Hangars at Public Airports (US)

[Jim Kellett]

Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?

Has any US-based gliding club been subjected to a "based aircraft" fee by a
public airport?

Jim Kellett
Skyline Soaring, Front Royal, VA

[BTIZ]

Around here... normally once you have a hangar, or shade cover, it's yours
until you give it up. Also, most of the hangars on local GA airports here
are private hangars on leased land. You own it and pay property taxes on it.
County wins both ways.

BT

"Jim Kellett" > wrote in message
...
> Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
> switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?
>
> Has any US-based gliding club been subjected to a "based aircraft" fee by
a
> public airport?
>
> Jim Kellett
> Skyline Soaring, Front Royal, VA
>
>

[rjciii]

"Jim Kellett" > wrote in message >...
> Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
> switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?

See if there is anything you can use in FAA Order 5190.6A WRT to
Sponsor Assurances wording (I paraphrase): <Airport owners must
provide fair and equitable access to any and all airport facilities to
all airport users without discriminating against any aviation
activity>.

If the airport has accepted federal funding for airport improvements
(which I'm pretty sure every public airport in this country has) then
the airport owner/operator must comply with FAA Order 5190.6A, which
mandates that the owner must provide equal access to airport
facilities on a fair and equitable basis. Therefore, the airport
cannot charge more for like hangar space to one user than another.
Nor can they assess a charge to one user using a different formula to
derive the charge.

The airport can assess a higher charge for a fully enclosed hangar
than a shadeport. But if there is a flat rate charge per
hangar/shadeport offered to any one airport user, then the airport
cannot charge another owner any more or less to park an aircraft
within a like storage structure. Likewise, any assessment on a per
square footage basis must be uniorm and applicable to any and all
airport users.

I suggest you apprise the airport management of their federal funding
obligations and contact your FAA ADO Airports Compliance Officer.

RD

[Nyal Williams]

At our former location each aircraft had to consume
an established fuel amount each month. Fortunately,
these could be spread out over the fleet and the towplanes
always covered it.

At 04:00 06 April 2004, Btiz wrote:
>Around here... normally once you have a hangar, or
>shade cover, it's yours
>until you give it up. Also, most of the hangars on
>local GA airports here
>are private hangars on leased land. You own it and
>pay property taxes on it.
>County wins both ways.
>
>BT
>
>'Jim Kellett' wrote in message
...
>> Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a
>>public airport's
>> switching to a 'dutch auction' for its hangars on
>>an annual basis?
>>
>> Has any US-based gliding club been subjected to a
>>'based aircraft' fee by
>a
>> public airport?
>>
>> Jim Kellett
>> Skyline Soaring, Front Royal, VA
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Michael McNulty]

"rjciii" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jim Kellett" > wrote in message
>...
> > Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
> > switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?
>
> See if there is anything you can use in FAA Order 5190.6A WRT to
> Sponsor Assurances wording (I paraphrase): <Airport owners must
> provide fair and equitable access to any and all airport facilities to
> all airport users without discriminating against any aviation
> activity>.
>
> If the airport has accepted federal funding for airport improvements
> (which I'm pretty sure every public airport in this country has) then
> the airport owner/operator must comply with FAA Order 5190.6A, which
> mandates that the owner must provide equal access to airport
> facilities on a fair and equitable basis. Therefore, the airport
> cannot charge more for like hangar space to one user than another.
> Nor can they assess a charge to one user using a different formula to
> derive the charge.
>
> I suggest you apprise the airport management of their federal funding
> obligations and contact your FAA ADO Airports Compliance Officer.
>
> RD

A Dutch Auction does not "charge more for like hangar space to one user than
another". It charges all of the successful bidders the same price as the
lowest successful bidder. The marginal bidder gets what he wanted at the
price he was willing to pay. Those who bid higher get what they wanted a
price below what they were willing to pay. Those who bid less than the
marginal bidder did not want/need it bad enough. Overall a pretty fair and
efficient method to distribute a valuable resource.

[Shawn Curry]

Michael McNulty wrote:

> "rjciii" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>"Jim Kellett" > wrote in message
>
> >...
>
>>>Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
>>>switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?
>>
>>See if there is anything you can use in FAA Order 5190.6A WRT to
>>Sponsor Assurances wording (I paraphrase): <Airport owners must
>>provide fair and equitable access to any and all airport facilities to
>>all airport users without discriminating against any aviation
>>activity>.
>>
>>If the airport has accepted federal funding for airport improvements
>>(which I'm pretty sure every public airport in this country has) then
>>the airport owner/operator must comply with FAA Order 5190.6A, which
>>mandates that the owner must provide equal access to airport
>>facilities on a fair and equitable basis. Therefore, the airport
>>cannot charge more for like hangar space to one user than another.
>>Nor can they assess a charge to one user using a different formula to
>>derive the charge.
>>
>>I suggest you apprise the airport management of their federal funding
>>obligations and contact your FAA ADO Airports Compliance Officer.
>>
>>RD
>
>
> A Dutch Auction does not "charge more for like hangar space to one user than
> another". It charges all of the successful bidders the same price as the
> lowest successful bidder. The marginal bidder gets what he wanted at the
> price he was willing to pay. Those who bid higher get what they wanted a
> price below what they were willing to pay. Those who bid less than the
> marginal bidder did not want/need it bad enough. Overall a pretty fair and
> efficient method to distribute a valuable resource.
>
Curious. I don't recall seeing it in the OP. Why does the airport
management want to change the policy? Is the airport over the hill
getting three time the rent or something?

Shawn

[Nyal Williams]

Such an arrangement puts hangarage into a directly
competitive market economy. How often should/could
such auctions be held? Annually, quarterly, monthly?



