jet it screams "money coming out the
> wazoo" which makes me wonder whether you're charging me way too much for
the
> software. Even getting them to cover the equivalent of an airline ticket
> might be touchy. Last IT consulting shop I was at, the clients screamed
> bloody murder about covering any ticket over $300, even cross-country. It
> may be worth it ultimately, but if you're billing $100k of travel to
clients
> now, that money might be out the door if you do get a plane.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 08:08:09 GMT, "nobody" > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
120K
> >annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
asked
> >me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> >fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
>
> >I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a jet
> >versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
to
> >both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers.
>
> Me either, but I do know enough to say that outright ownership is
> going to be impossible for $100k/year, especially if opportunity cost
> or loan payments are considered. The loan payment on most jets will
> approach $100k/year. Throw in a hangar rent, insurance, and a
> corporate pilot (or two), and you will have hit $100k without going
> anywhere. You could probably leaseback the jet to the local
> charter/FBO operation to help defray the fixed costs, but I have a
> hard time believing a jet leaseback can make it financially feasible.
>
> Charter will be expensive too, but then again, so are the airlines if
> the trips are last minute and to out of the way destinations. It is
> easy to spend $1000/ticket. If you are flying 3-6 people via $1000
> airline tickets, givent the time savings and flexibility involved, a
> charter may make sense instead.
>
> >2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
the
> >Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander. Short
of
> >looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I
find
> >an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
> >
> >3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be in
> >need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
RVSM
> >certification?
>
> Many of the older jets use fuel inefficient engines that will increase
> hourly fuel costs. Also, many older jets are so loud that they are
> limited in terms of when & what airports they can use. One other
> consideration is runway length. If you are flying to out of the way
> destinations, a 350 kt Citation (which requires less than 3500ft of
> runway) may be much quicker door-door than a 500kt Lear that requires
> 5000+ ft runways.
>
> Ops figures for several of the Citation series can be found at:
> http://www.risingup.com
>
> Last, I would spend some time at this website - NBAA has published
> many articles that address your situation and your questions.
> http://web.nbaa.org/public/about/library/
>
> -Nathan
>
>
>
>

Knew there had to be a catch, thanks for clearing that up.
Ed

Exactly! Key personnel and scheduling. Bottom line is "can we afford it?",
not "is it cheaper?"

Ed

> wrote in message
news:By6vd.6604$xa6.4103@trnddc09...
>
> On 12-Dec-2004, zatatime > wrote:
>
> > Just from what I know about operating/owning small aircraft, and the
> > charter business, you're doing pretty well right now, and any other
> > alternative will be significantly more expensive.
>
> There are undoubtedly some companies that actually reduce travel costs by
> operating their own aircraft (or that use fractional ownership programs),
> but that is not usually the issue. The two key factors that "sell"
business
> aviation are increased productivity of executives and key staff and
> increased business opportunities that are enabled by substantially
increased
> travel flexibility.
>
> I have experience with two examples. In one case, a wireless company can
> centralize network engineering functions (and thereby saving huge amounts
> annually) by being able to dispatch engineering teams (and their
equipment)
> as required to relatively small cities within a region. This would be
> difficult to do using the airlines.
>
> The other case is my own: Using my Arrow I have been able to schedule
> meetings with clients that would have been tough to work out if I were
> constrained by airline routes and schedules.
>
> --
> -Elliott Drucker

I checked them out. You deposit 100K or 250K and they deduct $2,150 per
hour you fly for a light jet. Probably the simplest plan I've seen so far.

