AIRNAV not publishing fuel prices... [Archive]

ASJ

January 29th 04, 03:42 PM

It's amazing to watch all these people turn against AirNav. I use the site
every time I was doing long distance planning. The FBO list and the
comments were the best part of it. The site is simple, fast and works
well. (for people on slow dialup lines at home or traveling simple is
really good!)

I clicked on "add new fbo" and it listed the basic listing as $20/year.
This certainly isn't going to break the bank at any fbo.

I hope he doesn't start loosing lists as that's one the main uses I have for
the site. That said it costs money to run it and he has to make money
somehow. Maybe this will work for him, maybe not? I certainly hope it
doesn't go away!

-Andrew

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> In a previous article, Tyler > said:
>>Fuel prices at most of the airports within 50 miles of me are listed. I'm
>>not sure that all of them have a "subscription" with Airnav.
>
> Last year, AirNav contacted me (as representative of my flying club) and
> gave me a year to pony up some extremely high listing fee or get dropped
> from their listing. Checking the fact that in the previous month only one
> person had come to our club web site through the AirNav listing (versus
> 10-20 a day through Google) we declined to be listed.
>
> I suspect your local FBOs are probably in their 1 year waiting period.
>
>

--
Andrew Stanley-Jones | "It's kind of fun to do the impossible."
EE, LongEz N87KJ | -- Walt Disney

Andrew Gideon

January 29th 04, 04:47 PM

ASJ wrote:

> I hope he doesn't start loosing lists as that's one the main uses I have
> for
> the site. That said it costs money to run it and he has to make money
> somehow. Maybe this will work for him, maybe not? I certainly hope it
> doesn't go away!

It is an interesting problem, common to too many "middle man" businesses:
the set of parties that pay isn't exactly the real consumer. In this case,
the site visitors are the users while the businesses pay for the listings.

Economically, it would make more sense for the listings to be free and the
site to be available only to subscribers (or with a "value added" section
available only to subscribers). Those that accrue the most value are
paying for the site in that situation. More, there's no economic incentive
that reduces the site's quality.

Given how much we here like the site, I suspect that this would have been
the smarter move.

As it stands, there's going to be a drop in quality of the site because the
need to pay is going to cause some businesses to balk. The drop in quality
will mean, long term, fewer visitors. That in turn means that businesses
are less likely to pay.

It's a downward spiral from there.

- Andrew

Ben Jackson

January 29th 04, 06:52 PM

In article >,
ASJ > wrote:
>
>It's amazing to watch all these people turn against AirNav.

I'm not against it, it's just a far less valuable resource when the
data is being filtered by who pays to be listed. I don't want to know
just which FBOs and restaurants paid the protection money, I want to
know them all.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[email protected]

January 29th 04, 06:59 PM

Andrew Gideon > wrote:
: Economically, it would make more sense for the listings to be free and the
: site to be available only to subscribers (or with a "value added" section
: available only to subscribers). Those that accrue the most value are
: paying for the site in that situation. More, there's no economic incentive
: that reduces the site's quality.

I sure hope not. It's pretty difficult to find good aviation information without
paying a nominal but extremely annoying "subscription fee." From the cheap-******* user's
point of view, I *despise* having to pay for nominal services for nominal costs... it's a
matter of principle. If they start charging a user subscription fee, then there will
immediately be 5-10 copycat sites vying for the $20/year users. It nominalizes the
system.

I'd venture to say that airnav is the de-factor standard for cross-country
fuel-stop planning. Having a nominal listing fee for fuel price makes good sense for
FBO's... provided it's reasonable. If there's 10 sites like it, they'll all suck. Darwin
takes care, and airnav has "won."

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Marty Shapiro

January 29th 04, 08:54 PM

wrote in
:

> Andrew Gideon > wrote:
>: Economically, it would make more sense for the listings to be free
>: and the site to be available only to subscribers (or with a "value
>: added" section available only to subscribers). Those that accrue the
>: most value are paying for the site in that situation. More, there's
>: no economic incentive that reduces the site's quality.
>
> I sure hope not. It's pretty difficult to find good aviation
> information without
> paying a nominal but extremely annoying "subscription fee." From the
> cheap-******* user's point of view, I *despise* having to pay for
> nominal services for nominal costs... it's a matter of principle. If
> they start charging a user subscription fee, then there will
> immediately be 5-10 copycat sites vying for the $20/year users. It
> nominalizes the system.
>
> I'd venture to say that airnav is the de-factor standard for
> cross-country
> fuel-stop planning. Having a nominal listing fee for fuel price makes
> good sense for FBO's... provided it's reasonable. If there's 10 sites
> like it, they'll all suck. Darwin takes care, and airnav has "won."
>
> -Cory
>

There is competition for AirNav's fuel price data base. Unfortunately, it
is currently a subscription service, but they intend to convert to a free
service if they can find a sponsor.

The service is Fillup Flyer Fuel Finder, http://www.fillupflyer.com

Although I use AirNav instead of Fillup Flyer, I did look into both
services several years ago. The major difference I noticed at that time
was that AirNav fuel prices were provided voluntarily by pilots who take
the time to report what they either pay or observe at an airport, while
Fillup Flyer called 6,000 FBOs every month.

Since the airports where I do most of my flying (San Francisco Bay area)
were very well represented in AirNav (most fuel prices were less than 30
days old and all FBOs seemed to be included), I never signed up with Fillup
Flyer, but did get some of their sample reports.

If AirNav stops listing ALL fuel prices and only lists those that
advertise, then their value will be diminished and it will be time to
revisit Fillup Flyer, especially if they become a free service to the user.

A quick look at Fillup Flyer web pages today showed that the current prices
are no membership & $10/report or $24.95 annual membership & $5/report.
This is using the internet. For a higher price per report, you can obtain
reports via fax or 800#.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

John Galban

January 29th 04, 08:55 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<go9Sb.50241$U%5.270242@attbi_s03>...
>
> He has a great website, and I use it almost daily for one thing or another.
> I think their listing fee works out to something less than 60 cents a day --
> something I was glad to pay for such a valuable service.

I think its utility will be a lot less valuable once the "free"
period has expired for all of the GA businesses. The beauty of the
original site was that it had all available info about FBOs and fuel
prices around the country and all of the info came directly from the
horses mouths (us). Once the site is reduced to info about only
businesses that paid up, it ceases to be the all encompassing,
one-stop-shopping resource that it once was. I know more GA business
owners who have declined to pony up, than those who have.

One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay? And
if that were the case, how would we find out about them?

I know running Airnav costs money, I just think this new direction
kills off the core of what made Airnav the best aviation site on the
Internet. I'd rather see banner advertising to pay the bills.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Jay Honeck

January 29th 04, 09:22 PM

> One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
> Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
> customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
> comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?

I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how Paulo
has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting sued.

There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
uncomfortable.

Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was a
really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
line-guy to avoid the place."

Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get him
in hot water, IMHO.

I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
place.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Kyler Laird

January 29th 04, 10:12 PM

(Victor) writes:

>Maybe somebody with the right capabilities could build a mirror web
>site so we could publish the fuel prices.

I've appreciated Airnav and have been sad to see the recent changes.

I've been thinking of building an interface to Airnav that would allow
people to submit prices/comments both to Airnav *and* a public
repository simultaneously. (I'd provide an initial interface to it
but everyone else would be welcome to the data.) Is there interest?

--kyler

Kyler Laird

January 29th 04, 10:12 PM

(Ben Jackson) writes:

>>It's amazing to watch all these people turn against AirNav.

