Airport/Facility Feedback on AirNav

[schmookeeg]

Those were logical and well-thought-out answers, and I appreciate them.

I really like some of the ideas that are flowering in this thread -- the comment-deletion-notification one seems logical, and I do like the "unverified businesses" idea, even though it goes against the grain of your 2004 cull-a-palooza.

I think it presents a different picture of an airport when it has only one reported business, vs and airport with only one "confirmed" business and reports of a dozen others, even if some are obsolete. It makes me feel like if I *do* have that unplanned breakdown, that I will do better at the more "buzzy" airport.

I can totally see the data creep getting way out of hand. I respect your handling of it, and I can't throw stones from my armchair, it is not a simple cut-and-dry issue.

Just seeing you here makes me feel good that Airnav will go the distance. Thanks.

Cheers,

- Mike

(For the record, I have 2 businesses listed on Airnav, only one of which is in my sig )

 

[dmccormack]

I like AirNav and have posted comments (once was sent a free sleeve of uber-nice golf balls from the FBO).

One minor suggestion: On the home page, put in a series of boxes next to each type (airport, Navaid, etc) so I can search directly from there.

Saves a click.

 

[flybill7]

I love AirNav. I check it for every new airport I go to, for fuel prices, for the comments. Keep up the great work AirNavGuy.

 

[t0r0nad0]

Following up on my previous post - I even used AirNav for years before I started my flight training so I could get the frequencies and Airport Diagrams for an airport I was going to visit (I used to be a frequent flyer) so I could listen in on my scanner.

 

[jason]

Hey, if you wanna redo my site for me with php go at it.

I'd consider it. Do you have someplace to host such a site?

 

[DGlaeser]

I also use AirNav a lot and appreciate all you do to keep it up to date and accurate. I hope your health plan has good mental health coverage

My suggestion is to add a Restaurants/Food section to your standard template. I'd even make food availability one of the search criteria. I often select stops primarily on the avaialbility of food. No data in that section would indicate no reliable expectation of getting something to fill MY tank. I'd hope that section would be a good standard place to note on-field or walking distance restaurants, or if the FBO has vending machines, or a crew car for nearby restaurants.

Keep up the good work!

 

[dmccormack]

I also use AirNav a lot and appreciate all you do to keep it up to date and accurate. I hope your health plan has good mental health coverage

My suggestion is to add a Restaurants/Food section to your standard template. I'd even make food availability one of the search criteria. I often select stops primarily on the avaialbility of food. No data in that section would indicate no reliable expectation of getting something to fill MY tank. I'd hope that section would be a good standard place to note on-field or walking distance restaurants, or if the FBO has vending machines, or a crew car for nearby restaurants.

Keep up the good work!

Just like a CFI... "Where's the vending machines?!?!"

 

[murphey]

also remember that some FBOs explicitly refuse to be listed on AirNav. There's an entire company that has a number of FBOs that will not allow themselves to be listed on AirNav. I even contacted one of them and asked why and got the run-around. But what did come out of the discussion (?) was that they didn't feel that AirNav users were their target audience.

Huh? is all I could respond.

 

[AdamZ]

Paolo, Have you considered, either linking to a FlyIn Site such as Flyincalendar.com or creating a section for flyins at the airports that are listed on AirNav.

This group, Pilots of America, has a lot of flyins at 3MO, KLOM, 6Y9, WV62, and there are obviously hundreds of other flyins across the country. Posting these flyins or linking to flyincalender.com will promote , the flyin, bring business to the FBOs, recognition to smaller fields such as 6Y9 and generate more traffic on AirNav and generally promote GA. Just a thought

 

[ScottM]

I am the founder of AirNav. Once in a while I read or hear something like this and it just makes my stomach turn.