Ed

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
...
> I saw some interesting stuff at www.sentientjet.com. Looks like somewhere
> between a charter and fractional. I think you pay an upfront fee, and they
> schedule the charter for you, supposedly at a better rate.
>
> I think they simply act as a dispatcher. It may or not be what you're
> looking for.
>
> Good luck.
>
>
> "nobody" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> >
> > I had a brief meeting with my CEO last week. Our company spends 80K -
> 120K
> > annually on commercial flights. He knows I am a private pilot and he
> asked
> > me if I could prepare a comparative analysis of alternatives such as
> > fractional ownership, outright ownership, leaseback or charter.
> >
> > I don't know jack about jets. My assumption is that I'm looking at a
jet
> > versus a King Air or similar. We're based in Houston and regularly fly
to
> > both coasts with 3 - 6 passengers. I am looking at a large, empty
> > spreadsheet. Many manufacturers and brokers offer breakdowns for their
> > products but I am looking for a non-biased source for several pieces of
> > information.
> >
> > 1.) Where can I find non-biased, mostly accurate estimate of direct and
> > indirect operating costs?
> >
> > 2.) There are several business jet models available for < 1,000,000 like
> the
> > Hawker DH 125, Sabre, Citation 500, Lear 24 and 25, Jet Commander.
Short
> of
> > looking up all the AD's for each variation of each model, where can I
find
> > an honest review of those models with both pros and cons?
> >
> > 3.) Is < $1,000,000 reasonable or should I expect those aircraft to be
in
> > need of some serious work, AD compliance, or expensive upgrades to meet
> RVSM
> > certification?
> >
> > 4.) Anybody know what a full time corporate pilot makes nowadays?
> >
> > TIA,
> > Ed
> >
> >
>
>

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> A bare bones jet like a CJ-2 will cost about $1200/hr to operate if you
have
> high utilization. Interest cost on the purchase will be about $350K/yr.
If
> you fly 400hrs/yr it will cost $830K/yr.

Could you show some details for those numbers? I don't know about theCJ-2,
but I do know some people who oeprate a 2001 CJ-1 and those numbers are not
even close on the interest cost.

> particulary if you are going to the NE or NW. Without RVSM, none of the
> older jets will be able to make the westbound legs without stopping..

Pardon? Just about any jet now is going to have to be certified for RVSM to
use an altitude over FL290. The cost, relative to the cost of the aircraft,
is "minimal" for equipment and training.

> I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private
jet
> to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor
to
> install the software?

That does sound bizarre, but I'd guess he's not talking about installing
Windows XP on some secretaries workstation. Now, if it's nusual software on
a highly secure system and environment, maybe so, but in any case, they'd be
more likely to jsut use the airlines.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >
> > I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private
jet
> > to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor
to
> > install the software?
>
> While I've not heard of private aircraft being used for this, sending
company
> personnel to do software installations is SOP for large systems or cases
in
> which security is a big issue. Contractors would be completely unsuitable
for
> this in all the cases with which I am familiar.

Some times it requires a security clearance...Secret, Top Secret...


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Ed,

Yup, good points all. I learned to fly at HOU years ago and know the area well.
I've lived in Silicon Valley for a number years now.

GA begins to shine when you need to go off the beaten path. It's always going
to be more expensive, but it might be worth it in your situation.

A friend of mine operates a Cessna 421, a pressurized cabin class piston twin.
You could get into a good one for about $350K and he figures his operating
costs around $350/hr or so. Of course, it isn't as fast as a jet, but it
cruises in the flight levels, over some of the weather and it has a john. But a
trip from IWS to Sacramento would still take about 7-8 hours or so.


<< You're correct that IAH and HOU both have a lot of operations. The
assumption that large companies are in large cities is incorrect. Try to
get a flight into Chapel Hill, NC. You have to go to Raleigh via Charlotte.
How about Tyco Electronics in Harrisburg, PA via CLE. Intel in Folsom takes
a flight to SFO then Sacramento but we usually drive a rental from SFO
>><BR><BR>

--
Dr. Nuketopia
Sorry, no e-Mail.
Spam forgeries have resulted in thousands of faked bounces to my address.

