Yet another person tries to create a "jet sharing" company...

Henning said:
I don't get how it works without being 135.
Click to expand...
I think it's just another broker selling seats instead of trips or legs. They'll use existing 135 operators.

I can see one problem right off. What if one of the parties is late. Do they get kicked off the boat? Who pays then?
 
If the network is big enough economies of scale would make the wait for the next ride tolerable. I've shouted to anybody willing to listen that corporate aviation isn't about selling transportation or glamour or comfort or status, it's about selling time.
 
From a mutual benefit standpoint, and assuming everybody has a watch and a "no later than" departure mentality, it would definitely fill a need. Owners don't like to charter because it reduces their access to their plane and charter customers tend to be less careful with the furniture. If the revenues from carrying a couple of added passengers make a significant dent in operating costs for a trip owners are going to fly anyway, they will at least listen to the sales pitch.

Passengers who want to fly private but can't afford a jet or a full charter rate will obviously pay up big-time for a seat, but at an incredibly cheaper cost than other options.

I have no idea whether they can surmount the obvious business, regulatory and logistics issues, or whether sufficient demand exists to make it viable. But on paper this deal makes more sense than most others that have been floated.

Everskyward said:
I think it's just another broker selling seats instead of trips or legs. They'll use existing 135 operators.

I can see one problem right off. What if one of the parties is late. Do they get kicked off the boat? Who pays then?
Click to expand...
 
It's easy to make a small fortune in aviation.......start with a large fortune. This idea has surface beauty....but the details will get it grounded in reality.
 
What's your best guess on the proposed revenue split between owner and seat broker?

Threefingeredjack said:
It's easy to make a small fortune in aviation.......start with a large fortune. This idea has surface beauty....but the details will get it grounded in reality.
Click to expand...
 
Captain said:
If the network is big enough economies of scale would make the wait for the next ride tolerable. I've shouted to anybody willing to listen that corporate aviation isn't about selling transportation or glamour or comfort or status, it's about selling time.
Click to expand...
I agree that time is more important than glamour to the majority of passengers. That's why I think getting everyone to show up at that same time will be a major problem.
 
Wouldn't you agree that some passengers or groups are never late and some are never on time? Couldn't you quickly identify them and decide which ones would be most attractive to a company selling seats?

Everskyward said:
I agree that time is more important than glamour to the majority of passengers. That's why I think getting everyone to show up at that same time will be a major problem.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Wouldn't you agree that some passengers or groups are never late and some are never on time? Couldn't you quickly identify them and decide which ones would be most attractive to a company selling seats?
Click to expand...
Then you would have the problem of matching the passengers who tend to arrive on time or early and the ones who tend to arrive late. In addition, it's not uncommon for passengers to change their departure times one way or the other. They give notice but it isn't a huge amount of notice. This is not a problem for the crew but it would be to other passengers.
 
If it works, somebody must obviously figure this stuff out. If the owners are being compensated for the service they agreed to provide, the terms of the deal must be structured accordingly. My Citation-III client in Dallas has never been on time and never call to advise the crew, the grocery guy and the rotary brush guy have never been late.

Everskyward said:
Then you would have the problem of matching the passengers who tend to arrive on time or early and the ones who tend to arrive late. In addition, it's not uncommon for passengers to change their departure times one way or the other. They give notice but it isn't a huge amount of notice. This is not a problem for the crew but it would be to other passengers.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
What's your best guess on the proposed revenue split between owner and seat broker?
Click to expand...

Tough to call. I'm going to assume that the operators have a handle on their fixed costs, and will of course need to cover them. The rub comes when you begin to negotiate the commission to the broker. I would think that a sliding percentage based on increased revenue to the operator would be a logical starting position by the broker's representatives, and a set percentage would be the operator's position. My wife, who scrapes together a few pennies to feed us by negotiating and constructing contracts for joint ventures, doesn't have any better guesses either.
IMHO, the value balance lies in that gray area between the known asset, the planes, and the intangible, which is the ability of the broker to steer butts to seat, which is based on their contacts and marketing. If asked to invest in such a venture I would ask: "Aren't there any bridges for sale???"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top