It is absolutely NOT TRUE that we will delete anything critical or negative. Absolutely not. Having said that, AirNav comments are not an "anything goes" forum. We have a policy on comments that all comments must adhere to. Much like POA does, but with slightly different rules. The policy is posted on our site, in the open for anyone to read. Comments that violate the policy are not posted. Sometimes comments will get posted and are later removed when they are later found to be violating the policy. But there is nothing in the policy that refers to positive or negative comments, or that anything critical gets removed, or that "site sponsors" can influence the comments. Nothing. In fact, if you browse AirNav you will find quite a few negative comments, some of them on the pages of some of AirNav's biggest customers.

So now smigaldi thinks he can come here on POA and say that AirNav admins delete anything remotely critical. I am going to present our side and let you decide. Scott wrote about an FBO, and I quote: "I did pay over $5/gal for fuel and still had to pay for parking". That FBO was not charging $5, and up until that point had never charged $5 or higher. The FBO GUARANTEES their price posted on AirNav, was updating the price regularly, and claimed to never have sold fuel above $5. We asked Scott for a receipt so we could even get him a refund of the overcharge. Scott could not produce a receipt or any evidence that he has been charged over $5. We then asked for just an N-number and a date so that the FBO could look up their own records. No response from Scott to that one.

One of our rules on comments is that "Factual statements in comments must be truthful". Every evidence we had pointed to the fact that the price had never been $5. The comment was deleted due to the factual statement by Scott that he had paid over $5/gallon, which was plainly not true. Perhaps Scott made some math error and no longer had the original receipt to recheck his math. But in the end the fact is, the factual statement was not truthful, and that is why the comment had to be removed. Not because of any influence by a "site sponsor", as Scott alleges.

We at AirNav put a lot of work into these comments, and do our best to make sure they are the best trustworthy information for the aviation community. We may not always get it 100% right, but we try hard. Commercial interests are not part of the equation when dealing with comments. Some FBO customers don't feel the same way and we have lost some accounts for not acquiescing to an advertiser's desire to control comments.

So there. I had to say it.

Yep you had to say your incomplete and partially true story.

What you left out is what has me concerned.

First the main point of my comment, which you neglected to even discuss was that the FBO had poor tie down facilities, left me to dig them out and charged me for that service. The fuel price they quoted did not include taxes and with those taxes added up to the $5/gal.


You also demanded that I send you private credited card statement information via email which no one in their right mind would do.

But you had also removed the comment before you even contacted me. The FBO in question is the only one on the airport and there has been issues with the monopoly that they have at the airport. That may be something you did not know, but was well known to even the line guys who had told me that single pistons were not very welcome at that FBO when we went to search for the tie down. That is the issue the FBO did not wish to have documented because they feared getting competition on the airport. This all still begs the question about why the comment about the tie downs was removed?


As for me not sending you my N-number, that is not true. I responded to your email request for that info along with a note telling you I would not send my credit card statement to you. You chose to ignore that email and as the comment had already been removed it was easy for me to surmise that you were serving your customers. Those that pay you are your customers. Pilots are not your customer at all, and I chose to no longer offer information for free that you would in turn be able to use for your profit. Much like the $100 hamburger guy did or still does.

Had my comment been as you have indicated untrue then it would have been a statistical outlying and anyone reading it would have known it to be untrue. But I suspect that the FBO knew the comment to be true and did not wish for it to be seen and hence they objected and you quickly removed it based on your paying customer's request.

I just went to look to see what had been written about that FBO and found this comment on there now, I guess the FBO had missed it and has not objected to it or maybe, just maybe so many of these kept coming in that the FBO could not get you to do their dirty work for them anymore? hmmm.

From Amelia Reiheld on 10-Nov-2007 Nice people, good airport, but at $5.35/ gal, 100LL is the highest I've ever paid, and to add financial insult to economic injury, their fancy $10/night parking fee is not waived for a night, for even for topped-off fuel purchase. Thus, unless weather's a major problem on my frequent trips to Lansing, I'll probably land at another nearby airport whenever I can. The Lansing FBO is obviously catering to the turbine crowd, where expense isn't an issue.