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> zatatime wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:22:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Contractors would be completely unsuitable for
>> >this in all the cases with which I am familiar.
>>
>> I've seen it done, and worked on proprietary projects. You have to
>> sign a bunch of forms saying you won't steal the technology or compete
>> with them for 6 to 12 months, but most of it just re-enforces what
>> should be good ethical procedures anyway.
>
> For the systems on which I used to work, no contractor could do it without
> several days to several weeks of extensive training at corporate
> facilities.
> That alone makes contracting with remotely based people for one-shot jobs
> completely unsuitable. In some cases with which I'm familiar, a security
> clearance is also required, but I would guess that isn't the case here.
>
> George Patterson

Who said anything about "one shot jobs". They are going to the coasts
frequently to do installations.

Mike
MU-2

I have a friend who bought a CJ2 last month for about 5.3MM. The $350K/yr
is just assuming an interest cost a little below 7% it does not consider
ammortization of the loan. The RVSM comment was based on the notion that
the new jets all have RVSM or can have it added fairly easily since they
already have digital airdata. BTW getting RVSM on some older jets is not
trivial because the skins are not straight enough.. If you are buying a
$1MM airplane, $100K for RVSM is not trivial.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>> A bare bones jet like a CJ-2 will cost about $1200/hr to operate if you
> have
>> high utilization. Interest cost on the purchase will be about $350K/yr.
> If
>> you fly 400hrs/yr it will cost $830K/yr.
>
> Could you show some details for those numbers? I don't know about theCJ-2,
> but I do know some people who oeprate a 2001 CJ-1 and those numbers are
> not
> even close on the interest cost.
>
>> particulary if you are going to the NE or NW. Without RVSM, none of the
>> older jets will be able to make the westbound legs without stopping..
>
> Pardon? Just about any jet now is going to have to be certified for RVSM
> to
> use an altitude over FL290. The cost, relative to the cost of the
> aircraft,
> is "minimal" for equipment and training.
>
>> I have never heard of a company flyings technicians around in a private
> jet
>> to install software. It sounds ridiculous. Can't you find a contractor
> to
>> install the software?
>
> That does sound bizarre, but I'd guess he's not talking about installing
> Windows XP on some secretaries workstation. Now, if it's nusual software
> on
> a highly secure system and environment, maybe so, but in any case, they'd
> be
> more likely to jsut use the airlines.
>
>
> --
> Matt
> ---------------------
> Matthew W. Barrow
> Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> Montrose, CO
>
>

nobody wrote:

>
> I wonder how your clients knew how you flew. Most of my teams have enough
> miles that they are traveling platinum elite status and almost without
> exception, fly first class for the price of refundable coach. I'm not aware
> that the clients have any idea that my teams are traveling first class. The
> clients certainly haven't complained. If we went to private jet, I would
> expect the same level of discretion from my team.
>

When your teams are flying first class on coach fares, they are
providing coach ticket receipts for reimbursement. I assume the client
audits them or wants to see them.

what receipts will they present when they fly on a corporate jet?

No, not really. The expenses come in as a line item on the invoice for the
installation and training, not as expense items to each member of the team.
Our admin dept. audits the expense reports from the teams. We charge
1,500.00 per day per person plus reasonable expenses.


"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> nobody wrote:
>
> >
> > I wonder how your clients knew how you flew. Most of my teams have
enough
> > miles that they are traveling platinum elite status and almost without
> > exception, fly first class for the price of refundable coach. I'm not
aware
> > that the clients have any idea that my teams are traveling first class.
The
> > clients certainly haven't complained. If we went to private jet, I
would
> > expect the same level of discretion from my team.
> >
>
> When your teams are flying first class on coach fares, they are
> providing coach ticket receipts for reimbursement. I assume the client
> audits them or wants to see them.
>
> what receipts will they present when they fly on a corporate jet?
>

On 13-Dec-2004, "nobody" > wrote:

> Exactly! Key personnel and scheduling. Bottom line is "can we afford
> it?", not "is it cheaper?"


