AirNav Censorship

jdfrey1

jdfrey1

Pre-Flight
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
96
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
Display Name
Display name:
Jeff Frey
I recently posted on AirNav.com what I feel was well deserved criticism for Ace Aviation at 35D in Allegan, MI. I was again at this airport today and experienced similar issues and went to check the comments and noticed that you have put this in your comments section: "Ace Aviation has requested that AirNav not collect or publish user comments. For any feedback or customer service inquiries, please contact Ace Aviation directly." I also recently put a comment about the FBO at KBKW and when I just went in I don't even see the FBO listed anymore.

To me this is censorship and really defeats the purpose of AirNav's service. Many pilots including myself use AirNav to see the experiences of other pilots and to determine if there may be potential issues. I have seen before where a less than desirable comment is left and the FBO replies with their perspective or an apology which I am totally fine with but to just take the comments down because they aren't all positive is really a big issue to me. My comments were not offensive and only stated the facts of my experience.

I sent AirNav an email today telling them that I think they should reconsider allowing this practice as I believe they will lose credibility with the large group of pilots that use their service to get information from other pilots.
 
Any time the FBO wants to remove comments Airnav complies. :mad:

The FBO at KDVN tried to charge me $25 parking fee for stopping for lunch. :eek: I posted a complaint and it was removed.
 
I have posted negative comments on air nav without them being removed,however more and mor fbo,s are not allowing any postings which is a negative for aviation.comments on this site can be very helpfull ,but it may take time to find them.when I use air nav I figure if the FBO doesn't allow postings they are a problem FBO.
 
You are not the customer of airnav. You are the product being sold.

Airnav is an advertising venue marketing to FBOs. Yes, some FBOs reserve the right to block all comments, others reserve the right to have only comments approved by them show up. This is hardly news. If I see an FBO that blocks comments, I will do what I can to avoid giving them any of my business. If an FBO replies to unfavorable comments in a reasonable manner, I try to look at the merits of the comment and reply. It is not allways the FBO who is in the wrong.

How much did you pay for that airnav search again ?
 
weilke said:
You are not the customer of airnav. You are the product being sold.

Airnav is an advertising venue marketing to FBOs. Yes, some FBOs reserve the right to block all comments, others reserve the right to have only comments approved by them show up. This is hardly news. If I see an FBO that blocks comments, I will do what I can to avoid giving them any of my business. If an FBO replies to unfavorable comments in a reasonable manner, I try to look at the merits of the comment and reply. It is not allways the FBO who is in the wrong.

How much did you pay for that airnav search again ?
Click to expand...

Sorta why I don't even bother with reviews. Just give me the vitals and facts and that's good enough for me.

It drives me freaking NUTS when I see comments on news items on other news sites. I don't CARE what other people are thinking or saying. I just want the news, and okay I'll entertain your ad because that's how it's paid for but leave the other crap out.
 
weilke said:
You are not the customer of airnav. You are the product being sold.

Airnav is an advertising venue marketing to FBOs. Yes, some FBOs reserve the right to block all comments, others reserve the right to have only comments approved by them show up. This is hardly news. If I see an FBO that blocks comments, I will do what I can to avoid giving them any of my business. If an FBO replies to unfavorable comments in a reasonable manner, I try to look at the merits of the comment and reply. It is not allways the FBO who is in the wrong.

How much did you pay for that airnav search again ?
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

I'm not in the position to use FBOs much, but that's how I'd handle it. If they don't accept comments, avoid them.
 
weilke said:
You are not the customer of airnav. You are the product being sold.

Airnav is an advertising venue marketing to FBOs. Yes, some FBOs reserve the right to block all comments, others reserve the right to have only comments approved by them show up. This is hardly news. If I see an FBO that blocks comments, I will do what I can to avoid giving them any of my business. If an FBO replies to unfavorable comments in a reasonable manner, I try to look at the merits of the comment and reply. It is not allways the FBO who is in the wrong.

How much did you pay for that airnav search again ?
Click to expand...

I totally agree with your point about FBO replies and actually I believe that adds credibility as you can tell they care about their service and reputation enough to reply to a customer.

I think the comment about how much we payed for the AirNav search is irrelevant though. If AirNav is going to allow any comments, then they should be comprehensive as long as they don't violate the terms they previously specified. If their sole purpose is for the FBOs to "advertise" then they should remove the comment system.
 
jdfrey1 said:
I totally agree with your point about FBO replies and actually I believe that adds credibility as you can tell they care about their service and reputation enough to reply to a customer.