>I'm not against it, it's just a far less valuable resource when the
>data is being filtered by who pays to be listed. I don't want to know
>just which FBOs and restaurants paid the protection money, I want to
>know them all.

Yup, that's a good summary of my feelings.

I'm also reluctant to put much effort into maintaining a proprietary
resource. I think Airnav comments are very valuable and I've entered
my share, but I don't like the idea of putting my effort into a
database I don't control. (That goes for $100 Hamburger, Aeroplanner,
AOPA, ... too.)

I firmly believe that a public database to which everyone can
contribute and from which everyone can draw is the answer. I'm quite
willing to host a version of it.

Anyone know if the basic FBO info that Airnav uses is public in some
form? I haven't noticed it in the ATA-100 data.

--kyler

Tom Sixkiller

January 29th 04, 10:49 PM

"Kyler Laird" > wrote in message
...
> (Ben Jackson) writes:
>
> >>It's amazing to watch all these people turn against AirNav.
>
> >I'm not against it, it's just a far less valuable resource when the
> >data is being filtered by who pays to be listed. I don't want to know
> >just which FBOs and restaurants paid the protection money, I want to
> >know them all.
>
> Yup, that's a good summary of my feelings.
>
> I'm also reluctant to put much effort into maintaining a proprietary
> resource. I think Airnav comments are very valuable and I've entered
> my share, but I don't like the idea of putting my effort into a
> database I don't control. (That goes for $100 Hamburger, Aeroplanner,
> AOPA, ... too.)
>
> I firmly believe that a public database to which everyone can
> contribute and from which everyone can draw is the answer. I'm quite
> willing to host a version of it.
>
> Anyone know if the basic FBO info that Airnav uses is public in some
> form? I haven't noticed it in the ATA-100 data.

Hey folks! It's a free market.

Build your own web site and do it YOUR way. Hell, there's a lot of web
development types in here already.

John Godwin

January 29th 04, 11:53 PM

(John Galban) wrote in
om:

> I think its utility will be a lot less valuable once the "free"
> period has expired for all of the GA businesses. The beauty of
> the original site was that it had all available info about FBOs
> and fuel prices around the country and all of the info came
> directly from the horses mouths (us). Once the site is reduced to
> info about only businesses that paid up, it ceases to be the all
> encompassing, one-stop-shopping resource that it once was.

I think you hit the nail on the head. First of all, I have high praise
for the good things that Paulo and AirNav have done for the aviation
community. User feedback (good and bad) is something you rarely see
and helps with flight planning.

I wouldn't have a problem if Paulo decides to put small advertising
banners at the top of the page, after all, many other websites have
done this and running the site isn't free. Removing certain FBOs takes
AirNav down to the level of corporate sites (such as Millionaire,
Signature, etc.) where you'll see nothing but fluff.

Again, truely sad.

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT from email address)

Bob Noel

January 30th 04, 01:38 AM

In article >, Kyler Laird
> wrote:

> (Victor) writes:
>
> >Maybe somebody with the right capabilities could build a mirror web
> >site so we could publish the fuel prices.
>
> I've appreciated Airnav and have been sad to see the recent changes.
>
> I've been thinking of building an interface to Airnav that would allow
> people to submit prices/comments both to Airnav *and* a public
> repository simultaneously. (I'd provide an initial interface to it
> but everyone else would be welcome to the data.) Is there interest?
>
> --kyler

or maybe let people post to rec.aviation.products, and provide
a focused "google". Did that make any sense?

--
Bob Noel

Bob Fry

January 30th 04, 02:36 AM

Kyler Laird > writes:

> I firmly believe that a public database to which everyone can
> contribute and from which everyone can draw is the answer. I'm quite
> willing to host a version of it.

Hosting is one thing; developing and maintaining it are another. I'm
all for public and open, but, like the open source movement, I wonder
how the workers get compensated.

Kyler Laird

January 30th 04, 06:12 AM

Bob Noel > writes:

>> I've been thinking of building an interface to Airnav that would allow
>> people to submit prices/comments both to Airnav *and* a public
>> repository simultaneously. (I'd provide an initial interface to it
>> but everyone else would be welcome to the data.) Is there interest?

>or maybe let people post to rec.aviation.products, and provide
>a focused "google". Did that make any sense?

It makes a lot of sense to me and I'd normally be one of the first to
suggest a Usenet-based solution. This time, however, it's not so clear
that it's the best distribution medium. I can imagine collecting the
prices and comments from posted messages, but it could get ugly fast -
especially prices, if they're kept reasonably current. I like to
encourage the use of Google, but I even worry about it being a
proprietary database.

I think it would be great, however, if someone built a mechanism to
post comments and even significant price changes back to Usenet.

Of course one of my biggest concerns about any such community-managed
system is authentication. I'd like all comments to be signed in some
form with a trust network so that we can easily separate the signal
from the noise. I have ideas for that.

--kyler

Tom Sixkiller

January 30th 04, 02:06 PM

"John Godwin" > wrote in message
. 3.44...
>
> I wouldn't have a problem if Paulo decides to put small advertising
> banners at the top of the page, after all, many other websites have
> done this and running the site isn't free. Removing certain FBOs takes
> AirNav down to the level of corporate sites (such as Millionaire,
> Signature, etc.) where you'll see nothing but fluff.

I've noticed Signature and Millionaire frequently get savaged for their
pompous attitudes and high prices in AirNav's user comments.

Mike Rapoport

January 30th 04, 03:00 PM

Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post unedited
comments?

Mike
MU-2

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03...
> > One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
> > Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
> > customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
> > comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?
>
> I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how Paulo
> has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting
sued.
>
> There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
> Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
> uncomfortable.
>
> Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
> AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was a
> really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
> line-guy to avoid the place."
>
> Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
> owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get
him
> in hot water, IMHO.
>
> I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
> buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
> pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
> place.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

G.R. Patterson III

January 30th 04, 04:49 PM

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post unedited
> comments?

Last year, the host of another web site was successfully sued by Wouk over comments
that someone posted on that site.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

Paulo Santos

January 30th 04, 05:16 PM

Folks,

I normally don't follow Usene. It is fun, but I just don't have the
time. So pardon my late entry into this thread. [Thanks, Victor, for
telling me about the thread.]

I started AirNav in 1995 and am still involved in it, although I don't
run the whole show anymore.

First of all, let me thank all of you on Usenet for the support you
have been providing. You folks on rec.aviation.* are incredibly
supportive, and I hope you will continue to be after you read this.

And second, let me assure all of you that AirNav remains committed to
providing incredible value to the aviation community.

One thing that several of you have figured out is that AirNav needs to
have a sufficient revenue stream to be viable. I don't think anybody
would deny us that. Even though we would very much like to provide
the service for free to everyone indefinitely, it is just not viable.
A revenue stream was absolutely necessary.

So we started by introducing simple and useful revenue solutions that
we though would be well received by everyone. We looked at several
solutions, and rolled them out over time: quality non-annoying banner
ads, online hotel and car reservations, upgraded listings for FBOs
that wanted it. All the while, we were providing a free Basic
presence to every FBO and aviation business.

It turned out that those revenue streams still weren't enough to
support the site. Maybe if pilots had made more hotel reservations it
would have been sufficient. The reservations they make help, but that
is still not sufficient.

So we did some serious soul searching and looked for a viable revenue
model. Two alternatives: charge the users (pilots) or charge the
advertisers (FBOs). We though that charging the pilots made the most
sense, since they were the ones benefiting most directly from the
site. But we conducted some surveys, and got some viscious negative
reactions from the majority of pilots. It would go something like
this:
- Do you use AirNav?
- YES, all the time. I love it.
- What do you fly, how much?
- I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
- What does AirNav do for you?
- I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
- Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
[ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
[ after regaining composure... ]
- Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.