Not exactly my point. A company might be able to "afford" to own its own
plane, but not be able to justify it. In reality, "the bottom line" is, in
fact, the bottom line. In other words, if using business aviation, whether
charter, fractional ownership, or dedicated operation, results in improved
profits and/or business operation, then go for it.

--
-Elliott Drucker

So the client never has an opportunity to audit the expenses you charge
to them? Talk about trust.

nobody wrote:

> No, not really. The expenses come in as a line item on the invoice for the
> installation and training, not as expense items to each member of the team.
> Our admin dept. audits the expense reports from the teams. We charge
> 1,500.00 per day per person plus reasonable expenses.
>
>
> "xyzzy" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>nobody wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I wonder how your clients knew how you flew. Most of my teams have
>
> enough
>
>>>miles that they are traveling platinum elite status and almost without
>>>exception, fly first class for the price of refundable coach. I'm not
>
> aware
>
>>>that the clients have any idea that my teams are traveling first class.
>
> The
>
>>>clients certainly haven't complained. If we went to private jet, I
>
> would
>
>>>expect the same level of discretion from my team.
>>>
>>
>>When your teams are flying first class on coach fares, they are
>>providing coach ticket receipts for reimbursement. I assume the client
>>audits them or wants to see them.
>>
>>what receipts will they present when they fly on a corporate jet?
>>
>
>
>

Mike Rapoport wrote:

> I have a friend who bought a CJ2 last month for about 5.3MM. The $350K/yr
> is just assuming an interest cost a little below 7% it does not consider
> ammortization of the loan. The RVSM comment was based on the notion that
> the new jets all have RVSM or can have it added fairly easily since they
> already have digital airdata. BTW getting RVSM on some older jets is not
> trivial because the skins are not straight enough.. If you are buying a
> $1MM airplane, $100K for RVSM is not trivial.

What does skin straightness have to do with it? It isn't obvious and I
couldn't find anything with a web search.


Matt

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> Who said anything about "one shot jobs". They are going to the coasts
> frequently to do installations.

The suggestion made was to avoid travel by farming the installation out to local
contractors. That makes it a series of "one shot jobs".

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

xyzzy wrote:
>
> So the client never has an opportunity to audit the expenses you charge
> to them? Talk about trust.

Trust has nothing to do with it. The expenses are part of the cost of the
product. If the company doesn't want to pay it, they don't buy the software.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

Uneven surfaces can cause static pressure to vary with speed. There was an
article in ( I think) Business and Commercial Aviation saying that some
aircraft couldn't be RVSM certified, period, because of this issue.

Mike
MU-2


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>> I have a friend who bought a CJ2 last month for about 5.3MM. The
>> $350K/yr is just assuming an interest cost a little below 7% it does not
>> consider ammortization of the loan. The RVSM comment was based on the
>> notion that the new jets all have RVSM or can have it added fairly easily
>> since they already have digital airdata. BTW getting RVSM on some older
>> jets is not trivial because the skins are not straight enough.. If you
>> are buying a $1MM airplane, $100K for RVSM is not trivial.
>
> What does skin straightness have to do with it? It isn't obvious and I
> couldn't find anything with a web search.
>
>
> Matt
>

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>
>> Who said anything about "one shot jobs". They are going to the coasts
>> frequently to do installations.
>
> The suggestion made was to avoid travel by farming the installation out to
> local
> contractors. That makes it a series of "one shot jobs".
>
> George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

OK, but it makes more sense to train people for a *series* of one shot jobs
than for a single one shot job. I was thinking regional contractors, not
someone different for each job.

Mike
MU-2

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

>
> xyzzy wrote:
>
>>So the client never has an opportunity to audit the expenses you charge
>>to them? Talk about trust.
>
>
> Trust has nothing to do with it. The expenses are part of the cost of the
> product. If the company doesn't want to pay it, they don't buy the software.

earlier in the thread he wrote:

> Typically, they pay
> refundable Y fare rates. It's spelled out in the P.O. what we will
> expense
> to the client and what the cap is.

