EAA's President, Rod Hightower, resigns

[wabower]

Earnings aren't as important as net worth. Guys in my age group could easily pay cash for an expensive airplane and upkeep, even though earnings are no longer at previous levels.

I would say new Cessnas are not affordable for anyone who makes less than the mid to high six figures. You could make an argument the that statement might exclude the Skycatcher, but I'd then argue that someone in the top 6% of earners is probably going to want something a little bigger and a little faster.

 

[DaleB]

Earnings aren't as important as net worth. Guys in my age group could easily pay cash for an expensive airplane and upkeep, even though earnings are no longer at previous levels.

But they're also generally smart enough to know there are better deals to be had than a $150K go-kart.

 

[EppyGA]

So you're saying Jack was never cut out to be a knife, but he'll make a good fork?

Not sure your point.

Jack may be a good guy. He may even enjoy light aviation. It doesn't mean Cessna got any better at the light aircraft manufacturing role while he was there. By better, I mean driving costs down to normal American higher income levels. Building new designs that are affordable. Moving forward, not building 40 year old designs.

EAA is a vastly different role. It'll be interesting to see what he does. I suspect "more of the same" which at least a decade of decline in pilot starts that "stick", and few aircraft that people can afford, is the result.

EAA = Nice magazine. Best fly-in around. Great "hook". People see EAA stuff, they want to fly. Then they ask someone how much it costs. Gone. Poof. That's the broken part.

No significant battles won against government over-reach and product liability which all lead back to one place, cost -- which is still ravaging recreational aviation.

Selling big tents at a huge fly-in to the manufacturers isn't helping the average EAA member other than keeping dues low. It makes us all happy to gawk at airplanes we can't afford, but it's not saving the hobby.

Pushing regulatory change to allow Experimentals to exist, truly changed the hobby, but that was in the 70s and 80s. How about going after the onerous certification process?

Can the pilot organizations push harder? I don't know. But I think they have to, or die of attrition.

If Jack can pull it off, he's the right person for the job. We shall see.

One area that has the potential to increase interest is the Young Eagle program. Notice I said potential.

Our chapter flies on average 50+ every month. While we see a lot of return visitors we have been having internal discussions whether we are actually increasing interest in GA or just giving free airplane rides.

One thing I've tried to do is force us to have some kind of follow-up program but have had no success in convincing others to implement something. The only change we are making is to try and limit the returnees to once a quarter.

We've also begun giving Eagle Flights. So far I'm guessing we've flown a dozen of these. This should be a program we can follow-up with easily but again we are not. It will stay like that because our program coordinator is not going to change it and he's not going to quit soon either.

I took the time and effort to propose some ideas for the Eagle Flight program and send them to him. Not a single idea I proposed has been incorporated or talked about.

 

[wabower]

Some probably are, but I plead the 5th. We're clearly the ones with both time and resources to do that stuff, which is no different than 30 years ago when I was watching the old farts enjoy the same perks.

But they're also generally smart enough to know there are better deals to be had than a $150K go-kart.

 

[denverpilot]

Earnings aren't as important as net worth. Guys in my age group could easily pay cash for an expensive airplane and upkeep, even though earnings are no longer at previous levels.

And you're not buying, because they're overpriced. A Cessna built by Mr. Pelton's Cessna isn't a good investment, even for someone who can write a check for one. Got it.

As far as Net Worth goes... How are the next two generations going to build their Net Worth? Investments not only take time (age) but something left to invest in. (They also require a low tax burden.)

Will they need government "certification" regulations to lock out competition from their industry, long enough to build up a business to sell to the Chinese, too? That's how Jack made his millions.

Should Cessna's employees have invested in Mr. Pelton's Cessna? Would doing so have increased their Net Worth or destroyed it?

Will the Cessna employees now make enough money to invest in anything significant, working for the Chinese investors that Mr. Pelton sold the company to? Will they be sharing the profits?

Are you buying Textron stock now? Did you buy under Mr. Pelton? You're defending him as a "leader", but did you put your money behind him? I doubt.

That's Jack's legacy. Whether he loves GA or not, he sold it out to foreign investors -- to make sure his golden parachute was fully funded.

Like Kent said, don't look to Cessna for leadership. They wait and "do it right", which apparently means, "sell to foreign investors".

Jack's not alone in that game in aviation, so I say, he's just "more of the same". Even Cirrus sold out. When the chips are down, today's "leaders" bail out and get paid personally at the loss of whole companies to foreign investors.

And more importantly, and on point, why would a recreational aviation organization hire a sell-out of that magnitude, to their Board? Or call him a leader? A leader in selling out?

What besides spending his Chinese money on his 195, and a Skycatcher made in China for his wife, does he know about the average American recreational pilot's fiscal challenges?

