The math doesn't work out that way for me. Pro pilot and/or charter come with a huge set of limitations, not the least of which is requiring ample advance notice to get anything done, and often you can't schedule what you want when you want it. Those opportunity costs are often overlooked by people doing simple math of the economic impact of aviation on a business.

Imagine if your car required you to book trips 5 days in advance, and could not be used on 30% of all days, how far less useful it would be to you.


Yes.

Mike C.

Why would you need to schedule anything in advance with a pro pilot who is on your payroll full time?

Why would you need to schedule anything in advance with a pro pilot who is on your payroll full time?

Because they are human and not a machine.

Mike C.

Equating the "cost" of using and flying your own business airplane versus the cost of the alternatives is missing the point entirely of why you own and fly a business aircraft in the first place.

If you are asking the question, you just don't get it.

It is similar to people trying to justify (or not) the cost of an upgrade on the resale value of the airplane instead of evaluating the added benefit, safety, and reliability the upgrade provides while you own and use the airplane.

Is it cheaper to fly commercial, charter, or fractional than flying one's own business aircraft? In most cases - probably - in some cases maybe or maybe not. But if your sole focus is to save money - why are we talking airplanes - just get in your car and drive - or ride the bus.

The flexibility and value of owning and flying one's own business airplane comes in many forms that go way beyond cost. If you don't see it - fly the airlines for business and fly your plane around the patch on the weekends. In my case, I just couldn't do what I do or build the business I have without a business aircraft - and specifically a business jet. It is safer, it is faster and it allows me to be a lot more productive than the alternative. It is an invaluable productivity and business development tool.

Would having a pilot be "better" - it depends. We actually do have a professional pilot on our payroll but rarely (as in almost never) use him when I fly - his job is to fly employees or associates. Is my training an added cost? Yes but once again, if you are asking the question, you just don't get it. I fly at least 300 hours per year which means I take flying seriously and staying sharp (trained) is not an option - its the cost of admission. And I don't see it as self-flagellation - I actually enjoy it and helps me disconnect and think out of the box.

If you take flying seriously, having a pilot chauffeur you around is impractical and plain dumb - it's that simple. And you also sacrifice a space in the airplane for no meaningful reason.

On the question of "loss-leader cost" by having the company's top brass train and fly on the company's own airplane - in my case I spend at least 300 hours in the air, plus the time to prep the airplane, plus the one-week (sometime two) training "retreats" I take every year.

The airline alternative would actually be at least 2,000+ hours of "loss leader cost" in travel time, check-in, check-out, connections, not to mention the time sitting next to fat people in airline seats that grow smaller and tighter by the day and which make it hard to get any work done, plus all the time sitting around in crowded boarding halls - without counting cancellations, re-routes, etc.

I know - being partnered with a PE fund, our finance guys actually get to do the math every quarter (cost and time of airlines vs cost and time for use of our aircraft for each leg).

How is that for loss-leader cost? The point is - there is no loss leader cost.

I think a lot of people get caught up in the idea of losing potential productive work time while doing flight training, but they forget the HOURS involved in traveling to and from airport hubs and then sitting and waiting to board an airliner…..for every trip.

It’s why, even in my lowly 310, my actual door-to-door time was faster than an airline flight in trips up to 500 miles or more.. And, I’d end up at an airport really close to my actual destination.

It makes sense.

And, as to the theme of this thread, if I had an SF50, it would beat the airline door-to-door time in 800 mile trips..

I think a lot of people get caught up in the idea of losing potential productive work time while doing flight training, but they forget the HOURS involved in traveling to and from airport hubs and then sitting and waiting to board an airliner…..for every trip.

It’s why, even in my lowly 310, my actual door-to-door time was faster than an airline flight in trips up to 500 miles or more.. And, I’d end up at an airport really close to my actual destination.

It makes sense.

And, as to the theme of this thread, if I had an SF50, it would beat the airline door-to-door time in 800 mile trips..

All the discussion of business use of general aviation made me sad because it reminded me that I had to sell my A36 that I used on business when we hit a rough patch a few years ago. And now that I've sold the business I am not allowed to use GA. Which is OK as they paid me well for the business and can make all the rules they want.....I have more than enough screw you money to walk away whenever I want.

It never made financial sense for me because I refrained from taking employees on the plane for liability reasons. I do think it can make financial sense in many cases, especially if you are flying multiple employees and can save man hours. However, in my business (environmental consulting) we get paid by the hour by clients for travel time so saving billable hours on travel by using GA was never a motivator. For me it was the time I saved as CEO, the flexibility to travel when I wanted and the time efficiency over airline travel for trips under 400nm.

Very easy to come up with an arrangement where pro pilot is *available* 24/7, as long as they don't actually have to work 24/7. I would happily take a job where I have to be available 24/7 as long as I only actually have to work 20 hrs a week.

So are you. A pro pilot can fly your staff around while you are sick or on vacation or tied up with critical work or just don't feel like going anywhere.

You missed my point entirely. What I am saying is that we own and fly these planes for all these intangible benefits the flying has to offer, not to so save money.

It all depends on where you are and your level of experience with airline travel. I live in NYC where there is a direct flight to just about anywhere, and I've traveled by airlines on a weekly basis for 20 years. When I did, I had this down to a science - never waited a minute to board the airliner, except for when there are delays. And when there are delays, I am sitting at the lounge working, not wasting time. Not to mention, I am also working during the flight, which I can't do while flying the plane.

Don't get me wrong, business travel by private plane is great, and I've done it successfully for many years. I am just being honest about the reasons why we do it

Very easy to come up with an arrangement where pro pilot is *available* 24/7, as long as they don't actually have to work 24/7. I would happily take a job where I have to be available 24/7 as long as I only actually have to work 20 hrs a week.

Very easy to come up with an arrangement where pro pilot is *available* 24/7, as long as they don't actually have to work 24/7. I would happily take a job where I have to be available 24/7 as long as I only actually have to work 20 hrs a week.