Rod Machado's New PPL Manual

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:48:25 -0700 (PDT), Dan
wrote:

On Mar 25, 7:14 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:

That last qualifier "within a GA environment" is just a little vague.
There is flying a NORDO champ of the flat lands neatly crisscrossed
with a grid roads spaced a mile apart and little traffic, and there is
operating in IMC in the Los Angeles basin. The two are not equal by
any means. An airman with an instrument rating is expected to be
competent to safely pilot his aircraft in the latter environment
without causing a hazard to himself or other flights.

We're not talking about Instrument Rated students -- we're talking
about the artificially high attrition in GA due to inadequate
counseling, assistance, and guidance.

We all know about the price -- but we lose more than we should due to
just plain Old School, Dumb, Inflexible, unenlightened, unadaptable
FBOs that don't realize what an asset a well run flight school is to
General Aviation, the students, the instructors, the airport, and the
FBO

You sound like a man with a plan. How would you suggest enlightening
those FBOs you mention?

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:27:28 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

Where is Cessna, et al with conspicuousness at the local
municipal airport, someone you could talk to or ask questions while
(always) waiting for your (late) flight, handout a damn brochure FCS?

Perhaps your suggestion might be well received by these sorts of
organizations: http://www.cessna.org/

Larry, agreed. Let me point out that I have been hard at my study,
education and preparation and until you sent this link, I had no
attention to this organization.

Surely the AOPA has some constructive input to offer on this issue.

They do. How many potential, not student pilots, know who AOPA is? I
didn't until I came to Rec.Aviation.*.

GA is only available to those whose family or friends have involvement
or those, like myself, that are willing to spend hours simply finding
out the very basics (such as AOPA, FAR regs, etc).

GA is not mainstream from an awareness standpoint.

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:18:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I don't think that I have ever seen a hobby, pleasure sport or job field
that appears to go out of its way to place barriers, hurdles and
hoop-jumping as GA. My novitiate guess is that this must stem from a
post-War mentality when pilots were trained and coming into GA ready to
fly in gobs.

There is indeed a "macho mystique" associated with pilots in general
that attracts a specific demographic to flying and discourages the rest
of a potential market. Not a good business model at all.

This is a fundamental failure that has to be laid at the feet of the
Cessnas of the world. Unless I missed it (surely could have), where is
the consolidation of the major mfgs efforts (monies) to promote GA? Not
to promote Piper, to promote GA?

Competitors in most any underexposed market, when faced with entry level
barriers, have found that it is a strong economic model to *first*
promote their market (GA); let the competition begin...when there are
folks to compete for.

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:31:59 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

The NAS is, by design, an engineered
system. Those who are uncomfortable dealing with the specifics and
absolutes of engineering and engineered systems are probably
unqualified to operate in that environment, and shouldn't get involved
with it.

Unqualified or undesirable? GA as a business cannot survive if the
qualifications omit the undesirables.

The dedication and commitment required to remain current,
and the fundamental change in attitude necessary to responsibly
command a flight demand a certain "fire in the belly" toward being an
airman.

GA as a business cannot survive if the qualifications require passionate
airmen only.

The financial, time commitment, and negative marketing
obstacles serve to test that desire, and weed out those would be
flight students who lack the required commitment to succeed at
becoming a competent pilot, not merely a certificate holder.

They test it but not for the reasons you report. They have not succeeded
in their plans to market GA, the obstacles are there because the GA
industry as a whole has failed to eliminate them.

Can you seriously imagine the CEO of Cessna standing in front of the
Textron Board and stockholders grinning and saying:

"We have had a great year. 100,000 potential Cessna owners have been
blocked out of the marketplace. The airs, Gentlemen, are safer today
than ever"."

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:48:25 -0700 (PDT), Dan wrote:

but we lose more than we should due to
just plain Old School, Dumb, Inflexible, unenlightened, unadaptable
FBOs that don't realize what an asset a well run flight school is to
General Aviation, the students, the instructors, the airport, and the
FBO

Dan Mc

Aside from all the "feel good" reasons, the FBOs, like any other
business, do not see the risk-reward economic benefits in their favor.
Like most small businessmen, they have great fear in leading the market
rather than following and reacting to it. If all FBOs had a slew of
people waiting to spend their flight instruction $$$ with them, things
would rapidly change. The GA industry, led by the mfgs, have failed to
develop that demand.

Maxwell wrote:
"news.chi.sbcglobal.net" wrote in message
. net...
While I agree that humor can be a very valuable teaching tool, I find it
works best in one-on-one or small group situations where it can be
tailored to the specific audience.

Unfortunately, in his writings, I find that some of Mr. Machado's humor
falls into the "silly" category, and does not appeal to me at all. This is
not to take anything away from the "meat" of Mr. Machado's writing, which
I usually find quite valuable.

