what's up with this, ladies????

JOhnH said:
How many members on this board joined AOPA, then opted out. New facts come to light. Worthy goals become distorted. Things change.
Click to expand...

do you actually have anything to add to the thread other than how much your hangar costs and 'things change'? what's your point? I found it to be an interesting article, if you don't, then go troll a different thread.
 
eman1200 said:
do you actually have anything to add to the thread other than how much your hangar costs and 'things change'? what's your point? I found it to be an interesting article, if you don't, then go troll a different thread.
Click to expand...
My point is that your conclusion that they like paying a $50 ramp fee is off base.

But if it will make you happy, I will put this thread on ignore.
 
JOhnH said:
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
Click to expand...
Yup. Or they may not feel that it is the FAAs place to regulate ramp fees. I have no idea. I’m not a member.
 
I emailed them for more information. I said "other than the fact that JOhnH pays over $400 for his hanger, what OTHER reasons did you have for withdrawing?" so maybe we'll get some actual insight.
 
From the Flying Mag article:
giving pilots an option to park in areas not controlled by the FBO
Click to expand...

Something I have been doing for several years. Just ask someone what the borders are for their area. Park outside that area.

I understand that it may not be possible to do that at large airports, but the airports I frequent I know their areas. And guess what.?? They will still fuel me if I ask for it.


What I did not like was a couple of places that asked me to sign a liability release stating that they (the fbo) are not responsible for any damage that my plane my occur while on their property. I did not sign.
 
I’d bet good money the head of WIA owns an FBO with high and hidden ramp fees or is related to someone who does. :)

Anyone want to do the legwork to find out, feel free.

Seriously doubt they took a membership vote or poll in the week since the first AOPA press release.
 
denverpilot said:
I’d bet good money the head of WIA owns an FBO with high and hidden ramp fees or is related to someone who does. :)....
Click to expand...

I don’t doubt that but the why join the fight to begin with?
 
Mike Smith said:
Always follow the money.
Click to expand...

denverpilot said:
I’d bet good money the head of WIA owns an FBO with high and hidden ramp fees or is related to someone who does. :)

Anyone want to do the legwork to find out, feel free.

Seriously doubt they took a membership vote or poll in the week since the first AOPA press release.
Click to expand...
 
JOhnH said:
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
Click to expand...

NO, NO, NO. That hangar is on an airport paid for with public funds and you should have the right to use if for free. (along with anyone else who wants to use it for free.)
 
kayoh190 said:
I wonder how many of those are dudes just signing up for the WIA job fairs?
Click to expand...

You should disclose you're being rhetorical ;). ¡Of course the majority of those members are male! It's a rent-seek by that organization to peddle the sausage crank at the airline job fairs. (the irony of that dynamic does not escape me). As to your point further, of course they're also not about to publicize that fact and be uncovered as turncoats, having only a tertiary "concern" for female professional employment membership.

To be fair, most folks on here are not airline pilots. What you highlight is already well established common fact among pro circles. I have several female students of mine who were WIA sponsors and free training recipients. Token recipients, not all "women in aviation" get a free ride. At any rate, they'll make it to the right seat of a SW 737 before I will, and I'm 10 years senior in military progression and hours (to be fair, I'm not pursuing airline aspirations at the moment).

I don't fault them for it; if I had a vagina I would be just as cunning and unapologetic in taking advantage of these leg-ups. After all the game is chess, it ain't checkers. My only objection is to people born rounding third base waxing poetic about arguing they've hit a homer. That's my only dog in the WIA fight. They're not victims, let's get that clear. If that makes me a misogynist, as a brother, son, and husband, I'm more than happy to be called one.
 
JOhnH said:
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
Click to expand...

Well, that article really sucks but I think the premise of the objection is HIDDEN fees. I would hate to check into a hotel and not know what I owe until I check out. That's how many FBOs do business and we put up with it. Worse, I've talked to multiple people at some FBOs and received different answers as to what there fee it...wiping 15 minutes of each other,

With that said, respectfully voicing one's dissent shouldn't receive the reaction it did. Not agreeing is NOT trolling.
 
JOhnH said:
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
Click to expand...

We bought our hangar. We do pay a lease for the land under it, though.

In return we get bad repaving jobs that create more FOD than anything. LOL.

