AIRNAV not publishing fuel prices...

"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:34:19 GMT, Newps wrote:


The information he provides is available elsewhere, for example AOPA.
So if you are a member of AOPA there's no reason to pay for the same
information twice.

One of the things I use AIRNAV for is to find all airports along my
route of flight that have an ILS and 24 hour fuel availability. There
is no other site that I am aware of that will give me that information
with a single request.

Quite so!

Also, AirNav will save our company about $40K a year as we move our two
birds a few miles (46) away. Yeah, the information was probably available
elsewhere, but AirNav made the search easy.

Last year, AirNav contacted me (as representative of my flying club) and
gave me a year to pony up some extremely high listing fee or get dropped
from their listing. Checking the fact that in the previous month only one
person had come to our club web site through the AirNav listing (versus
10-20 a day through Google) we declined to be listed.

For a flying club I suppose only "click-throughs" matter. FBO owners,
however, need to be looking at their listing from an exposure standpoint.

Well, flying clubs can look at their listing not only from the
perspective of a direct benefit to the club (getting exposure for
their club on a site with highly targeted GA interests, as opposed to
a general public search engine such as Google) but also from the
perspective of he benefit to their operation and to their members. If
AirNav helps their members operate their aircraft more efficiently,
increase flying hours and/or reduce operating costs, then it should
make sense for them to do their fair share to improve AirNav's chances
of being around to continue to provide that service.

Alas, not all view it that way, and some look at hits only.

In the case of Paul Tomblin, who defended his club's treasure chest by
declining the offer, that "extremely high listing fee" was less than
$2 per club member per year. If AirNav is not worth $2 per year to
his club members, then he did the right thing by refusing the
extremely high priced offer.

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

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).

And the intent is for that to continue. I know perfectly well that
the value of the site would be severely diminished if it wasn't
comprehensive.

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 know more GA business
owners who have declined to pony up, than those who have.

Since you know so many business owners, if you like AirNav and want it
to continue to provide a good service you are in a good position to
help. You can help by thanking the buiness owners that believed in
the model and "ponied up", and encourage the others to sign up. It is
not going to break their bank, no matter how small they are.

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? And
if that were the case, how would we find out about them?

Comments and listing payments are completely independent. A listing
does NOT give a business the right to pick and choose which comments
will get posted. If it says there at the top of the comments section
"Comments from AirNav users", then AirNav's good name it at stake. We
will not falter in our determination to post fair and verifiable
comments.

Yes, some FBOs have tried to censor their comments, but we have always
and will always decline. If they insist, we offer to refund their
money. At that point most just accept reality and take it as it is.
Occasionally, they want to play tough. We have lost a large 20+ FBO
chain account as a result of that firm policy, and we will stand by it
no matter what. Actually, when I say that we have lost the account,
that is a temporary thing. I am confident that they will turn around
and see how futile their resistance is. By not signing up they
forfeit the opportunity to present themselves, and are left with the
comments only. They are left with just the very thing they were
trying to avoid.

Now, do we publish every comment? No, we don't. We do not publsh, or
will remove, the following:
- comments from the business owners, director, employees or agents,
except those submitted specifically as a followup to a comment from
one of their customers
- comments from past business owners, director, employees or agents
- comments from direct competitors
- comments that are not representative of an actual customer
experience
- comments with forged or concealed identities
- comments with foul language
- comments that contain personal references or personal attacks (these
may be removed at the request of the affected person)
- comments from minors

Occasionally some comment that shouldn't be posted gets through, but
if we later catch it we will remove it.

We will also remove any comment at any time at the request of the
original author.

Finally, and most importantly, we expect comment authors to stand
behind their words. If an affected business wants to follow up on a
comment, we will put the business and the comment author in touch. If
the comment author fails to communicate or to respond to a challenge,
then if the business requests we may remove the comment.

This could be a high maintenance process, but fortunately aviation if
full of honest and upstanding people and it works quite well. I guess
the dishonest cheaters and liars also cheat on their training,
currency and maintenance, and eventually are eliminated from the gene
pool.

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

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

Integrity, paucity and fear.

Businesses see that we try hard to do the right thing. That alone
gets us the respect that keeps another honorable business or person
with integrity from suing us.

Shortage of assets also helps. Even if they sued, there wouldn't be
much to collect. So what's the point?

And finally, fear of retribution. If they sued, it would be fair game
for us to post their suit on the web site. After all, it is public
record. The damage they would be doing to themselves would be far
greater than the damage inflicted by any comment.

