Cost Of Operation

[cap]

#### ------the industry has gotten itself into 'a position' and it will not be re-corrected, I believe, without some 'pain' involved. You have named some of the 'pain' and I might be one of those feeling that 'pain'. If I can propose the idea and open up my big yap about it, I should be prepared to pay the price. Undoubtedly, some of my skills are waining and that'll be left up to others to decide if I need to be 'fodder' for helping to "get this train back on the tracks". I do believe though, that those companies that are properly ran and treat their employees well and want to keep them will survive quite suffer the times. Those pilots that have something to offer, will also survive.

 

Unions, assocaitions, etc I do believe in and they do serve a purpose for sure, but until the industry can get healthy and secure in the long term, I don't believe unions will correct the problem. The issue goes deeper than just wages or benefits, but first the industry has to be stabilized for the long term before that industry can guarantee you or I long term agreements on wages or the job security us and our familes want.

 

 

God, I should like a union negotiator already. Help me!

[cap]

It would appear that I am unable to "Edit" the previous post, so I will apologize now for what appears to be "baffle-gab" and can only add that the "fusible link" between my fingers and my brain must have melted.....R & R is in progress. Albert Ross is a better spokesman than me anyway, even if he is uglier.

[cap]

#### ------ your last line is EXACTLY my point and the industry is resilent and will make do just fine. We've had to improvise and adapt before and we can do it again. We tried "deregualtion" and it didn't work out too well, so let's go back to where it was and have another look at something better while we're there........because this ain't working the way it is bud.

[Phil Croucher]

Ugly? Just because someone set fire to my face and put it out with a spade....

 

My problem with any regulation system is, if I see a business opportunity that noone else has spotted, why should some government committee (which we all have agreed in other threads has no basis in reality) stop me exploiting it just because someone fat, dumb and happy is already there (no personal slights intended)?

 

I can see the idea behind regulation, but there's a dark side, too.

 

Phil

[cap]

Albert Ross ------point made and understood. I believe that the records will show that that was one of the original reasons for "deregualtion". As I stated before, I was all in fobour of it for the reason you stated and I called that "free enterprise". I believe that it still would work "on paper", but I few realized that "deregulation also had a 'dark side'.

 

Before "deregulation" there was a basic requirement to have certain things in place and a fair amount of money was required to 'get up and rolling'. That requirement has dropped considerably since that point and allowed a higher percentage of 'chisel charters' into the business. They existed before and always will, but it's very difficult to 'chisel' too much when you have many fixed monthly bills to pay. In otherwards, if your life is tied up in your business, you are less reluctant to declare bankruptcy than the person that has much less invested. You also have a personal reputation and want to see your suppliers, etc paid on time. You judge your purchases carefully, including how much you pay for the company trucks. etc. The guy that's 'chiselling' may well have a $55,000 1/2 ton after 1 month.....and it's leased also. In fact, maybe his whole operation may be leased. I got nothing against leasing and many times it's a good business practice, but let's see some of the owner's 'cold hard cash' down on the table first and then see how low they want their rates to go. They can't do it because the playing field has now been 'leveled'. They now have to resort to what the other guy has been doing for years and shoving 'lost leaders' out the door isn't the reason that he's still in business.

 

I agree with you Albert, but the system has to change because there are too many good owner/operators out there that are being hurt by all this. There's an 'over-supply', the customers know it, pump it for all it's worth and the rates stay down.

 

Oh yes......and I've not as round anymore, I'm a teeny bit smarter than I was, still happy and I''m STILL better-looking than you in the morning.....BUT you got a "candy-***" job....Grrrrrrrrrrr.

[Phil Croucher]

I've always felt that company owners should be vetted for sanity, but that'll never happen

 

Phil

[jetbox]

The only regulation needed is for the hourly prices to be fixed at an acceptable level. Free enterprise can still exist the way it does now but the jerkoffs of this industry would no longer be able to lowball everybody. If we are all obligated to charge x amount of dollars per hour, then the only variable is good service and good equipement.

There's nothing wrong with any risk takers having the chance to kick the cat, as long as they don't do it at a discount rate wich is precisely what is happening now! :down:

[Blackmac]

Rather boring topic, heard it all before.

 

When are we going to get into some topic with "balls" to it.

 

I think you guys just like to see what you say in the printed word.

[widgeon]

http://www.conklindd.com/store/pdf/lifesamp.pdf

 

sample sheet for 206l1.

 

I assume these guyze nose dere stuff

 

bottom of page 9 gives average hourly cost of 1,162 USD.

 

Insurance $200 per flight hour is more than the pilots salary !!

 

based on 350hrs /yr.