$1295.00 Guaranteed Multi Ratings A+++++++++++ Service

The Guys Below Are Great A+++ Customer Service They respect you even after
they get your Money! They follow through with what they say.

GUARANTEED MULTI RATINGS, no flight time limit! No C/R twins, mature ATP
rated instructors, $1295. Examineer fee not included. Also ATP, MEI, CFII,
and instrument ratings. Multi PIC $129 wet. Dallas, TX/(817) 557-4004.


Steven Rhine
CP ASEL & AMEL Instrument Airplane

In article , NW_PILOT
wrote:

The Guys Below Are Great A+++ Customer Service ....

What is this, eBay?


GUARANTEED MULTI RATINGS, no flight time limit!

I'm already suspicious.

No C/R twins...

Translation: A very old Apache. Yes?

$1295. Examineer fee NOT INCLUDED

So... you're saying it's *not* a $1295 Guaranteed Multi Rating, then?


Multi PIC $129 wet.

Two engines burning 9 gallons per hour. Fuel's $3-5 a gallon. Average
of, say, $72 an hour in fuel alone. $129 an hour seems a little on the
low side.


And spamming newsgroups is a poor way to generate business, believe me.

"beavis" wrote in message
...
In article , NW_PILOT
wrote:

The Guys Below Are Great A+++ Customer Service ....

What is this, eBay?


GUARANTEED MULTI RATINGS, no flight time limit!

I'm already suspicious.

No C/R twins...

Translation: A very old Apache. Yes?

No they Use BE95 Travelairs in decent condition.


$1295. Examineer fee NOT INCLUDED

So... you're saying it's *not* a $1295 Guaranteed Multi Rating, then?

What they are saying is if you go up and blow a check ride the remedial
training is included!



Multi PIC $129 wet.

Two engines burning 9 gallons per hour. Fuel's $3-5 a gallon. Average
of, say, $72 an hour in fuel alone. $129 an hour seems a little on the
low side.


And spamming newsgroups is a poor way to generate business, believe me.

Not spamming the new groups, I am just referring people as I had a good
experience down there!

Again:

The Guys Below Are Great A+++ Customer Service They respect you even after
they get your Money! They follow through with what they say.

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"NW_PILOT" wrote:

And spamming newsgroups is a poor way to generate business, believe
me.

Not spamming the new groups, I am just referring people as I had a good
experience down there!

fwiw - My first thought when seeing the subject line was: @#(*&34, more
spam.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate


Wow, no wonder I rarely post on Usenet any more! I was just posting that the
place was good business "A+++++ customer service" because it is rare in
aviation. Most places treat you good then take your money and then treat you
like crap! Clyde Frederickson who runs Multi Engine Training is a stand up
business man and respects his clients and will not B.S. you.

They go above and beyond what is required with rides to and from motel, and
have complementary coffee, snacks & soda pop. It is something that should be
posted all over the aviation community to keep this guy in business so that
people in the future can have a great experience with a good business.


Steven L. Rhine
CP ASEL & AMEL Instrument Airplane
CFI (Student)

NW_PILOT wrote:

Wow, no wonder I rarely post on Usenet any more!

The fact that you probably caught heat for posting a video of an aileron
roll in a C152 has nothing to do with it, eh?

I was just posting that the
place was good business "A+++++ customer service" because it is rare in
aviation.

Your original post in this thread read to me like canned spam. Your
latest post does not. Take a look at the two styles of writing and see if
you can identify a difference.




--
Peter

: )

Wow, no wonder I rarely post on Usenet any more! I was just posting that the
place was good business "A+++++ customer service" because...

Then tell us stories. Read r.a.p and you'll see others posting stories
of their first solo, their rides in a B-whatever, trip reports,
experiences with different kinds of instructors... stuff with detail,
imagery, human interest; stuff that puts you in the cockpit with them.

