PDA

View Full Version : SFT, et al - A word of Caution


MALCOLM_DEAN
8th Nov 2001, 19:10
I have just returned from Florida and unfortunately have seen first hand, the distress and worry that has been caused by the difficulties at SFT in particular and other FTO's in general. Indeed there were people who had lost money with PPSC who subsequently lost money with SFT. I have nothing but total sympathy for them and wish them all the luck in the world in trying to recover from this major setback.

I do feel that we should all take a little breath and just sit back and see what can be learnt from the occurrences of the past 3/4 months in the UK flight training arena.

The failures of PPSC, SFT, Four Forces, European Flyers have nothing at all to do with the events of September 11th. ( In common with many other current failures in the aviation industry as a whole !)

Their failures have more to do with the considerably increased costs of operating under JAA regulations and a corresponding lack of revenue due to intense competition driving prices down.

Before anybody cries out, this is not a "crie de couer" from another FTO it is just a dose of reality coming into the argument.The truth of the matter is that many FTO's cannot cover their costs with the prices bandied about in the market at present. The lack of a level playing field between the UK and the USA vis a vis operating costs is also a significant factor.

Handing over a substantial portion of your business to a third party may help you bring your total product cost down to a competitive level, but you have also just reduced you own companies flight hours revenue and as a consequence your UK hourly flight rate indirect costs increase substantially. This then makes it even harder to make money on the training you do provide in the UK.

I, along with Alex Whittingham, Clive Hughes and countless others have consistently tried to warn people of the dangers of parting with substantial funds in advance of any flight training. It is a perilous course of action at the best of times and in the current climate, the cash flow revenue would be like manna from heaven for some organisations. That is the main reason that discounts for up front payment should be avoided like the plague, it's on a par with the double glazing salesman and his " if you sign on the dotted line TODAY I can give you another XX% discount"

The harsh reality of all of these past events is that prices will inevitably rise. The cynics amongst the industry will say that those FTO's left are simply taking the opportunity to increase profits, what the FTO's are really doing is trying to make SOME profit. In the long term, it will benefit the industry as a whole and the surviving FTO's will be fitter and leaner ( God, I wish I was !!).

I really do feel we all ought to think carefully about the postings that we place on pprune.

You will have read on previous threads that veiled references were made to SFT's parlous state in mid August. That thread was closed due to the nature of the way it was being conducted. This may be a rumour factory but the moderators have a responsibility to the industry as a whole to see that anything posted is a legitimate complaint/comment/observation. Unsubstantiated allegations can be extremely damaging to those who are named and devastating to pprune should it result in legal action. The other side of the coin is that it does of course force the moderators to take a stance on the issue. In this particular case, their investigations led them to believe that all was OK with SFT and there was nothing to worry about. That, with hindsight was obviously a bad call. It is however one that would not have had to be made if substantiated allegations had been made.

Finally, there is a requirement under JAA regulations that all FTO's and TRTO's prove they have the financial strength and stability for the courses of training that they currently offer. Other than submitting a declaration once a year, the policing of this is virtually none existant. Indeed I am just waiting for the first phoenix to rise from the ashes of the past few weeks. Not only is this an insult to those who have lost money, it is also galling to those FTO's who are paying their dues and being penalised for doing so. I think the time has come when we should all make representations to the authority that more effort is put into this particular aspect of approvals.


Good luck, Safe flying and above all, hang onto your money until you absolutely have to part with it.

Malcolm Dean
Head of Training
Multiflight

[ 08 November 2001: Message edited by: MALCOLM_DEAN ]

Naples Air Center, Inc.
8th Nov 2001, 19:34
Malcolm,

When a student puts money down at a school for flight training, it is a contract. Whether signed or unsigned, its still a contract. Another point is that contract is only as good as the two people entering into it. I am of the firm believe that yourself, Alex and Clive would make sure all students and vendors were paid before closing your doors. It is the integrity and moral compass of the owner/managers of the school that matters most. No piece of paper will ever replace that.

Sincerely,

Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.
Naples Air Center, Inc.

QUERY
9th Nov 2001, 17:09
Pleading for higher training prices will not impress most people on PPRuNe, which is a Pilots, not a providers, forum.