-------
>A Dutch Auction does not 'charge more for like hangar
>space to one user than
>another'. It charges all of the successful bidders
>the same price as the
>lowest successful bidder. The marginal bidder gets
>what he wanted at the
>price he was willing to pay. Those who bid higher
>get what they wanted a
>price below what they were willing to pay. Those who
>bid less than the
>marginal bidder did not want/need it bad enough. Overall
>a pretty fair and
>efficient method to distribute a valuable resource.
>
>
>

[Scott]

It must be too early in the morning. I don't get it. How do dutch
auctions work? If the LOWEST bids wins the price for everybody, why
doesn't everybody bid $1.00? Then everybody could get a hangar for a
buck a month. I will re-read this thread tonight when I'm more awake.

Scott


Michael McNulty wrote:
> "rjciii" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>"Jim Kellett" > wrote in message
>
> >...
>
>>>Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
>>>switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?
>>
>>See if there is anything you can use in FAA Order 5190.6A WRT to
>>Sponsor Assurances wording (I paraphrase): <Airport owners must
>>provide fair and equitable access to any and all airport facilities to
>>all airport users without discriminating against any aviation
>>activity>.
>>
>>If the airport has accepted federal funding for airport improvements
>>(which I'm pretty sure every public airport in this country has) then
>>the airport owner/operator must comply with FAA Order 5190.6A, which
>>mandates that the owner must provide equal access to airport
>>facilities on a fair and equitable basis. Therefore, the airport
>>cannot charge more for like hangar space to one user than another.
>>Nor can they assess a charge to one user using a different formula to
>>derive the charge.
>>
>>I suggest you apprise the airport management of their federal funding
>>obligations and contact your FAA ADO Airports Compliance Officer.
>>
>>RD
>
>
> A Dutch Auction does not "charge more for like hangar space to one user than
> another". It charges all of the successful bidders the same price as the
> lowest successful bidder. The marginal bidder gets what he wanted at the
> price he was willing to pay. Those who bid higher get what they wanted a
> price below what they were willing to pay. Those who bid less than the
> marginal bidder did not want/need it bad enough. Overall a pretty fair and
> efficient method to distribute a valuable resource.
>
>

[Shawn Curry]

Scott wrote:

> It must be too early in the morning. I don't get it. How do dutch
> auctions work? If the LOWEST bids wins the price for everybody, why
> doesn't everybody bid $1.00? Then everybody could get a hangar for a
> buck a month. I will re-read this thread tonight when I'm more awake.
>
> Scott


Somebody will say "But if I bid $2, I'm sure to get a space if a lottery
is needed."
Isn't this one of those John Nash models?
Never got into this stuff beyond the SciAm level. Didn't pay that much
attention in the movie-Jennifer Connelly's fault.
;-)

Shawn

[Cliff Hilty]

I think it works like this, if you have 40 of the same
hangars and 60 people want them, They bid for them.
The top forty bids are accepted and they all will pay
what the 40th bid was. While the lower twenty 41 thru
60 get no hangar! I think:)




Somebody will say 'But if I bid $2, I'm sure to get
a space if a lottery
is needed.'
Isn't this one of those John Nash models?
Never got into this stuff beyond the SciAm level. Didn't
pay that much
attention in the movie-Jennifer Connelly's fault.
;-)

Shawn

[303pilot]

I believe it works like this:
5 hangars
10 bidders

bidder 1 $10
bidder 2 $9
bidder 3 $8
bidder 4 $7
bidder 5 $6
bidder 6 $5
bidder 7 $4
bidder 8 $3
bidder 9 $2
bidder 10 $1

Bidder 5 is the marginal bidder @ $6 and gets a hangar for what he was
willing to pay. Bidders 1-4 also get hangars and pay less than they were
willing to. This could also be done w/a reserve to prevent lowball
collusion.


"Scott" > wrote in message
...
> It must be too early in the morning. I don't get it. How do dutch
> auctions work? If the LOWEST bids wins the price for everybody, why
> doesn't everybody bid $1.00? Then everybody could get a hangar for a
> buck a month. I will re-read this thread tonight when I'm more awake.
>
> Scott
>
>
> Michael McNulty wrote:
> > "rjciii" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> >>"Jim Kellett" > wrote in message
> >
> > >...
> >
> >>>Has any US-based gliding club been involved with a public airport's
> >>>switching to a "dutch auction" for its hangars on an annual basis?
> >>
> >>See if there is anything you can use in FAA Order 5190.6A WRT to
> >>Sponsor Assurances wording (I paraphrase): <Airport owners must
> >>provide fair and equitable access to any and all airport facilities to
> >>all airport users without discriminating against any aviation
> >>activity>.
> >>
> >>If the airport has accepted federal funding for airport improvements
> >>(which I'm pretty sure every public airport in this country has) then
> >>the airport owner/operator must comply with FAA Order 5190.6A, which
> >>mandates that the owner must provide equal access to airport
> >>facilities on a fair and equitable basis. Therefore, the airport
> >>cannot charge more for like hangar space to one user than another.
> >>Nor can they assess a charge to one user using a different formula to
> >>derive the charge.
> >>
> >>I suggest you apprise the airport management of their federal funding
> >>obligations and contact your FAA ADO Airports Compliance Officer.
> >>
> >>RD
> >
> >
> > A Dutch Auction does not "charge more for like hangar space to one user
than
> > another". It charges all of the successful bidders the same price as
the
> > lowest successful bidder. The marginal bidder gets what he wanted at
the
> > price he was willing to pay. Those who bid higher get what they wanted
a
> > price below what they were willing to pay. Those who bid less than the
> > marginal bidder did not want/need it bad enough. Overall a pretty fair
and
> > efficient method to distribute a valuable resource.
> >
> >
>