Are we supposed to believe he's got our interests at heart?

Last I checked, I can't sell my employee's futures to the Chinese to afford to purchase a new Cessna. I'm guessing most EAA members are in the same boat.

When Boyer came to AOPA he used his skill in Media to promote and speak in public.

When Fuller came to AOPA he used his skillset to continue his work with behind the scenes folk in Washington D.C. (Not effectively, but still... Does what he always did.)

When J. Mac moved from Flying to EAA, he continued to write about jets.

So... when Pelton sits on the EAA Board, will he build up EAA to sell it? How big will his parachute be?

People don't often change their stripes, and he's got a Cessna 195 to feed.

Someone has lost their mind over at EAA. They effectively just hired Frank Lorenzo for their BoD.

Believe me, I would love to be wrong on this one. But this guy isn't going to lead the orgaization anywhere he doesn't get paid. That's his MO.

 

[wabower]

And you're not buying, because they're overpriced. A Cessna built by Mr. Pelton's Cessna isn't a good investment, even for someone who can write a check for one. Got it.

Try to keep up. It's no longer Mr Pelton's Cessna.

As far as Net Worth goes... How are the next two generations going to build their Net Worth? Investments not only take time (age) but something left to invest in. (They also require a low tax burden.)

We figured it out, they have the opportunity to do the same.

Will they need government "certification" regulations to lock out competition from their industry, long enough to build up a business to sell to the Chinese, too? That's how Jack made his millions.

Who knows? If they need something they don't have, they might want to get it. Or if there's no real need and just some IT guy running his yap the need won't materialize and they can keep on keepin' on.

Should Cessna's employees have invested in Mr. Pelton's Cessna? Would doing so have increased their Net Worth or destroyed it?

It never was Mr. Pelton's Cessna. It was and still is Textron's Cessna.

Will the Cessna employees now make enough money to invest in anything significant, working for the Chinese investors that Mr. Pelton sold the company to? Will they be sharing the profits?

It wasn't his company to sell, so he didn't sell it. So you can report back to your third grade teacher that Mean old Mr Pelton is the hero.

Are you buying Textron stock now? Did you buy under Mr. Pelton? You're defending him as a "leader", but did you put your money behind him? I doubt.

No clue what they invest in. But you can ask the portfolio manager if you want. Knock yourself out.

That's Jack's legacy. Whether he loves GA or not, he sold it out to foreign investors -- to make sure his golden parachute was fully funded.

Jack sold nothing. You are really making yourself look even more like an idiot, but i'll play the game. This transcript will make fun reading at the country club poker game.

Like Kent said, don't look to Cessna for leadership. They wait and "do it right", which apparently means, "sell to foreign investors".

Who could doubt you or Kent about financial and management decisions at Textron?

Jack's not alone in that game in aviation, so I say, he's just "more of the same". Even Cirrus sold out. When the chips are down, today's "leaders" bail out and get paid personally at the loss of whole companies to foreign investors.

Was the shift from Cessna to Cirrus because you finally woke up and realized you had been talking about the wrong company all along?

And more importantly, and on point, why would a recreational aviation organization hire a sell-out of that magnitude, to their Board? Or call him a leader? A leader in selling out?

Because they want to invest in whatever refreshments you are enjoying tonight.

What besides spending his Chinese money on his 195, and a Skycatcher made in China for his wife, does he know about the average American recreational pilot's fiscal challenges?

Not much. He just lives at the airpark because there's more grass for his dog to pee on.

Are we supposed to believe he's got our interests at heart?

After making a total fool of yourself on this post, do you think anybody cares what you think at this point?

Last I checked, I can't sell my employee's futures to the Chinese to afford to purchase a new Cessna. I'm guessing most EAA members are in the same boat.

Sorry to hear that. Smart guys seem to be able to make things happen.

When Boyer came to AOPA he used his skill in Media to promote and speak in public.

(hic)

When Fuller came to AOPA he used his skillset to continue his work with behind the scenes folk in Washington D.C. (Not effectively, but still... Does what he always did.)

Is this a Foster Brooks routine?

When J. Mac moved from Flying to EAA, he continued to write about jets.

Interesting. I didn't know Stearmans and AT-6's were jets, but whatever you say.

So... when Pelton sits on the EAA Board, will he build up EAA to sell it? How big will his parachute be?

The Chinese have expressed an interest but can't pronounce Expelimental

People don't often change their stripes, and he's got a Cessna 195 to feed.

Yep, another insurmountable hurdle if you are charged with providing the brainpower.

Someone has lost their mind over at EAA. They effectively just hired Frank Lorenzo for their BoD.

