AIRNAV not publishing fuel prices...

"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

Martin Hotze wrote:

- 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.


ah, yes. Pilots.

Paulo:

You wrote that this response was received from "the vast majority" of
those interviewed. Have you considered the following factors:

o Sample bias - of whom did you ask? Maybe Martin's wrong.
Perhaps it isn't "Pilots", but "Baron Pilots" grin.

o The difference between what people say and what people do.
This could be especially true here as people attempt to work
w/o your service and re-learn its value. Add to that if you'd
provided both free and paid service levels, which would constantly
tempt the free users.

o Would you be better off serving the minority that would be willing
to pay with high quality data than risking your data quality for the
cheap majority? Consider that the reduced population of users (of
your "for pay" service, at least) might actually drop your costs.

I hope that this works out for you, of course. And it is your business;
not mine. But because I do hope that this works out for you - as well
as those of us using your service - I'm raising these issues that you may
not (or may; I don't know) have considered.

Best...

Andrew

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"

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$) *
************************************************** ***********************

(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

"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

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

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/

[ a baron driver and AirNav]
- 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?


There is no assurance that by paying $39/year the service would remain the
same. Look at what happend to "commercial free cable TV" once enough people
started paying. Commercials came back.

You don't always get what you pay for, but you sure pay for what you get.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

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