Better way than Wet Rates?

"Tim Hogard" wrote in message
...

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?


Change your rates when the fuel prices go up enough. If the contract doesn't
let you do this, change it or walk away and don't look back.

On second thought, unless you've owned an airplane before, don't even think
about a leaseback. If you can't afford to own a plane on your own you sure
as hell can't afford the risk of a leaseback. And if you can afford to own a
plane, why let other people use it on all the nice sunny days?

-cwk.

C Kingsbury ) wrote:
: On second thought, unless you've owned an airplane before, don't even think
: about a leaseback. If you can't afford to own a plane on your own you sure
: as hell can't afford the risk of a leaseback. And if you can afford to own a
: plane, why let other people use it on all the nice sunny days?

This plane will be joinly owned by two or three people, one who
is a student at the flight school where it would live.

The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane. The payoff for the
student pilot is something in the area of 115 hrs.

From a purely investment point of view the numbers show up as ROI
of 7.5 years or some such thing so like any plane ownership, its
not a great idea.

All the numbers assume no major expenses outside of the averages
that the flight school has had for other aircraft that are of
the same age and condition. Anything else is a risk.

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com

Tim Hogard wrote:

The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane.

Then it wouldn't be allowed at 4R7...

This year the commission suggested that requirement to the city council
and they approved it. They are in the process of evicting 3 planes
housed there now. A 172H, '47 Bo and an Extra...

Darrel Toepfer wrote:
snipped: mandated ins. by airport comission

: This year the commission suggested that requirement to the city council
: and they approved it. They are in the process of evicting 3 planes
: housed there now. A 172H, '47 Bo and an Extra...

Mandatory insurance with (1) the town, (2) the FBO, (3) the comission
individually named was attempted at my home field last year. The backlash
was so intense from the pilot community that it was quickly dropped.
Several pilots made very effective presentations to the board of selectmen,
who were convinced of the futility of attempting to mandate this.
--
Aaron Coolidge

Aaron Coolidge wrote:

Mandatory insurance with (1) the town, (2) the FBO, (3) the comission
individually named was attempted at my home field last year. The backlash
was so intense from the pilot community that it was quickly dropped.
Several pilots made very effective presentations to the board of selectmen,
who were convinced of the futility of attempting to mandate this.

Well we're still trying to get the "owners" organized...

"Tim Hogard" wrote in message
...
C Kingsbury ) wrote:

The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane. The payoff for the
student pilot is something in the area of 115 hrs.

Nuts! I know you guys brew some pretty strong beer down there but this
verges on the clinical definition of insanity.

The fact that you can afford it makes me question why you would ever want to
do this kind of leaseback. You only make money if nothing unexpected happens
in terms of maintenance, and if a student prangs the prop or something you
eat it all.

So in other words, the FBO has agreed to let you take on 100% of the risk of
owning an airplane, will let any jackass with a 1-hour checkout fly it, in
return for which they are guaranteed a profit. If this were a marriage it'd
be considered spousal abuse.

Personally, I think this is the worst leaseback scenario I've ever heard.

Best,
-cwk.

Plenty of leasebacks work, you only hear about the ones that didn't.

It sounds like he has the proper expectations financially, but what about
enjoying the plane and liability?

With 3 owners you are likely to be either using it too much to get much
rent, or not getting enough time to enjoy it yourselves. Not insuring makes
it likely to be profitable at low rental amounts, but...

With no liability, how are you planning to protect your assets from when
someone else flies it in to a school bus?

Dude ) wrote:
: It sounds like he has the proper expectations financially, but what about
: enjoying the plane and liability?
Flight time costs so much now, I'm flying far less than I would
like to anyway thanks to ATC fees and landing fees.

: With 3 owners you are likely to be either using it too much to get much
: rent, or not getting enough time to enjoy it yourselves. Not insuring makes
: it likely to be profitable at low rental amounts, but...
I was considering not getting hull insurance.

: With no liability, how are you planning to protect your assets from when
: someone else flies it in to a school bus?
The field requires 2 million liability and the practice field
requires 5 million so thats required and will happen.

Big issue is how often someone is likly to break it in some way.
Since 99% of its flights will be for flight instruction or an owner,
it seems ot me that the risk compaired to the costs may be justified.
If anything bad happens including something fairly minor, the
insurance company will write it off and pay me book value... i.e.
nothing. In that case, I'm better off selling it as scrap my self
where I could get more out of it depending on what happended.
Insurance doesn't cover anything minor (Less than $2500), or major
(greater than its book value) so for the 4% of its hull value I'm
paying per year, I'm not getting much real insurance aginst things
that are likly to happen. After all how many claims are for between
$2500 and $15,000?

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com

: With no liability, how are you planning to protect your assets from when
: someone else flies it in to a school bus?
The field requires 2 million liability and the practice field
requires 5 million so thats required and will happen.

Before pursuing this any further I think you had better check out the
liability insurance angle. You might find it difficult to get those limits
(at least smooth) written.

Howard


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 10/29/2004

Howard Nelson ) wrote:
:
:
: : With no liability, how are you planning to protect your assets from when
: : someone else flies it in to a school bus?
: The field requires 2 million liability and the practice field
: requires 5 million so thats required and will happen.
:
: Before pursuing this any further I think you had better check out the
: liability insurance angle. You might find it difficult to get those limits
: (at least smooth) written.
It can be done. Its a 2 million policy with a rider that it goes up to 5 mil
at the one field.

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com