Stories that convey, without any advertising hype, the substance of what
makes you judge this place as you do. Then we can read those stories
and be impressed that, for example, they have "complementary coffee,
snacks & soda pop", or whatever it is that really makes them a valuable
asset to the GA community. For example, did you flunk your checkride
after training with them, and then they gave you extensive free
re-training so that you could pass it? Did they analyse their failure
to teach you, your failure to learn, your nerves, whatever, and
concentrate on that? What was it like? That could be a very
interesting story in itself, and no "A++++++ service" would be needed.
And anything other than =your= =personal= experience is just a rehash of
their publicity booklet.

What are your detailled =personal= experiences with this outfit? What
was your first flight like? What did you find on preflight? This is
how you contribute to the newsgroup.

The cost aspect is quite secondary (and uninteresting). Looking for a
bargain in flight training is like looking for a bargain in a brain
surgeon. (In my case, I just look for one that has their own magnifying
glass.

It is something that should be
posted all over the aviation community to keep this guy in business

That is the =definition= os spam.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

CFI (Student)

Less generalities. More details. More explanations. Work from simple to
complex. Tell us why you think this place is so great. Begin at the
beginning. Teach us something.

Jim

Aw, now you've placed me in the position of appearing to defend an
article posted by the infamous Mr. Rhine.


On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:09:45 GMT, Jose
wrote in : :

What are your detailled =personal= experiences with this outfit? What
was your first flight like? What did you find on preflight? This is
how you contribute to the newsgroup.

Actually, the newsgroup charter specifies:

Information pertinent to pilots of general aviation aircraft
which would not fall into one of the other non-misc
rec.aviation groups.

So it is _information_ (not personal experience) that is crucial for
on-topic articles posted to this newsgroup.

It is something that should be
posted all over the aviation community to keep this guy in business

That is the =definition= os spam.

Well, that's partially true.

http://www.antionline.com/jargon/spam.php
spam vt.,vi.,n.

[from "Monty Python's Flying Circus"] 1. To crash a program by
overrunning a fixed-size buffer with excessively large input data.
See also buffer overflow, overrun screw, smash the stack.

2. To cause a newsgroup to be flooded with irrelevant or
inappropriate messages. You can spam a newsgroup with as little as
one well- (or ill-) planned message (e.g. asking "What do you
think of abortion?" on soc.women). This is often done with
cross-posting (e.g. any message which is crossposted to
alt.rush-limbaugh and alt.politics.homosexuality will almost
inevitably spam both groups). This overlaps with troll behavior;
the latter more specific term has become more common.

3. To send many identical or nearly-identical messages separately
to a large number of Usenet newsgroups. This is more specifically
called `ECP', Excessive Cross-Posting. This is one sure way to
infuriate nearly everyone on the Net. See also velveeta and jello.

4. To bombard a newsgroup with multiple copies of a message. This
is more specifically called `EMP', Excessive Multi-Posting.

5. To mass-mail unrequested identical or nearly-identical email
messages, particularly those containing advertising. Especially
used when the mail addresses have been culled from network traffic
or databases without the consent of the recipients. Synonyms
include UCE, UBE. 6. Any large, annoying, quantity of output. For
instance, someone on IRC who walks away from their screen and
comes back to find 200 lines of text might say "Oh no, spam".

The later definitions have become much more prevalent as the
Internet has opened up to non-techies, and to most people senses 3
4 and 5 are now primary. All three behaviors are considered abuse
of the net, and are almost universally grounds for termination of
the originator's email account or network connection. In these
senses the term `spam' has gone mainstream, though without its
original sense or folkloric freight - there is apparently a
widespread myth among lusers that "spamming" is what happens when
you dump cans of Spam into a revolving fan.

So it is _information_ (not personal experience) that is crucial for
on-topic articles posted to this newsgroup.

Well then most of the articles here are off topic. And I daresay
personal experience counts as information.

As for the definition of spam, we all write our own dictionaries, don't
we? And even a teeny bit of Hormel canned spiced ham is still spam.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.