That clearly implies that the airfare is not built into the cost of the
product, but is billed to the client as a separate line item.

I'm not questioning whether they should buy a jet, but I am questioning
his assertion that as long as his consultants use discretion, the client
won't know they flew in on a private jet.

Audits and paper trails aside, when I have gone on customer engagements
I am always asked about my flight arrangements. Usually it's just the
customers' guys being friendly, looking to swap travel stories with road
warriors. Often I'm asked because it affects when meetings are
scheduled too. Unless they start telling lies in response to those
harmless queries, a practice that is hard to maintain, there is simply
no way that "discretion" will keep the clients from knowing they flew in
on a corproate jet. Especially since he's talking about using it to
small towns without good airline service.

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
> Audits and paper trails aside, when I have gone on customer engagements
> I am always asked about my flight arrangements. Usually it's just the
> customers' guys being friendly, looking to swap travel stories with road
> warriors. Often I'm asked because it affects when meetings are
> scheduled too. Unless they start telling lies in response to those
> harmless queries, a practice that is hard to maintain, there is simply
> no way that "discretion" will keep the clients from knowing they flew in
> on a corproate jet. Especially since he's talking about using it to
> small towns without good airline service.
>

Lying will work great until it doesn't, and then you're screwed. My approach
would be to simply have a standardized rate of tables for each city and a
surrounding area, based on airline fares. I'd be upfront with the client
that you use a company jet and this is to their benefit because the
consultants will arrive fresh and cheerful and not be in a rush to be out
the door at 3pm so they can make the last plane out of town.

-cwk.

C Kingsbury wrote:
>
> > G.R. Patterson III wrote:

I did not.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

"nobody" > wrote in message
. com...
> Typically, they pay refundable Y fare rates.

Yeah, you SAP guys had it pretty damn good. Since you sold the system to the
CEO you could usually get a fair deal when it came to travel but we were a
lot farther down the food chain, and often had to eat travel costs
ourselves. Needless to say, that company is no longer in business...

> I wonder how your clients knew how you flew. Most of my teams have enough
> miles that they are traveling platinum elite status and almost without
> exception, fly first class for the price of refundable coach. I'm not
aware
> that the clients have any idea that my teams are traveling first class.

If the ticket cost was reasonable they wouldn't ask any questions. The main
thing they would grumble about was when they booked an appointment two
months out and we bought the ticket a week before, thus pushing us into the
high-fare bucket. The sales guys bitched about that too but then you should
have heard them moan when we had to throw a restricted ticket away because
they'd sell the same guy to a client in some other city the day after the
first client's job finished, and the cheap ticket we bought two months
earlier couldn't be changed. Idiots.

-cwk.

The sales guys bitched about that too but then you should
> have heard them moan when we had to throw a restricted ticket away because
> they'd sell the same guy to a client in some other city the day after the
> first client's job finished, and the cheap ticket we bought two months
> earlier couldn't be changed. Idiots.
>
> -cwk.
>


So, the customer paid for the tickets, so your company was covered.

Your company got more revenue because the salesman sold the service and the
resource which was going to be sitting back at the office is now being put
to use in the field thus ensuring continued employment for said resource and
others.

Your salesman moaned because he had a feeling he would end up getting a
complaint from the customer on the cost of the travel ticket which would
mean more work for him (in case you were unaware, sales people work on
relationships and customer happiness. I suspect the installers moaned when
they learned that they would have to install in less than optimal
conditions? I know I did.)

From these circumstances you draw the conclusion that the salesmen were
idiots?

Perhaps you left out a premise or two?

I'm not supporting lying in any way. But, there is no reason to advertise
your mode of transportation. Personally it seems pretentious and
ostentatious other than in a passing remark or in response to a direct
question to reveal that you are traveling in such style. When somebody asks
what time is it, you don't say "Look at my Rolex!"