So, folks, there you have it, a tremendous irrational response. And
this wasn't one or two people that we interviwed, it was the vast
majority. Definitely something we were not expecting from the
community of pilots.

In asking the FBOs how they felt about being charged they were more
reasonable. Well, more of them anyway, but still not 100%. They have
more of a business-minded approach to it, and as long as the rates are
affordable, charging the FBOs is a reasonable thing.

So we implemented that. We charge very reasonable rates to make sure
that no aviation business is left out for lack of affordability. We
have different rates at different airports to give everyone a fair
chance. An FBO at Bubba Jones Cropdusting Strip is going to pay a lot
less than an FBO at Big City Executive Airport. Our rates start at
under $10/month at every airport except the nation's top 80 airports,
and can be as little as $10/year at Bubba Jones's Strip. We give
significant discounts to non-profits (flying clubs, etc.), and to
small businesses that just can't hope to have the volume of an FBO
(airport restaurants, etc.). Can any FBO or business claim not to be
able to afford it? Can they do it straight-faced?

So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
prices, and user comments. (To those business that order services
from us, promise to pay, and then fail to pay their bills, well, those
we remove altogether -- but you wouldn't want to do business with
those guys anyway.).

It is not our intention to diminish the value of the service we
provide to the aviation community, but unfortunately we have to
distinguish between the non-payers and those that believe in us and
the service we provide. Continuing with the old model was just not
viable because AirNav would disappear altogether, and that is no way
to provide a valuable service to the community.

What can you as pilots do? Tell our sponsoring FBOs that you
appreciate their sponsorship. The FBOs need feedback to tell them
that their advertising dollars are being well spent. And to those
FBOs that don't sponsor AirNav, you should make it clear to them that
you use AirNav, and that AirNav plays a role in your FBO selection
process. They'll get the message.

I will follow up to some of the others posts in this thread
separately.

Thanks for your support, and we look forward to your comments and
insight.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

John Galban

January 30th 04, 05:22 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03>...
>
> I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
> buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
> pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
> place.

Don't get me wrong. I think that Paulo has done an incredible job
with Airnav. I tell anyone who will listen that it is the best
aviation site on the web. I also think he should make a buck on this
venture (lots of them, actually). I just think that his current
strategy will degrade the quality of the site.

There are lots of good mom & pop FBOs that are run on a shoestring
and don't do any advertising. That doesn't make them bad. You might
be content to avoid anyone who does not pay for an Airnav listing, but
if half of the FBOs disappear from the site, will it be as useful as
it once was? I don't think so. Ultimately, it's Paulo's call.
Personally, I'd be glad to pay an annual subscription fee to access
Airnav. It's a valuable resource to me.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Jay Honeck

January 30th 04, 06:06 PM

> Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post
unedited
> comments?

I dunno -- it's a gray area. But if it were me, just from a business
standpoint I'd be pretty worried about allowing third-hand, unverifiable
attack-posts.

I'd at least want a way to verify who was making the complaint, so as to
ensure that it's not just a disgruntled former employee posting stuff.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03...
> > > One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
> > > Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
> > > customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
> > > comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?
> >
> > I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how
Paulo
> > has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting
> sued.
> >
> > There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
> > Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
> > uncomfortable.
> >
> > Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
> > AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was
a
> > really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
> > line-guy to avoid the place."
> >
> > Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
> > owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get
> him
> > in hot water, IMHO.
> >
> > I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> > years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make
a
> > buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap
to
> > pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid
the
> > place.
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
> >
>
>

Roger Long

January 30th 04, 06:47 PM

Just ask Mike Busch formerly (probably because of this very issue) of Avweb.
--
Roger Long

Mike Rapoport > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post
unedited
> comments?
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>

Gig Giacona

January 30th 04, 06:54 PM

"Paulo Santos" > wrote
> So we did some serious soul searching and looked for a viable revenue
> model. Two alternatives: charge the users (pilots) or charge the
> advertisers (FBOs). We though that charging the pilots made the most
> sense, since they were the ones benefiting most directly from the
> site. But we conducted some surveys, and got some viscious negative
> reactions from the majority of pilots. It would go something like
> this:
> - Do you use AirNav?
> - YES, all the time. I love it.
> - What do you fly, how much?
> - I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
> - What does AirNav do for you?
> - I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
> dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
> filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
> - Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
> [ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
> [ after regaining composure... ]
> - Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.
>

Who would have thought Baron drivers were that stupid?

Thanks for the info, it is about what I'd guessed.

Gig Giacona
www.peoamerica.net/N601WR

Jay Honeck

January 30th 04, 07:16 PM

> So, folks, there you have it, a tremendous irrational response. And
> this wasn't one or two people that we interviwed, it was the vast
> majority. Definitely something we were not expecting from the
> community of pilots.

Paulo, we've seen this same kind of irrational reaction from pilots (and
non-pilots) on occasion. One encounter in particular stands out in my mind:

We received a call from the airport, saying that they had a guy who needed a
suite for the night. He and his wife had just arrived in his $500K Baron,
and wanted to see our place cuz he'd read about it in GA News.

Before I could say "hello" he started trying to chisel down the price on one
of our suites. The EAA and AOPA discounts weren't enough for him -- and he
eventually demanded to stay in the absolute cheapest suite we had, which, I
informed him, was NOT an aviation theme suite.

He said it didn't matter -- so I put him in our smallest suite for a
whopping $47.95. Then, of course, after check-in he started bitching that
there was no "airplane stuff" in his suite.

Now, remember, we've not raised any prices from the previous owners, we've
invested tens of thousands of dollars into artwork, decor, furniture,
memorabilia, etc, we provide a FREE $30K van for the Baron pilot to drive,
and we deliver a FREE breakfast to his suite each morning, along with the
daily paper -- yet he wanted to pay "Super 8" prices.

Now, when I get someone like that -- pilot or not -- I simply give them the
"Motel 6" phone number, and wish them a good day. Life is too short to
screw with people like that.

Charge what you must to survive, Paulo. We'll stick with you!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[email protected]

January 30th 04, 08:33 PM

In rec.aviation.owning Ben Jackson > wrote:
: Well eventually he'll make it useless enough that someone else
: replicates the service. I never did like the way nearby attractions
: were cataloged. For example, I tried to add beach access information
: for a few coastal Oregon airports, but that never turned up.

Here's a way to split the difference, I think. Although it's still a
"subscription service," AOPA is one organization I feel every pilot should be a member of.
It's pretty trivial to *add* the user/feedback functionality to an existing site, so
perhaps roll it into AOPA's site? That makes some sense, no?

Of course, we'd have to convince them to buy into it.

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Kyler Laird

January 30th 04, 09:12 PM

"Gig Giacona" > writes:

>> - Do you use AirNav?
>> - YES, all the time. I love it.
>> - What do you fly, how much?
>> - I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
>> - What does AirNav do for you?
>> - I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
>> dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
>> filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
>> - Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
>> [ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
>> [ after regaining composure... ]
>> - Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.
>>

>Who would have thought Baron drivers were that stupid?

I understand that it's fun to call others "irrational" and "stupid"
upon failure to understand their logic, but this decision sometimes
has nothing to do with cost so if you're stuck thinking in those
terms you're unlikely to understand what's happening.

I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
(thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

--kyler

Kyler Laird

January 30th 04, 09:12 PM

(Paulo Santos) writes:

>One thing that several of you have figured out is that AirNav needs to
>have a sufficient revenue stream to be viable. I don't think anybody
>would deny us that. Even though we would very much like to provide
>the service for free to everyone indefinitely, it is just not viable.
>A revenue stream was absolutely necessary.