They could ask the same question about strange hires in Denver

Believe me, I would love to be wrong on this one. But this guy isn't going to lead the orgaization anywhere he doesn't get paid. That's his MO

. Surely not. Nobody at EAA has ever gotten paid. Paul, Tom and all the others who have served in similar capacities are on food stamps. The reason they've never released all the financials is because they are so ashamed of how little they've made.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

All I need to know about his performance is that he's not there anymore. Speaks volumes, really.

And every person that's arrested is guilty, too. I've been a part of an organization led by... Well, you'd have to call him the perfect guy for the job. Did wonderful things, busted his ass, and took a very low salary. But, someone else wanted his job and started a witch hunt among the board of directors, who eventually voted 8-1 to remove this guy. So, clearly in your book he was worthless, right? (The answer: An emphatic no. An emergency meeting of all members was called, at which point we threw out the entire board of directors, voted in a new board, and re-hired the guy.) Often, especially in public companies, someone's head has to roll. You've heard the "prepare two envelopes" joke, haven't you?

You don't exactly have people beating down your door to pick up the Ovation, right?

Actually, I've had quite a bit of interest lately. Came *this close* to getting it sold last week... Just not quite close enough.

Wayne wants "a name" for someone to head up EAA. I say that we probably won't find "a name" inside the in-bred halls of Corporate Aviation. Pelton was deemed a failure by his peers on the last BoD he worked for, now he's a BoD member at a new place?

Yeah... that makes sense... just keep playing those musical chairs games. That'll fix it.

I think Wayne's point is that you're not offering up solutions. You're just sitting here bitching on a web board, and for all your bitching you haven't come up with anyone better.

As far as "deemed a failure," see above. I'm sure the EAA board knows Jack's history, and clearly they're comfortable with him at the helm for the time being.

Kent completely misunderstood my comment about aircraft availability and EAA. I think the Experimental category is the only place left that can possibly create an affordable four-place trainer that can match the Skyhawk for half the price. I didn't say every student would be BUILDING that airplane themselves, just that they'll be FLYING someone else's eventually. The old aircraft from the 70s are eventually going to wear out. Building an RV is fun for some, and really fun flying for someone with some experience, but no one is going to lease it out to an FBO for training primary students.

The reason for the misunderstanding is that I thought you knew that experimental aircraft cannot be used for commercial operations such as flight training, so your scenario is impossible.

§ 91.319 Aircraft having experimental certificates: Operating limitations.
(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—

(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or

(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

 

[denverpilot]

And every person that's arrested is guilty, too. I've been a part of an organization led by... Well, you'd have to call him the perfect guy for the job. Did wonderful things, busted his ass, and took a very low salary. But, someone else wanted his job and started a witch hunt among the board of directors, who eventually voted 8-1 to remove this guy. So, clearly in your book he was worthless, right? (The answer: An emphatic no. An emergency meeting of all members was called, at which point we threw out the entire board of directors, voted in a new board, and re-hired the guy.) Often, especially in public companies, someone's head has to roll. You've heard the "prepare two envelopes" joke, haven't you?

Okay. Jack's a Saint with a 195 who did everything right and the Board all wanted him gone. That makes sense.

So, apparently my scenario of non-performance, is as plausible as your outlandish Board-hates-Jack conspiracy theory now, it would appear.

We're ultimately back to "he's wanting to spend more time with his family" BS, direct from the official standard template Corporate Press Release, when all execs leave, designed to thwart slander lawsuits.

Actually, I've had quite a bit of interest lately. Came *this close* to getting it sold last week... Just not quite close enough.

That's good. There's still enough of us left that it'll sell eventually. Not for much longer. The last generation of retract light single pilots is coming soon.

The only reason to create more is the Commercial ticket. Recreationally, not much reason to do it anymore.

She's a nice airplane.

If being well above 90th percentile in household income in the U.S. could easily swing it, I'd own such a sweet bird.

95th percentile doesn't even cut it, single-owner. Not and take care of it properly.

So, I'll continue to work on that Net Worth thing. Wayne says that's what counts, as if anyone who can afford to fly today doesn't already know that.

I don't have any buddies that I know of with any government defined monopolies that are just getting started, that I can invest in.

But, will keep an eye out.

So far it would appear that to be as "successful" as Jack, I'll need to sell someone else's very old American company to the Chinese -- after making sure to sign a golden parachute contract.

Modern success and leadership 101.

Hooray.

Will be interesting to see if the Ovation sells to an individual owner or a club/co-ownership. If you can share, Kent.

I think Wayne's point is that you're not offering up solutions. You're just sitting here bitching on a web board, and for all your bitching you haven't come up with anyone better.

Wayne hasn't said that. He likes to play quiz games. I don't mind.

If he wants to tell me to stop complaining, he knows how. And if that's his point he can say so.