MD Multiflight says: 'The truth of the matter is that many FTO's cannot cover their costs with the prices bandied about in the market at present.' Surely that is the same in any sector at any time? Companies which are unprofitable, or less efficient than the competition, have only two options- either improve, or 'shut up shop', which is what has happened in the case of the business failures mentioned by Malcolm.
That is the mechanism of any market- it's the same in everything- whether fish and chips, flowers, flying or funerals.

Although current circumstances are definitely difficult for many sectors, inc. flight training, in most countries, reduced demand ought to lead to lower, not higher, prices, in the short-term. It will not have escaped people's attention that fuel costs and instructor pay are reducing- so what should happen to the hourly rate? Significant business failures (and there will be more) cut supply and, in time, any market stabilises at different price and quantity levels- until something else happens !

Malcolm/Multiflight blames JAA and 'the lack of a level playing field between the UK and the USA' but those points are excuses.
JAA may be .... but it affects everyone. Also, CAA/JAA training in the US and other countries is neither new nor even any recent factor in the market. Just check old Pilot mags.- CAA training has been offered in the US for 10 years, if not longer. For example, CAA-PPL courses were advertised for only £1995 for years and Ormond Beach, as well as Naples etc., are still in business but so are plenty of places in the UK, who could obviously compete then and now.

JAA is more costly, than CAA, everywhere but, without wanting to re-open the futile debate about the merits of either-or anywhere !, it is definitely the case that the choice and competition of CAA/JAA training in the US and other countries is good for consumers, however unwelcome it may be to the flying schools and clubs in UK.

Send Clowns
9th Nov 2001, 18:35
I have no comment on this other than to correct one fact. As far as I understand none the students who joined SFT from PPSC lost any money with SFT. They have just finished the modules they had paid for (and had they not, the free training I and my colleagues will be providing would cover up to three weeks of shortfall) and have been sitting exams this week. Good luck to them all, a pleasant if (in the case of S2) rather boisterous bunch to teach.

QUERY
10th Nov 2001, 00:24
A search on Send Clowns, who may be well- intentioned, would confirm an absence of authority, or any claim, to represent anyone and, also, persistent naivety.
It is curious and suspicious that NOBODY (management, administrator etc.) who claims to be currently in charge of the affairs of SFT (an organisation Clowns claims is profitable !), or the moderator, seems to have posted -either to refute any of the rumours and associated concerns and criticisms or just to clarify their position.
Why not?
It is best to be open-minded but wouldn't it be fair to conclude that SFT is now history?

MALCOLM_DEAN
11th Nov 2001, 02:53
Send Clowns,

I take on board your comments, however I must respectfully disagree with you.

I actually met and spoke to two people in Florida who are in this position. I am not prepared to go into individual circumstances but I have no reason to doubt the bona fide nature of their comments or indeed the paperwork they produced to back up their claims.They may, like many PPSC and SFT students have lost money and have yet to darken the doors of their respective training providers.

Query,

Again I take on borad your comments. I would point out that my post is not a plea for highr prices, it is just an observation of what I feel will be the nett result of the changes we have seen.

It is clear from your comments that you are obviously not based in the UK as there certailny has been no reduction of fuel costs here. There has however been a drop of about 25% in fuel costs in the USA over the past 6 weeks or so. Is that your home base ?

As for reducing Instructor salaries. I pay £18.00 per flying hour with a gaurantee of £750.00 per month for PPL Instructors and substantially higher for Commercial Instructors. These are up for review on January 1st as per company policy and I can assure you ( and more importantly those who work for me) that these will NOT be reviewed downwards !!

What are you currently paying ?


Malcolm Dean

[ 10 November 2001: Message edited by: MALCOLM_DEAN ]

QUERY
11th Nov 2001, 05:10
Sorry, Malc., I cannot work out why you say:
'It is clear from your comments that you are obviously not based in the UK' simply because 'there certailny has been no reduction of fuel costs here'.
What I meant was that there has been a significant reduction in petrol prices, around England, and I do travel widely. That led me to presume that wholesale Avgas prices had been reduced in line with that. That is not suggest that you are wrong, when you are, unlike me, a major purchaser of Avgas. The issue here is about that- if petrol has gone down everywhere and, according to you, Avgas has become cheaper in the US, why haven't Avgas prices gone down in the UK?
The answer is rather obvious, so why don't you and others in GA complain to your MP's, the OFT etc. about the anti-competitive arrangement amongst the Avgas suppliers.