So...what would it take to convince you to just sell AirNav (or
at least the database)?

--kyler

Kyler Laird

January 30th 04, 10:12 PM

Bob Noel > writes:

>or maybe let people post to rec.aviation.products, and provide
>a focused "google". Did that make any sense?

I've thought on this more. I *really* would like something like
that and I think that my initial reaction was short-sighted.

If the quantitative data (fuel prices, services, ...) is
maintained separately, I think that handling the qualitative data
(user comments) through Usenet would be perfectly appropriate and
provide some great benefits.

The trick would be getting users to post comments that could be
reliably found. Most of us don't even use keywords for our
Usenet postings now, so I suspect this means putting indexing
info in the subject line. Getting the subject line just right is
the trick.

I'm going to think on it more. Thank you for the idea. I'm
sorry I didn't "see the light" sooner.

--kyler

Steve

January 30th 04, 11:15 PM

What about a public/private model, where if an FBO et al, pay then they show
on the public, and if a "pilot" pays, then "everything" shows on the private
access. What about allowing a pilot to pay either, yearly, per need, or for
blocks of access.

Just random thoughts.

- Steve

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
> Folks,
>
> I normally don't follow Usene. It is fun, but I just don't have the
> time. So pardon my late entry into this thread. [Thanks, Victor, for
> telling me about the thread.]
>
> I started AirNav in 1995 and am still involved in it, although I don't
> run the whole show anymore.
>
> First of all, let me thank all of you on Usenet for the support you
> have been providing. You folks on rec.aviation.* are incredibly
> supportive, and I hope you will continue to be after you read this.
>
> And second, let me assure all of you that AirNav remains committed to
> providing incredible value to the aviation community.
>
> One thing that several of you have figured out is that AirNav needs to
> have a sufficient revenue stream to be viable. I don't think anybody
> would deny us that. Even though we would very much like to provide
> the service for free to everyone indefinitely, it is just not viable.
> A revenue stream was absolutely necessary.
>
> So we started by introducing simple and useful revenue solutions that
> we though would be well received by everyone. We looked at several
> solutions, and rolled them out over time: quality non-annoying banner
> ads, online hotel and car reservations, upgraded listings for FBOs
> that wanted it. All the while, we were providing a free Basic
> presence to every FBO and aviation business.
>
> It turned out that those revenue streams still weren't enough to
> support the site. Maybe if pilots had made more hotel reservations it
> would have been sufficient. The reservations they make help, but that
> is still not sufficient.
>
> So we did some serious soul searching and looked for a viable revenue
> model. Two alternatives: charge the users (pilots) or charge the
> advertisers (FBOs). We though that charging the pilots made the most
> sense, since they were the ones benefiting most directly from the
> site. But we conducted some surveys, and got some viscious negative
> reactions from the majority of pilots. It would go something like
> this:
> - Do you use AirNav?
> - YES, all the time. I love it.
> - What do you fly, how much?
> - I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
> - What does AirNav do for you?
> - I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
> dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
> filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
> - Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
> [ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
> [ after regaining composure... ]
> - Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.
>
> So, folks, there you have it, a tremendous irrational response. And
> this wasn't one or two people that we interviwed, it was the vast
> majority. Definitely something we were not expecting from the
> community of pilots.
>
> In asking the FBOs how they felt about being charged they were more
> reasonable. Well, more of them anyway, but still not 100%. They have
> more of a business-minded approach to it, and as long as the rates are
> affordable, charging the FBOs is a reasonable thing.
>
> So we implemented that. We charge very reasonable rates to make sure
> that no aviation business is left out for lack of affordability. We
> have different rates at different airports to give everyone a fair
> chance. An FBO at Bubba Jones Cropdusting Strip is going to pay a lot
> less than an FBO at Big City Executive Airport. Our rates start at
> under $10/month at every airport except the nation's top 80 airports,
> and can be as little as $10/year at Bubba Jones's Strip. We give
> significant discounts to non-profits (flying clubs, etc.), and to
> small businesses that just can't hope to have the volume of an FBO
> (airport restaurants, etc.). Can any FBO or business claim not to be
> able to afford it? Can they do it straight-faced?
>
> So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
> take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
> prices, and user comments. (To those business that order services
> from us, promise to pay, and then fail to pay their bills, well, those
> we remove altogether -- but you wouldn't want to do business with
> those guys anyway.).
>
> It is not our intention to diminish the value of the service we
> provide to the aviation community, but unfortunately we have to
> distinguish between the non-payers and those that believe in us and
> the service we provide. Continuing with the old model was just not
> viable because AirNav would disappear altogether, and that is no way
> to provide a valuable service to the community.
>
> What can you as pilots do? Tell our sponsoring FBOs that you
> appreciate their sponsorship. The FBOs need feedback to tell them
> that their advertising dollars are being well spent. And to those
> FBOs that don't sponsor AirNav, you should make it clear to them that
> you use AirNav, and that AirNav plays a role in your FBO selection
> process. They'll get the message.
>
> I will follow up to some of the others posts in this thread
> separately.
>
> Thanks for your support, and we look forward to your comments and
> insight.
>
> Paulo Santos
> AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

[email protected]

January 30th 04, 11:57 PM

On 30-Jan-2004, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> He said it didn't matter -- so I put him in our smallest suite for
> awhopping $47.95.

Holy cow, Jay! Even in Iowa City a suite -- ANY suite -- for under 50 bucks
a night has got to be a great deal, especially with breakfast included.
What do you do, charge extra for the towels?
--
-Elliott Drucker

[email protected]

January 31st 04, 12:06 AM

On 30-Jan-2004, (Paulo Santos) wrote:

> So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
> take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
> prices, and user comments.

Paulo,

First of all, I want to thank you for providing such a useful service to the
GA community. I've used it frequently with good results.

I believe that your fee structure, as you describe it, is very fair and
reasonable. But for users, I fail to see what the big deal is. If you
continue to list non-paying FBOs, along with their telephone numbers, fuel
prices, and user comments, you are still providing the majority of what
users want to see. The rest -- advertising and/or links to websites -- are
really more to the benefit of the business involved.

Keep up the good work!

--
-Elliott Drucker

Victor

January 31st 04, 12:06 AM

Paulo,

First of all I would like to thank you once more on creating such a
great website. Second I would like to apologize if starting this
thread made you upset in any way. The reason I started this thread is
to raise your attention to something that could ultimately affect
AIRNAV.

As you can see from all the posts made by GA people, everybody
understand that AIRNAV needs funding. We do not need any other mirror
web site as long as AIRNAV continue providing a mechanism that all
pilots can help each other in selecting the FBO on an unknown airport.

The way AIRNAV created to fund the web site is kind of awkward. The
FBOs that have a high price and has money to invest in advertising
should not be to inclined on maintaining a web site that is been used
by pilots to find a cheaper source of fuel in the region. But I hope
this is giving good returns to AIRNAV.

The problem comes that FBOs that have the best prices are not to
willing to invest in advertising probably because their margins are
low or they belong to the City. This is easily proved on AIRNAV web
site doing a Long Format Great Deal Report. You will notice that more
than 50% of the FBOs in that report are not sponsoring AIRNAV. And
these are the FBOs that should have the greatest interest in
advertising their prices.

I do remember sometime ago when AIRNAV web site was down. You stated
that many pilots have contacted you asking to give financial support.
I am sure that if you included an easy way for pilots/owners that take
great advantage from the site to make donations, you could be
surprised. The same comes to Hotel and Car reservations, let the
pilots know that by doing these reservations through AIRNAV they are
helping support the website.