He'd rather nitpick the details of my obviously non-professional business opinions, ignore the macro point being made (granted with some poor examples on my part), instead of discussing what Jack's real legacy is.

Jack ran a dinosaur aviation company up the bubble, doing nothing significantly different than the company had done since it was founded, and then in a downturn, sold off all of its future profits and manufacturing of its first drafting-board new product in decades, to China. (New Citations are incremental updates to the jet line. Not brand new.)

Wayne would rather ask me silly details about "backlog" on bizjet orders, in an attempt to ignore the point. Jack's not cut from the right material for EAA.

As far as "deemed a failure," see above. I'm sure the EAA board knows Jack's history, and clearly they're comfortable with him at the helm for the time being.

Clearly. More of the same.

Should I say it again? More of the same.

The reason for the misunderstanding is that I thought you knew that experimental aircraft cannot be used for commercial operations such as flight training, so your scenario is impossible.

I was saying EAA is the ONLY organization with any vested interest in CHANGING that.

They won't.

Especially under a former Certificated manufacturing head.

They wanted someone the vendors who buy the big tents, recognize at dinner.

Wayne, you wanted a name. I'll give you one. Chris Dillis.

The guy behind bringing the Gobosh to the U.S. and who took his little LSA from one aircraft to owning multiple LSAs, running a flight school with them, and expanding to two airports before buying out the owner of a traditional flight club, and then finding them a way to replace a 20+ year old instrument simulator with a Redbird, and generally kicking ass at making flying as affordable as possible here in Denver.

That guy has horse sense and business sense and would be a great fit for EAA.

He did all of that in the middle of the worst years.

His airplanes are new, his prices are low, and he knows what it takes to get students in the door and keep them.

I doubt he wants the EAA job, but he'd be a heck of a lot more interesting than anyone EAA has tried from the big industry names so far.

There's plenty of leaders out here. They aren't running Cessna, Piper, Beech, Mooney, and other big names into bankruptcy.

They're ignoring that big biz silliness and getting people flying.

 

[dmspilot]

The reason for the misunderstanding is that I thought you knew that experimental aircraft cannot be used for commercial operations such as flight training, so your scenario is impossible.

(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate—

(1) For other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or

(2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.

Are you sure that "flight training for hire" qualifies as "carrying persons for hire"?

After all, you only need a 3rd class medical to flight instruct instead of a 2nd class, because you aren't using your commercial pilot certificate, because you are flight instructing for hire rather than carrying persons for hire.

And the 100-hour inspection rule also implies they are two separate things:

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) for hire, and no person may give flight instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, unless within the preceding 100 hours

I know of a flight school that, at one time, was giving instruction in an experimental (but to post-private students).

Also, even if experimentals cannot be used for flight instruction for hire, that does not preclude their use in flying clubs.

 

[Carnack]

I find it odd, with all the back and forth between Wayne and Nate that Jack presented Textron and Cessna a fraudulant resume that contained a Aeronautical Engineering Degree from a diploma mill / defunct hotel in Po Dunk Wyoming didn't get a bit of traction from Wayne.

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

His silence on that point is deafening...

Jack wanted a CEO job at a billion dollar aerospace company and gets his foot in the door using a fake Aeronautical Engineeris Degree is troubling at best and criminal at worst.. IMHO...

Any comments Wayne ?

 

[wabower]

If true (and just because 60 Minutes said it doesn't make it so) I assume it wasn't his finest hour. Nor do I know the underlying details, or whether his accomplishments in his career field were considered in the process. Or maybe he sent in a check and a degree showed up in the mail. If his dismissal by the suits at Textron was due to the diploma gaffe, I'd be willing to accept it as having paid the price for the FU.

Nor at this point do I particularly care. It's old news and people are free to think what they will. The Obama team doesn't seem to think Clinton's record of deceit is disqualifying insofar as campaigning for the president is concerned, and many other highly-placed individuals have a blemish on their resume in spite of their accomplishments.

My work causes me to be reasonably close to the GA mfg industry and the people in C-level jobs. Pelton was (and evidently still is, based on his current position) highly regarded for his personal and professional commitment to our segment of GA. My stated position is that he would be on my short list of candidates to lead EAA. The board may or may not agree, and may decide that Madonna is a better choice. If so, they can save some money when booking the lead act for the annual OSH concert.

I find it odd, with all the back and forth between Wayne and Nate that Jack presented Textron and Cessna a fraudulant resume that contained a Aeronautical Engineering Degree from a diploma mill / defunct hotel in Po Dunk Wyoming didn't get a bit of traction from Wayne.

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d75a19ed-4ce3-4ddf-abc4-7b2da56dc1db

His silence on that point is deafening...