I think the comment about how much we payed for the AirNav search is irrelevant though. If AirNav is going to allow any comments, then they should be comprehensive as long as they don't violate the terms they previously specified. If their sole purpose is for the FBOs to "advertise" then they should remove the comment system.
Click to expand...
Not that I disagree, but if you look at it from AirNav's viewpoint, their business model is to make money off of the fees that FBO's pay to advertise. If an FBO feels that using AirNav is going to adversely affect their business then why should they use AirNav for advertising? Certainly, we all agree a negative comment can adversely affect a business, and in reality anything the business says to counter the negative comment will be seen by the many as just being self serving. Thus the easiest way for AirNav to continue to get an FBO's business is to allow FBO's to censor comments. This is only good business practice as far as AirNav is concerned.

For me knowing how a website is supported is imperative to me to determine how to interpret the subjective information I get from a website.
 
jdfrey1 said:
I totally agree with your point about FBO replies and actually I believe that adds credibility as you can tell they care about their service and reputation enough to reply to a customer.

I think the comment about how much we payed for the AirNav search is irrelevant though. If AirNav is going to allow any comments, then they should be comprehensive as long as they don't violate the terms they previously specified. If their sole purpose is for the FBOs to "advertise" then they should remove the comment system.
Click to expand...

That makes sense.
 
jdfrey1 said:
I think the comment about how much we payed for the AirNav search is irrelevant though. If AirNav is going to allow any comments, then they should be comprehensive as long as they don't violate the terms they previously specified. If their sole purpose is for the FBOs to "advertise" then they should remove the comment system.
Click to expand...

The FBOs pay for airnav, they control what shows up in their ads. If this was a subscription service paid for by the users, the users would have a say on what information is included.
 
I take the comments with a grain of salt. One happy customer might tell a couple people; an unhappy customer will tell everyone.
 
douglas393 said:
Not that I disagree, but if you look at it from AirNav's viewpoint, their business model is to make money off of the fees that FBO's pay to advertise. If an FBO feels that using AirNav is going to adversely affect their business then why should they use AirNav for advertising? Certainly, we all agree a negative comment can adversely affect a business, and in reality anything the business says to counter the negative comment will be seen by the many as just being self serving. Thus the easiest way for AirNav to continue to get an FBO's business is to allow FBO's to censor comments. This is only good business practice as far as AirNav is concerned.

For me knowing how a website is supported is imperative to me to determine how to interpret the subjective information I get from a website.
Click to expand...

A negative review among numerous positive reviews isn't likely to impact business at all. If the FBO is concerned about it, they can demonstrate that by responding to the complaint. Having negative comments selectively removed isn't what I'd consider ethical.

I have first-hand experience with the AirNav phenomenon from several years ago now. I posted a somewhat complimentary, somewhat critical review of an FBO that fancied itself as a "celebrity" FBO, and shortly thereafter the comment was removed and the FBO became closed to comments. I haven't been back to that FBO since, and I work to avoid FBOs that do not accept comments on AirNav. Any way you look at it, that's a bad sign.


JKG
 
weilke said:
The FBOs pay for airnav, they control what shows up in their ads. If this was a subscription service paid for by the users, the users would have a say on what information is included.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between the content of ads and the content of reviews. AirNav doesn't position itself as a testimonial site, so I wouldn't expect FBOs to be granted editorial control over comments. Apparently they can direct AirNav to not accept comments, but at best the optics of such a decision are poor.


JKG
 
JGoodish said:
A negative review among numerous positive reviews isn't likely to impact business at all. If the FBO is concerned about it, they can demonstrate that by responding to the complaint. Having negative comments selectively removed isn't what I'd consider ethical.
Click to expand...
I believe you are right, but why would a business even want to take the chance? I am not sure of the ethics of removing negative comments on a website that someone is paying to be on. Often when a business responds to a negative complaint, the response often sounds self serving and then compounds the negativity. Often the best policy is not even respond.

Certainly its disingenuous, but to call it unethical I think would depend on the circumstances of the post. Then again, I must admit, I personally, and professionally put absolutely no energy or stature to online comments. My experience has been people who have a negative opinion of someone or something are much more likely to expend the energy and the time to complain either on-line or in some other fashion, than those who have a positive or neutral experience. Business being business, the bad apples tend not to last long.

