Owning vs. charter vs. airlines

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...
Those are suppliers, not "deals".


And just how do they manage to "Supply" the company without working out
a
deal?


Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK.

The two I mentioned. Wal-Mart was perhaps the first compnay to do long term
deals with their vendors, which is why they were able to get fabulous deals.

Period. Furthermore I
doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a customer because they
could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.

Read Walton's biography.

"Stephan in Burlington" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:45:31 -0700, while the Captain of the mv
Perfecto was guiding her to her next port, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

And just how do they manage to "Supply" the company without working out a
deal?


But if they do 100 of those $ 4 billion deals a year, that means they
buy $ 400 billion of merchandise, yet their annual sales last year
were only $ 285 billion.

I didn't say (IIRC) they did them ANNUALLY, but they do a load of long term
deals with vendors which is how they manage to get great deals over the long
term.

Also, there was a interesting write-up about Wal-Mart's flight operations a
couple years ago in Professional Pilot (?) on how ANYONE in the company can
book a seat on theri aircraft (of which they have something like a couple
dozen that fly everyday.

Of course, Walton made his company by visiting every single store annually
(when they had something like 700), using his Cessna 421 (?) and he flew up
until his cancer made it unfeasible for him to fly any more.

When he finally stopped flying (just a few months before his death) he had
amassed soemthing like 8000 hours...all of it from the left seat.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...



Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK.

The two I mentioned. Wal-Mart was perhaps the first compnay to do long
term
deals with their vendors, which is why they were able to get fabulous
deals.

Period. Furthermore I
doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a customer because
they
could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.


I also forgot to mention all the corporate buyouts that run well over $4
billion.

Mike Rapoport wrote:
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...

Those are suppliers, not "deals".


And just how do they manage to "Supply" the company without working out a
deal?



Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK. Period. Furthermore I
doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a customer because they
could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.


You know, it doesn't really make a damn bit of difference what deals
Walmart has or has not made, nor does it matter what any other company
has or has not done. The original point was that started this whole
waste of time was the fact that sometimes the "economical" choice winds
up losing you money. This is true whether or not the original example
has ever actually been represented in real life, and it's something that
every company either knows intuitively or soon learns in sorry detail.

Furthermore, in the engineering management world, when a request for
bids says that bids must be received by such-and-such time, then they
better be there at that time. Bids that aren't received on time are
simply not considered - there are usually plenty of bidders who do get
their bids in on time, and if not, the client will probably re-start
the bidding process.

Rich Lemert

Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK. Period. Furthermore I
doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a customer because
they could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.


You know, it doesn't really make a damn bit of difference what deals
Walmart has or has not made, nor does it matter what any other company
has or has not done. The original point was that started this whole
waste of time was the fact that sometimes the "economical" choice winds
up losing you money. This is true whether or not the original example
has ever actually been represented in real life, and it's something that
every company either knows intuitively or soon learns in sorry detail.

Furthermore, in the engineering management world, when a request for
bids says that bids must be received by such-and-such time, then they
better be there at that time. Bids that aren't received on time are
simply not considered - there are usually plenty of bidders who do get
their bids in on time, and if not, the client will probably re-start
the bidding process.

Rich Lemert


You can often get a waiver if you show good faith effort, and if you show
that it could not have been changed. For instance, if Fed Ex put it on the
wrong truck.

Still, it doesn't help, and people who don't know how these things work just
really have not seen the pettiness and/or bureaucratic idiocy that goe on
these days. Often, you have a big ego type who is looking to get rid of
competitors so he can choose the vendor who best kisses his arse, or some
power starved purchasing maggot who loves his/her chance to veto the will of
the executive and sales people who all make 3 to 30 times what they make.

"Dude" wrote in message
...

Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK. Period. Furthermore
I
doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a customer because
they could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.


You know, it doesn't really make a damn bit of difference what deals
Walmart has or has not made, nor does it matter what any other company
has or has not done. The original point was that started this whole
waste of time was the fact that sometimes the "economical" choice winds
up losing you money. This is true whether or not the original example
has ever actually been represented in real life, and it's something that
every company either knows intuitively or soon learns in sorry detail.