Jack wanted a CEO job at a billion dollar aerospace company and gets his foot in the door using a fake Aeronautical Engineeris Degree is troubling at best and criminal at worst.. IMHO...

Any comments Wayne ?

 

[Carnack]

If true (and just because 60 Minutes said it doesn't make it so) ......

My work causes me to be reasonably close to the GA mfg industry and the people in C-level jobs. .....

.

If you are really close to the GA industry then you should know this is 100% accurate.

Your attempt to shed doubt on a factual event for whatever reason reduces my trust in you substantially.

 

[wabower]

I'm glad you have better information than I do. The story was never of interest to me one way or the other. But our troop leader resigned and I didn't finish Eagle Scout either, so that may explain part of it.

.

If you are really close to the GA industry then you should know this is 100% accurate.

Your attempt to shed doubt on a factual event for whatever reason reduces my trust in you substantially.

 

[Jim Logajan]

I find it odd, with all the back and forth between Wayne and Nate that Jack presented Textron and Cessna a fraudulant resume that contained a Aeronautical Engineering Degree from a diploma mill / defunct hotel in Po Dunk Wyoming didn't get a bit of traction from Wayne.

Since he actually got the diploma he wasn't engaging in fraud when he claimed he had it. So the issue wasn't fraud, it was that the college wasn't accredited.

The federal government doesn't accredit post secondary education institutions; that is done entirely by private agencies.

 

[denverpilot]

More of the same. More of the same.

If there's one thing our modern "winners" are great at, it's cheating and rationalizing it all away as moral.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Okay. Jack's a Saint with a 195 who did everything right and the Board all wanted him gone. That makes sense.

Point being, it happens, probably more frequently than you'd think. To lead an organization you need to be as good or better at politics than you are at actually running the organization.

We're ultimately back to "he's wanting to spend more time with his family" BS, direct from the official standard template Corporate Press Release, when all execs leave, designed to thwart slander lawsuits.

Oh, there's no doubt that's a cover story on Hightower. While I didn't have any particular problems with the guy, he stirred the pot within EAA *way* too much, and it came back to bite him.

That's good. There's still enough of us left that it'll sell eventually. Not for much longer. The last generation of retract light single pilots is coming soon.

Disagree. While the movement has been towards fixed-gear aircraft like the Cirrus and Columbiessna lines, people do still like folding legs a la Bonanza, Mooney, etc. They each have appeal. I think if the Pipistrel Panthera makes it to certification, it'll be a big hit, both for its efficiency as well as the fact that it's got both the sleek sexy curves of a composite design as well as the "I'm in the big time now" cool factor of the folding legs.

Modern success and leadership 101.

I thought that was "come up with a good idea in college, make it happen, and sell it to Google for a billion dollars."

Will be interesting to see if the Ovation sells to an individual owner or a club/co-ownership. If you can share, Kent.

So far, the interest has been from single owners. Only one club (that already has a couple of J-model Mooneys) has expressed interest. Maybe some of the folks I've talked to have partners, but I dunno.

Jack ran a dinosaur aviation company up the bubble, doing nothing significantly different than the company had done since it was founded, and then in a downturn, sold off all of its future profits and manufacturing of its first drafting-board new product in decades, to China. (New Citations are incremental updates to the jet line. Not brand new.)

Jack did what Jack was hired to do. Cessna is the most successful company in the industry, so Jack continued to follow the same methodology that got them there, which is to be very conservative. The cost of R&D and certification on something that departs significantly from the norm is staggering, and sadly isn't really smart any more. Look at the Klapmeier brothers - They were smart and driven and came up with the most successful *new* design in decades, yet they had to sell out to the Chinese to stay in business as well.

I was saying EAA is the ONLY organization with any vested interest in CHANGING that.

They won't.

Especially under a former Certificated manufacturing head.

Maybe that's because it'll never happen no matter what EAA does. It's called "picking your battles."

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Are you sure that "flight training for hire" qualifies as "carrying persons for hire"?

Check out the (e) section of the reg too. There's more on flight training there. I don't disagree with any of your other observations on the reg, but it isn't legal to rent experimental aircraft.

I know of a flight school that, at one time, was giving instruction in an experimental (but to post-private students).

I'm not sure how long it's been the case (maybe Ron can enlighten us), so maybe it was legal at the time - Or maybe it wasn't. But it isn't now, and I highly doubt that'll change.

Also, even if experimentals cannot be used for flight instruction for hire, that does not preclude their use in flying clubs.