I have very little first hand experience with this, but, I have flown the
Warrior to several customers sites. Only one client knew that I flew
myself. Its always easy to be vague. When asked "What time does your
flight leave?", I simply look at my watch and say, "Oh, I've got plenty of
time." How was your flight? Great, I didn't lose my luggage.

CWK is right, when cornered we can be honest and justify the flight with the
same reasons that we justify the purchase, umm... if we justify the
purchase.

Ed


"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "xyzzy" > wrote in message
> ...
> > G.R. Patterson III wrote:
> >
> > Audits and paper trails aside, when I have gone on customer engagements
> > I am always asked about my flight arrangements. Usually it's just the
> > customers' guys being friendly, looking to swap travel stories with road
> > warriors. Often I'm asked because it affects when meetings are
> > scheduled too. Unless they start telling lies in response to those
> > harmless queries, a practice that is hard to maintain, there is simply
> > no way that "discretion" will keep the clients from knowing they flew in
> > on a corproate jet. Especially since he's talking about using it to
> > small towns without good airline service.
> >
>
> Lying will work great until it doesn't, and then you're screwed. My
approach
> would be to simply have a standardized rate of tables for each city and a
> surrounding area, based on airline fares. I'd be upfront with the client
> that you use a company jet and this is to their benefit because the
> consultants will arrive fresh and cheerful and not be in a rush to be out
> the door at 3pm so they can make the last plane out of town.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
>
> Your salesman moaned because he had a feeling he would end up getting a
> complaint from the customer on the cost of the travel ticket which would
> mean more work for him

The problem is that the salesman would promise things he couldn't
necessarily deliver. For instance, he'd promise that the ticket would cost
no more than $300. This would work if we booked the ticket that very minute,
but experience showed that booking tickets more than two weeks in advance
(unless we bought Y fares which defeats the purpose) was dangerous due to
scheduling. And if we had to throw tickets away, he (head salesguy was also
the GM) would blame me (head of consulting) for that too. Heads or tails, I
lost.

> From these circumstances you draw the conclusion that the salesmen were
> idiots?

Regularly promising things you can't deliver at a given price (they did it
on every part of the deal, not just the travel) fits my definition pretty
well.

-cwk.

D'oh. Damn newsreader.

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> C Kingsbury wrote:
> >
> > > G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
> I did not.
>
> George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble
enterprise.

"nobody" > wrote in message
om...
> I'm not supporting lying in any way. But, there is no reason to advertise
> your mode of transportation. Personally it seems pretentious and
> ostentatious other than in a passing remark or in response to a direct
> question to reveal that you are traveling in such style. When somebody
asks
> what time is it, you don't say "Look at my Rolex!"

Since 9/11 no one thinks business travel is a perk anymore. Even getting to
fly F is seen as merely a lighter form of punishment. All clients cared
about were the ticket prices.

> CWK is right, when cornered we can be honest and justify the flight with
the
> same reasons that we justify the purchase, umm... if we justify the
> purchase.

The fact is that if you're making enough money to seriously consider
justifying flying your teams around by private jet, you're probably making a
killing on the software. How price-sensitive are your customers now and are
you seen as being low-cost or producing an extremely high ROI?

To be fair there can be benefits to this too, though. Companies like to feel
that they are doing business with winners, more so the higher up the ladder
you go. Flying in on your own jet certainly projects that image. Every
client will be different.

-cwk.

>
> The fact is that if you're making enough money to seriously consider
> justifying flying your teams around by private jet, you're probably making
> a
> killing on the software. How price-sensitive are your customers now and
> are
> you seen as being low-cost or producing an extremely high ROI?
>
> To be fair there can be benefits to this too, though. Companies like to
> feel
> that they are doing business with winners, more so the higher up the
> ladder
> you go. Flying in on your own jet certainly projects that image. Every
> client will be different.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

I call BULL! :)

I believe you have carried your point too far. The flexibility to use a
private plane when it makes sense could not be such an extreme case.

