Can Private Jets Truly Make Money From Operations

[Inverted]

No idea what he's talking about, but NetJets has been screwing with their union recently.

Recently? lol.


NJASAP is a gutless union with no power and management has been screwing with them for years.

 

[knot4u]

I've been working on pt 135 managed jets for a couple of decades. My understanding has always been that the owners were never intending to make a profit, they were just trying to offset their cost through tax write offs or, to a lesser extent, charters. Some owners will sign on with a management company and put their airplane on the 135 cert and only allow certain people to charter their plane and even then the charters are only the minimum the IRS requires for them to write off the operating cost as a business expense. This is not some dirty little secret, it's done everyday all over the country with VLJs to large cabin airplanes. Yes, a private jet can generate money, for the management company, not for the owner. A private jet is a depreciating asset that only becomes more expensive as its value drops. Some owners that actually utilize their airplanes for their specific needs and require them in their business are able to justify that loss and won't be disappointed. Some trust fund kid that thinks they can buy a G-IV and make money is going to regret it. I've seen both sides of that coin. And then there are the unicorns, the people with enough money that they don't care about the cost (the rule of thumb for a newish large cabin jet is 10% of the purchase price annually to operate it) that keep it pt 91, those folks are few and far between.

 

[killbilly]

It seems like the OP is saying the larger 91 operations should operate under a different regulatory framework than the current 91 operational rules? Like, a subset or something? Because scale?

 

[CFI A&P]

The question is if the shift to large scale operations for profit rather than traditional aircraft sales and management necessitates a higher level of scrutiny given some of these companies are approaching 1000 aircraft fleets, with the same or more flights a day. Is that company an outlier therefore it can be regulated through company specific op-specs, or should there be a fundamental enhancement of operating certificates at the federal level for operators above a certain threshold of flights and fleets? And does squeezing margins from operations rather than relying on sales and management actually work? The conflict is clear here when reliance on operational efficiency for profits incentivises following the bare minimum of regulations which may not be enough when conducting large scale, airline style operations.

This sounds like a Grant Cardone word salad you hear on a radio advertisement.

It seems like the OP is saying the larger 91 operations should operate under a different regulatory framework than the current 91 operational rules? Like, a subset or something? Because scale?

Like 91k ?

 

[killbilly]

This sounds like a Grant Cardone word salad you hear on a radio advertisement.



Like 91k ?

I dunno. I'm kinda guessing at things through the verbosity.

 

[Richman]

Man, we seem to spend a lot of time these days swatting at bots.

 

[KLB]

Either a bot of someone going on a fishing expedition?

 

[KLB]

Man, we seem to spend a lot of time these days swatting at bots.

You beat me by 1 minute.

 

[flyingpotato]

I've been working on pt 135 managed jets for a couple of decades. My understanding has always been that the owners were never intending to make a profit, they were just trying to offset their cost through tax write offs or, to a lesser extent, charters. Some owners will sign on with a management company and put their airplane on the 135 cert and only allow certain people to charter their plane and even then the charters are only the minimum the IRS requires for them to write off the operating cost as a business expense. This is not some dirty little secret, it's done everyday all over the country with VLJs to large cabin airplanes. Yes, a private jet can generate money, for the management company, not for the owner. A private jet is a depreciating asset that only becomes more expensive as its value drops. Some owners that actually utilize their airplanes for their specific needs and require them in their business are able to justify that loss and won't be disappointed. Some trust fund kid that thinks they can buy a G-IV and make money is going to regret it. I've seen both sides of that coin. And then there are the unicorns, the people with enough money that they don't care about the cost (the rule of thumb for a newish large cabin jet is 10% of the purchase price annually to operate it) that keep it pt 91, those folks are few and far between.

Yes, this category of customers in addition to company fleets who don't intend to turn a profit have been the primary user and intended customer of biz jets. Noted a massive cultural and operational difference from private 91 accounts with unrestricted budgets, and large fractional and up and coming charter operators who operate these jets like a domestic and international airline. The main manufactures are not designing these planes for that type of large fleet use. Some (Textron and Bombardier to some extent) are directly catering to this type of operation, so it will be interesting to see what regulatory responses will result as these types of large scale operations grow.

 

[Ian_J]

@flyingpotato

Why did you delete your post in the military helicopters over DC thread?

 

[knot4u]

Yes, this category of customers in addition to company fleets who don't intend to turn a profit have been the primary user and intended customer of biz jets. Noted a massive cultural and operational difference from private 91 accounts with unrestricted budgets, and large fractional and up and coming charter operators who operate these jets like a domestic and international airline. The main manufactures are not designing these planes for that type of large fleet use. Some (Textron and Bombardier to some extent) are directly catering to this type of operation, so it will be interesting to see what regulatory responses will result as these types of large scale operations grow.

You ask questions and that's okay. Now you have to answer questions, we'll go old school, what street did you grow up on? What was your first pets name? Did you go to any of your school dances? What were your dates names? If you lie we'll know. So before we continue I'd appreciate some sort of verification that you're not AI. Just give us solid facts.

 

[flyingpotato]

I dunno. I'm kinda guessing at things through the verbosity.

You ask questions and that's okay. Now you have to answer questions, we'll go old school, what street did you grow up on? What was your first pets name? Did you go to any of your school dances? What were your dates names? If you lie we'll know. So before we continue I'd appreciate some sort of verification that you're not AI. Just give us solid facts.

Lol yeah right.

 

[knot4u]

Lol yeah right.

What's right? I asked simple questions that if you're an actual person would not reveal your identity. One word answers and you can't answer. I'll show you mine if you show me yours...