I feel for Paulo. He's operated this website full-time for a couple of
years, basically "on the house."

Make that 9 years.

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.

Way to go, Jay. Make sure FBOs know that.

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

In a previous article, (Paulo Santos) said:
AirNav helps their members operate their aircraft more efficiently,
increase flying hours and/or reduce operating costs, then it should
make sense for them to do their fair share to improve AirNav's chances
of being around to continue to provide that service.

If AirNav asked for direct donations from people who benefited from it, I
would donate since I use it. But to spend members money because some of
them might get some benefit from it is unconsionable.

$2 per club member per year. If AirNav is not worth $2 per year to
his club members, then he did the right thing by refusing the
extremely high priced offer.

It is not for me to decide that my club members get benefit from something
that demonstrably does not lead to benefit to the club itself.

Personally, I think members of my flying club get nebulous benefits from
having the CoPilot databases available to them, but I'm not about to steal
money from the club to keep that afloat either.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Surely the 98% of DNA we share with monkeys must be enough to stop
people from sinking this low.
-- Frossie

Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.

Those with high prices often provide a higher level of service. Not
everyone always wants the cheap price. Believe me, I like cheap fuel.
But I also do a lot of meetings at FBOs. An FBO with a conference
room, meeting facilities, a speakerphone, internet connection, and a
courtesy car provides me a valuable office space for a day -- for
free. Well, not for tree, but for the extra cost of the fuel. I
don't mind paying extra for the better services, and if the way to
charge is through the fuel price, that is fine with me.

If I am just passing through on a refueling stop, with no wife or
customers, I don't mind the "FBO in a double-wide" that offers cheaper
fuel.

Different missions, different needs.

The FBOs with higher prices are the ones that should want to advetise
the most -- they want to show the services and amenities they offer,
in a way to justify the higher prices they charge.

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

"Paulo Santos" wrote in message
om...

Yes, some FBOs have tried to censor their comments, but we have always
and will always decline. If they insist, we offer to refund their
money. At that point most just accept reality and take it as it is.
Occasionally, they want to play tough. We have lost a large 20+ FBO
chain account as a result of that firm policy, and we will stand by it
no matter what. Actually, when I say that we have lost the account,
that is a temporary thing. I am confident that they will turn around
and see how futile their resistance is. By not signing up they
forfeit the opportunity to present themselves, and are left with the
comments only. They are left with just the very thing they were
trying to avoid.

One would think that they would expend that energy to keep customers happy
(i.e., "We regret the experience that Joe Blow had with our company...",
rather than trying to rationalize like children.

I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
(thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

What Javascript and cookies and whatever? On AirNav?

"Paulo Santos" wrote in message
om...
Those with high prices will not want their prices to be listed. Those
with low prices are too cheap (poor) to pay to list their prices.

Those with high prices often provide a higher level of service. Not
everyone always wants the cheap price. Believe me, I like cheap fuel.
But I also do a lot of meetings at FBOs. An FBO with a conference
room, meeting facilities, a speakerphone, internet connection, and a
courtesy car provides me a valuable office space for a day -- for
free. Well, not for tree, but for the extra cost of the fuel. I
don't mind paying extra for the better services, and if the way to
charge is through the fuel price, that is fine with me.

If I am just passing through on a refueling stop, with no wife or
customers, I don't mind the "FBO in a double-wide" that offers cheaper
fuel.

Different missions, different needs.

The FBOs with higher prices are the ones that should want to advetise
the most -- they want to show the services and amenities they offer,
in a way to justify the higher prices they charge.

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

Yet this one inverts all the rationale.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KCOS

(Paulo Santos) writes:

I, for example, used AirNav from my phone last night. Is the data
worth $100/year to me? Sure. Is it worth $100/year if I have to
use JavaScript and cookies and whatever other garbage to get to it
(thus rendering it unusable on my phone and most of my other
browers) and can no longer post usable links to it? No way.

What Javascript and cookies and whatever? On AirNav?

No, on similar services that switch to requiring authentication in
order to use. The quote above it was
- Great. Would you pay $39/year to continue to use the service?
I assume that you'd verify that users paid, not just go on the honor
system.

Aeroplanner is an example of a system that requires cookies to
authenticate for their service. AOPA is a decent counterexample.
(They permit standard authentication in addition to the cookie
stuff.)

Like I said, I appreciate AirNav the way it is. (But *you* know
that already.)

--kyler