AIRNAV not publishing fuel prices...

(John Galban) wrote in
om:

I think its utility will be a lot less valuable once the "free"
period has expired for all of the GA businesses. The beauty of
the original site was that it had all available info about FBOs
and fuel prices around the country and all of the info came
directly from the horses mouths (us). Once the site is reduced to
info about only businesses that paid up, it ceases to be the all
encompassing, one-stop-shopping resource that it once was.

I think you hit the nail on the head. First of all, I have high praise
for the good things that Paulo and AirNav have done for the aviation
community. User feedback (good and bad) is something you rarely see
and helps with flight planning.

I wouldn't have a problem if Paulo decides to put small advertising
banners at the top of the page, after all, many other websites have
done this and running the site isn't free. Removing certain FBOs takes
AirNav down to the level of corporate sites (such as Millionaire,
Signature, etc.) where you'll see nothing but fluff.

Again, truely sad.

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT from email address)

In article , Kyler Laird
wrote:

(Victor) writes:

Maybe somebody with the right capabilities could build a mirror web
site so we could publish the fuel prices.

I've appreciated Airnav and have been sad to see the recent changes.

I've been thinking of building an interface to Airnav that would allow
people to submit prices/comments both to Airnav *and* a public
repository simultaneously. (I'd provide an initial interface to it
but everyone else would be welcome to the data.) Is there interest?

--kyler

or maybe let people post to rec.aviation.products, and provide
a focused "google". Did that make any sense?

--
Bob Noel

Bob Noel writes:

I've been thinking of building an interface to Airnav that would allow
people to submit prices/comments both to Airnav *and* a public
repository simultaneously. (I'd provide an initial interface to it
but everyone else would be welcome to the data.) Is there interest?

or maybe let people post to rec.aviation.products, and provide
a focused "google". Did that make any sense?

It makes a lot of sense to me and I'd normally be one of the first to
suggest a Usenet-based solution. This time, however, it's not so clear
that it's the best distribution medium. I can imagine collecting the
prices and comments from posted messages, but it could get ugly fast -
especially prices, if they're kept reasonably current. I like to
encourage the use of Google, but I even worry about it being a
proprietary database.

I think it would be great, however, if someone built a mechanism to
post comments and even significant price changes back to Usenet.

Of course one of my biggest concerns about any such community-managed
system is authentication. I'd like all comments to be signed in some
form with a trust network so that we can easily separate the signal
from the noise. I have ideas for that.

--kyler

"John Godwin" wrote in message
. 3.44...

I wouldn't have a problem if Paulo decides to put small advertising
banners at the top of the page, after all, many other websites have
done this and running the site isn't free. Removing certain FBOs takes
AirNav down to the level of corporate sites (such as Millionaire,
Signature, etc.) where you'll see nothing but fluff.

I've noticed Signature and Millionaire frequently get savaged for their
pompous attitudes and high prices in AirNav's user comments.

Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post unedited
comments?

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03...
One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?

I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how Paulo
has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting
sued.

There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
uncomfortable.

Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was a
really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
line-guy to avoid the place."

Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get
him
in hot water, IMHO.

I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
place.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mike Rapoport wrote:

Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post unedited
comments?

Last year, the host of another web site was successfully sued by Wouk over comments
that someone posted on that site.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

Folks,

I normally don't follow Usene. It is fun, but I just don't have the
time. So pardon my late entry into this thread. [Thanks, Victor, for
telling me about the thread.]

I started AirNav in 1995 and am still involved in it, although I don't
run the whole show anymore.

First of all, let me thank all of you on Usenet for the support you
have been providing. You folks on rec.aviation.* are incredibly
supportive, and I hope you will continue to be after you read this.

And second, let me assure all of you that AirNav remains committed to
providing incredible value to the aviation community.

One thing that several of you have figured out is that AirNav needs to
have a sufficient revenue stream to be viable. I don't think anybody
would deny us that. Even though we would very much like to provide
the service for free to everyone indefinitely, it is just not viable.
A revenue stream was absolutely necessary.

So we started by introducing simple and useful revenue solutions that
we though would be well received by everyone. We looked at several
solutions, and rolled them out over time: quality non-annoying banner
ads, online hotel and car reservations, upgraded listings for FBOs
that wanted it. All the while, we were providing a free Basic
presence to every FBO and aviation business.

It turned out that those revenue streams still weren't enough to
support the site. Maybe if pilots had made more hotel reservations it
would have been sufficient. The reservations they make help, but that
is still not sufficient.

