A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Better way than Wet Rates?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 29th 04, 04:15 PM
Tim Hogard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Better way than Wet Rates?

A friend and I are considering buying a plane that will be on
leaseback to a flight school.

I was wondering if the days of the "Wet Rates" are numbered with
fuel cost going up so high. As far as I can tell, renting planes
with fuel goes back to well before the '70s and I was wondering
what other systems have been tried? Based on a rate of fuel being
$1.25 a liter it looks like fuel will cost more for a year than an
engine and when your talking about planes that are worth less than
2x of the price of an engine, that messes up the economics.

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com
  #2  
Old October 29th 04, 05:10 PM
NW_PILOT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tim Hogard" wrote in message
...
A friend and I are considering buying a plane that will be on
leaseback to a flight school.

I was wondering if the days of the "Wet Rates" are numbered with
fuel cost going up so high. As far as I can tell, renting planes
with fuel goes back to well before the '70s and I was wondering
what other systems have been tried? Based on a rate of fuel being
$1.25 a liter it looks like fuel will cost more for a year than an
engine and when your talking about planes that are worth less than
2x of the price of an engine, that messes up the economics.

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com


I would watch out for most lease backs as the flight school most likely
benefits more than you will and may cost you more in the longrun depending
on the airplane.


  #3  
Old October 29th 04, 06:45 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tim Hogard wrote:
A friend and I are considering buying a plane that will be on
leaseback to a flight school.

I was wondering if the days of the "Wet Rates" are numbered with
fuel cost going up so high. As far as I can tell, renting planes
with fuel goes back to well before the '70s and I was wondering
what other systems have been tried? Based on a rate of fuel being
$1.25 a liter it looks like fuel will cost more for a year than an
engine and when your talking about planes that are worth less than
2x of the price of an engine, that messes up the economics.

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?


I don't think it too much difference one way or the other to the owner, but
there are some tradeoffs. Choose your poison.

Wet rate:
- you either need to pad your rates to cover potential cost increases, or make
frequent adjustments to your rental rate.
- you have to deal with fuel receipts for away-from-base fuel purchases.
- your renters have no incentive to conserve fuel.
- you might be able to negotiate a fuel discount since the handling is simpler
for the FBO (all the fuel billing goes to one place).

Dry rate:
- you need to establish a protocol for rental returns, like "always return it
full".
- you have to put up with complaints "it wasn't full when I got it".
- harder to accomodate a renter who wants partially filled tanks to provide
more carrying capacity.
- your renters have no incentive to keep the mixture rich enough to preserve
your expensive engine.

  #4  
Old October 29th 04, 08:44 PM
TripFarmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do like the big guys do......have a "fuel surcharge" added.


Trip

In article , says...

Tim Hogard wrote:
A friend and I are considering buying a plane that will be on
leaseback to a flight school.

I was wondering if the days of the "Wet Rates" are numbered with
fuel cost going up so high. As far as I can tell, renting planes
with fuel goes back to well before the '70s and I was wondering
what other systems have been tried? Based on a rate of fuel being
$1.25 a liter it looks like fuel will cost more for a year than an
engine and when your talking about planes that are worth less than
2x of the price of an engine, that messes up the economics.

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?


I don't think it too much difference one way or the other to the owner, but
there are some tradeoffs. Choose your poison.

Wet rate:
- you either need to pad your rates to cover potential cost increases, or make

frequent adjustments to your rental rate.
- you have to deal with fuel receipts for away-from-base fuel purchases.
- your renters have no incentive to conserve fuel.
- you might be able to negotiate a fuel discount since the handling is simpler

for the FBO (all the fuel billing goes to one place).

Dry rate:
- you need to establish a protocol for rental returns, like "always return it
full".
- you have to put up with complaints "it wasn't full when I got it".
- harder to accomodate a renter who wants partially filled tanks to provide
more carrying capacity.
- your renters have no incentive to keep the mixture rich enough to preserve
your expensive engine.


  #5  
Old October 29th 04, 11:59 PM
C Kingsbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tim Hogard" wrote in message
...

What are the options for lease back that doesn't turn into
a fuel price gamble?