Correct, but my contention is simply that a trainer E-AB aircraft is not going to be the savior of GA like Nate said. Keep in mind that if the "flying club" is one of those pseudo-FBO non-equity ones and provides the instructor as well as the airplane, that they'd probably be over the line. There may be some new students savvy and dedicated enough to find an equity club and hire their own instructor, but they're a small enough percentage of the already small number of potential new student pilots that it simply isn't enough to grow the pilot population that way.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Jack wanted a CEO job at a billion dollar aerospace company and gets his foot in the door using a fake Aeronautical Engineeris Degree is troubling at best and criminal at worst.. IMHO...

You don't need an Aeronautical Engineering degree to be the CEO of an airplane company.

 

[Carnack]

You don't need an Aeronautical Engineering degree to be the CEO of an airplane company.

That might be so, but then why did Jack mail a big check to a diploma mill, attend NO classes and receive a degree that he then added to his resume while appling for the CEO job at Cessna ?

 

[denverpilot]

Cessna is the most successful company in the industry...

That pretty much gives someone all they need to know about aircraft manufacturing as a business, right there.

(Defense contractors notwithstanding, of course. They aren't feeling too hot anymore either.)

Oh well. We will all continue to fly to OSH, camp, drink beer, laugh, and watch our aircraft slowly rot out from underneath us...

... while the "leaders" over at the Hilton, will keep selling assets and jobs and companies away overseas, to make their nut.

Disappointing that is who EAA wants to run their place, but whatever. It ain't the groundbreaking organization it once was. And it definitely won't be again.

 

[Jim Logajan]

That might be so, but then why did Jack mail a big check to a diploma mill, attend NO classes and receive a degree that he then added to his resume while appling for the CEO job at Cessna ?

Probably because he felt credentialism was keeping him from the job or jobs he thought he could otherwise do. Using a diploma mill allowed him to claim credentials without actually lying. The more telling question is why Cessna didn't do a better job of vetting the candidates for CEO.

The irony here is that you earlier posted a link to Aero News web site, which happens to be owned and run by someone who has been known to lie, including claiming to be a doctor and a parachute rigger when he was neither.

You may counter with "But the info comes from another source and it is accurate," but that seems to be no different than a defender of Jack Pelton saying "But he still successfully ran other companies, including Cessna."

 

[Carnack]

Probably because he felt credentialism was keeping him from the job or jobs he thought he could otherwise do. Using a diploma mill allowed him to claim credentials without actually lying. The more telling question is why Cessna didn't do a better job of vetting the candidates for CEO.

The irony here is that you earlier posted a link to Aero News web site, which happens to be owned and run by someone who has been known to lie, including claiming to be a doctor and a parachute rigger when he was neither.

You may counter with "But the info comes from another source and it is accurate," but that seems to be no different than a defender of Jack Pelton saying "But he still successfully ran other companies, including Cessna."

You are right.. CBS's 60 Minutes didn't run the story and Jack didn't misrepresent himself to Cessna /Textron as a Aeronautical Engineer...

I do agree, they trusted him not to lie about his credentials, which turned out to be egg on everyones face.

 

[wabower]

Yep, those sorry turds running aviation businesses are sending some of their business offshore. Some have even been acquired by foreign buyers. I can't imagine any industry could or would use off-shore stuff in their business without being ashamed of themselves. After all, everybody knows that if it's not made in the USA we shouldn't even consider buying it.

Don't they know they are setting a horrible example and it won't be long before other US companies do the same? Get a rope!

And while we're making up bogus facts to match our fictional account of what happened in 2008 and thereafter, we should also skewer all the companies who had placed orders with Cessna, Falcon, Bombardier, Hawker, Gulfstream and other manufacturers that were cancelled due to the credit market crunch that was unprecedented since the Great Depression. How dare them default on their deposits and forfeit billions of dollars to the airplane manufacturers as a result. Wait, we may need more than one rope!

That pretty much gives someone all they need to know about aircraft manufacturing as a business, right there.

(Defense contractors notwithstanding, of course. They aren't feeling too hot anymore either.)

Oh well. We will all continue to fly to OSH, camp, drink beer, laugh, and watch our aircraft slowly rot out from underneath us...

... while the "leaders" over at the Hilton, will keep selling assets and jobs and companies away overseas, to make their nut.

Disappointing that is who EAA wants to run their place, but whatever. It ain't the groundbreaking organization it once was. And it definitely won't be again.

More of the same. More of the same.

If there's one thing our modern "winners" are great at, it's cheating and rationalizing it all away as moral.

 

[d.grimm]

I am with Wayne on this one. I have had the opportunity
To be involved with the purchase of four new Citations in the last seven years.
In my opinion, Textron considers the CEO position at Cessna
middle management. I've heard Jack was shown the door
because trying to keep his workers and believed the economy
was turning around. After the usual business stuff, he loved talking
About his 195, 206, and PT22.
I think the EAA is in good hands.
Dave

 

[denverpilot]

I'd be fine with skewering the companies that canceled orders. Any if them banks, perhaps? Any of their leaders in jail yet for their gross negligence? They out of business yet?