I do understand that you are charging from the FBOs prices from $20 to
$750 per year is really very cheap considering the revenue generated
by the FBOs. But some people are just lazy to send a check every year
or have to much paper work involved to make such payment.

What I ask of you is to publish just fuel prices for the FBOs that are
not able to make such payments. This is not happening; I know at least
two airports with new fuel service that the prices are not been
published. And also like to suggest include the prices charged for
tie-down and hanger, sometimes these charges surprise us pilots.

Personally I always mention AIRNAV to the FBOs I visit and will
continue to do so.

Rgds,

Victor

Tom Sixkiller

January 31st 04, 01:14 AM

"John Galban" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:<IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03>...
> >
> > I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> > years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make
a
> > buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap
to
> > pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid
the
> > place.
>
>
> Don't get me wrong. I think that Paulo has done an incredible job
> with Airnav. I tell anyone who will listen that it is the best
> aviation site on the web. I also think he should make a buck on this
> venture (lots of them, actually). I just think that his current
> strategy will degrade the quality of the site.
>
> There are lots of good mom & pop FBOs that are run on a shoestring
> and don't do any advertising. That doesn't make them bad. You might
> be content to avoid anyone who does not pay for an Airnav listing, but
> if half of the FBOs disappear from the site, will it be as useful as
> it once was? I don't think so.
>
Recall that all FBO's are listed, even those that pay nothing. They don't an
elaborate link, but their base info and fuel prices are listed.

> Ultimately, it's Paulo's call.
> Personally, I'd be glad to pay an annual subscription fee to access
> Airnav. It's a valuable resource to me.

I find no real fault at all with his plan.

Tom Sixkiller

January 31st 04, 01:17 AM

"Kyler Laird" > wrote in message
...
> "Gig Giacona" > writes:
>
> >> - Do you use AirNav?
> >> - YES, all the time. I love it.
> >> - What do you fly, how much?
> >> - I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
> >> - What does AirNav do for you?
> >> - I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
> >> dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
> >> filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
> >> - Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
> >> [ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
> >> [ after regaining composure... ]
> >> - Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.
> >>
>
> >Who would have thought Baron drivers were that stupid?
>
> I understand that it's fun to call others "irrational" and "stupid"
> upon failure to understand their logic, but this decision sometimes
> has nothing to do with cost so if you're stuck thinking in those
> terms you're unlikely to understand what's happening.
>
> I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
> worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
> use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
> (thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
> browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

S, it's not a matter of cost, it's the one in a thousand users like yourself
that have an issue under extreme circumstances?

Talk about validating the point about "irrational" and "stupid".

Tom Sixkiller

January 31st 04, 01:23 AM

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post
unedited
> comments?
>
> Mike
> MU-2

They are not unedited; they have to go through an approval process.
Likewise, a lot of positive comments are put in by employees and the FBO
owners.

Like anything, you have to take it with a grain of salt...sometimes

--
"He that would make his own liberty secure,
must guard even his enemy from oppression;
for if he violates this duty, he establishes
a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine lots of salt.

Mike Rapoport

January 31st 04, 01:36 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:j4ySb.191013$na.317880@attbi_s04...

> He said it didn't matter -- so I put him in our smallest suite for a
> whopping $47.95. Then, of course, after check-in he started bitching that
> there was no "airplane stuff" in his suite.

> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
Now everyone here will feel like a sucker if they pay one penney more! :-)

Mike
MU-2

Tony Cox

January 31st 04, 02:24 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:j4ySb.191013$na.317880@attbi_s04...
>
> He said it didn't matter -- so I put him in our smallest suite for a
> whopping $47.95. Then, of course, after check-in he started bitching that
> there was no "airplane stuff" in his suite.
>

I've just the thing for your budget customers.

How about a selection of fine O470 engine mounts,
out-of-spec rockers & worn-out valves? You can
put them in the corner next to a vintage bucket of
used Aeroshell 100+ with matching hacked-up oil
filter, or sprinkle them around the floor. Your choice.

There. Fine old 'airplane stuff'. Feel free to pick them
up next time you're in Las Vegas.

--
Dr. Tony Cox
Citrus Controls Inc.
e-mail:
http://CitrusControls.com/

Jay Honeck

January 31st 04, 02:36 AM

> Now everyone here will feel like a sucker if they pay one penney more! :-)

Any one is welcome to our smallest suite for that price -- just $47.95.
(Plus the Gubmint's share, of course...)

Even at that ridiculous price, you'll STILL get a 300 square foot suite
(bigger than the Sheraton's LARGEST suite), with a full kitchen, breakfast
bar, queen-sized bed, and delivered breakfast basket -- the best deal you'll
ever find, anywhere.

Just don't expect new furniture, carpeting, window treatments, cool aviation
artwork, or any sort of memorabilia!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

January 31st 04, 02:38 AM

> How about a selection of fine O470 engine mounts,
> out-of-spec rockers & worn-out valves? You can
> put them in the corner next to a vintage bucket of
> used Aeroshell 100+ with matching hacked-up oil
> filter, or sprinkle them around the floor. Your choice.

Got a bunch of that stuff in the lobby already, Doc Tony.

Well, no oil, though... Mary wouldn't let me have it...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

January 31st 04, 02:40 AM

> Holy cow, Jay! Even in Iowa City a suite -- ANY suite -- for under 50
bucks
> a night has got to be a great deal, especially with breakfast included.
> What do you do, charge extra for the towels?

And that "little" suite, at that price, is bigger than the largest suite our
competitor has to offer -- at three times the money.

And it has a full kitchen.

We offer value. That's what we're all about. :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Geoffrey Barnes

January 31st 04, 03:14 AM

> Just ask Mike Busch formerly (probably because of this very issue) of
Avweb.

You mean the Mike Busch who just started writing a montly column for AvWeb?
He's not "formerly" anything there. He had a very close call with a nasty
bout of cancer, and was focused on beating that for a while. But now he's
cancer free and back into aviation again.

January 31st 04, 03:36 AM

Paulo,

Thank you for the excellent service you have been providing over the years.

I read the posts and understand your need for revenue. I was thinking that
if you continued to charge the businesses listing on your site and that did
not provide sufficient revenue, and before you took the step of charging
users a yearly fee you might consider a voluntary donation system. I for one
would find it easy to justify sending in x amount of dollars ( $10, $20 )
to help keep the site going. This system would also allow for people who
have a bigger budget or are simply more generous to send in more money if
the want to. Good luck.

Jon

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
> Folks,
>
> I normally don't follow Usene. It is fun, but I just don't have the
> time. So pardon my late entry into this thread. [Thanks, Victor, for
> telling me about the thread.]

Doug

January 31st 04, 05:33 AM

Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.
Accurate information will disappear. I think he should sell ads.
That's it. Or perhaps charge a subscription, though I question if all
us pilots would fork over anything.

I for one do not change my routes to obtain cheap gas. I stop where
convenient. At lunch I want a resturant on the field, if not I want to
borrow a courtesy car and go to a cafe. For evening stop I want a
hotel that will pick me up and drop me off. I don't want to navigate a
rental car to/from the hotel or pay the rental car fee. I only rent a
car when I need to do business or sightseeing nearby. I do shop gas
around my nearby airport, I know where the cheap gas is near here. The
service is of limited value to me. But I do know that others differ
and plan their flights based on it.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03>...
> > One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
> > Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
> > customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
> > comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?
>
> I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how Paulo
> has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting sued.
>
> There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
> Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
> uncomfortable.
>
> Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
> AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was a
> really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
> line-guy to avoid the place."
>
> Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
> owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get him
> in hot water, IMHO.
>
> I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
> buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
> pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
> place.