It also usually goes up every year for no increase in services. Faster than the rate of inflation.

Probably pays for the automatic anti-terrorism gate the idiot in the Porsche crashed through. Stuff like that. :)
 
Clip4 said:
Or maybe given the choice between an FBO with a nice restroom and a free ramp with nothing they decided to support FBOs.
Click to expand...

It’s okay. You can hang some nice credit card readers on the stalls and not put it on your website. New revenue model for Signature, maybe they’ll give you a cut?
 
timwinters said:
Well, that article really sucks but I think the premise of the objection is HIDDEN fees.
Click to expand...

I flew into KLEX recently... only one FBO on the field. Signature or something (one of the big chains). Its a very sleepy class C.

$7/gal avgas. I asked at the desk what the tie down fee is for one night. $15 bucks she says, 10 gal fuel minimum to waive it. I said go ahead and put in 10 gallons. I don't need the fuel but I figured I might as well get something out of the transaction.

Next day I get a bill for almost $100. I said "hey wait, I thought the fees were waived?". The girl at the desk politely let me know that the tie down fee was waived. Sure enough the $15 tie down fee was waived. But the $15 handling fee, the $6 infrastructure fee and the $5 security fee remained. Between the mark-up on the gas and the fees they probably pocketed in excess of 50 bucks off me and I used zero services. The FBO was an inconvenience if anything.
 
@dell30rb , did she at least hand you a free lemon-scented wet-wipe to get their slime off of you before you tracked it into your airplane? :)
 
dell30rb said:
I flew into KLEX recently... only one FBO on the field. Signature or something (one of the big chains). Its a very sleepy class C.

$7/gal avgas. I asked at the desk what the tie down fee is for one night. $15 bucks she says, 10 gal fuel minimum to waive it. I said go ahead and put in 10 gallons. I don't need the fuel but I figured I might as well get something out of the transaction.

Next day I get a bill for almost $100. I said "hey wait, I thought the fees were waived?". The girl at the desk politely let me know that the tie down fee was waived. Sure enough the $15 tie down fee was waived. But the $15 handling fee, the $6 infrastructure fee and the $5 security fee remained. Between the mark-up on the gas and the fees they probably pocketed in excess of 50 bucks off me and I used zero services. The FBO was an inconvenience if anything.
Click to expand...

See I have no problem with the pricing. I have a problem with the fact the fees are not disclosed. They know if they had disclosed the entirety of the fees, you would have made other arrangements. That's what makes that particular manifestation of the profit motive unethical imo.

Remind me again why it's legal for undisclosed fee to be legally owed to the service provider when a written service contract is absent?
 
hindsight2020 said:
See I have no problem with the pricing. I have a problem with the fact the fees are not disclosed. They know if they had disclosed the entirety of the fees, you would have made other arrangements. That's what makes that particular manifestation of the profit motive unethical imo.
Click to expand...

True, fees not disclosed is a big part of it. In this case, KLEX my only alternate would have been to try and sneak over to a dark corner of the ramp and shut down, then try to sneak out a gate somewhere. No reasonable alternates.

I do have an issue with not having any other options except high fees charged by a private business at a publicly funded airport. Exceptions of course for truly busy airports that need to limit traffic due to capacity reasons (JFK, etc...).
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
I flew into KLEX recently... only one FBO on the field. Signature or something (one of the big chains). Its a very sleepy class C.

$7/gal avgas. I asked at the desk what the tie down fee is for one night. $15 bucks she says, 10 gal fuel minimum to waive it. I said go ahead and put in 10 gallons. I don't need the fuel but I figured I might as well get something out of the transaction.

Next day I get a bill for almost $100. I said "hey wait, I thought the fees were waived?". The girl at the desk politely let me know that the tie down fee was waived. Sure enough the $15 tie down fee was waived. But the $15 handling fee, the $6 infrastructure fee and the $5 security fee remained. Between the mark-up on the gas and the fees they probably pocketed in excess of 50 bucks off me and I used zero services. The FBO was an inconvenience if anything.
Click to expand...

Subtract the fuel and the tie down, the fees were $26 had you just stopped there. Add the tie down you were at $41. Not exactly highway robbery.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Subtract the fuel and the tie down, the fees were $26 had you just stopped there. Add the tie down you were at $41. Not exactly highway robbery.
Click to expand...