It's not about xenophobia, and you know it. Nice feint. It's about who gets paid and who gets screwed in buyouts. Pelton, got paid for selling out.

You never answered whether or not employees of Cessna should have been invested in their company.

Or if they got paid so greatly and increased their Net Worth upon the Textron buyout, or upon the sale of Textron to the foreign company, that they didn't mind being sold.

Did they have leadership they could believe in?

I have been to that same all-hands meeting before...

"We are growing, life is grand, we're going to sell the company, keep working hard, even harder, we've got your back..."

Never seems to come true, that fairy tale. The company is sold, pink slips hit most of the staff, payroll is frozen long enough to make back the cash the last group of "leaders" took upon departure, and only one small group comes out smelling like roses.

These guys lying over and over again, does tend to get noticed eventually, Wayne. They don't lie to their peers. They lie to their staff.

Sorry if it bugs you that I don't like them much as people, after such behavior, and I'm saying they're sellouts with no class.

I'm sure from your perspective, they've made you money and helped you out. Not here.

Which great American company would you go to work for today if you were 20-something, Wayne? Which one is so true to their word and loyal to their staff, that you could put a 30 year career in for them and they'd truly appreciate it?

Give me a break. I'm not anti-China. I'm anti-Peltonesque sellouts with no skin in the game.

 

[bbchien]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RTvsHfj53A

See post #12.

 

[wabower]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RTvsHfj53A

See post #12.

My contacts at Cessna were (since most have also now left the company) people I had known for many years. They said at the time that Pelton was fired because he was overly committed to the employees and to preserving light planes as part of Cessna's product and support activity, i.e too much of a grass-roots guy.

The naysayers in the EAA ranks are saying he's just another corporate guy. What's your take on all this? Where do you rank him?

 

[bbchien]

I don't know him well enough to say anything sensible. I can only tell you that Rod hadn't a clue.

Let's give the guy a chance....

 

[wabower]

denverpilot;

I'd be fine with skewering the companies that canceled orders. Any if them banks, perhaps? Any of their leaders in jail yet for their gross negligence? They out of business yet?

Without knowing the makeup of the back-log, I assume some of the unfilled orders were from banks. Nor do I know how many, if any, took delivery of their planes or forfeited their deposits. Are you painting all banks with the same brush, or just those you have chosen to demonize?

It's not about xenophobia, and you know it. Nice feint. It's about who gets paid and who gets screwed in buyouts. Pelton, got paid for selling out.

To whom did he sell out? Did he have an employment contract? Was it executed without duress? Did it contain a termination clause? Was it properly disclosed? Did he and the company abide by the terms?

You never answered whether or not employees of Cessna should have been invested in their company.

During what period of time? If they bought, is it possible that they might also have sold? Is a blood oath required in order to be employed by a public company? Would such purchases have been made as individual investors or under the more-favorable terms of an employee benefit plan?

Or if they got paid so greatly and increased their Net Worth upon the Textron buyout, or upon the sale of Textron to the foreign company, that they didn't mind being sold.

Name the foreign company that bought TXT.

Did they have leadership they could believe in?

Based on the successful track record over a number of years and the sentiments expressed by numerous employees, evidently a great many of them thought so, until the suits on Textron's board canned him.

I have been to that same all-hands meeting before...

Were you coerced, or did you willingly attend?

"We are growing, life is grand, we're going to sell the company, keep working hard, even harder, we've got your back..."

Anybody gullible enough to believe that crap is ripe for picking. What would Jerry McGuire have said when he heard it?

Never seems to come true, that fairy tale. The company is sold, pink slips hit most of the staff, payroll is frozen long enough to make back the cash the last group of "leaders" took upon departure, and only one small group comes out smelling like roses.

If he hadn't wanted them shorn he wouldn't have made them sheep.

These guys lying over and over again, does tend to get noticed eventually, Wayne. They don't lie to their peers. They lie to their staff.

Welcome to the world. And they may not have known what was coming at the time and thought they were being truthful. If not, shame on them for being deceitful, shame on you for letting them do it.

Sorry if it bugs you that I don't like them much as people, after such behavior, and I'm saying they're sellouts with no class.

What would you do differently if you were in their place? Give it all away?

I'm sure from your perspective, they've made you money and helped you out. Not here.

If they have been clients of any of the businesses, I might have indirectly benefitted from providing a service but don't remember doing so. Otherwise, I can't think of any way that I could have benefitted. But if you think any of them owe me any money, please advise. I'll send them a bill and split whatever I collect with you 50-50.

