Airventure Australia bans AvPlan from attending? Really? [Archive]

Shagpile

8th Aug 2017, 07:24

Guys don't believe everything you read. As always, the devil is in the detail.

OzRunways offered to support the AirVenture airshow in March as a major sponsor, when nobody else would. Everybody was offered sponsorship in a variety of forms, big & small. OzRunways is still the only sponsor (although organisers are in talks with CASA & QBE).

Later, the organisers needed more money. Other industry groups were approached, multiple times, but declined to support the airshow (and we're not talking $500 for a table). They asked us again for more money with an offer of exclusivity, which we accepted. And this is not play money - we're talking tens of thousands. Now, OzRunways is STILL THE ONLY SUPPORTER of this airshow, and I tell you - it's hanging by a thread with all this bull**** talk of guerrilla marketing to make us look bad for not inviting freeloaders.

Let me be clear: We will gladly go non-exclusive if others can step in and become sponsors -- that is, to share the financial burden of running this thing. It doesn't run on hopes & dreams; it requires dollars. Like $10,000 or $20,000 per sponsor, across multiple sponsors.

Please direct your anger at the appropriate organisation, because we're quickly losing interest at being the sole supporter of this event if there's going to be blowback at not inviting a freeloader to the party. What we want to see is EVERYBODY put in significant funds to run these airshows, EVERYBODY invited, then we can all get back to wearing ray ban aviators and high fiving each other.

dhavillandpilot

8th Aug 2017, 07:28

Have any of you ever heard of ambush marketing?

That is exactly what is happening to oz runways.

The Olympic Games suffers this and fights back

If av plan was genuine they could have stumped up sponsorship money, but no they just want to benifit from a competitors sponsorship

My understanding oz runways would be happy to include avplan in a combined sponsorship

The alternative would have been no sponsorship and no air adventure

I'll leave it to the readers what they would prefer

Shagpile

8th Aug 2017, 07:36

My understanding oz runways would be happy to include avplan in a combined sponsorship

Yes that is the case.

IFEZ

8th Aug 2017, 07:41

Well said Shagpile. I can see how this would really p*** you off.

Come on AvPlan - stump up the cash and join the party.

In the mean time, I'll continue to use OzRunways as my preferred EFB http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Ixixly

8th Aug 2017, 08:34

Out of interest Shagpile, to hopefully put this to rest, Avplan are claiming on their Blog Post on the 07/08 that they were not formally approached to provide sponsorship this year? You can confirm that this is indeed not the truth?

I'm an Ozrunways user myself and recommend them to anyone asking but I am curious and would love to see this said in no uncertain manner to put the naysayers to bed.

kaz3g

8th Aug 2017, 09:44

Perhaps they could have been proactive and offered to provide a sponsorship?

I use OzRunways on two devices and it is the best thing that has happened to aviation since the GPS became available for the masses.

Kaz

MilFlyer

8th Aug 2017, 10:06

Guys don't believe everything you read. As always, the devil is in the detail.

...It doesn't run on hopes & dreams; it requires dollars. Like $10,000 or $20,000 per sponsor, across multiple sponsors.

Hi Shagpile. No problems at all - can you publish how much you paid for "exclusive" sponsorship. I'm pretty sure it isn't $10k.

Please direct your anger at the appropriate organisation

I thought I was. Can you confirm that AirVentures offered you exclusive sponsorship or did you offer it? When I say "offered" it, they were the ones to suggest that they would exclude your competitors? from even attending the entire event or having a trade booth? That is not how typical "Platinum" sponsorship works at events.

MilFlyer

8th Aug 2017, 10:10

Have any of you ever heard of ambush marketing?

Precluding a company from PAYING for a trade booth at a show is hardly "Ambush marketing" :rolleyes:

My understanding oz runways would be happy to include avplan in a combined sponsorship

How did you come to that understanding?

Shagpile

8th Aug 2017, 10:23

You can confirm that this is indeed not the truth?

We have been advised by the organisers that yes sponsorship was offered and was declined.

We've been fielding calls from industry all day over this rock show of misinformation & propaganda, and it's put the entire airshow at risk.

Lead Balloon

8th Aug 2017, 10:25

MilFlyer

Do you have any pecuniary interest or employment or corporate management role in either OzR, AvP or the Airventure organisation? I don't.

I'm just trying to work out the motivations for your outrage on this.

GA air shows in Australia these days are effectively glorified Aeroclub fly-ins, organised by volunteers who try their best to make it work. Some fancy themselves as important wheelers and dealers, but they generally aren't. I reckon EFB subscriptions out of attendance at Airventure in Australia would be chump change compared with the usual media through which people choose and subscribe to an EFB. I can therefore understand the dilemma faced by OzR and AvP and the temptation to just shrug and say: Screw spending money on this.

clouddancingbo

8th Aug 2017, 10:28

Lead Balloon

8th Aug 2017, 11:29

Any conflicts of interests clouddancingbo? I'm always suspicious of first posts that don't ask about how to get a pilot's licence.

Let's all dedicate energy to an argument about who's right and who's wrong about sponsorship arrangements for this event. Not sure who benefits. I'll do my best to get there, but I can only imagine AvP's level of motivation to do the same after returning from Oshkosh.