JGoodish said:
I have first-hand experience with the AirNav phenomenon from several years ago now. I posted a somewhat complimentary, somewhat critical review of an FBO that fancied itself as a "celebrity" FBO, and shortly thereafter the comment was removed and the FBO became closed to comments. I haven't been back to that FBO since, and I work to avoid FBOs that do not accept comments on AirNav. Any way you look at it, that's a bad sign.
JKG
Click to expand...
I try to avoid "celebrity" businesses. My experience has taught me that the real "celebrity" businesses often do not toot that horn too loudly. Typically, when a business calls themselves a "celebrity" business it means a celebrity used their bathroom when his car broke down in front of it while he was having an episode of Montezuma's revenge, or was sick from a hangover. In any case, I am not a celebrity, and do not expect to be treated specially. I am happy if I can get friendly and courteous treatment.
 
douglas393 said:
Not that I disagree, but if you look at it from AirNav's viewpoint, their business model is to make money off of the fees that FBO's pay to advertise. If an FBO feels that using AirNav is going to adversely affect their business then why should they use AirNav for advertising? Certainly, we all agree a negative comment can adversely affect a business, and in reality anything the business says to counter the negative comment will be seen by the many as just being self serving. Thus the easiest way for AirNav to continue to get an FBO's business is to allow FBO's to censor comments. This is only good business practice as far as AirNav is concerned.

For me knowing how a website is supported is imperative to me to determine how to interpret the subjective information I get from a website.
Click to expand...

Since I can get everything AirNav publishes in ForeFlight or Garmin Pilot, the ONLY value it has to me is user comments to find out who I should or shouldn't do business with. If that goes away, I have not reason in the world to ever look at the site. Once that becomes the general consensus within the pilot community, how much ad revenue can AirNav generate??
 
LDJones said:
Since I can get everything AirNav publishes in ForeFlight or Garmin Pilot, the ONLY value it has to me is user comments to find out who I should or shouldn't do business with. If that goes away, I have not reason in the world to ever look at the site. Once that becomes the general consensus within the pilot community, how much ad revenue can AirNav generate??
Click to expand...
My guess is that AirNav and the FBO's that use AirNav depend on the naivity of people and feels that the vast majority of pilots using their sites either does not care or does not realize that comments can be selectively removed by the FBO's in question. I am not a user of AirNav, mostly because I can find the objective information I need in sites I regularly use, and think I can trust the opinions of the members of POA much more than some unknown person complaining about an FBO online. Also, and maybe I have been lucky, but I have yet to have a negative experience at an FBO.
 
douglas393 said:
Certainly its disingenuous, but to call it unethical I think would depend on the circumstances of the post. Then again, I must admit, I personally, and professionally put absolutely no energy or stature to online comments. My experience has been people who have a negative opinion of someone or something are much more likely to expend the energy and the time to complain either on-line or in some other fashion, than those who have a positive or neutral experience. Business being business, the bad apples tend not to last long.
Click to expand...

Removing negative comments on a site which presents itself as open to reviews (as opposed to testimonials) most certainly is unethical. Clearly, there is an intent to deceive the reader in that situation.

I have found online reviews to be an incredibly valuable source of information over the years--not necessarily specific to FBOs, but products, attractions, restaurants, hotels, etc. Yes, you have to filter the "paid endorsements" and those who have chips on their shoulders, but those reviews are usually easy to spot.


douglas393 said:
I try to avoid "celebrity" businesses. My experience has taught me that the real "celebrity" businesses often do not toot that horn too loudly. Typically, when a business calls themselves a "celebrity" business it means a celebrity used their bathroom when his car broke down in front of it while he was having an episode of Montezuma's revenge, or was sick from a hangover. In any case, I am not a celebrity, and do not expect to be treated specially. I am happy if I can get friendly and courteous treatment.
Click to expand...

This particular FBO didn't call themselves a celebrity business, and that was part of the problem. I had used them a few times before I ran into an issue. Yes, I always noticed that the flight planning room and associated equipment was behind a locked door, as were other typical flight crew amenities (this was before smartphones, tablets, and WiFi were ubiquitous), but they would gladly shuttle us back and forth to a local restaurant when we'd visit and didn't have a car. Then we ran into two issues: refusal to permit us access to the radar and weather computer when a professional flight crew was around (but not using it), and the day we showed up for departure to find the "24 hour" FBO closed because a pro golfer had apparently decided to show up in his jet. It was then that we learned that they close to "the great unwashed" when folks who fancy themselves as "celebrities" show up, and as a result, they get repeat business from those individuals. Can I blame them for doing that? No. Can I blame them for not informing us of that policy ahead of time, and then preventing access to our aircraft until the "celebrity" was out of sight? Yes. After my review was removed from AirNav and the FBO listing was subsequently closed to comments, that was the final straw. Thankfully, there was another FBO on the field which did not appear to have any of the same issues the last time I was there.