Change your rates when the fuel prices go up enough. If the contract doesn't
let you do this, change it or walk away and don't look back.

On second thought, unless you've owned an airplane before, don't even think
about a leaseback. If you can't afford to own a plane on your own you sure
as hell can't afford the risk of a leaseback. And if you can afford to own a
plane, why let other people use it on all the nice sunny days?

-cwk.


  #6  
Old October 30th 04, 02:24 AM
Tim Hogard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C Kingsbury ) wrote:
: On second thought, unless you've owned an airplane before, don't even think
: about a leaseback. If you can't afford to own a plane on your own you sure
: as hell can't afford the risk of a leaseback. And if you can afford to own a
: plane, why let other people use it on all the nice sunny days?

This plane will be joinly owned by two or three people, one who
is a student at the flight school where it would live.

The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane. The payoff for the
student pilot is something in the area of 115 hrs.

From a purely investment point of view the numbers show up as ROI
of 7.5 years or some such thing so like any plane ownership, its
not a great idea.

All the numbers assume no major expenses outside of the averages
that the flight school has had for other aircraft that are of
the same age and condition. Anything else is a risk.

-tim
http://web.abnormal.com
  #7  
Old October 30th 04, 07:37 AM
Darrel Toepfer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tim Hogard wrote:

The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane.


Then it wouldn't be allowed at 4R7...

This year the commission suggested that requirement to the city council
and they approved it. They are in the process of evicting 3 planes
housed there now. A 172H, '47 Bo and an Extra...
  #8  
Old October 30th 04, 02:59 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Plenty of leasebacks work, you only hear about the ones that didn't.

It sounds like he has the proper expectations financially, but what about
enjoying the plane and liability?

With 3 owners you are likely to be either using it too much to get much
rent, or not getting enough time to enjoy it yourselves. Not insuring makes
it likely to be profitable at low rental amounts, but...

With no liability, how are you planning to protect your assets from when
someone else flies it in to a school bus?


  #9  
Old October 30th 04, 05:57 PM
C Kingsbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tim Hogard" wrote in message
...
C Kingsbury ) wrote:


The plane will be something like a 152 or Tomahawk. The value of
the plane makes it an "investment" I could walk away from and I'm
considering no hull insurance on the plane. The payoff for the
student pilot is something in the area of 115 hrs.


Nuts! I know you guys brew some pretty strong beer down there but this
verges on the clinical definition of insanity.

The fact that you can afford it makes me question why you would ever want to
do this kind of leaseback. You only make money if nothing unexpected happens
in terms of maintenance, and if a student prangs the prop or something you
eat it all.

So in other words, the FBO has agreed to let you take on 100% of the risk of
owning an airplane, will let any jackass with a 1-hour checkout fly it, in
return for which they are guaranteed a profit. If this were a marriage it'd
be considered spousal abuse.

Personally, I think this is the worst leaseback scenario I've ever heard.

Best,
-cwk.


  #10  
Old October 30th 04, 07:05 PM
Aaron Coolidge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Darrel Toepfer wrote:
snipped: mandated ins. by airport comission

: This year the commission suggested that requirement to the city council
: and they approved it. They are in the process of evicting 3 planes
: housed there now. A 172H, '47 Bo and an Extra...

Mandatory insurance with (1) the town, (2) the FBO, (3) the comission
individually named was attempted at my home field last year. The backlash
was so intense from the pilot community that it was quickly dropped.
Several pilots made very effective presentations to the board of selectmen,
who were convinced of the futility of attempting to mandate this.
--
Aaron Coolidge
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Revisiting lapse rates (From: How high is that cloud?) Icebound Instrument Flight Rules 5 November 26th 04 10:41 PM
Dillsburg freight rates to Europe Tom Home Built 0 May 31st 04 11:55 AM
Europe squadrons honored for high retention rates Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 January 10th 04 09:14 PM
Shop Labor Rates (here and there) Craig Prouse Owning 15 September 7th 03 12:24 AM
Trap rates for E-2 and C-2 types ? Pechs1 Naval Aviation 1 July 25th 03 06:51 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.