Gulfstream/PFJ/ATP

[moleman]

Okay, read the whole thing and seriously wonder about you. <<edited to be more open to poster's ideas or something...>>



I'm sure you're cool in real life, but here on the internet you sound silly.

Just sayin'.

I'm not cool in real life. You probably aren't going to believe me but I'm kind of an A hole.

Just think how silly I'll look as soon as your boy gets done with his post explaining how what was it again???

ATP was misleading, and I think he even said defrauding at one point, veterans.

I'll look really bad then.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

ATP WAS misleading veterans. They're not anymore though so that is kind of a dead issue.

 

[moleman]

ATP WAS misleading veterans.

HOW? What evidence do you have to support that statement?

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

An advertisement by them in a magazine, I saw the image which presented ATP as "VA Approved" when in fact they were not. At the time the only VA benefits one could receive with ATP was reimbursement of DPE fees. I saw it here on JetCareers, so perhaps you could use the search function. They also had a page on their website which I would characterize as misleading. The fact that they blanked out the page very shortly after a post about it appeared on this site seems to confirm that in my eyes as well.

If you don't remember either of these two posts then perhaps you haven't been lurking long enough

 

[MikeD]

I have never stated that I do not have a pony in the race. Nor have I gone into the forums of your advertisers and made unfounded accusations.

Don't see why you've got such a large fire lit for this issue, since it has nothing to do with you.

When someone makes accusations about one of your advertisers misleading potential students doesn't jetcareers have some responsibility to determine if the accusations are true?

We're not a law firm. People are going to post their own opinions and personal experiences.

If the accusations turn out to be false and baseless then perhaps there should be some ramifications for the poster. In this case the poster has demonstrated a clear historical bias against the advertiser and for a competitor.

We're not a court of law either.....people have their likes and dislikes.

I've been lurking here long enough to know. I have respect for all you guys and gals and for the work that you do. However I think the discourse in this section has been allowed to deteriorate to a level that renders it useless.

It is apparent to me that a significant portion of the negative posts toward ATP come from folks that have an interest in ATP being perceived negatively.(i.e. people working for FBOs).

I can help clean it up or continue with the scorched earth, don't make no nevermind to me. Just let me know which way to go.

So what is your dog in this fight, since you seem bound and determined to get into it?

EDIT: In any event, it seems the VA question was answered.

 

[MikeD]

I'm not cool in real life. You probably aren't going to believe me but I'm kind of an A hole.

Just think how silly I'll look as soon as your boy gets done with his post explaining how what was it again???

ATP was misleading, and I think he even said defrauding at one point, veterans.

I'll look really bad then.

Again, your interest is? Just curious as it seems more than just casual interest.

 

[Kleigh]

Since the Panama City location is 141 and has been for a while, doesnt that mean it is VA approved? If so, how is that misleading? You are or you arent. If you are, why all the fuss?

 

[JEP]

I have never stated that I do not have a pony in the race. Nor have I gone into the forums of your advertisers and made unfounded accusations.

Still can't find where said you do that. but o.k.

When someone makes accusations about one of your advertisers misleading potential students doesn't jetcareers have some responsibility to determine if the accusations are true?

If ATP had trouble with JetCareers, they would pull their advertising. That has not happened. If someone is going to make the big decision of dropping that cash with only the word of some anonymous person on the internet, well then, they are misleading themselves.

If the accusations turn out to be false and baseless then perhaps there should be some ramifications for the poster. In this case the poster has demonstrated a clear historical bias against the advertiser and for a competitor.

Does the prosecution rest yet? Seriously....

I've been lurking here long enough to know. I have respect for all you guys and gals and for the work that you do. However I think the discourse in this section has been allowed to deteriorate to a level that renders it useless.

Yet you continue to post in it. That just doesn't make sense.

It is apparent to me that a significant portion of the negative posts toward ATP come from folks that have an interest in ATP being perceived negatively.(i.e. people working for FBOs).

11. Our moderators are not "referees". We're here to keep Jetcareers a friendly, informative and fun environment, not to ensure "overly vigorous" debates are fought out evenly. If a thread or user has gotten out of hand, report it to the moderation team using the 'report post' feature (

). If your response to the user is in clear violation of the the rules of this website, you may receive a warning or infraction -- even though you feel "the other guy started it first". This is very important and helps maintain a healthy environment here at Jetcareers.com.

I can help clean it up or continue with the scorched earth, don't make no nevermind to me. Just let me know which way to go.

Not sure it needs to be cleaned up. As for the 'scorched earth' comment, it only scorches if there is someone sparking it.

The issue has be resolved according to the poster. So leave it at that.

 

[wrxpilot]

Like all of us here, I have spent thousands of dollars buying time in various airplanes.

Me too, except they were RENTAL planes.

 

[BroncsRule]

If ATP had trouble with JetCareers, they would pull their advertising. That has not happened. If someone is going to make the big decision of dropping that cash with only the word of some anonymous person on the internet, well then, they are misleading themselves.

Therein lies the problem. Many of the guys who post here, like the person who started this thread, go to great lengths to hold themselves out as experts in this field. He even includes a link with every one of his posts that touts his experience. When someone like that says something inflamatory about a subject he is an "expert" in, it seems to invite more comments by other "experts" in the field.

Then a young guy comes a long doing some research about aviation and comes across this particular nonsense and accepts it at face value.

In certain circles, not this one obviously, that could possibly be seen as libelous. What I hear Moleman saying is that allowing unfiltered slanderous and libelous comments made by people holding themselves out as experts on your site, may expose those responsible to liaility far exceeding having one of your major advertisers drop you.