JKG
 
JGoodish said:
There's a difference between the content of ads and the content of reviews. AirNav doesn't position itself as a testimonial site, so I wouldn't expect FBOs to be granted editorial control over comments. Apparently they can direct AirNav to not accept comments, but at best the optics of such a decision are poor.


JKG
Click to expand...

Whatever airnav presents to you once you click on the FBOs name is the FBOs 'ad' and they control the content. Airnav is not a newspaper, a charity or the goverment, they are under not obligation to be fair.

As I said, I vote with my wallet if I see a FBO that has airnav comments disabled. The AOPA airport directory btw. doesn't allow FBOs to edit the entries. The AOPA directory is paid by the members, not the FBOs.
 
douglas393 said:
I believe you are right, but why would a business even want to take the chance? I am not sure of the ethics of removing negative comments on a website that someone is paying to be on. Often when a business responds to a negative complaint, the response often sounds self serving and then compounds the negativity. Often the best policy is not even respond.
Click to expand...

Often I find the replies to be quite helpful. Sometimes frontline staff screws up and the bad airnav review is what gets a problem resolved at the management level (improper application of ramp-fee policies, parking fees the like). Also, at times, pilots are self-important buffoons and complain about petty crap. Getting 'the other side' of the story allows the reader to form a better opinion on whether they want to take their money to a particular business.
 
Go start a facebook group 'FBOs that suck and why' get your pilot friends to join and theirs and so on.
 
Geico266 said:
Any time the FBO wants to remove comments Airnav complies. :mad:

The FBO at KDVN tried to charge me $25 parking fee for stopping for lunch. :eek: I posted a complaint and it was removed.
Click to expand...

That's because they know there is no food served at So Co. It's also a BYOB joint. ;):yes::D
 
My view of AirNav is that any FBO that doesn't allow comments has a reason for it since they obviously suck. That's all the information that is needed.
 
JGoodish said:
Removing negative comments on a site which presents itself as open to reviews (as opposed to testimonials) most certainly is unethical. Clearly, there is an intent to deceive the reader in that situation.
Click to expand...
I cannot argue with your point of view, it just seems to me in the grand scheme of things, if you get information on a business from a commercial website that the business is paying to be on, expecting the site not to protect the interests of the business seems to me to be setting yourself up for disappointment. AirNav's purpose seems to me to bring business into the FBO's that pay to advertise on their site, why would they want to do something that is counterproductive to that goal?

JGoodish said:
I have found online reviews to be an incredibly valuable source of information over the years--not necessarily specific to FBOs, but products, attractions, restaurants, hotels, etc. Yes, you have to filter the "paid endorsements" and those who have chips on their shoulders, but those reviews are usually easy to spot.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt in my mind that online reviews can be a valuable source of information, I just have found that online reviews are just as often reliable as they are unreliable. I think you have to take them in context, and that is why I find them to often be unhelpful.

JGoodish said:
This particular FBO didn't call themselves a celebrity business, and that was part of the problem. I had used them a few times before I ran into an issue. Yes, I always noticed that the flight planning room and associated equipment was behind a locked door, as were other typical flight crew amenities (this was before smartphones, tablets, and WiFi were ubiquitous), but they would gladly shuttle us back and forth to a local restaurant when we'd visit and didn't have a car. Then we ran into two issues: refusal to permit us access to the radar and weather computer when a professional flight crew was around (but not using it), and the day we showed up for departure to find the "24 hour" FBO closed because a pro golfer had apparently decided to show up in his jet. It was then that we learned that they close to "the great unwashed" when folks who fancy themselves as "celebrities" show up, and as a result, they get repeat business from those individuals. Can I blame them for doing that? No. Can I blame them for not informing us of that policy ahead of time, and then preventing access to our aircraft until the "celebrity" was out of sight? Yes. After my review was removed from AirNav and the FBO listing was subsequently closed to comments, that was the final straw. Thankfully, there was another FBO on the field which did not appear to have any of the same issues the last time I was there.