Tom Sixkiller

January 31st 04, 05:45 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:bxESb.60871$U%5.362571@attbi_s03...
> > Now everyone here will feel like a sucker if they pay one penney more!
:-)
>
> Any one is welcome to our smallest suite for that price -- just $47.95.
> (Plus the Gubmint's share, of course...)
>
> Even at that ridiculous price, you'll STILL get a 300 square foot suite
> (bigger than the Sheraton's LARGEST suite), with a full kitchen, breakfast
> bar, queen-sized bed, and delivered breakfast basket -- the best deal
you'll
> ever find, anywhere.
>
> Just don't expect new furniture, carpeting, window treatments, cool
aviation
> artwork, or any sort of memorabilia!
>
> :-)

Does that include the indoor toilet option?

Jay Honeck

January 31st 04, 01:36 PM

> Does that include the indoor toilet option?

For just ten bucks a night more...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Victor

January 31st 04, 01:55 PM

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THIS IS NOT HAPENING FOR NEW FBOs THAT DIDN'T HAVE
A LISTING BEFORE THE NEW POLICY. I KNOW AT LEAST TWO AIRPORTS WITH
FUEL THAT ARE NOT LISTED IN AIRNAV.

wrote in message >...
> On 30-Jan-2004, (Paulo Santos) wrote:
>
> > So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
> > take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
> > prices, and user comments.
>
>
> Paulo,
>
> First of all, I want to thank you for providing such a useful service to the
> GA community. I've used it frequently with good results.
>
> I believe that your fee structure, as you describe it, is very fair and
> reasonable. But for users, I fail to see what the big deal is. If you
> continue to list non-paying FBOs, along with their telephone numbers, fuel
> prices, and user comments, you are still providing the majority of what
> users want to see. The rest -- advertising and/or links to websites -- are
> really more to the benefit of the business involved.
>
> Keep up the good work!

Newps

January 31st 04, 03:10 PM

Doug wrote:

> Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
> with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.

Not always too cheap. They just don't care because it doesn't bring in
any business. Buddy of mine owns a self serve 12,000 gallon tank at an
airport near here. He sell 100LL for $2.19 a gallon. The guy across
the ramp, who a lot of people don't like, is the FBO and has long sold
fuel. He is on very shaky financial ground and is now forced to sell
fuel at the same price. Problem is he only buys 1000 gallons at a time
and can't get as good a price from the dealer. Here at the main airport
in Billings 100LL goes for about $2.90. Most traffic will stop here at
the main airport, even though 11 miles away you can save 70 cents a gallon.

G.R. Patterson III

January 31st 04, 03:49 PM

Paulo Santos wrote:
>
> I normally don't follow Usene. It is fun, but I just don't have the
> time. So pardon my late entry into this thread. [Thanks, Victor, for
> telling me about the thread.]

Well, that post pretty much takes care of all the objections I've seen in this
thread so far.

Thanks, Paulo.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

James M. Knox

January 31st 04, 04:08 PM

Newps > wrote in
news:4APSb.191598$I06.2115961@attbi_s01:

>> Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
>> with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.
>
> Not always too cheap. They just don't care because it doesn't bring
> in any business.

I think there are more reasons. [And unfortunately, I don't know a good
solution to the problem.] I frequently find myself at a lot of small
rural airports around the southwest. Most of these are unattended. A
lot that *claim* to be attended simply have a guy who lives in a trailer
somewhere on the property and mows the grass and keeps the barb wire
fences mended in return for a sub-standard place to live.

Fuel is from a self-serve pump, billed as the owning cities utility
district. There is usually a pay phone and a public toilet/building (or
at least a designated tree).

The problem here is NOT the price of an Airnav listing, but rather that
the airport is not run as a profit center. Just who is going to agree
to run the listing? The guy mowing the field? He doesn't have the
authority to spend the $10 per year, nor does he care. He gets nothing
from the fuel flow. The city utility district? They just handle the
billing - it's a data processing center. You could spend $50 in long
distance calls (not to mention your time) just trying to find anyone to
give you a definitive yes or no about subscribing to Airnav for $10 per
year.

[And yes, this situation has other fallout - no one promotes aviation,
no one promotes the airport or flying, and the airport is always viewed
as (and is) a drain on the public coffers.]

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

Newps

January 31st 04, 07:28 PM

James M. Knox wrote:

> Newps > wrote in
> news:4APSb.191598$I06.2115961@attbi_s01:
>
>
>>>Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
>>>with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.
>>
>>Not always too cheap. They just don't care because it doesn't bring
>>in any business.
>
>
> I think there are more reasons. [And unfortunately, I don't know a good
> solution to the problem.] I frequently find myself at a lot of small
> rural airports around the southwest. Most of these are unattended. A
> lot that *claim* to be attended simply have a guy who lives in a trailer
> somewhere on the property and mows the grass and keeps the barb wire
> fences mended in return for a sub-standard place to live.

Paulo mentioned he was shocked that a guy driving a Baron wouldn't cough
up a nominal amount each month for the service. The fact is we all
cough up a lot of nominal amounts each month for various services, all
an unbelievably good value. Pretty soon it ain't nominal anymore.

Tom Sixkiller

January 31st 04, 08:30 PM

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:BlTSb.148233$Rc4.1190979@attbi_s54...
>
>
> Paulo mentioned he was shocked that a guy driving a Baron wouldn't cough
> up a nominal amount each month for the service. The fact is we all
> cough up a lot of nominal amounts each month for various services, all
> an unbelievably good value. Pretty soon it ain't nominal anymore.

Umm...yes...so what's the punch line?

What price good information?

John Galban

January 31st 04, 10:33 PM

(Paulo Santos) wrote in message >...
>
> So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
> take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
> prices, and user comments.

OK Paulo,

I take back all my comments in this thread. The original post led
me to believe that non-paying FBOs were not being listed (fuel prices
or comments). If that is not the case, then I think you've struck an
excellent compromise. The FBOs that pay get improved exposure, and we
still get all of the available core information that we need.

I really hope that model works out for you. As I said in another
post, you've created one of the best aviation resources on the web and
you deserve to make something from it.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Newps

January 31st 04, 10:34 PM

Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:BlTSb.148233$Rc4.1190979@attbi_s54...
>
>>
>>Paulo mentioned he was shocked that a guy driving a Baron wouldn't cough
>>up a nominal amount each month for the service. The fact is we all
>>cough up a lot of nominal amounts each month for various services, all
>>an unbelievably good value. Pretty soon it ain't nominal anymore.
>
>
> Umm...yes...so what's the punch line?
>
> What price good information?

The information he provides is available elsewhere, for example AOPA.
So if you are a member of AOPA there's no reason to pay for the same
information twice.

ArtP

January 31st 04, 10:48 PM

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:34:19 GMT, Newps > wrote:

>The information he provides is available elsewhere, for example AOPA.
>So if you are a member of AOPA there's no reason to pay for the same
>information twice.

One of the things I use AIRNAV for is to find all airports along my
route of flight that have an ILS and 24 hour fuel availability. There
is no other site that I am aware of that will give me that information
with a single request.

Tom Sixkiller

February 1st 04, 04:13 AM

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:L3WSb.154496$nt4.711997@attbi_s51...
>
>
> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> > "Newps" > wrote in message
> > news:BlTSb.148233$Rc4.1190979@attbi_s54...
> >
> >>
> >>Paulo mentioned he was shocked that a guy driving a Baron wouldn't cough
> >>up a nominal amount each month for the service. The fact is we all
> >>cough up a lot of nominal amounts each month for various services, all
> >>an unbelievably good value. Pretty soon it ain't nominal anymore.
> >
> >
> > Umm...yes...so what's the punch line?
> >
> > What price good information?
>
> The information he provides is available elsewhere, for example AOPA.
> So if you are a member of AOPA there's no reason to pay for the same
> information twice.