I'm just sayin

 

[BroncsRule]

Me too, except they were RENTAL planes.

Yes? Please get to the point.

You were buying flight time. Please tell me how buying 250 hours in a Beech 1900 is different. They are not displacing anyone from the seat as implied here. They are not violating the Teamster contract. It isn't immoral, it isn't illegal. It isn't buying a job, it is buying flight training and block time. That's it.

Other than guys who have gone the military route, it is the same thing that all of you have done.

 

[SteveC]

What I hear Moleman saying is that allowing unfiltered slanderous and libelous comments made by people holding themselves out as experts on your site, may expose those responsible to liaility far exceeding having one of your major advertisers drop you.

I'm just sayin

[mod hat off]

:whatever:

Not-so-veiled threats are the soup de jour now? From a personal opinion (not that of the website) let me just say "Good luck with that".

 

[JEP]

Therein lies the problem. Many of the guys who post here, like the person who started this thread, go to great lengths to hold themselves out as experts in this field. He even includes a link with every one of his posts that touts his experience. When someone like that says something inflamatory about a subject he is an "expert" in, it seems to invite more comments by other "experts" in the field.

Then a young guy comes a long doing some research about aviation and comes across this particular nonsense and accepts it at face value.

In certain circles, not this one obviously, that could possibly be seen as libelous. What I hear Moleman saying is that allowing unfiltered slanderous and libelous comments made by people holding themselves out as experts on your site, may expose those responsible to liaility far exceeding having one of your major advertisers drop you.

I'm just sayin

[modhat off as well]

Let's look at this from the outside:

1. user 'A' starts up a firestorm in a thread.
2. user 'B' registers soon after that
3. user 'B' has 5 or six posts and all of them are in the same thread where said storm was started.
4. hmmmm

I'm just sayin.

 

[deadstick]

You were buying flight time. Please tell me how buying 250 hours in a Beech 1900 is different.

Well, I know that our 35-year-old BE20 "rents" for $1600/hr, and the 1900D burns mucho mo go juice. You're not renting the plane, or you'd pay more than $30k, but you are subsidizing the operation. This essentially makes these 1900D's equipped with 20 revenue-generating seats. The other 19 occupants are expecting more.

 

[wjmiller3]

Well, I know that our 35-year-old BE20 "rents" for $1600/hr, and the 1900D burns mucho mo go juice. You're not renting the plane, or you'd pay more than $30k, but you are subsidizing the operation. This essentially makes these 1900D's equipped with 20 revenue-generating seats. The other 19 occupants are expecting more.

Very well put, and professional.

I think everyone should step back and take a breath. It's obvious their questions have been answered numerous times, and even more obvious the two are not going to get the point. Take the hook out of your cheek and LET IT GO, turn the trolling motor off, fire up the engine and move on!!

 

[BroncsRule]

[modhat off as well]

Let's look at this from the outside:

1. user 'A' starts up a firestorm in a thread.
2. user 'B' registers soon after that
3. user 'B' has 5 or six posts and all of them are in the same thread where said storm was started.
4. hmmmm

I'm just sayin.

Ok, you don't want to address the issue. I understand. It's hard to respond to the truth and admit you are wrong about something when all your buds are watching, and I suppose that liability issues aren't your forte. Your response is a little confusing though.

By user A, are you referring to the guy who started this thread? Is user B the guy who acused someone of committing a felony, and then has been backpeddling since?

 

[BroncsRule]

[mod hat off]

:whatever:

Not-so-veiled threats are the soup de jour now? From a personal opinion (not that of the website) let me just say "Good luck with that".

A threat? Not me. I have no basis for that. I'm just stating the obvious for all of the guys who have become experts on everything avaition here and talk smack like they are playing B-ball in the park with their pals.

This is a very public place, the internet. It is one thing to think something, you are entitled to your opinion. It is not advisable however to make unfounded accusations about someone that may injure them in some way.

Am I wrong?

 

[JEP]

Ok, you don't want to address the issue. I understand. It's hard to respond to the truth and admit you are wrong about something when all your buds are watching, and I suppose that liability issues aren't your forte. Your response is a little confusing though.

By user A, are you referring to the guy who started this thread? Is user B the guy who acused someone of committing a felony, and then has been backpeddling since?

And I suppose that the obvious is not your forte.......

User A - moleman
User B - BroncsRule

I'd introduce the two of you, but something tells me you have already met.

Now for the veiled threats, good luck with that.

If you have something to offer the thread in regards to ATP/Gulfstream/PFJ then feel free to do so. If the only thing you have to offer is echoing, moleman save the keystrokes.

 

[JEP]

A threat? Not me. I have no basis for that. I'm just stating the obvious for all of the guys who have become experts on everything avaition here and talk smack like they are playing B-ball in the park with their pals.

This is a very public place, the internet. It is one thing to think something, you are entitled to your opinion. It is not advisable however to make unfounded accusations about someone that may injure them in some way.

Am I wrong?

Often times, free advice is worth exactly what you paid for it.

 

[deadstick]

Anybody remember TAB Express? Didn't they try to run scheduled 135 (after there was no more Sched 135) like this GTA/GIA program? I can get some A/B90's CHEAP today...maybe I'll start a ME training program in them.:nana2: At least this will give them PIC time after they get their multi.

The fact is that GIA will not "hire" anybody who has not gone through their...sorry, GTA's internship program. At least under PFT, you were hired first on your credentials.

Today, the end-all question is "What do you do after the 250 hrs internship is over?" Stay at GIA? Not with furloughed pilots waiting for a call. Another airline? Who? Seriously, what is next?