JKG
Click to expand...
Well, in that context they are jerks and do not deserve your business.
 
Ask Angies List to start an FBO section.

As far as the celebrity FBO, I can guarantee you that were they holding my airplane hostage and refusing to let me board my own aircraft, the the uproar, including the local police and the local TV station and the FSDO, would have been of celebrity status.
 
Dr. O said:
Ask Angies List to start an FBO section.

As far as the celebrity FBO, I can guarantee you that were they holding my airplane hostage and refusing to let me board my own aircraft, the the uproar, including the local police and the local TV station and the FSDO, would have been of celebrity status.
Click to expand...
Not a bad idea, but why reinvent the wheel. We have the perfect place to do this already, and in fact do it quite often. Right here on POA!
 
douglas393 said:
Not a bad idea, but why reinvent the wheel. We have the perfect place to do this already, and in fact do it quite often. Right here on POA!
Click to expand...

Yep and the owner of the FBO that this thread was started about has displayed massive amounts of butthurt over one negative review posted on this very site.
 
weilke said:
Whatever airnav presents to you once you click on the FBOs name is the FBOs 'ad' and they control the content. Airnav is not a newspaper, a charity or the goverment, they are under not obligation to be fair.

As I said, I vote with my wallet if I see a FBO that has airnav comments disabled. The AOPA airport directory btw. doesn't allow FBOs to edit the entries. The AOPA directory is paid by the members, not the FBOs.
Click to expand...

I don't click on FBO names, I click to read comments. A user comment section that is presented as an unadulterated value to readers shouldn't be "edited" into a testimonial section without informing the readers. Perhaps they do "inform" the readers in their T&Cs, but it's underhanded and deceptive at best. As someone else mentioned, if there isn't at least a hint of objectivity on AirNav's part regarding the comments, they are of little value in a world where the airport and navaid information is available in many other places.

That being said, I learned first hand about how they operate years ago. There is nothing wrong with them declining to accept comments for some FBOs, but I don't know of any case where such a practice reflects positively on the FBO.


JKG
 
I emailed AirNav about my concern and here is the response I received:

Jeffrey,

Yes Aces Aviation has gone to a No Comment policy.. They have the ability to do this with a paid subscription.. As far as your comment at BKW they actually don't have a paid listing they had a courtesy listing with us and when our IT department runs maintenance on the system it will kick out some of the courtesy listing if there have been no activity on it for a while thinking the data is bad.. We don't know they have been kicked out until someone brings it to our attention.. I put their courtesy listing back on today and your comment is displayed..


Thanks Jeffrey, you have a great week!
Gina Garmon
Customer Service Manager
AirNav, LLC
email: gina@airnav.com
Phone: 404-975-0600
Direct: 404-963-9045
Fax: 877-392-3006
Mail: PO Box 20273 Atlanta, GA 30325-0273
Click to expand...
So a paid advertisement definitely gives them control. Thanks everyone for your perspective on this! AirNav has definitely dropped a notch on my credibility scale. I will still use it but definitely will be less reliant on the comments.
 
JGoodish said:
I don't click on FBO names, I click to read comments. A user comment section that is presented as an unadulterated value to readers shouldn't be "edited" into a testimonial section without informing the readers.
Click to expand...

You click under 'FBO, Fuel providers and Aircraft Ground Support' on a banner that carries the FBOs logo.
They dont make any claim about it being 'unadulterated'.

Their website, their way of doing business. You are free to use another provider of airport information if you dont like their policy on comments.


That being said, I learned first hand about how they operate years ago. There is nothing wrong with them declining to accept comments for some FBOs, but I don't know of any case where such a practice reflects positively on the FBO.
Click to expand...

While I tend to view any FBO that does so with a healthy dose of skepticism, this is not necessarily a sign of something wrong. Flew into a small place in ND with one of those '1 man and a gas-pump' FBOs. The comments were disabled. I asked the elderly owner of the FBO why he did that and it was simply that he had to rely on a nephew to handle the various online listings and just didn't want to deal with it after it had been set up.
Another local FBO was listed with an incorrect name and incorrect phone number after a change in the FBO contract. He told me that airnav would not update the information unless he purchased an ongoing listing with them.