So go with AOPA. I'll stick with AirNav since I find AOPA to be to pilots
what AARP is to geezers. :~)

Tom Sixkiller

February 1st 04, 04:16 AM

"ArtP" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:34:19 GMT, Newps > wrote:
>
>
> >The information he provides is available elsewhere, for example AOPA.
> >So if you are a member of AOPA there's no reason to pay for the same
> >information twice.
>
> One of the things I use AIRNAV for is to find all airports along my
> route of flight that have an ILS and 24 hour fuel availability. There
> is no other site that I am aware of that will give me that information
> with a single request.

Quite so!

Also, AirNav will save our company about $40K a year as we move our two
birds a few miles (46) away. Yeah, the information was probably available
elsewhere, but AirNav made the search easy.

Paulo Santos

February 1st 04, 08:55 PM

> > Last year, AirNav contacted me (as representative of my flying club) and
> > gave me a year to pony up some extremely high listing fee or get dropped
> > from their listing. Checking the fact that in the previous month only one
> > person had come to our club web site through the AirNav listing (versus
> > 10-20 a day through Google) we declined to be listed.
>
> For a flying club I suppose only "click-throughs" matter. FBO owners,
> however, need to be looking at their listing from an exposure standpoint.

Well, flying clubs can look at their listing not only from the
perspective of a direct benefit to the club (getting exposure for
their club on a site with highly targeted GA interests, as opposed to
a general public search engine such as Google) but also from the
perspective of he benefit to their operation and to their members. If
AirNav helps their members operate their aircraft more efficiently,
increase flying hours and/or reduce operating costs, then it should
make sense for them to do their fair share to improve AirNav's chances
of being around to continue to provide that service.

Alas, not all view it that way, and some look at hits only.

In the case of Paul Tomblin, who defended his club's treasure chest by
declining the offer, that "extremely high listing fee" was less than
$2 per club member per year. If AirNav is not worth $2 per year to
his club members, then he did the right thing by refusing the
extremely high priced offer.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

Paulo Santos

February 1st 04, 09:34 PM

> I think its utility will be a lot less valuable once the "free"
> period has expired for all of the GA businesses. The beauty of the
> original site was that it had all available info about FBOs and fuel
> prices around the country and all of the info came directly from the
> horses mouths (us).

And the intent is for that to continue. I know perfectly well that
the value of the site would be severely diminished if it wasn't
comprehensive.

> Once the site is reduced to info about only
> businesses that paid up, it ceases to be the all encompassing,
> one-stop-shopping resource that it once was. I know more GA business
> owners who have declined to pony up, than those who have.

Since you know so many business owners, if you like AirNav and want it
to continue to provide a good service you are in a good position to
help. You can help by thanking the buiness owners that believed in
the model and "ponied up", and encourage the others to sign up. It is
not going to break their bank, no matter how small they are.

> One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
> Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
> customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
> comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay? And
> if that were the case, how would we find out about them?

Comments and listing payments are completely independent. A listing
does NOT give a business the right to pick and choose which comments
will get posted. If it says there at the top of the comments section
"Comments from AirNav users", then AirNav's good name it at stake. We
will not falter in our determination to post fair and verifiable
comments.

Yes, some FBOs have tried to censor their comments, but we have always
and will always decline. If they insist, we offer to refund their
money. At that point most just accept reality and take it as it is.
Occasionally, they want to play tough. We have lost a large 20+ FBO
chain account as a result of that firm policy, and we will stand by it
no matter what. Actually, when I say that we have lost the account,
that is a temporary thing. I am confident that they will turn around
and see how futile their resistance is. By not signing up they
forfeit the opportunity to present themselves, and are left with the
comments only. They are left with just the very thing they were
trying to avoid.

Now, do we publish every comment? No, we don't. We do not publsh, or
will remove, the following:
- comments from the business owners, director, employees or agents,
except those submitted specifically as a followup to a comment from
one of their customers
- comments from past business owners, director, employees or agents
- comments from direct competitors
- comments that are not representative of an actual customer
experience
- comments with forged or concealed identities
- comments with foul language
- comments that contain personal references or personal attacks (these
may be removed at the request of the affected person)
- comments from minors

Occasionally some comment that shouldn't be posted gets through, but
if we later catch it we will remove it.

We will also remove any comment at any time at the request of the
original author.

Finally, and most importantly, we expect comment authors to stand
behind their words. If an affected business wants to follow up on a
comment, we will put the business and the comment author in touch. If
the comment author fails to communicate or to respond to a challenge,
then if the business requests we may remove the comment.

This could be a high maintenance process, but fortunately aviation if
full of honest and upstanding people and it works quite well. I guess
the dishonest cheaters and liars also cheat on their training,
currency and maintenance, and eventually are eliminated from the gene
pool.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC hhtp://www.airnav.com/

Paulo Santos

February 1st 04, 09:51 PM

> I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how Paulo
> has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting sued.

Integrity, paucity and fear.

Businesses see that we try hard to do the right thing. That alone
gets us the respect that keeps another honorable business or person
with integrity from suing us.

Shortage of assets also helps. Even if they sued, there wouldn't be
much to collect. So what's the point?

And finally, fear of retribution. If they sued, it would be fair game
for us to post their suit on the web site. After all, it is public
record. The damage they would be doing to themselves would be far
greater than the damage inflicted by any comment.

> I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
> years, basically "on the house."

Make that 9 years.

> Now that he's trying to actually make a
> buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
> pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
> place.

Way to go, Jay. Make sure FBOs know that.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

Paul Tomblin

February 1st 04, 09:54 PM

In a previous article, (Paulo Santos) said:
>AirNav helps their members operate their aircraft more efficiently,
>increase flying hours and/or reduce operating costs, then it should
>make sense for them to do their fair share to improve AirNav's chances
>of being around to continue to provide that service.

If AirNav asked for direct donations from people who benefited from it, I
would donate since I use it. But to spend members money because some of
them might get some benefit from it is unconsionable.

>$2 per club member per year. If AirNav is not worth $2 per year to
>his club members, then he did the right thing by refusing the
>extremely high priced offer.

It is not for me to decide that my club members get benefit from something
that demonstrably does not lead to benefit to the club itself.

Personally, I think members of my flying club get nebulous benefits from
having the CoPilot databases available to them, but I'm not about to steal
money from the club to keep that afloat either.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Surely the 98% of DNA we share with monkeys must be enough to stop
people from sinking this low.
-- Frossie

Paulo Santos

February 1st 04, 10:04 PM

> Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
> with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.

Those with high prices often provide a higher level of service. Not
everyone always wants the cheap price. Believe me, I like cheap fuel.
But I also do a lot of meetings at FBOs. An FBO with a conference
room, meeting facilities, a speakerphone, internet connection, and a
courtesy car provides me a valuable office space for a day -- for
free. Well, not for tree, but for the extra cost of the fuel. I
don't mind paying extra for the better services, and if the way to
charge is through the fuel price, that is fine with me.

If I am just passing through on a refueling stop, with no wife or
customers, I don't mind the "FBO in a double-wide" that offers cheaper
fuel.

Different missions, different needs.