Ixixly

8th Aug 2017, 11:38

Sounds like AvPlan are the ones in the wrong here, from most accounts except theirs they've been offered Sponsorship and declined for whatever reason, AirVenture have then decided to try and do what they could to save the show which was offer OzRunways the deal that they've taken and in response they've started a campaign of misinformation.

I think the outrage here Lead Balloon is that OzRunways haven't done this as a "Business" thing, you're probably right that the subscriptions they'd get from such an event are miniscule compared to what they get from Advertising and Word of Mouth, from all accounts they've done this because they don't want to see this Airshow fail but AvPlan have taken it as an opportunity to put out a smear campaign. If they decided the money wasn't worth being spent, cool, no problems. OzRunways decided it was worth it and took the opportunity and now it seems AvPlan are annoyed because they assumed somewhere along the line that they'd be entitled to go and now aren't.

In my opinion I'd say it's time for someone to leak a couple of emails and put the whole thing to bed and let this be about an Airshow that we can all enjoy instead of someone trying to bring it down by running a smear campaign.

Lead Balloon

8th Aug 2017, 12:23

If AvP is in the wrong here and engaging in a deliberate 'smear campaign', I'll send an email to Bevan expressing my disappointment.

If.

Will it cause the end of GA as we know it? No.

There are many reasons for the lack of sponsors for Airventure Australia. Those are the stark realities of an industry in its death throes as a consequence of consecutive stultifying mediocrities that Australia has called governments for the last couple of decades.

MilFlyer

8th Aug 2017, 12:59

MilFlyer

Do you have any pecuniary interest or employment or corporate management role in either OzR, AvP or the Airventure organisation? I don't.

I'm just trying to work out the motivations for your outrage on this.

Me neither. Take a wild stab in the dark from my name where my interests are :mad:

I just *know* this kind of bull**** isn't normal. To pretend that OzRunways is some kind of White knight savior is equally dumb.

It is *NOT* normal for this to occur at trade shows in aviation or other businesses. I'm simply asking if this was the stupidity of the organisers of the show (did they OFFER this or did OzRunways request it )

It seems that the ShagPile bloke is connected to OzRunways so he can answer this question.

Most that talk about "sponsorship offering" have clearly never attended a trade show. It doesn't work like that. There are sponsorship levels that you can purchase. They pretty much *NEVER* offer an exclusion of other businesses. If you disagree with this statement, please link some media kits from another event that describes it.

So, back to my question.

Did AirVenture Australia OFFER to exclude the competitors of the major sponsor, or did OzRunways request it?

Simple question, no?

We have been advised by the organisers that yes sponsorship was offered and was declined. That's not how it works, and for you to suggest otherwise is demonstrably false. Are you suggesting AvPlan were informed 'Would you like to be the premier sponsor, if not you can't even have a booth'? No, you aren't because I'm willing to bet a substantial amount of money that that's false.

We've been fielding calls from industry all day over this rock show of misinformation & propaganda, and it's put the entire airshow at risk.

Of course. The RAAF Roulettes are about to pull out on the basis of your PR stuff-up. I call bull****. The show will go ahead with or without you. You know that. I know that. AirVentures know that.

Shagpile, just answer this:

Did AirVenture Australia OFFER to exclude the competitors of the major sponsor, or did OzRunways request it?

Ixixly

8th Aug 2017, 14:20

MilFlyer, you've mentioned Trade Shows, this isn't a Trade Show though, is it? Trade Shows NEED to have as many companies as they can, that's what attracts people is the ability to shop around.

This is an Event, an Aviation Event where they bring together different parts of the Industry in the best way they can. This required them to have the money to get it up and running which from what has been said it sounds like they were struggling to raise. It's just like an AFL Match, Four & Twenty are Major Sponsors, so guess which Pies you find there? Coca Cola are a Major Sponsor, guess which Drinks you'll be finding there? (FYI, have't been to a match in a while, no idea if they're even the current sponsors but you get the point!)

OzRunways offered to be a Sponsor back in March and what they've said is that AvPlan decided NOT to be a Sponsor, likely they wanted to just be an Exhibitor. Air Venture found themselves coming up short and put out word that they didn't have enough Sponsors and needed Sponsors or a Major Sponsor, not just people wanting Stall Spaces.

OzRunways stepped in to help secure the event going ahead as they felt this was something they wanted to do and this was based on terms offered by Air Venture. Should they have turned around and said "We're very sorry, we don't think these terms are fair to our competitors so we'd rather not and potentially have the event not go ahead..."? Who would that benefit then?

Even if they had asked for Exclusive Rights as opposed to being offered them, who cares?! They stumped up the cash, as Lead Balloon said, Money Talks.

And I agree Lead Balloon, it's not the end of GA, but for whatever reason OzRunways have decided to give it a crack and dish out the cash, I don't think they deserve this smear campaign from AvPlan making it sound like they've done something sneaky or underhanded. From what I've seen around, the way they've been putting it to people is like OzRunways Team deliberately did this just to spite them and that would cost them money for the wrong reasons.