Even coach fares that need connections could run up the bill, and if you can
do a tighter schedule by sending a team to a region to hop around for a
week, I can see it saving days in the field, hotel, car, meals, etc. Even
at over 2k an hour, it could actually work out to being within 2 times or
even closer. That may make it worth it for them. Also, it could make it
more economical to send a larger team which may have other benefits.

Let's say we take two teams of 3 to the left coast to do a total of 4
installs (two each). Instead of 6 round trip coach fares for 3,000, we take
the Jet.

Coach we have to take Sunday to Friday Night. We also get little
productivity out of the teams other than the installs and travel, because
they are whipped by the experience of commercial travel and long car drives.

Jet or Turbo Prop we may have Sunday to Thursday night and we can have our
whole crew in the office on Friday. For every single installer that doesn't
get burned out and cause turnover, we save about $40,000 each year (my best
guess, but its likely more).

Yes, meals and hotels are actually a little more because we have the flight
crew, but that likely gets well balanced with free parking. Even if the jet
is 3 times the cost of travel, you get 6 employee work days back and likely
reduce turnover.

So, what if supplementing the existing commercial travel with a Jet costs an
extra $400,000 per year. Could it not be worth it to the CEO?

BTW, the Jet ride close has long been a successful sales tool in Software.

>>
>> Your salesman moaned because he had a feeling he would end up getting a
>> complaint from the customer on the cost of the travel ticket which would
>> mean more work for him
>
> The problem is that the salesman would promise things he couldn't
> necessarily deliver. For instance, he'd promise that the ticket would cost
> no more than $300. This would work if we booked the ticket that very
> minute,
> but experience showed that booking tickets more than two weeks in advance
> (unless we bought Y fares which defeats the purpose) was dangerous due to
> scheduling. And if we had to throw tickets away, he (head salesguy was
> also
> the GM) would blame me (head of consulting) for that too. Heads or tails,
> I
> lost.
>
>> From these circumstances you draw the conclusion that the salesmen were
>> idiots?
>
> Regularly promising things you can't deliver at a given price (they did it
> on every part of the deal, not just the travel) fits my definition pretty
> well.
>
> -cwk.
>

Sounds to me like the real idiot was the GM. He likely took the job because
he wasn't a good salesman. Then, he likely did a lousy job communicating
these issues to his salesforce (likely because he was too busy with his nose
up a bunch of arses).

So from my perspective, the problem was not so much idiot sales people as it
was idiot management. If they had done a better job of working the
commissions so that these problems became a money problem to the salesmen,
AND given them some control over the process, then it likely would have gone
away.

Managers can talk to sales people all they want, but all they hear is what
the commission plan says. Ignore this at your peril.

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> >> Your salesman moaned because he had a feeling he would end up getting a
> >> complaint from the customer on the cost of the travel ticket which
would
> >> mean more work for him
> >
> > The problem is that the salesman would promise things he couldn't
> > necessarily deliver. For instance, he'd promise that the ticket would
cost
> > no more than $300. This would work if we booked the ticket that very
> > minute,
>
> So from my perspective, the problem was not so much idiot sales people as
it
> was idiot management. If they had done a better job of working the
> commissions so that these problems became a money problem to the salesmen,
> AND given them some control over the process, then it likely would have
gone
> away.

As is so often the case, the GM was former #1 salesguy, and he turned out to
be possibly the single most consistently incompetent businessperson I've
ever worked with. Worse still, by being the GM, he had no one to watch and
keep an eye on the voodoo quotient in his deals. Good at sales does not
imply good at management and certainly not vice versa.

-cwk.

>
> As is so often the case, the GM was former #1 salesguy, and he turned out
> to
> be possibly the single most consistently incompetent businessperson I've
> ever worked with. Worse still, by being the GM, he had no one to watch and
> keep an eye on the voodoo quotient in his deals. Good at sales does not
> imply good at management and certainly not vice versa.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

So, now you have 2 incompettent managers, him and the guy he worked for.