I wish to bring to your attention the comment about catering to the turbine crowd. This comment was made after my visit. One can see that it is still the case there.

So there I had to say it too. AirNav caters to its paying customers. The information is at best incomplete and the system is manipulated by the paying advertisers.

Like the old saying goes, you get what you pay for. We pilots pay nothing for it and the advertisers do pay for it. So of course they get to control the message. I don't think anyone is accusing AirNav of being anything but advertiser supported.

My experience is not unique either

AirNav.com censuring

Notify me of new responses

Curious if anyone else has been censured by AirNav.com when leaving
comments about an FBO's service. I spent $350 on fuel in Hattiesburg
and was asked to limit my courtesy car time to 1/2 hour to drive out
for a sit-down dinner. When posted on AirNav.com, my comments were
changed to:This comment has been temporarily suspended by AirNav pending an
investigation.

-- Don Shade, July 14, 2008
​

Answers

I think that FBOs can pay to have airnav.com remove all the comments or to make their listing uncommentable. FBOs and flight schools also need to pay to be listed, which means that airnav.com is not a reliable means of finding out what services are available at a given airport. If you look at http://www.airnav.com/airport/kbed , for example, you find the two FBOs that sell fuel listed. You won't find East Coast Aero Club or Executive Flyers, two of the largest flight schools in the region. You won't find Nagle Aircraft Service, one of the best piston maintenance shops around. You won't find AirShares, the fractional Cirrus operation.
The best way to look at airnav.com is as an advertising medium for FBOs. It is not an online community.

-- Philip Greenspun, July 14, 2008
​

The management at AirNav must read your blog because they published my comments almost immediately after I posted this.

-- Don Shade, July 14, 2008​

I believe that the missing-FBO problem stems from AirNav's policy regarding listing. If a third party enters a fuel price, an FBO gets a "free" listing showing the price. If the FBO subsequently upgrades to a paid listing and then doesn't want to pay anymore, they get removed and don't go back to a free listing. AirNav definitely appears to censor any comments that could be construed in a negative way. I enter comments on FBOs that send unsolicited commercial email, and many of them disappear.

-- Kenneth Adelman, December 28, 2008
​

every time i have left negative comments they have censored them. look at the comments very few if any are critical.

-- ken ouellette, April 27, 2009​

http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000u30&topic_id=Aviation&topic=

I understand that AirNav is a business. A business that for the first time is probably dealing with competition. The Flight Aware guys have got to be taking a lot of the traffic that you used to get. Their site just keeps getting better and better while you still runs slow, and has a clunky user interface. I see that in the past couple of weeks you have been out trying to get more exposure for your site by trying some new gorilla marketing things such as social networking and most likely coming to PoA. That is fine, I get too that you are about making money for your customers as well. I also applaud you for what you did with AirNav in early days. But to pretend that the feedback on the site is not censored is at best pulling the string of credulity to the breaking point.




​

 

[Graueradler]

I operate an FBO. I am satisfied with my interface with AirNav. I recovered 40% of the cost of my listing on AirNav the afternoon of the first day from a large sale to a flier who stopped because he had checked prices on AirNav.

We have positive comments and one negative. The negative comment is accompanied by a rebuttal from me.

 

[airnav]

Yep you had to say your incomplete and partially true story.

What you left out and out right lied about is what has me concerned.

First the main point of my comment, which you neglected to even discuss was that the FBO had poor tie down facilities, left me to dig them out and charged me for that service. The fuel price they quoted did not include taxes and with those taxes added up to the $5/gal.

We had no problem with the part of your comment that talked about the poor tie downs. If that was the only thing, your comment would have stayed. The only sentence in question was that the price of fuel had been over $5. That, as best as we could determine, was not true.

You also demanded that I send you private credited card statement information via email which no one in their right mind would do.

No we did not. What would be the point? A credit card statement would be of no use because it does not show the price per gallon.