But the info not volunteered either when discussing the overnight fee. That's the problem. Omission dishonesty. That's the problem.
 
hindsight2020 said:
You should disclose you're being rhetorical ;). ¡Of course the majority of those members are male! It's a rent-seek by that organization to peddle the sausage crank at the airline job fairs. (the irony of that dynamic does not escape me). As to your point further, of course they're also not about to publicize that fact and be uncovered as turncoats, having only a tertiary "concern" for female professional employment membership.

To be fair, most folks on here are not airline pilots. What you highlight is already well established common fact among pro circles. I have several female students of mine who were WIA sponsors and free training recipients. Token recipients, not all "women in aviation" get a free ride. At any rate, they'll make it to the right seat of a SW 737 before I will, and I'm 10 years senior in military progression and hours (to be fair, I'm not pursuing airline aspirations at the moment).

I don't fault them for it; if I had a vagina I would be just as cunning and unapologetic in taking advantage of these leg-ups. After all the game is chess, it ain't checkers. My only objection is to people born rounding third base waxing poetic about arguing they've hit a homer. That's my only dog in the WIA fight. They're not victims, let's get that clear. If that makes me a misogynist, as a brother, son, and husband, I'm more than happy to be called one.
Click to expand...

Born on Third Base. Barry Switzer coined the phrase. Chuck Collins wrote the book. It’s on my reading list. Yeah I know, off the subject here
 
Clip4 said:
Subtract the fuel and the tie down, the fees were $26 had you just stopped there. Add the tie down you were at $41. Not exactly highway robbery.
Click to expand...

"$26 had you just stopped there" is disingenuous, don't forget the forced purchase of 10 gal at $7/gallon. I'm guessing they net about 30 bucks on the fuel.

I should have just refused the fuel and paid the fees. $41 plus a few bucks tax for a night is still expensive for an experience I was actually inconvenienced by. A tie down spot with zero services, within 150 yards of any airport exit or gate would have been more convenient. If you need manned security for the gate charge $10/night and put in a 100LL self serve with a reasonable mark-up, it would easily pay for itself.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
"$26 had you just stopped there" is disingenuous, don't forget the forced purchase of 10 gal at $7/gallon. I'm guessing they net about 30 bucks on the fuel.

I should have just refused the fuel and paid the fees. $41 plus a few bucks tax for a night is still expensive for an experience I was actually inconvenienced by. A tie down spot with zero services, within 150 yards of any airport exit or gate would have been more convenient. If you need manned security for the gate charge $10/night and put in a 100LL self serve with a reasonable mark-up, it would easily pay for itself.
Click to expand...

No one forced you to purchase fuel, in fact self serve fuel is available at KLEX for a $1.50 a gallon cheaper. You opted to buy fuel at $7 bucks a gallon to save on another fee(s), which rarely work out to the pilots favor and why FBO offer sucker deals like this.

So if you subtract a net $55 fuel purchase, your fee was $41, which included one night tie down and that is not an egregious overnight fee at a 4 star FBO.

Not that it matters to you, but that FBO that you can’t remember the name of invested $11 million in the KLEX facility in 2010 and they aren’t going to let members of the poor pilots club use it for free. Nor is the KLEX airport going to build you a free ramp and diminish that FBOs investment in the airport infrastructure, diminish rent and other fees paid to the airport or reduce local employment.

“The terms of the lease agreement between TAC Air and Blue Grass Airport provide that all of TAC Air's $11 million investment in terminal and hangar improvements will be turned over to the airport at the end of the 20 year lease – not costing taxpayers a dime."
https://bluegrassairport.com/pr/072810_TACAirR.html
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
No one forced you to purchase fuel, in fact self serve fuel is available at KLEX for a $1.50 a gallon cheaper. You opted to buy fuel at $7 bucks a gallon to save on another fee(s), which rarely work out to the pilots favor and why FBO offer sucker deals like this.

So if you subtract a net $55 fuel purchase, your fee was $41, which included one night tie down and that is not an egregious overnight fee at a 4 star FBO.

Not that it matters to you, but that FBO that you can’t remember the name of invested $11 million in the KLEX facility in 2011 and they aren’t going to let members of the poor pilots club use it for free. Nor is the KLEX airport going to build you a free ramp and diminish that FBOs investment in the airport infrastructure, diminish rent and other fees paid to the airport or reduce local employment.
Click to expand...