Which great American company would you go to work for today if you were 20-something, Wayne? Which one is so true to their word and loyal to their staff, that you could put a 30 year career in for them and they'd truly appreciate it?

Probably none of them. Didn't do it before, wouldn't do it now. In 1967 I had put in my time with Ernst and was ready to move on. A guy named Glenn Hanson tried to recruit me into the insurance business, and part of his spiel was that employers would only pay what they thought their job was worth. If I wanted to make more, I had prove I was worth it by doing it on my own. He was right.

Give me a break. I'm not anti-China. I'm anti-Peltonesque sellouts with no skin in the game.

Your posts provide compelling evidence to the contrary regarding China. Do you think anybody else reads your stuff?

 

[Everskyward]

Based on the successful track record over a number of years and the sentiments expressed by numerous employees, evidently a great many of them thought so, until the suits on Textron's board canned him.

This is pretty much what I have observed too. I've met a number of people who worked for Cessna in the years since I've flown one, well, the current one, mostly pilots and the acceptance team. They all had nice things to say about Pelton and Cessna.

Also, I remember them telling me at the time (2008) that they had a two year backlog, on the Sovereign anyway, and that half of the sales were to foreign buyers, mostly in Europe and Asia.

 

[nddons]

I met Paul Poberesky at a breakfast meeting several months after Hightower took over. Paul was the keynote speaker.

I got the distinct and strong impression that Paul wasn't going to be letting go very easily. I'm not sure how successful one can be when you follow a person who refuses to clean out his desk and move on.

Plus, I think they look at the EAA as a family business, and not an association of members. It's tough to be successful when you are not part of the family.

 

[dell30rb]

Game set match...

 

[denverpilot]

I'm done. My opinion is Pelton won't bring anything new or innovative to the EAA table. Here's hoping he finds someone that will and that he won't shackle them as their overseer.

Hightower ticked everyone off, that's clear. Whether those he ticked off have any grand ideas on how to wield EAA's clout to truly make things better for Experimental Aircraft owners and builders or the larger pilot community, isn't really known. The status quo is strong in Wisconsin.

They run a nice fly-in. They have a nice magazine. Whether they're ready to buckle down and fight as the number of pilots continues to dwindle, remains to be seen.

The general malaise surrounding dealing with FAA is telling. Folks refuse to believe FAA works for the people, and until that sea change in people's brains happens, we're really screwed. To see that change, requires a rallying point and person or persons to rally behind.

Reading Civil War stuff lately points this out clearly... "Lee to the rear! Lee to the rear! We'll stop them for you sir, but don't stay here it's too dangerous!" That level of devotion isn't warranted by anyone yet at EAA. In fact, aviation in general is overcome by a "dig in and entrench" siege mentality. I suspect a change in the Presidential election could be a mental switch point, but it remains to be seen in November if that will occur. (That's not meant to endorse one side or the other, it's an observation that when other "big things" change, people tend to think smaller stuff can. It's a trigger point mentally.)

I'm up for anything that brings more pilots into the ranks. Even if it lowers precious nannyist "safety" concerns to a point. Students flying Experimentals? Hell yes. We can figure out a way to do that. Maybe not all Experimentals, and maybe you really need to know who built them and how... But if the certificated manufacturers won't update beyond 1950's tech, something has to change.

In my best German accent... "Vee shall see... Vee shall see."

 

[JGoodish]

I don't know Jack Pelton, nor Rod Hightower, and have never been a member if the EAA. Given what appears to be happening to AOPA, however, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that the EAA is somewhat listless.

Regarding the Pelton degree "scandal," anyone who hires a CEO based on a degree and not experience is an idiot. CEO is not an entry level position, and companies don't run on idealistic theories from business school. Some of the most successful CEOs of all time either dropped out of college or never attended to begin with. From what I recall, Pelton was still leading Cessna years after it was revealed that his degrees were from a diploma mill, so Textron must have been rather happy with his performance. Although some folks think that execs live the good life with no worries, the reality is that it is a high stress, highly political job, with absolutely zero job security from one day to the next. It isn't uncommon these days for senior execs to have rather short tenures at major corporations, and by that measure alone Pelton's career at Cessna was a success. Whether he has the right experience, vision, and desire to lead EAA is another question entirely.

I suspect that one of the biggest barriers to flight training these days is cost. Have to get folks working again, incomes up, and fuel prices down, and all those involve public policy that is far more complex than what the FAA, EAA, AOPA, or any of the other alphabet soup can do. Advocacy groups can work to spur interest, but it's an uphill battle from there.


JKG

 

[denverpilot]

"My real goal here is to keep everybody on the track that we've been on …"

What'd I say?

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Pelton_EAAWillKeepOnCourse_207566-1.html

Zzzzz.