When you said you no longer had the receipt, we asked for an N-number and date, so that we could have the FBO pull up the record of the transaction. We did not ask for the credit card statement. I still have that email. If you keep old email, look on 7/11/07 at 12:53 and you will see.

But you had also removed the comment before you even contacted me. The FBO in question is the only one on the airport and there has been issues with the monopoly that they have at the airport. That may be something you did not know, but was well known to even the line guys who had told me that single pistons were not very welcome at that FBO when we went to search for the tie down. That is the issue the FBO did not wish to have documented because they feared getting competition on the airport. This all still begs the question about why the comment about the tie downs was removed?

We had not removed the comment before we contacted you. We had suspended the comment until we could sort things out. Fyi, as soon as someone reports a policy violation a comment gets automatically suspended. When a comment is suspended we do not entirely take it out: we leave a notice on the site saying that that particular comment is suspended. Then we review the comment and the complaint, contact the author, contact the FBO, do whatever we need to do, and then the comment either comes back or gets deleted. This is typically fast, but it depends a lot on how fast people respond.

The story about the tie downs was removed because it was in the same comment as the $5 fuel. If you wanted to strike out the part about $5 fuel you could have told us and we would have taken that out and the rest of the comment would have been published. But we would not take the liberty of editing out a significant portion of your comment.

As for me not sending you my N-number, that is a lie. I responded to your email request for that info along with a note telling you I would not send my credit card statement to you.

I'm sorry, I never received that email. Would you care to resend, please?

Had my comment been as you have indicated untrue then it would have been a statistical outlying and anyone reading it would have known it to be untrue. But I suspect that the FBO knew the comment to be true and did not wish for it to be seen and hence they objected and you quickly removed it based on your paying customer's request.

Golly. You keep hammering on the same note. Paying or not paying has nothing to do with this. We would have treated it exactly the same way had this been a non-paying FBO.

I just went to look to see what had been written about that FBO and found this comment on there now, I guess the FBO had missed it and has not objected to it or maybe, just maybe so many of these kept coming in that the FBO could not get you to do their dirty work for them anymore? hmmm.

Thanks for finding that comment. You proved my point: we do publish negative comments about paying customers. Thanks, Scott.

You also quote Don Shade's experience. For all here to witness, you can still today see Don's comment published on the page of a paying customer. That comment was reported to be in violation of the policy, we investigated and found it to not be in violation, and promptly reinstated it.

So there I had to say it too. AirNav caters to its paying customers. The information is at best incomplete and the system is manipulated by the paying advertisers.

True. AirNav serves the aviation community, which includes paying customers and pilots and many non-paying business. The non-revenue service is made possible by the money we get from the paying customers.

True. The information is incomplete. No one can claim that their information is complete: it never is. We wish it was, we work to make it as good as possible, but we understand it is not perfect. We believe it to be the best and most complete FBO information out there, from any free or paid service.

False. The comments are not manipulated by advertisers. That is just not true. I am sorry if that is your perception. I don't quite understand why you think that, because you yourself have found and quoted negative comments associated with paid advertisers.

Like the old saying goes, you get what you pay for. We pilots pay nothing for it and the advertisers do pay for it. So of course they get to control the message. I don't think anyone is accusing AirNav of being anything but advertiser supported.

Advertisers pay to get control of their listing (their list of services, their contact info, logos, photos, etc.) Not the comments.

I also applaud you for what you did with AirNav in early days. But to pretend that the feedback on the site is not censored is at best pulling the string of credulity to the breaking point.

If by "censored" you mean that comments are selectively posted, then you are right: we only publish comments that we believe to comply with our policy.

But we absolutely do not selectively remove or edit comments to please customers. I am truly sorry that that is your perception. If you can't convince yourself that you are wrong by the negative comments you find, I don't know how I could possibly convince you.

 

[Anthony]

Another satisfied Airnav user here. I use it everytime I fly to a new airport. Its part of my routine flight planning.