And why would the RAAF Roulettes pull out of an Event because it's Major Sponsor has exclusivity over one small portion? Especially when the ADF uses OzRunways?! Also I wouldn't describe it as a PR Stuff Up at all, infact I'd say only a small number of potential attendees would even be aware of it and of those aware it probably wouldn't sway the majority of them. Hasn't made News Headlines at all and barely made a 2 page thread on here, even on Facebook only a tiny number of responses.

Arctaurus

8th Aug 2017, 19:33

Let's not allow the facts to get in the way of a good story.

Avplan was not formally approached for sponsorship.

Whether or not OZ Runways was complicit in an arrangement to lock out a competitor - I have no idea.

But the way it's been managed suggests something has gone badly adrift. This is not good publicity for OZ Runways either.

If the air show can't sustain the level of sponsorship required, the organisers (RAAus, APF, SAAA) need to re think the real purpose of this event, and stop trying to make it something it's not.

As a smaller "fly in" for this group of aviators, an annual event is ideal, but to upscale it requires serious support (sponsorship and appearances) and it seems this just isn't happening.

Sunfish

8th Aug 2017, 22:32

I am faced with an Eight hour drive to Narromine. I have yet to try for accommodation and I won't use a tent again. I last went in 2015, it was worthwhile....just..

my interests are:

- the C of A issue process for experimental.

- getting a few hours in a Savannah or equivalent if the opportunity presents.

- update on MPC refresher training.

- maybe learning something and maybe buying something.

- looking at the pretty aircraft.

I note an entity called "air ventures" is running the event. Who are they? What happened to SAAA? Is there even going to be any presence from SAAA? RAA? CASA? AsA? Is this 'event" going to be anything more then a crummy airshow in a country town in the middle of nowhere?

That is 16 hours driving and I am starting to feel that maybe its not worth the effort after reading this thread.

I suppose Narromine was chosen because its equally hard to get to from anywhere.

Dale Hardale

8th Aug 2017, 22:42

Sunfish:

What you say is what this event should really be all about.

Everyone seems to be overtaken by a desire to make this airshow something it's not possible to be.

Other factors - Accommodation, location etc etc are real issues to many people. A smaller event that re-focuses on what RAAus, APF, SAAA have as their core interest and values is probably a good thing.

Egipps

8th Aug 2017, 23:11

I note an entity called "air ventures" is running the event. Who are they? What happened to SAAA? Is there even going to be any presence from SAAA? RAA? CASA? AsA? Is this 'event" going to be anything more then a crummy airshow in a country town in the middle of nowhere?

Hi, I'm assuming the same organisation that ran OzKosh last year. From the airventure website. AirVenture Australia (http://airventureaustralia.com.au/)

WHAT'S HAPPENING?
It's more than just planes. It's a celebration of flight!

RAAus, SAAA and APF are pleased to bring you AirVenture Australia (AVA) 2017. Building on the success of 2016, this year’s event is certainly designed to offer something for everyone. An assortment of seminars for young, old, experienced and novice aviators. A comprehensive aviation exhibition space where if you can think of it, you’ll find it. Top all this off with an airshow that will blow your sock off and you will start to see why AVA 2017 can’t be missed. Sign up now for updates, or visit again soon. Tickets on sale August.

no_one

8th Aug 2017, 23:44

Hi, I'm assuming the same organisation that ran OzKosh last year. From the airventure website. AirVenture Australia (http://airventureaustralia.com.au/)

WHAT'S HAPPENING?
It's more than just planes. It's a celebration of flight!

RAAus, SAAA and APF are pleased to bring you AirVenture Australia (AVA) 2017. Building on the success of 2016, this year’s event is certainly designed to offer something for everyone. An assortment of seminars for young, old, experienced and novice aviators. A comprehensive aviation exhibition space where if you can think of it, you’ll find it. Top all this off with an airshow that will blow your sock off and you will start to see why AVA 2017 can’t be missed. Sign up now for updates, or visit again soon. Tickets on sale August.

My understanding is that SAAA last ran the event in 2015 as "Ausfly". Since then it has been run by a separate group of people, many of whom were the previous organisers. This was to allow the event to transition from being an SAAA event to being an event for all the different aviation groups. The event receives support from SAAA, RAAus, APF and others...

With this background I can understand why they wanted to change the name from Ausfly but it would be good if they could at least come up with something that doesn't cause confusion with everyone you talk to about the event.

Old Akro

8th Aug 2017, 23:51

Exclusive sponsorship's are not new or uncommon. But it should only relate to sponsorship, not other commercial dealings.

If Air Venture are refusing to deal with AvPlan commercially (ie not allowing AvPlan to take a display booth) at the direction of a third party (ie Ozrunways), then this sounds very much like third line forcing to me which is against the trade practices act and actionable in the Federal Court.

Frankly, I think its a naive and clumsy move by both AirVenture and OzRunways in such a small community as aviation. Its guaranteed to disenfranchise someone.

Ozrunways would be justified in wanting a marketing advantage from being the major sponsor (and if their assertion is correct only sponsor), but there are many smarter ways to do it.

I count 14 sponsors on previous AusFly posters. Are OzRunways really the only ones prepared to return as sponsors?