So, I dont put much weight on the information on airnav to start with. The FAA publishes this nifty thing called 'Airport and Facilities Directory' that contains the phone numbers for the FBOs, a phonecall often answers any questions you may have better than all the online sources.
 
weilke said:
The FAA publishes this nifty thing called 'Airport and Facilities Directory' that contains the phone numbers for the FBOs[. A] [phone call] often answers any questions you may have better than all the online sources.
Click to expand...

I don't see FBO information (phone numbers or otherwise) in the A/FD.
 
acrophile said:
I don't see FBO information (phone numbers or otherwise) in the A/FD.
Click to expand...

You are right, it was the various state aviaton dept. directories I had in mind.
 
I got a flyer in the mail from Derek Mulder of Ace Aviation. I won't ever be flying into Allegan as long as he owns the place. Especially with him now being a whiny ***** about Airnav comments. Hey, Derek Mulder of Ace aviation, if you didn't wear your ass as a hat, you might not drive customers away.
 
The world of customer reviews is a bit tricky. On the one hand its not like a consumer reports which accepts no advertising and tests products in their independent labs with nothing to gain or lose if they tick off a given manufacturer. AirNav on the other hand depends on Ads and many of them from the FBOs or other businesses being reviewed. On the other hand they won't get advertising dollar #1 if they don't have pilots visiting their site. I think you just have to understand that Airnav is what it is get what use or info from it that you can and realize that it is not a consumer reports type site.

Additionally the other side of the coin is that there are those that will trash an FBO because they are a competing business. I recall one such incident where the instructors of one Flight School piled on and trashed a competing FBO/Flight School, simply in my opinion because they were a competitor.
 
Thanks OP for posting this, I have found them selectively showing comments even if the FBO hasn't decided to disallow comments.

I've posted several comments that didn't negatively impact an FBO and they never show up.

This one bothered me:
http://airnav.com/airport/KEDU/A#c

I posted a comment that I don't think the FBO deserved 2 stars and negative comments because AirNav's fuel prices weren't updated. The FBO has no responsibility to update AirNav. I was even part of a "customer interview" by AirNav and mentioned this, they said they would look into it (although nothing changed).

I think I'll be switching to SkyVector's airport page as what I'm looking for is airport and/or FBO comments as well as (multiple) large photos of the airport areas.
 
weilke said:
The AOPA airport directory btw. doesn't allow FBOs to edit the entries. The AOPA directory is paid by the members, not the FBOs.
Click to expand...

And because the comments on the AOPA airport directory aren't technically anonymous that should inhibit groundless attacks.

I wish more AOPA members would add relevant and useful comments to the AOPA airport directory.

"AOPA member comments are are offered unedited and do not necessarily reflect the views of AOPA.
...
Only current AOPA members and business managers can post comments."
 
Airnav will allow the fbo to delete comments as well as post their own testimonials (and in fact, slander pilots who posted critical comments) disguised as independent reviews.
Believe me, I've been all over that with those crooks at Capital Aviation.
 
weilke said:
You click under 'FBO, Fuel providers and Aircraft Ground Support' on a banner that carries the FBOs logo.
They dont make any claim about it being 'unadulterated'.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. I don't click on banners, and I dont click on logos. I go to the airport page and click to read the comments.

The issue is that AirNav presents the comments section as an independent review site for FBOs. It isn't, and they don't make it clear that reviews may be selectively edited by their paid advertisers, deceiving the reader and disrespecting those who take the time to leave reviews. It's their right to run their business however they see fit, but that doesn't change the fact that comments posted on their site cannot be viewed as credible.

And, if an FBO wants to be listed on AirNav but doesn't want to monitor the comments, then fine, don't. If you are and FBO and provide great service at a good price, you should have nothing to worry about. Good businesses should be interested in candid reviews and mature enough to handle negative comments, justified or not. If an FBO is closed to comments on AirNav, I can only reasonably assume that it's because they're afraid of what folks might say about them, and that usually isn't a good sign.


JKG
 
weilke said:
You are not the customer of airnav. You are the product being sold.

Airnav is an advertising venue marketing to FBOs. Yes, some FBOs reserve the right to block all comments, others reserve the right to have only comments approved by them show up. This is hardly news. If I see an FBO that blocks comments, I will do what I can to avoid giving them any of my business. If an FBO replies to unfavorable comments in a reasonable manner, I try to look at the merits of the comment and reply. It is not allways the FBO who is in the wrong.

How much did you pay for that airnav search again ?
Click to expand...

I bet AirNav gains more revenue from page views and that mining of the person browsing email address then actual FBO subscription fees...:dunno::rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top