 

[ScottM]

But we absolutely do not selectively remove or edit comments to please customers. I am truly sorry that that is your perception. If you can't convince yourself that you are wrong by the negative comments you find, I don't know how I could possibly convince you.

Sorry I cannot convince myself I am wrong. Especially since I feel that I am correct. the price they stated was without tax and with the fuel taxes was $5/gal (I cannot remember what the exact amount was any longer, but it was in that ballpark). I never even complained about the fuel price.

My complaint was that I was charged parking for inferior parking facilities and about the inferior parking places themselves. I feel that was the issue all along as the conversation about those inferior parking facilities started in the FBO when I asked for the fee to be waived and was refused. I had dug out the tie downs myself and left them in a way that other planes could use them. I felt that was at least worthy of some customer consideration in the waiving of that parking fee. I feel you are an unwitting middleman in this issue and since you receive money from one of the parties are compromised in your ability to be fair and impartial. As a businessman you are going to give your paying customers the service they demand.

 

[kevin47881]

My hat's off to AirNav and the service provided. It is rare that AirNav is not part of my pre-flight process.

 

[SkyHog]

Airnav Guy, question:

If an FBO pays for a listing, and then cancels their listing, what happens to the comment that have been left?

 

[JOhnH]

But I want to thank everyone for participating. To the AirNav supporters, a big thank you for the kudos. We circulate them to the staff, and they are well-needed boosts. Thanks.

For the AirNav naysayers, a big thank you for the intellectual stimulation and for your constructive criticism. You are helping us get better. Thanks to you too.

As a business owner, I wish I could keep such an attitude at all times when it comes to the inevitable complainers. You provide a great service which I use prior to every flight. But one thing that I have found is that there are some people that are going to complain about the price, even if it is free. You do your best and these people complain that it is not perfect. They see all businesses as being rich and omnipotent and have no tolerance of the work and sweat that goes into building something and they feel entitled to have you respond to their every whim without charge. They feel they could do it better. They have no sense of the evolution from "that sounds easy" to fixing small and large problems one at a time until what you have is no longer easy.

I don't want to ramble but I sympathize with the people that are trying and have no sympathy for the whiners unless they are part of the solution.

For those that want to go and start your own "free Airnav" Good luck. But how are YOU going to take it when the snipers whine and complain about the deficiencies of YOUR free product. And they will.

AirNav Rocks! Like someone else said, I would hate to see the "good old days" return.
John

 

[gismo]

Sorry I cannot convince myself I am wrong. Especially since I feel that I am correct. the price they stated was without tax and with the fuel taxes was $5/gal (I cannot remember what the exact amount was any longer, but it was in that ballpark). I never even complained about the fuel price.

My complaint was that I was charged parking for inferior parking facilities and about the inferior parking places themselves. I feel that was the issue all along as the conversation about those inferior parking facilities started in the FBO when I asked for the fee to be waived and was refused. I had dug out the tie downs myself and left them in a way that other planes could use them. I felt that was at least worthy of some customer consideration in the waiving of that parking fee. I feel you are an unwitting middleman in this issue and since you receive money from one of the parties are compromised in your ability to be fair and impartial. As a businessman you are going to give your paying customers the service they demand.

Scott, have you considered entering a replacement comment about the tiedown experience and either leaving out the fuel price issue entirely or just mentioning that the advertised price at the time of your visit didn't include additional taxes? It sure sounds like Airnav's reason for deleting your comment was due entirely to the price you stated which they believe to be in error (perhaps by only a small amount).

 

[Everskyward]

the price they stated was without tax and with the fuel taxes was $5/gal (I cannot remember what the exact amount was any longer, but it was in that ballpark).

My question to Airnav Guy is, are the fuel prices posted the out-the-door price or the price before taxes? Does the FBO have a choice which price to post? This could make a difference if people are comparison shopping.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

My question to Airnav Guy is, are the fuel prices posted the out-the-door price or the price before taxes? Does the FBO have a choice which price to post? This could make a difference if people are comparison shopping.