Furthermore, in the engineering management world, when a request for
bids says that bids must be received by such-and-such time, then they
better be there at that time. Bids that aren't received on time are
simply not considered - there are usually plenty of bidders who do get
their bids in on time, and if not, the client will probably re-start
the bidding process.

Rich Lemert


You can often get a waiver if you show good faith effort, and if you show
that it could not have been changed. For instance, if Fed Ex put it on
the
wrong truck.

Still, it doesn't help, and people who don't know how these things work
just
really have not seen the pettiness and/or bureaucratic idiocy that goe on
these days. Often, you have a big ego type who is looking to get rid of
competitors so he can choose the vendor who best kisses his arse, or some
power starved purchasing maggot who loves his/her chance to veto the will
of
the executive and sales people who all make 3 to 30 times what they make.

Funny thing is, the OP was NOT about BIDDING, but negotiating, dealing
face-to-face, selling...

In a world where most business with end-users is done by phone menus and
CSR's in India, the upper levels typically deal across the conference table.

Not sure what kind of car you are talking about, but it does not cost me
$15-$30/day. Mine is about $2.00 per day, which includes purchase price,
insurance and maintenance. But your point is still valid.



Don Hammer wrote in
:

Corporate and private jets are never about saving money. They
fulfull many strategic needs. Can you own a car cheaper than take the
bus? Never. There are other reasons you pay for that car or two you
own -

Ego - It's mine
My schedule
My space
Security
Point to point travel where the bus doesn't go
etc.

You pay dearly to own a car and do it yourself($15 to $30 per day).
People that buy corporate arcraft do the same. They are just on a
different level than the rest of us. If you were a citizen of a third
world country living in a shack, that fat cat that drives by in a Jeep
looks to him like the guy in a corporate aircraft looks to you and me.
I't just a matter of prospective.

I'm in the business of putting people in private jet aircraft and it's
not about hauling a bunch of people either. The average load factor
for all Gulfstream GV/G-550's is 3.5 even though most have 12 to 14
pax seats. This aircraft has a range of 6,700nm and the average stage
length is 1.6 hours.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Not sure what kind of car you are talking about, but it does not cost me
$15-$30/day. Mine is about $2.00 per day, which includes purchase price,
insurance and maintenance.

My insurance alone is nearly $2.00 a day.

George Patterson
Whosoever bloweth not his own horn, the same shall remain unblown.

Don't know about $4 billion deals, but there are plenty of examples
where uncertainties in airline schedule has increased customer costs.
For instance, I used to be able to take an early flight and be on time
for a morning meeting in DC, and return the same day. I can't do that
anymore. Now I have leave on the previous evening and stay at a hotel. I
have, on many occasions, spent more time waiting in airports than it
would have taken me to drive that distance. It still does not make it
worthwhile to charter an airplane, but I can see how it might for
someone else. If your time is worth a few thousand $ per hour,
chartering might be well worth it.



"Mike Rapoport" wrote in
k.net:


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...
Those are suppliers, not "deals".


And just how do they manage to "Supply" the company without working
out a deal?


Walmart has never signed a single $4B deal AFAIK. Period.
Furthermore I doubt that *any* supplier has ever lost Walmart as a
customer because they could not arrive somewhere at a particular time.

Mike
MU-2

I suppose that you are right if there is any such thing as a $4B opportunity
that depends on being somewhere at a specific time. I any event, a BBJ will
never be the cheapest way to get anywhere.

Will it ever be the most reliable? The airlines have more planes to
swap around if something breaks, for example. And the private jet is
subject to most of the same air-traffic delays, isn't it?

Let me preface this by saying that I am by no means an expert. I
think with some fractional ownership jets, you have a choice between
several. Therefore, I think reliability would be less of an issue. I
also think that air traffic control can subject private aircraft to
the same delays as commercail. However, our city has 2 airports. One
downtown with mostly private aircraft and one large interanational
airport. I have been 16th in line for takeoff from the international
airport, but it is rare that a lot of aircraft are moving or taking
off at the same time at the downtown airport.