Lead Balloon

8th Aug 2017, 23:57

Doesn't seem to me that OzR 'directed' anything. They were offered exclusivity as the quid pro quo for paying a lot more money in sponsorship:Later, the organisers needed more money. Other industry groups were approached, multiple times, but declined to support the airshow (and we're not talking $500 for a table). They asked us again for more money with an offer of exclusivity, which we accepted.A tip for the future, OzR: In matters commercial, no kind act goes unpunished.

Old Akro

9th Aug 2017, 00:51

Doesn't seem to me that OzR 'directed' anything. They were offered exclusivity as the quid pro quo for paying a lot more money in sponsorship:A tip for the future, OzR: In matters commercial, no kind act goes unpunished.

My point is that exclusivity of sponsorship is one thing and a fair go. Refusing a different commercial relationship (ie renting a trade display stand) is a different thing.

The smarter strategic thing is to refuse AvPlans sponsorship, sell them a trade stand then for Ozrunways to use its sponsorship relationship to swamp AvPlan's visibility.

The Ozrunways sponsorship of AirVenture is commercial not philanthropic. Otherwise they wouldn't care about the prominent branding they are getting or excluding competitors.

I have no concern with OzRunways sponsorship of Air Venture. I am quite agnostic. But it doesn't look like it's been done very strategically.

Arctaurus

9th Aug 2017, 02:15

Are OzRunways really the only ones prepared to return as sponsors?

Perhaps other sponsors can't see the value in it - If that's the case, the organisers need to re think the whole thing.

Even if someone has crossed the line vis a vis the Trade Practices Act, no one is the winner and it drags everyone down.:ugh:

Shagpile

9th Aug 2017, 03:36

OzRunways has withdrawn major sponsorship of the event and will be a regular attendee.

Official statement here:
https://www.facebook.com/OzRunways/posts/1403117613107528

steveanz

9th Aug 2017, 03:37

Wow, what a shame that OzRunways have had to withdraw.

Now at least everyone knows that Avplan will step up to the plate with the same sponsorship now that the event has lost it...

spinex

9th Aug 2017, 04:14

I think Old Akro summed it up very neatly; there are no winners in this debacle. I've used both programs at various times and don't have a horse in the race, but I think we would all be the poorer if there wasn't the competition between them.

Cloudee

9th Aug 2017, 10:13

Wow, what a shame that OzRunways have had to withdraw.

Now at least everyone knows that Avplan will step up to the plate with the same sponsorship now that the event has lost it...

"had to withdraw"? Reads to me they chose to withdraw.

Clare Prop

9th Aug 2017, 11:07

RA Aus have made a statement on their facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/RAAus/posts/1911710245750869

Better late than never. OZrunways peeps shouldn't have had to defend themselves against the lynch mob without the support of the organisers. All rather badly handled IMO and a pity if this means the event can't go ahead as I'm sure a lot of work would have gone into it so far.

Horatio Leafblower

9th Aug 2017, 11:27

The Ozrunways sponsorship of AirVenture is commercial not philanthropic. Otherwise they wouldn't care about the prominent branding they are getting or excluding competitors.

Exactly.

Wasn't AOPA going to the event? Are they still going?

Is Paul Bennett going? No? Why?

Is the head of RAAus an ex F111 driver?

Is the Minister for Transport's Aviation advisor an ex F111 Navigator, ex Liberal Party candidate for the ACT elections, and the wife of Darren Chester's Chief of Staff?

Lead Balloon

9th Aug 2017, 11:53

I do hope you're not suggesting that political interests and connections may explain otherwise inexplicable behaviour, HL?

Political interests and connections would never influence these matters.

Horatio Leafblower

9th Aug 2017, 12:08

I do hope you're not suggesting that political interests and connections may explain otherwise inexplicable behaviour, HL?

I don't know anything about RAAus's leadership but I am certain that they have no National Party links.

I am sure there is no National Party influence.

I am sure that the dots you have connected in your mind are, in reality, totally unconnected.

Nothing to see here.

gerry111

9th Aug 2017, 14:28

Just as things couldn't get any worse for Australian GA, the manufacturers of both excellent EFB systems turned against one another..

spinex

9th Aug 2017, 17:54

Oh they've been sniping at each other for years - that's fine in my book, a bit of commercial competition is healthy, but the greater pity is that the aviation community has rushed to choose sides.

Talking about sides, I can't help noticing that this thread was earlier locked, despite a generally polite discussion. Did the way the discussion was headed not suit someone?

Jabberwocky82

9th Aug 2017, 20:32

Reading the Facebook pages of both company's of late has been some what laughable. So many are so easily to be offended, and the loss of a few ignorants, with their pitchforks in hand, here and there will not affect either's bottom line. In a month or so no will will remember these events and business will go along as usual.

The statement released by RAAus does seem to put some solidarity to the OzR story... Kind of hard for AvPlan to defend against that. The real sadness is that one individual has taken it upon themselves to get involved beyond their needs and basically ruined the security of the event.

And perhaps, maybe it's just not a viable event in the first place..?

Ixixly

9th Aug 2017, 22:20

Can MilFlyer please step back in and revise his posts?

Especially the line "Of course. The RAAF Roulettes are about to pull out on the basis of your PR stuff-up. I call bull****. The show will go ahead with or without you. You know that. I know that. AirVentures know that."