Excellent question, Mari. In my view, if they are not reporting an out of the pump price, they are misleading the public.

 

[JOhnH]

Excellent question, Mari. In my view, if they are not reporting an out of the pump price, they are misleading the public.

Do you really think AirNav has a policy that even considers whether the price reported includes tax? It is assumed that it does. Should AirNav now call every FBO to ask how they report prices? Ludicrous.

I think it would be more appropriate for POA members and others to post a PIREP each time they find an occurrence of deceitful advertising. And if the FBO has any integrity, they will respond honestly. If this turns out to be a widespread problem, then a new AirNAv policy stating that as a requirement may be warranted with exclusion the penalty for second violations.. I just hate to see gazillions of policies added on to policies because occasionally someone tries to get away with something. That is why our laws are as convoluted as the are.

Again I say that AirNav provides a great service to us FOR FREE. But people complain anyway instead of trying to help fix it.

 

[jesse]

We are proud that this service to and by the aviation community now supports the livelihood of 5 (soon to be 6) families. We have employees who maintain the site, answer your emails, work in a safe and pleasant environment (you should see our office!) and take home a dignified salary and full health benefits. One of our esteemed employees, a grandma, is now thinking about starting flying lessons. How cool is that?

I'm really glad to see that. AirNav does serve a valuable purpose to pilots all over the United States. So many people expect everything for nothing on the internet these days and just don't realize that it takes *TIME* to build things and even more to maintain them.

I will say that there was a time where I was *very* tempted to build another Airnav. My primary complaint was the performance. It was just *SLOW*. It seems you have that taken care of now.

As a person that does a fair amount of developing I have a healthy respect for your site. The logic behind it isn't rocket science but there is a *lot* of data in it. That data was not something I could re-produce on my own in any short period of time.

I'm glad to see that you found a balance that pays the bills, pays the staff a fair wage, and keeps your data clean and valid. Thanks for joining our community and respectfully addressing the concerns of our members.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Do you really think AirNav has a policy that even considers whether the price reported includes tax?

I didn't mean to imply AirNav was doing that. My beef is with the FBO's that report fuel price without tax. To me that is false advertising.

 

[ScottM]

I didn't mean to imply AirNav was doing that. My beef is with the FBO's that report fuel price without tax. To me that is false advertising.

I don't know if I would go so far as to call that false advertising. Many business do not advertise at the price + tax.

As an example if I wanted to go to an Apple Store to buy a new iTouch. The advertised price is $399. I am lucky enough to live in an area where there are two Apple stores nearby. They are both selling at the same price but on is a county and city that has very high sales tax, over 10%. If I buy it there I will pay more than at the other store. It is to me the same thing with fuel prices. If there is a sales tax no big deal. That is why I never thought this issue with my review was about the sales price, it was a manufactured issue by the FBO to have a comment, about their less than stellar dealings with small pistons, removed.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Fuel prices are in addition to federal, state, county and city taxes. For an accurate representation they should include all taxes.

 

[Everskyward]

I don't know if I would go so far as to call that false advertising. Many business do not advertise at the price + tax.

That is true for many businesses. You wouldn't expect to see an iTouch or computer advertised with a price including taxes. On the other hand, if you buy gas for your car the price advertised includes taxes. I have found that FBOs vary in how they advertise their fuel prices. Some include taxes, using the car gas model, and some don't. This can make comparison shopping difficult. Of course this is not Airnav's fault, but I don't see anywhere on their site where there is a policy one way or another.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I don't know if I would go so far as to call that false advertising.

I would.

Many business do not advertise at the price + tax.

IMO, you are comparing apples and oranges here. How many auto gas stations do you go to that have a price listed on the sign at the road and when you go to pay you find out that the price was many cents per gallon more? I bet the answer is never. Why should the prices an FBO quotes be any different?