On your other point, I am not an employer but whilst your generosity is admirable, you are competing for business against others less generous.

Sensible
11th Nov 2001, 05:27
Query, just for the record, if you are not an employer, what are you? You seem to speak with the authority of an employer in fact I would have guessed that you are running an FBO.

Wee Weasley Welshman
11th Nov 2001, 13:24
I back Malcolms comments all the way.

Wannabes moaning about flying training costs have my sympathy - we have all been there. Me included. In fact next Spring when I buy my Mum a new £5k kitchen then I am finally clear of flying debt...

BUT. If you actually research back you will find that - say - BAe at Prestwick were charging £49k for a CAP 509 course in 1993. In 2001 they are charging £48k for an ab initio ATPL course...

You can't get 'owt for 'nowt lads.

WWW

Naples Air Center, Inc.
11th Nov 2001, 20:46
WWW,

£48k for an ab initio ATPL course is insane. How much of that is Taxes and Fees put on by Governing Authorities? When you take the amount of money you figure is Taxes and Fees, how much of that goes back into the Aviation?

Do not get me wrong, I believe we are over taxed in the U.S. too, just not close to the extent that Europe is.

Every year new taxes are added in the name of improving aviation (where the money collected by the tax is suppose to go to new equipment for Control Towers or new runways) and end up in the general operating fund for the government and ultimately go to other non aviation related programs.

It just bothers me to see people that have to give up on their dream of flight just because they could not afford it. When you look into it, the reality is they could afford the cost of training, just not afford the Government Taxes and Fees which are added on top.

There is one thing the U.K. Government could learn from the U.S. In the U.S., there is no Sales Tax on Flight Training. Given the current state of Flight Training, they should reinstate the NVQ and really be on the way to helping students train in the U.K.

Sincerely,

Capt. Richard J. Gentil, Pres.
Naples Air Center, Inc.

Wee Weasley Welshman
12th Nov 2001, 13:36
Naples. Whilst it would be nice for training costs to go down there is a downside.

In the US training is cheap. And pay is low.

For the first 5 years you are going to earn very little in the US whilst you earn experience and wait to get hired by a 'Major'.

In the UK you can walk straight out of flight school into a LHR based EROPS jet... And I have friends who have done so.

So its either pays your money at the start or pay it over the first 5 years.

Although I concede that the the effective mortgaging of cheaper training by lower pay is a more economically democratic system it ain't going to happen in JAA land anytime soon.

The US has lower taxes than the EU. Period.

Cheers,

WWW

QUERY
12th Nov 2001, 23:20
I am, fortunately !, not running any FTO but I am becoming confused about what those who are (and WWW) expect.
WWW is correct (but isn't walking straight into a wonderful job rare now?) in that job prospects and pay will be better for pilots, in the long term, if supply is restricted because training is elitist (sponsored) and expensive (self-funded).
That has been the case in UK but competition has been increasing. Changed requirements and 'hidden extras' complicate precise comparisons but, based on prices advertised in Pilot, they do seem to be less in real terms that they were ten or five years ago.
Is that good, or bad, and for whom?
With BMI just announcing that it is to become a low cost operation (no prizes for guessing how!), the UK market will become more like the US and cannot return to the fatcat BOAC/BEA days.

On the flying school front, Malcolm points out that many were already marginal or going bust soon. There will be more flying school failures but that is needed for stability and viability for the survivors. As usual, some are cutting competitors' throats, with even lower prices, but it is not true that a low price must be ludicrous or unprofitable for everyone everywhere, because any business is always more or less efficient than its competitors.

Pub landlords have been predicting the imminent downfall of 'too cheap' Wetherspoons for years but they are still in business and growing. In the 1990's, the flying club fogies made the same sort of prediction about those offering £1995 CAA PPL courses but they are still in business with cheap JAA PPL courses.
Also, in any training business, running a course for £x might be financial suicide with less than ten students, break-even with twenty, but highly profitable with thirty.

P.S. any news of the rescue of 'profitable' SFT from its receivers?