Looks like without them it may indeed not go ahead after all despite what you claim to know.

tail wheel

9th Aug 2017, 22:35

Talking about sides, I can't help noticing that this thread was earlier locked, despite a generally polite discussion. Did the way the discussion was headed not suit someone?

A change of events caused a change of decision.

Nothing more, nothing less. :=

Sunfish

9th Aug 2017, 22:59

I hate to have to say it, but.....

If CASA wants to do something to change the negative perceptions that surround it in the GA world, it has just been handed a golden opportunity....

Step in right now and become the major sponsor for Ozkosh and save the event.

Whatever it costs, it is a small part of your marketing communications budget and in terms of bang for buck you will never have a better opportunity to effectively change industry perceptions.

Charlie Foxtrot India

10th Aug 2017, 01:41

Old Akro

10th Aug 2017, 03:30

If CASA wants to do something to change the negative perceptions that surround it in the GA world, it has just been handed a golden opportunity....

The used to sponsor AusFly

Old Akro

10th Aug 2017, 04:08

The statement released by RAAus does seem to put some solidarity to the OzR story... Kind of hard for AvPlan to defend against that.

Jaba, I trust that all the statements by the various parties are factual. And I think they don't contradict each other, but they are all talking about slightly different things. As I read the bare facts nothing OzRunways or RAAus has said contradicts or rebuts AvPlan's complaint:

1. For whatever reason past sponsors didn't seem prepared to support AirVenture 2017
2. Ozrunways stepped into the void and became prime sponsor.
3. AvPlan did not seek to take a sponsorship package - nor have I seen anything from them that complains about this.
4. The Avplan complaint is that they sought to take a commercial booth at AirVenture to represent their product in some way. This was rejected by AirVenture.
5. The agreement between OzRunways and Air Venture - which was leaked by one of the parties involved - precludes OzRunways competitors from taking a trade both at the show (as distinct from being a sponsor). One would assume that this prohibition would extend to include Jeppesen and AirServices Australia and possible Garmin - all of whom are OzRunways competitors in one way or another. I assume they have been smart enough that the contract not to single out AvPlan.

Personally, I find the prospect that you would exclude anyone from taking a trade booth or indeed giving them a speaking slot is extraordinary. I cant recall that I've ever attended an exhibition that has been like this. And you don't need to look any further than Airshows Downunder to see a whole patchwork of competitors with different levels of sponsorship, trade booths, speaking engagements, etc.

Australia is a small market and aviation is even a smaller community. OzRunways & AvPlan seem to have differentiated marketing that means (in my perception) they are not quire head to head. You need be able to abide with competitors.

I don't understand why you wouldn't let AvPlan have their trade booth. OzRunways has the upper hand with its major sponsorship. They could have made AvPlan look weak in comparison.

Instead everyone looks like petulant kids and the organisers look fractured.

Egipps

10th Aug 2017, 04:38

Sorry for the full quote. But in the absence of a like or agree button I would like to say I like your post.

Jaba, I trust that all the statements by the various parties are factual. And I think they don't contradict each other, but they are all talking about slightly different things. As I read the bare facts nothing OzRunways or RAAus has said contradicts or rebuts AvPlan's complaint:

1. For whatever reason past sponsors didn't seem prepared to support AirVenture 2017
2. Ozrunways stepped into the void and became prime sponsor.
3. AvPlan did not seek to take a sponsorship package - nor have I seen anything from them that complains about this.
4. The Avplan complaint is that they sought to take a commercial booth at AirVenture to represent their product in some way. This was rejected by AirVenture.
5. The agreement between OzRunways and Air Venture - which was leaked by one of the parties involved - precludes OzRunways competitors from taking a trade both at the show (as distinct from being a sponsor). One would assume that this prohibition would extend to include Jeppesen and AirServices Australia and possible Garmin - all of whom are OzRunways competitors in one way or another. I assume they have been smart enough that the contract not to single out AvPlan.

Personally, I find the prospect that you would exclude anyone from taking a trade booth or indeed giving them a speaking slot is extraordinary. I cant recall that I've ever attended an exhibition that has been like this. And you don't need to look any further than Airshows Downunder to see a whole patchwork of competitors with different levels of sponsorship, trade booths, speaking engagements, etc.

Australia is a small market and aviation is even a smaller community. OzRunways & AvPlan seem to have differentiated marketing that means (in my perception) they are not quire head to head. You need be able to abide with competitors.

I don't understand why you wouldn't let AvPlan have their trade booth. OzRunways has the upper hand with its major sponsorship. They could have made AvPlan look weak in comparison.

Instead everyone looks like petulant kids and the organisers look fractured.

IFEZ

10th Aug 2017, 04:51

I sincerely hope that the event goes ahead despite all this.

Sunfish - I like your idea. Good PR, repair a few bridges perhaps. As long as they don't stuff it up by doing a gestapo ramp check effort like they do at Avalon.

Derfred

10th Aug 2017, 04:54

Personally, I find the prospect that you would exclude anyone from taking a trade booth or indeed giving them a speaking slot is extraordinary.

I think OzRunways have just worked this out. Unfortunately it was a very public lesson.