This is my opinion only, but at best, those FBO's that do not include taxes in the price are misleading the public, and at worst are just plane unethical.

 

[ScottM]

IMO, you are comparing apples and oranges here. How many auto gas stations do you go to that have a price listed on the sign at the road and when you go to pay you find out that the price was many cents per gallon more? I bet the answer is never. Why should the prices an FBO quotes be any different?

I would not guess never. I see lots of auto stations advertising a price but the fine print that you may not see on the road at all is that the price for 'cash only' or with 'wash'.

 

[ScottM]

BTW just for fun I pulled one of my expense reports where I refueled the plane and was reimbursed. Several, but not all, charged me sales tax on top of the pump price. From my little survey it would seem that there is no set standard.

 

[kevin47881]

BTW just for fun I pulled one of my expense reports where I refueled the plane and was reimbursed. Several, but not all, charged me sales tax on top of the pump price. From my little survey it would seem that there is no set standard.

Scott, let me throw this out there for your consideration:

My home drome price listed on AirNav includes all applicable taxes. However, when I get the receipt, the base price is shown independent of the taxes.
I point that out to ask this; is it possible the advertised price was correct but the itemized billing on the invoice is creating the confusion?

*edit* "confusion" probably isn't the best word here but it's the best I can up with while dozing

 

[ScottM]

Scott, let me throw this out there for your consideration:

My home drome price listed on AirNav includes all applicable taxes. However, when I get the receipt, the base price is shown independent of the taxes.
I point that out to ask this; is it possible the advertised price was correct but the itemized billing on the invoice is creating the confusion?

*edit* "confusion" probably isn't the best word here but it's the best I can up with while dozing

Sure, it is possible. I really don't know. And as I said before it was not anything that had me 'upset', 'mad', or anything else. In fact I was not even really mad with the FBO over the whole digging out of the parking place tie downs to begin with. I just wanted to make note of it for others to be aware of. But it seems that the FBO did not like what was written.

 

[gprellwitz]

I'm another satisfied AirNav user. Personally, I find the comments very helpful; both the positive ones and the negative ones. I recognize that sometimes people leave spiteful comments, and may be more likely to leave a comment if they had a negative experience. But just because their experience was negative, doesn't mean that the business did anything wrong! The ability for the business to make a rebuttal is extremely valuable, and when they have taken the time to do that, it generally speaks well of them.

On the other hand, some FBOs have opted to request the comments be disabled, and AirNav accommodates that request. The FBO may do it for a variety of reasons. One case I'm familiar with made the request because they had some negative comments about personalities. They felt that most comments throughout AirNav were negative, and that pilots would only use them as reasons to not use their services. Personally, I think it was the wrong decision made for the wrong reasons.

As for the fuel prices, the smattering that I checked all stated on the FBO page that the prices included taxes. But the page that specifies that only appears if they are a paid listing. The column on the airport page showing prices doesn't specify whether they include taxes. However, on the update page for the prices (which is open to anyone who registers an account, not just FBO owners), they specify that the fuel price is supposed to include all taxes.

 

[Graueradler]

AirNav Guy - Unrelated to this thread but a suggestion that would make AirNav more useful to me. I am a paying customer (KRUE). I do periodic price surveys within 100NM to see where my prices stand. This is very easy on 100LL because their default local area seems to be 100NM. It is difficult on AirNav because I have to do 4 searches that produce some overlapping results and many results beyond 100NM. Using both services is useful because some airports are listed on one and not the other.

Perhaps a definable local area search radius.

 

[ScottM]

I wrote a complaint about an FBO in Davenport, IA that tried to charge me $25 fee for parking for 3 hours! They didn't even touch the plane! My comments were deleted because the lineman thought I was a twin, I was flying an RV-10! This should have been even more reason to leave negative comments, but AirNav is their sand box and they can do what they want.