So we did some serious soul searching and looked for a viable revenue
model. Two alternatives: charge the users (pilots) or charge the
advertisers (FBOs). We though that charging the pilots made the most
sense, since they were the ones benefiting most directly from the
site. But we conducted some surveys, and got some viscious negative
reactions from the majority of pilots. It would go something like
this:
- Do you use AirNav?
- YES, all the time. I love it.
- What do you fly, how much?
- I fly a Baron, 250 hours a year.
- What does AirNav do for you?
- I use it everytime I go somewhere. I have saved thousands of
dollars by using AirNav. On this last trip alone I save $150 by
filling up for $1.85 at XYZ.
- Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
[ blank stare, followed by color disappearing from pilot's face ]
[ after regaining composure... ]
- Are you out of your mind??? Absolutely not. I would stop using it.

So, folks, there you have it, a tremendous irrational response. And
this wasn't one or two people that we interviwed, it was the vast
majority. Definitely something we were not expecting from the
community of pilots.

In asking the FBOs how they felt about being charged they were more
reasonable. Well, more of them anyway, but still not 100%. They have
more of a business-minded approach to it, and as long as the rates are
affordable, charging the FBOs is a reasonable thing.

So we implemented that. We charge very reasonable rates to make sure
that no aviation business is left out for lack of affordability. We
have different rates at different airports to give everyone a fair
chance. An FBO at Bubba Jones Cropdusting Strip is going to pay a lot
less than an FBO at Big City Executive Airport. Our rates start at
under $10/month at every airport except the nation's top 80 airports,
and can be as little as $10/year at Bubba Jones's Strip. We give
significant discounts to non-profits (flying clubs, etc.), and to
small businesses that just can't hope to have the volume of an FBO
(airport restaurants, etc.). Can any FBO or business claim not to be
able to afford it? Can they do it straight-faced?

So what are we doing to the businesses that don't pay? We typically
take out all their information, except their name, phone number, fuel
prices, and user comments. (To those business that order services
from us, promise to pay, and then fail to pay their bills, well, those
we remove altogether -- but you wouldn't want to do business with
those guys anyway.).

It is not our intention to diminish the value of the service we
provide to the aviation community, but unfortunately we have to
distinguish between the non-payers and those that believe in us and
the service we provide. Continuing with the old model was just not
viable because AirNav would disappear altogether, and that is no way
to provide a valuable service to the community.

What can you as pilots do? Tell our sponsoring FBOs that you
appreciate their sponsorship. The FBOs need feedback to tell them
that their advertising dollars are being well spent. And to those
FBOs that don't sponsor AirNav, you should make it clear to them that
you use AirNav, and that AirNav plays a role in your FBO selection
process. They'll get the message.

I will follow up to some of the others posts in this thread
separately.

Thanks for your support, and we look forward to your comments and
insight.

Paulo Santos
AirNav, LLC http://www.airnav.com/

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03...

I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make a
buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap to
pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid the
place.


Don't get me wrong. I think that Paulo has done an incredible job
with Airnav. I tell anyone who will listen that it is the best
aviation site on the web. I also think he should make a buck on this
venture (lots of them, actually). I just think that his current
strategy will degrade the quality of the site.

There are lots of good mom & pop FBOs that are run on a shoestring
and don't do any advertising. That doesn't make them bad. You might
be content to avoid anyone who does not pay for an Airnav listing, but
if half of the FBOs disappear from the site, will it be as useful as
it once was? I don't think so. Ultimately, it's Paulo's call.
Personally, I'd be glad to pay an annual subscription fee to access
Airnav. It's a valuable resource to me.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post
unedited
comments?

I dunno -- it's a gray area. But if it were me, just from a business
standpoint I'd be pretty worried about allowing third-hand, unverifiable
attack-posts.

I'd at least want a way to verify who was making the complaint, so as to
ensure that it's not just a disgruntled former employee posting stuff.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:IQeSb.51817$U%5.286038@attbi_s03...
One other issue I have with Airnav's new direction is what will
Paulo do about a crappy business that offers poor service or rips off
customers? If they pay their advertising fee, do they get negative
comments removed from their listing? If not, why would they pay?

I've wondered about that myself. Actually, I've always wondered how
Paulo
has survived putting negative comments on his website, without getting
sued.

There are some pretty graphic and acidic posts about some businesses.
Someone with a mouth-piece and deep pockets could make Paulo's life very
uncomfortable.

Right after we bought the hotel, I found a bad review of our place on
AirNav. It was, of course (!), from before we bought the place, and was
a
really nasty one, written by a guy who claimed that he was "told by a
line-guy to avoid the place."

Paulo of course removed it from his site when he heard we were the new
owners, but THAT'S the kind of third-hand slander that could really get
him
in hot water, IMHO.

I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
years, basically "on the house." Now that he's trying to actually make
a
buck, everyone is down his throat. I say if an FBO is too damned cheap
to
pay for their listing, that alone says enough to me that I will avoid
the
place.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Just ask Mike Busch formerly (probably because of this very issue) of Avweb.
--
Roger Long

Mike Rapoport wrote in message
ink.net...
Is Paulo liable for maintaining a forum where other people can post
unedited
comments?

Mike
MU-2