Welcome to the power of social media, which can be extremely unforgiving when it comes to matters of a fair go.

I also struggle to believe all these references to OzRunways "generosity". It was a commercial decision to seek to block their competitor from exhibiting, and it was another commercial decision to pull out when the first decision turned out to be a poor one.

I have no skin in this game, but I have a pretty good bull**** detector.

spinex

10th Aug 2017, 08:46

Spinex I locked the thread temporarily as I could see where it was heading and wasn't going to be available to mod for a few hours so I suggested people continue their discussion/look for info on facebook.

For the record I understand they are both good products but I am too much of a luddite to use either of them effectively so have no preference. If you want to accuse mods of vested interests go ahead but not on this BB.

Probably as well to ensure your version meshes with that of your colleague above, before reading things into what I wrote. I too have no strong preference, nor any affiliation with either - just an interested bystander infuriated by the powers that be, essentially opening their mouths to change feet, again.

Dogimed

10th Aug 2017, 09:47

Its a bit hypocritical to accuse one team of being evil, or malicious when they were offered a sponsor spot which they took. They were asked to cough up some more money which they did. Sounds like good business practice to me. The only reason they were allowed to 'win' on the day was because the other team forfeited their position. Cant complain about the reffing if you were not on the field in the first place.

All those having a go at Oz Runways perhaps should take a moment to reflect and consider directing their angst at their 'team' EFB for not supporting them in their industry by putting money forward for sponsorship.

I think there is a clear winner of who was willing to put money into this industry and who wasn't. If you are arguing semantics about whether Ozrunways got a pound of flesh for their deal, who cares... they were putting money into it when others weren't.

Dog

le Pingouin

10th Aug 2017, 11:48

This has surfaced with 9 weeks to run to the event? Sounds like AvPlan got caught out being late to the party and are a little peeved.

Ixixly

10th Aug 2017, 12:00

Old Akro, your post is factual except for one thing, AvPlan have continued to claim they were never formally approached by Air Ventures for Sponsorship and in doing so make it out like they were shut out without being given the opportunity to participate.

OzRunways and now the SAAAs version sounds like they were given the opportunity and declined and then AvPlan decided to make themselves out to be the victims of some sort of backstabbing, this is the part that gets me agitated and is the part that has caused all the problems essentially.

Old Akro

10th Aug 2017, 21:34

Ixixly,

All I know is what I read in the various statements. What I read in the statements is at odds with what I see both OzRunways & AvPlan accused of.

I have not seen AvPlan complain of being locked out of sponsorship. They seem to be happy not being a sponsor.

But they say clearly that they wanted to participate by paying money to have a trade stand and are aggrieved that they were blocked from this.

I used to know the old Trade Practices Act better that all but a few specialist lawyers. I'm not very familiar with the new act, but prima facie this behavior would have been illegal under the old act and I suspect (but don't know) the new act also. I think AvPlan are justifiably aggrieved by this. I would be too. And if the boot was on the other foot, OzRunways.

AvPlan have made a statement that there were not FORMALLY approached about sponsorship. As I read their statement, this statement was not framed in the sense of a complaint.

I have run airshows, and car races. I have been marketing director for a major consumer brand and been a major sponsor of much bigger events than AirVenture. I've operated on both sides of sponsorship's. I know how it works. My guess would be that there were exploratory phone calls or meetings but that the follow-up of a formal package detailed in writing was never done. I would never make a decision until I had a sponsorship package formally detailed. I don't expect anyone else would.

Sponsorship's are commercial decisions. Its basically done with advertising funds. Event sponsorship must give better value than the same amount of money being spent on advertising and other marketing activities. If it does, there will be a queue of sponsors. If not there won't be.

From what I know of the people at both OzRunways and AvPlan they are good, honest people with good intent. I accept that the statements made by both are truthful, but I think many are reading meaning into both statements that goes beyond the words used.

KRviator

11th Aug 2017, 03:54

My guess would be that there were exploratory phone calls or meetings but that the follow-up of a formal package detailed in writing was never done. I would never make a decision until I had a sponsorship package formally detailed. I don't expect anyone else would.Could well be the case indeed, but then it makes me wonder if the initial phone call/email/smoke signals were along the lines of "Are you interested in sponsoring AVA?", "Nope", "Ok, thanks anyway" and that's the end of it so far as the AVA organisers are concerned.

If that is how it went down, I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised, but in saying that, AvPlan can't really complain they were never 'formally' asked to sponsor it if they knocked back an initial informal request to do so. Why then, would the organisers waste time sending paperwork to a company that may have already said no?

And, with everything now coming out, why have AvPlan not put their side of the story forward, instead sticking only with their "We were never formally asked" commentary? It is this silence, in conjunction with this statement that makes me wonder. I note they have since removed said comment from their FB feed, too....

Ixixly

11th Aug 2017, 08:50

Old Akro, all fair points and I bow to your experience and wisdom in such matters and to be perfectly honest, with your background, I suspect you know some of the players in this and perhaps a bit more about what are the possible going ons behind the scenes.