The FBOs with higher prices are the ones that should want to advetise
the most -- they want to show the services and amenities they offer,
in a way to justify the higher prices they charge.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

Tom Sixkiller

February 2nd 04, 12:40 AM

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Yes, some FBOs have tried to censor their comments, but we have always
> and will always decline. If they insist, we offer to refund their
> money. At that point most just accept reality and take it as it is.
> Occasionally, they want to play tough. We have lost a large 20+ FBO
> chain account as a result of that firm policy, and we will stand by it
> no matter what. Actually, when I say that we have lost the account,
> that is a temporary thing. I am confident that they will turn around
> and see how futile their resistance is. By not signing up they
> forfeit the opportunity to present themselves, and are left with the
> comments only. They are left with just the very thing they were
> trying to avoid.

One would think that they would expend that energy to keep customers happy
(i.e., "We regret the experience that Joe Blow had with our company...",
rather than trying to rationalize like children.

Paulo Santos

February 2nd 04, 02:39 AM

> I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
> worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
> use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
> (thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
> browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

What Javascript and cookies and whatever? On AirNav?

Tom Sixkiller

February 2nd 04, 09:38 AM

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
> > Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
> > with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.
>
> Those with high prices often provide a higher level of service. Not
> everyone always wants the cheap price. Believe me, I like cheap fuel.
> But I also do a lot of meetings at FBOs. An FBO with a conference
> room, meeting facilities, a speakerphone, internet connection, and a
> courtesy car provides me a valuable office space for a day -- for
> free. Well, not for tree, but for the extra cost of the fuel. I
> don't mind paying extra for the better services, and if the way to
> charge is through the fuel price, that is fine with me.
>
> If I am just passing through on a refueling stop, with no wife or
> customers, I don't mind the "FBO in a double-wide" that offers cheaper
> fuel.
>
> Different missions, different needs.
>
> The FBOs with higher prices are the ones that should want to advetise
> the most -- they want to show the services and amenities they offer,
> in a way to justify the higher prices they charge.
>
> Paulo Santos
> AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

Yet this one inverts all the rationale.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KCOS

Kyler Laird

February 2nd 04, 02:21 PM

(Paulo Santos) writes:

>> I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
>> worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
>> use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
>> (thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
>> browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

>What Javascript and cookies and whatever? On AirNav?

No, on similar services that switch to requiring authentication in
order to use. The quote above it was
>> - Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
I assume that you'd verify that users paid, not just go on the honor
system.

Aeroplanner is an example of a system that requires cookies to
authenticate for their service. AOPA is a decent counterexample.
(They permit standard authentication in addition to the cookie
stuff.)

Like I said, I appreciate AirNav the way it is. (But *you* know
that already.)

--kyler

Ron Natalie

February 2nd 04, 05:50 PM

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message om...
> So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
> take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
> prices, and user comments. (To those business that order services
> from us, promise to pay, and then fail to pay their bills, well, those
> we remove altogether -- but you wouldn't want to do business with
> those guys anyway.).

You better check that out with your buddies who are running the show.
It appears to me that non-participating businesses seem to have been
deleted entirely. I used to use AIRNAV as sort of an aviation yellow
pages when I needed to look up the phone number of an aviation business.
Several of the ones that I use seem to have been dropped entirely.

Your service has hence become too unreliable to be useful for me.
I

John Galban

February 2nd 04, 08:07 PM

(Paulo Santos) wrote in message >...
<snip>
> Since you know so many business owners, if you like AirNav and want it
> to continue to provide a good service you are in a good position to
> help. You can help by thanking the buiness owners that believed in
> the model and "ponied up", and encourage the others to sign up. It is
> not going to break their bank, no matter how small they are.
>

You can bet that I already have. Most of the ones I know are not
Internet savvy and have asked me what the story was behind the
solicitation from Airnav. I've encouraged all of them to sign up, but
to many of them, paying for a listing on the Internet is like paying
for a billboard on Mars. They just don't go there.

Keep up the good work and good luck with the new revenue model.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Andrew Gideon

February 2nd 04, 08:19 PM

John Galban wrote:

> You can bet that I already have. Most of the ones I know are not
> Internet savvy and have asked me what the story was behind the
> solicitation from Airnav. I've encouraged all of them to sign up, but
> to many of them, paying for a listing on the Internet is like paying
> for a billboard on Mars. They just don't go there.

But can you imagine the publicity should one of the rovers snap a picture of
a billboard?

Excuse me...I've a business plan to write up...

- Andrew

James M. Knox

February 3rd 04, 02:24 PM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in
:

> You better check that out with your buddies who are running the show.
> It appears to me that non-participating businesses seem to have been
> deleted entirely.

Perhaps, but I see some that I use on Airnav, still there (at least fuel
prices, which is what Paulo promised). Most of these are fields that I
can't believe ANYONE paid ANYTHING to stay on the list. [Not, as I
mentioned before, because it isn't worthwhile, but because there is no one
"in charge" to pony up the money - and yes, they probably haven't heard of
the Internet either. <G>]

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

Paulo Santos

February 4th 04, 10:15 AM

> What I ask of you is to publish just fuel prices for the FBOs that are
> not able to make such payments. This is not happening; I know at least
> two airports with new fuel service that the prices are not been
> published.

The absence of FBO prices is generally unrelated to the FBOs paying or
not. In the past, even before we charged, there could be FBOs that
were not listed, or FBOs with wrong prices, etc. Things change fast,
and it's hard to keep up with all the changes.

Now that we charge you assume that the absence of the FBOs is due to
their lack of payment. Not necessarily. It could be simply becaus we
don;t know they're there.

Please tell me what the missing FBOs are and we will take care of it.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

Tom Sixkiller

February 4th 04, 02:20 PM

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
> > What I ask of you is to publish just fuel prices for the FBOs that are
> > not able to make such payments. This is not happening; I know at least
> > two airports with new fuel service that the prices are not been
> > published.
>
> The absence of FBO prices is generally unrelated to the FBOs paying or
> not. In the past, even before we charged, there could be FBOs that
> were not listed, or FBOs with wrong prices, etc. Things change fast,
> and it's hard to keep up with all the changes.
>
> Now that we charge you assume that the absence of the FBOs is due to
> their lack of payment. Not necessarily. It could be simply becaus we
> don;t know they're there.
>
> Please tell me what the missing FBOs are and we will take care of it.
>

In this example: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KCOS , there's three FBO's.
One subscribes and two don't (IIUC). Yet two have fuel current prices and
one has not been updated in two years. Again, IIUC, the price updates are
submitted by users _or_ the FBO, correct?

Dude

February 5th 04, 06:18 AM

Paul,

You likely have considered this, but just in case...

Have you considered allowing other sites access to your database for a fee?
For instance, there are several flight planning services that could add
value by having your information in their tools. If they currently have
similar information, perhaps they could get it more cheaply from you.

Also, there are several weather services that send requested information
into the cockpit on demand. Perhaps they would see a competitive edge if
they could add the different fuel prices with the weather at the
destination.

Love the site, keep up the good work.

"Paulo Santos" > wrote in message
om...
> > What I ask of you is to publish just fuel prices for the FBOs that are
> > not able to make such payments. This is not happening; I know at least
> > two airports with new fuel service that the prices are not been
> > published.
>
> The absence of FBO prices is generally unrelated to the FBOs paying or
> not. In the past, even before we charged, there could be FBOs that
> were not listed, or FBOs with wrong prices, etc. Things change fast,
> and it's hard to keep up with all the changes.
>
> Now that we charge you assume that the absence of the FBOs is due to
> their lack of payment. Not necessarily. It could be simply becaus we
> don;t know they're there.
>
> Please tell me what the missing FBOs are and we will take care of it.
>
> Paulo Santos
> AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/