FlyBlackBird.com: Yet another desires to be the Uber of the Skies

EdFred said:
Yeah, because I'm telling the IRS that when I play poker with my buddies that I won. Like anyone is going to do that. Also, how do you trace cash?
Click to expand...
Gee, some of us obey the law even if we don't think anybody is watching us. I hate to see what your attitude to flight safety and regulatory compliance comes to when you don't think the FAA will be able to tell what you're doing.
 
flyingron said:
Gee, some of us obey the law even if we don't think anybody is watching us. I hate to see what your attitude to flight safety and regulatory compliance comes to when you don't think the FAA will be able to tell what you're doing.
Click to expand...

I don't wear my seatbelt when taxiing from the hangar to the gas pumps.

If you pick up a dollar that you find on the street do you report that to the IRS too? GMAFB.
 
RudyP said:
It appears that they are taking advantage of the following:
- it is legal for someone to hire a commercial pilot to fly them in an airplane the hirer (not the pilot) provides under part 91
- it is legal for an airplane owner to lease out their airplane to a third party if the third party flies themselves or hires their own commercial pilot
- blackbird is arranging two independent services that happen to coincide into a single point to point flight.

They have $10m of funding from a legit VC that isn’t easily fooled so they probably aren’t being completely naive about the regs.

That all being said, the FAA is king of the air and they may decide that while there isn’t currently an FAR being directly violated, this conflating of two technically legal things ends up violating the spirit of the FARs and write up a new ref or opinion that kills the concept.
Click to expand...
The FAA is more like the Queen of the air - what they say goes, unless/until the King (Federal courts) says otherwise. Maybe the VC has the money to get the King's ear, though I agree with you and others - it sounds like a violation of the spirit and intent, and you'd believe a FAA legal team could make a coherent argument to support that opinion - be an unusual judge who would find against the FAA's position.

No fan of the FAA - and some of the opinions look as though their aviation expertise isn't very broad, or deep. Or, they just aren't very bright. But I wouldn't be outraged if they shut this down - it's a long standing, consistent, and clear division, not at all ambiguous, and with rational intent.
 
EdFred said:
I don't wear my seatbelt when taxiing from the hangar to the gas pumps.

If you pick up a dollar that you find on the street do you report that to the IRS too? GMAFB.
Click to expand...
Seems like apples and oranges. I wear my seatbelt in the airplane for my own protection.

The found money is indeed income. But the IRS generally doesn't care about de minimus amounts of anything.
 
mirage00 said:
Here is one that is opening up at my airport

https://www.flewber.com/
Click to expand...

This one looks more like a legit small commuter airline. Regularly scheduled flights, etc. No mention of hooking up random pilots, planes,and passengers. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have all of the proper operators’ certificates, paperwork, etc. Nothing wrong with small. I have a friend who has a part 135 charter operation with a Cessna 182.

Much different from these “matching services” which seem to be trying to skirt the rules and provide flights to paying passengers without going through the work to get a 135 certificate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Surf Air is another arranger of "private flights," but they have been operating successfully for six years, using "DOT-registered air carriers" to provide the actual transportation. From the bottom of their Web page:

"Surf Air does not own or operate any aircraft. Surf Air arranges travel and other services solely as a manager of the Surf Air membership program and as an agent of its membership. All flights arranged by Surf Air for its members are performed by independent, third party FAA-licensed and DOT-registered air carriers."
​
http://www.surfair.com/
 
RudyP said:
They have $10m of funding from a legit VC that isn’t easily fooled so they probably aren’t being completely naive about the regs.
Click to expand...

Ooo, no. Don’t assume VC means smart or not easily fooled. I’ve seen a CEO getting several VC investments from several smart people adding up to to about $50m, with nothing but vaporware and empty promises of something that has no hope of ever making money or getting sold. He just personally wanted the product to be created for himself and got the VCs to fund it.

You just need a charismatic CEO with no sense of ethics and you’d be surprised how easy it is to get money from VC’s.
 
This company is trying to be the Uber of the skies. Except I’m sure they’re finding out fairy quickly that they're dealing with commercial pilots. Without us the planes don’t fly for hire under part 91 or 135. I’m not putting my hard earned cert. or integrity on the line just because someone decided something is fine. We will do our best to make the final decision as to what will happen under our authority to ensure compliance and the safe outcome of the flight or even if there is going to be one. When in doubt, You can always call up the local FSDO for clarification.
 
TK211X said:
...Except I’m sure they’re finding out fairy quickly that they're dealing with commercial pilots....
Click to expand...

They do appear to be aware of that; their Web site says that they're exclusively using commercially-certified pilots.

...When in doubt, You can always call up the local FSDO for clarification.
Click to expand...
Good idea.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
I can see one interesting issue, and that's the "house take". (If you have a bunch of guys playing poker, and someone wins $100K, it's tax free—unless the house takes a cut, then it's reportable income.)
Click to expand...

That's a pretty interesting interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code Section 61. Let me know how that position holds up when the IRS comes by.
 
In an FAA letter this week…


“We have considered the June 10, 2019 letter from BlackBird Air, Inc. (BlackBird), that set out many aspects of its business model and operating assumptions. The information that BlackBird has presented leads us to conclude that the pilots participating in BlackBird's platform and using its app are holding out and thus are engaged in common carriage.”

Going on….

“In sum, the FAA has concluded that pilots' use of the Black:Bird platform constitutes "holding out" and participating pilots are engaged in common carriage. Because these operations are subject to part 119 certification, a pilot who holds an airline transport pilot or commercial pilot certificate must obtain and hold a certificate issued under part 135 or the pilot must be employed by a company operating the flight that is certificated under part 119.”

And….

“Accordingly, please expect further investigative activity into BlackBird's operations, particularly regarding its pilot database.”

Want to read more about this, view the full letter at http://jasonblair.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Blackbird_Letter.pdf
 
JD318 said:
That's a pretty interesting interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code Section 61. Let me know how that position holds up when the IRS comes by.
Click to expand...
To be clear, that's our state law.
And back on topic: Blackbird has lost, but I can't believe that they even put up a fight. It was calling a tail a leg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top