That being the only probelm I have had with Air Nav management I use the site all the time. It has a nice link to NOTAMS, flight planning, charts, ect.

Give FlightAware a shot. I like it because it has all of the Arinav stuff and more. I can file flight plans, I have my airplane set up in the database and can do flight planning, get a DUATS brief and file with only pushing a few keys, I get fuel price searches along my route of flight, etc. PLUS I love the flight tracking. I give the link to people I am going to meet if they want to track me and I have filed.

 

[airnav]

Sorry I cannot convince myself I am wrong. Especially since I feel that I am correct. the price they stated was without tax and with the fuel taxes was $5/gal (I cannot remember what the exact amount was any longer, but it was in that ballpark). I never even complained about the fuel price.

All prices on AirNav are with all taxes included. If you paid $5/gal or more, you are entitled to a refund of the difference. Since you no longer have the receipt, it is very simple: just tell us the N-number and date of your visit and we will have the FBO look it up. It may not be too late (or it may be, I don't know the FBO's recordkeeping and this has been over two years)

I feel you are an unwitting middleman in this issue and since you receive money from one of the parties are compromised in your ability to be fair and impartial. As a businessman you are going to give your paying customers the service they demand.

We are not unwitting at all. We receive money from the FBO specifically to ensure that you pay the advertised price. Yes, imagine that, FBOs pay AirNav to ensure the pilot gets the deal they were promised. So, if you would just come forward with details about the transaction, we would be glad to correct any error and refund you any overcharge.

 

[airnav]

Airnav Guy, question:

If an FBO pays for a listing, and then cancels their listing, what happens to the comment that have been left?

It depends on the reason for cancelation.

If the FBO is going out of business generally the comments disappear. The exception is if there is a succeeding FBO that takes the place of the old one with substantially similar services, and both the old manager and the new manager express a desire to keep the comments.

If the FBO is staying in business but does not want to pay AirNav anymore, they go to a free listing and the comments remain. There is a (hopefully short) interim period when the listing and associated comments drop off the site while we convert from a paid listing to a free listing.

 

[airnav]

Scott, have you considered entering a replacement comment about the tiedown experience and either leaving out the fuel price issue entirely or just mentioning that the advertised price at the time of your visit didn't include additional taxes? It sure sounds like Airnav's reason for deleting your comment was due entirely to the price you stated which they believe to be in error (perhaps by only a small amount).

No no no, don't do that. You run afoul of rule #1, "Comments must be representative of a recent actual or prospective customer experience". Scott's experience is no longer recent. However, if Scott wants to instruct us to strike out of the comment the part about the fuel price, we would be glad to publish the rest of the comment, including his parking experience. Or if Scott were to somehow prove or help us prove that he paid over $5/gal (including taxes), we would not only refund him the difference but also reinstate the entire comment.

 

[airnav]

My question to Airnav Guy is, are the fuel prices posted the out-the-door price or the price before taxes? Does the FBO have a choice which price to post? This could make a difference if people are comparison shopping.

All taxes included. FBO has no choice.

 

[SCCutler]

I have tried a number of the other similar services, and come back to Airnav- must be a good reason for it! At the same time, some of the other sources are "nipping at your heels" (so to speak) wit their services, so I am sure that you are always looking for enhancements which will maintain the edge.

Here's a suggestion for one.

The AOPA Airport Directory (online) allows one to print a "kneeboard format" airport summary, which I find very useful when I am preparing a trip package. Since you already have all the data available, why not make an option to prepare and print something like this from an Airnav Airport Data screen. You could, of course, include paid advertiser information on the summary (key FBOs, etc.), as long as it is done in a way to not interfere with the informational usefulness.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

BTW just for fun I pulled one of my expense reports where I refueled the plane and was reimbursed. Several, but not all, charged me sales tax on top of the pump price. From my little survey it would seem that there is no set standard.

Why is it so damned difficult for them to quote an out of the pump price? I still say it is deceiving or dishonest not to do so.