Originally Posted by 'India-Mike
Far be it from me to disagree with Genghis
but I'd take a slightly more pessimistic view of a group that's expanding from say 6 to say 8. Trying to get fixed costs down methinks, which could be a sign of something sinister rather than beneficial. Also, what's happening to the additional share capital?
Group ownership can be fantastic when it works well amongst a bunch of like-minded individuals. But there's no beating the fact that the best group is a group of one. I'm both, and the latter is much better (until you have to meet big capital expenditure!)
Good luck whatever you choose.
You've never worried about disagreeing with me before I-M, and I think I'd worry if you agreed with me too often.
Twice I've been involved in an expanding syndicate, once as a founder member, the second as somebody buying in. Both times the reasons were the same - the aeroplane just wasn't getting flown enough, and yes that was pushing the fixed costs up and everybody wanted to get them down.
But, in the one I was a founder of, both before and after, I rarely had trouble getting the aeroplane when I wanted -and in the one I joined, I think once in 6 months I've failed to get it when I wanted it. In both cases of-course, that was apart from maintenance downtime - which would occur with any syndicate.
Like I-M, I'm also both, I own a whole aeroplane, 1/12th and 1/8th; the aeroplane with the worst availability is the one I own outright, 'cos there's nobody to share the problem-solving with. (But that particular aeroplane, I just enjoy too much to share!).
G