They did not invest $11m, 7 years ago so they could corner the bugsmasher market. I don't want to be forced to pay for their marble floors and high ceilings on a huge publicly funded airport that does not see much traffic. The investment is nice for the bizjet crowd who needs the nice facilities and specialized services, and we are happy to pay for it in that setting.

I am aware of the self serve pump, but please tell me how I can, as a transient, tie down for a night without paying 50 bucks in fees. There is no way to avoid them and they are not posted online. As I mentioned earlier, they are not posted in the FBO and the person at the counter did not fully disclose them either.

Finally, please don't belittle the poor pilot's club by including me in it.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
11M of stuff I don't need when i'm flying a bugsmasher. I don't want to be forced to pay for their marble floors and high ceilings on a huge publicly funded airport that does not see much traffic. The investment is nice for the bizjet crowd who needs the nice facilities and specialized services, and we are happy to pay for it in that setting.
Click to expand...

Even the bizjet crowd doesn’t care. As long as the Lexus is waiting they’re leaving anyway. They have no need to hang out at the FBO with the peasants.

You’ve hit the nail on the head though, when an airport is nowhere anyone wants to be, they charge the fees to keep the lights on. Notably the Alaska airports mentioned that have enough traffic to pay for amenities out of fuel flowage.

$11M headed for bankruptcy. Oh well. Like he said, there’s self serve. Airport management chooses not to maintain that, once the overpriced lounge goes under, they’ll have even less traffic. Nearly zero. Seen plenty of airports that look like that.

If the goal is to increase usership to a point of sustainability, hidden fees aren’t the way to accomplish it. They just keep the place on artificial life support.

If you have to rely on fees to make back $11M, you’re screwed and have no idea how to do basic business math. Or you’re planning on the bankruptcy car wash to leave the renovated place to the successor company.

I know businesses with 100+ staff that aren’t dumb enough to dump $11M into a building.
 
dell30rb said:
They did not invest $11m, 7 years ago so they could corner the bugsmasher market. I don't want to be forced to pay for their marble floors and high ceilings on a huge publicly funded airport that does not see much traffic. The investment is nice for the bizjet crowd who needs the nice facilities and specialized services, and we are happy to pay for it in that setting.

I am aware of the self serve pump, but please tell me how I can, as a transient, tie down for a night without paying 50 bucks in fees. There is no way to avoid them and they are not posted online. As I mentioned earlier, they are not posted in the FBO and the person at the counter did not fully disclose them either.

Finally, please don't belittle the poor pilot's club by including me in it.
Click to expand...

I realize you don’t get it. You aren't going in and out of that airport without paying and that is how the airport and the FAA want it.

“Airports must maintain a fee and rental structure that makes the airport as financially self-sustaining as possible under the particular circumstances at that airport. The requirement recognizes that individual airports will differ in their ability to be fully self-sustaining, given differences in conditions at each airport. The purpose of the self-sustaining rule is to maintain the utility of the federal investment in the airport.”
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
I realize you don’t get it. You aren't going in and out of that airport without paying and that is how the airport and the FAA want it.

“Airports must maintain a fee and rental structure that makes the airport as financially self-sustaining as possible under the particular circumstances at that airport. The requirement recognizes that individual airports will differ in their ability to be fully self-sustaining, given differences in conditions at each airport. The purpose of the self-sustaining rule is to maintain the utility of the federal investment in the airport.”
Click to expand...

Who gives a crap, FAA is spending debt money. It’s not like they’re actually operating from a balanced budget.

Fiscal theater, pretending they have limited funds other than what they can get a congressman drunk and get him or her to vote for, in new loans.

Worse than security theater when they babble stupidity like the above. I love their BS of “investment” yeah right. What’s FAA’s ROI on investing in FBO monopolies? More money from the owner to the pockets of local politicians? Some nice good gub’mint jobs at a place that otherwise couldn’t maintain its own keep, because aviation has been declining steadily in activity in these washed up places that have to make FBO deals to stay afloat, for decades?

Let me know when their “investment” pays off, so they get some of that grant money back plus interest. LOL LOL LOL. What a crock of ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top