From a lay persons point of view this seems more like an Event than some sort of Trade Show or some such and I am curious as to why there would be any legal reasons as to why an event holder is unable to legally have an exclusive right to the show in return for their sponsorship? Is there an easy way to explain it? Someone brought up the analogy of say AFL Matches, sponsors such as Coca Cola or Four n Twenty having exclusive rights, I would have thought this would be similar to that?

triadic

11th Aug 2017, 11:15

Go to Oshkosh and try and buy a Coke... Pepsi yes and the opposition don't (or didn't) get a Guernsey!:ugh:

Jabawocky

11th Aug 2017, 21:50

I am not involved, but having been the guy who ran it for years, and knowing all the players this is my take on it.

Both were formally and face to face offered. Avplan declined.

OzRunways stepped up and were not excluding but wanting to "moderate any competitive exhibitor" or something like that so they did not get hijacked. Think OSH or V8SC. I don't know what contracts were in place but this is the generalised I guess.

I do know leaking of a contract to non exhibitor and non organising groups happened and that is where the **** hit the fan. The leaker is the bad guy and not so much Avplan and OzRunways. The Avplan folk were not smart how they did this I might add and Bevan is a friend along with a couple of OzR guys. So no taking sides from me.

Everyone needs to direct there anger at the moron who did what he shouldn't have. No names but I am 100% sure who it was.....leopards don't change there spots and my guess is bankable for at least the value of a chocky frog. It will no doubt come out in the wash and if my hunch is correct I will be able to provide insight into it. They guy has form. Sadly.

megan

12th Aug 2017, 00:25

Go to Oshkosh and try and buy a Coke... Pepsi yes and the opposition don't (or didn't) get a GuernseyDon't know if it's still the case, but EAA negotiated with the service providers and agreed on the price that customers would be charged, whether it be food, drink etc. It was Coke who had the concession in my day, and price was one third of what you would pay at a football game. The EAA emphasis was on the family and affordability, not price gouging, and EAA ensured providers did not use it as a grand profit making exercise.

mcoates

12th Aug 2017, 06:43

Megan, you obviously are not very familiar with Oshkosh and it's operations and never been 'behind the scenes' as an exhibitor ?

LeadSled

12th Aug 2017, 08:18

Folks,
All very sad, and more than anything, a reflection of the parlous state of light aviation in Australia today.

Even more so, if we reflect on the "good old days" when NATFLY at Narromine over an Easter would attract over a 1000 aircraft, more than a third of them "conventional" GA aircraft, despite NATFLY being the annual gathering of RAOz (nee AUF).

Indeed, on one occasion, on the Saturday afternoon, I personally counted just under 600 aircraft on the ground at one time, almost 200 being GA aircraft. With swarms of aircraft in the air.

There is plenty of blame to share around, that such a gathering now seems impossible in Australia. This current debacle is just the current manifestation.

Short sighted local councils, various "alphabet soup" organisations lacking effective imagination and ambition, financially debilitated industry players due to to the decline of the sector, and, of course, our friends CASA spreading "Joy thru' Enforcement", scaring flying visitors away (just like recent Avalons) with rampant ramp checks.

Tootle pip!!

Jabawocky

12th Aug 2017, 11:16

Your highlighted words are the entire reason RAAus folk never fly in. I have spoken to hundreds over time and they all say even if i do the right thing i just don't want the hassle.

My prediction is this will be canned by early next week. I am joining the dots and many here will know my dot generator is likely to be on spec. I may be surprised though.

rutan around

12th Aug 2017, 21:47

even if I do the right thing i just don't want the hassle.It ain't just the RAA guys Jabba. A lot of GA pilots feel the the same.

It's like when you have a cop car following you. You try to do the right thing but you are not comfortable because if they want to be nasty there are too many infringements that are subjective. eg number plate too dull, tyre looks worn, not keeping far enough left etc.

With airshows it's easier and more comfortable to stay home and spend the fuel money on half a carton and a good red. To my less kind friends who will say I must be a bad ass to think this way it may be of interest that I have been ramped twice in some 6,000 hours and got off scot free.http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gifBoth ramping episodes were not at airshows.

Sunfish

12th Aug 2017, 22:18

A ramp inspection is a thinly disguised fishing operation. it has nothing to do with safety at all. i will not fly anywhere if there is a high probability of a ramp inspection at the destination.

I am also questioning my own decision to fly at all. Every two years there is the need for the bFR, the medical and the ASIC that i have to justify.

rjtjrt

12th Aug 2017, 22:49

CASA ramp checking at Airshow sums up CASA as an organisation - stupid and counterproductive.

no_one

13th Aug 2017, 00:46

As I posted at the link below the FAA don't do blanket ramp checks at airshows. They know that they lose more respect by heavy handed enforcement.

http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/591660-avalon-ramp-checks.html?post9692749#post9692749

megan

13th Aug 2017, 01:10

mcoates, not involved, but what I was told when inquired of the EAA at one of the shows. On the basis of your info the EAA rep didn't know what he was talking about. I know not.

Band a Lot

13th Aug 2017, 01:40

Reading all that and the 2 FB posts, I came to the conclusion that OzRunways initially stumped up what it considered a reasonable amount of cash as a commercial decision for this event.

Later even knowing that around $30,000 (or more) was not a good commercial investment for this event, they agreed to pay and allow the event to continue (this is admirable in my opinion).