Having learned everything I have needed to provide me with a successful
career as a computer programmer from reading nothing but very dry
documentation, I personally find that written humor is generally a
turn-off for me when I am trying to learn a complicated subject. As Joe
Friday would say, "Just the facts, ma'am."

And now that this is settled, let's move on to that high-wing vs. low-wing
thing, shall we ;-)



I agree with you and Larry. Most of the instructors I have encountered with
a sense of humor, have a very strong tendency to laugh ONLY at their own
jokes.

Kind of like Dudley, doesn't have much interest in any opinion other than
his own.



Not true. I share opinion with people all the time on Usenet. In fact,
the computer I'm writing this on was purchased to do just that.

Perhaps the reason I don't share opinion with you personally is that all
you seem capable of offering in the way of "opinion" are posts like this
one; non aviation oriented, and simply a totally ineffective and
uncalled for jab in the ribs.
There's no "opinion" to be shared with people like you. Only back and
forth flames that achieve absolutely nothing of use to the forum, or to
me personally. :-)



--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 26, 1:55 am, WJRFlyBoy wrote:

Aside from all the "feel good" reasons, the FBOs, like any other
business, do not see the risk-reward economic benefits in their favor.
Like most small businessmen, they have great fear in leading the market
rather than following and reacting to it. If all FBOs had a slew of
people waiting to spend their flight instruction $$$ with them, things
would rapidly change. The GA industry, led by the mfgs, have failed to
develop that demand.

If you think "feel good reasons" don't play a part in choice of what,
when, and where to purchase, you really don't understand the
marketplace and business at all.



Dan Mc

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:42:49 -0700 (PDT), Dan wrote:

On Mar 26, 1:55 am, WJRFlyBoy wrote:

Aside from all the "feel good" reasons, the FBOs, like any other
business, do not see the risk-reward economic benefits in their favor.
Like most small businessmen, they have great fear in leading the market
rather than following and reacting to it. If all FBOs had a slew of
people waiting to spend their flight instruction $$$ with them, things
would rapidly change. The GA industry, led by the mfgs, have failed to
develop that demand.

If you think "feel good reasons" don't play a part in choice of what,
when, and where to purchase, you really don't understand the
marketplace and business at all.

Dan Mc

After 35 years as a sole proprietor, in ten different industries, I have
been one of the luckiest businessmen on the face of the Earth.

Back to "feel good" reasons, you said "FBOs that don't realize what an
asset a well run flight school is to General Aviation, the students, the
instructors, the airport, and the FBO"

This must be another failing of mine, the inability to make profits out
of being community spirited. To operate their businesses fueled by their
love of aviation and supporting GA, translating that to income exceeding
expense.

Or maybe in your muppet on crack attack on my post you purposefully
twisted your own words to mean purchasing determinations, that ppl
purchase because it makes them feel good. I dunno, what do ya' think?

Over to you, Kermit.

On Mar 26, 1:14 pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:

After 35 years as a sole proprietor, in ten different industries, I have
been one of the luckiest businessmen on the face of the Earth.

Back to "feel good" reasons, you said "FBOs that don't realize what an
asset a well run flight school is to General Aviation, the students, the
instructors, the airport, and the FBO"


Take you all morning to write that one?

I'll ignore the chest pounding self aggrandizement and address your
"point":

Read and learn -- The successful sales process is part education
(appeal to reason), motivation (appeal to aesthetics), and self
interest (appeal to ego).

The sales process consists of several well known steps: Prospecting
(Leads), Qualifying, Need identification, Proposing,Closing, and the
Transaction (deal).

I'm not alone in contending that GA is doing a very poor job in every
stage of the sales process.

To repeat -- in words perhaps more comprehensible -- many (too many)
FBOs have *no* sales approach. They share Larry's view that "if they
wanna be a pilot, they'll put up with the crap."


Dan Mc

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:29:03 -0700 (PDT), Dan wrote:

Read and learn -- The successful sales process is part education
(appeal to reason), motivation (appeal to aesthetics), and self
interest (appeal to ego).

Kewl. Go on.

The sales process consists of several well known steps: Prospecting
(Leads), Qualifying, Need identification, Proposing,Closing, and the
Transaction (deal).

This is where we differ. You're a salesman, I am an owner who sells.
Guess what very important piece of the customer/client cycle you missed.
it gave you away as a salesman, not an owner.

Collection.

I'm not alone in contending that GA is doing a very poor job in every
stage of the sales process.

Considering that I have posted exactly that 3-4 times in this thread
alone....

To repeat -- in words perhaps more comprehensible -- many (too many)
FBOs have *no* sales approach. They share Larry's view that "if they
wanna be a pilot, they'll put up with the crap."

Dan Mc

Make sure you send then Dan's Six Steps To Success. Be ready when they
ask you "what about collections."

And for God's sake, don't give them my email.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.