A deal was done to sweeten this large cash agreement.

One of the competitors of OzRunways was declined a free lunch.

So they carried on until the lunch cancelled for everyone.

OzRunways decided to spread the food around to various outlets- now that's a very kind plan.

Does AvPlan cover Ecuador?

megan

13th Aug 2017, 02:39

Will MilFlyer be along shortly complaining about no lunch on offer?

triadic

13th Aug 2017, 04:19

Re RAMP checks at Airshows.
I am not sure if it was in the days or Mick Toller or Bruce Byron (or maybe earlier) but one of them made a statement back then that RAMP checks would never be conducted at Airshows or similar events.
We need the new DAS to come out with a similar statement. There is nothing to gain and lots to loose as discussed above.

Band a Lot

13th Aug 2017, 05:54

Spot on megan military folk are trained in that environment and while Milflyer might fly an aircraft it does not resemble the real World flying aircraft environment.

It is impossible for any airline or aviation company to conduct business like the military do and survive.

But they seem to miss this reality of life stuff that happens in the real World, Some airlines are sacking staff for taking a catering sandwich while the military counter parts go to the food hall and just fill the plates and complain about some part of the massive high quality selection of free food (or a minute contribution they need to make that may buy the little square of butter).

I'll put $50 up Milflyer - the event wont go ahead, you said it will.

Don't say you were not offered a seat at this table.

Sunfish

13th Aug 2017, 06:11

SAAA email suggests the event will go ahead.

Band a Lot

13th Aug 2017, 06:13

Maybe they just don't have the funds to cancel it, thus can it still be called an event?

Jabawocky

13th Aug 2017, 08:00

SAAA email suggests the event will go ahead.

Disingenuous email of the highest order. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.

My speculation based on knowing the form of the people involved. The apparent author of the email is the alleged culprit of all the drama, and now he wants the chapters to stump up their money to bail out the national body from his stuff ups.

I could be very wrong. Watch this space. My bet is it will be cancelled.

poteroo

13th Aug 2017, 13:25

My understanding is that the SAAA begging letter was only to individual members. We had our Chapter AGM here today and there was no correspondence 'on-the-table' from SAAA in respect of subsidising AV. So, no correspondence meant no discussion. Off the record of course, comments were scathing. The mood was not one of generosity to SAAA. happy days,

Slezy9

13th Aug 2017, 22:25

Spot on megan military folk are trained in that environment and while Milflyer might fly an aircraft it does not resemble the real World flying aircraft environment.

But they seem to miss this reality of life stuff that happens in the real World, Some airlines are sacking staff for taking a catering sandwich while the military counter parts go to the food hall and just fill the plates and complain about some part of the massive high quality selection of free food (or a minute contribution they need to make that may buy the little square of butter).

Haha, bitter much?

Real world? I've flown in both "worlds" and to be honest your "real world" (as in non-military) is more protected and shielded from the real stuff!

Band a Lot

13th Aug 2017, 23:26

Most in the real world paid for their flying training and remember they jobs they had to do to pay for that and the meals they missed in the process.

I never hear of a 777 captains applying for a military jobs, I guess they would not be accepted as it is a different World and to hard/old to retrain.

I also and from experience have noted that "most" ex-military personal have little to no understanding of costs, Milflyer has shown an example of this by his comment the show will go on. Sorry but money does not just grow on trees - someone needs to find that money or the fact is it is impossible to go on.

If the Australian government reduced its defence budget to $0, that will mean we will not have an Army, Navy or Air force. This is not because our military folk are bad or anything but, even if they turn up for work for free where will the fuel come from? It does not grow on trees, paper comes from trees but how will you cut them down with no axes?

In a World of Sponsorship it is tough in many industries, GA being one of them.

* Insurance
*Advertising
*Legal fees
*Security
*Seat Hire
*PA system hire
*Stage hire
*Printing (like programs)
*Toilet hire
*Rubbish bins and removal
*Generator hire
*Communication/s
*Transport and Accommodation

Are a few things that spring to mind that may need pre payment, some maybe recoverable during the event like selling programs. Some need to be paid or have been even if the event is rained out or cancelled.

While a fly in can be done to acceptable levels by some dedicated volunteers, a large event requires some professional assistance. When paying labour in Australia $30K does not go far.

So I guess I am just saying I think Milflyer has a shallow view on this particular event that is in a real fight to continue, and there are several bets that are on - it wont continue.

On a side note if money was growing on trees at AvPlan one would expect they would have happily been a reasonable size sponsor, so I am guessing they have a strict advertising budget and need to get the best bang for it.

mcoates

14th Aug 2017, 02:32

mcoates, not involved, but what I was told when inquired of the EAA at one of the shows. On the basis of your info the EAA rep didn't know what he was talking about. I know not.

I have just finished my 20th year as an exhibitor and whilst I don't like to complain about the EAA and AirVenture it is set up totally as an moneymaking opportunity. I would use an example of A&W that sell burgers and other things at the event. All of their cash registers and eftpos machines are connected directly to the EAA. The transaction that they produce comes out on AirVenture invoice and then directly from this comes a 40% commission on their sales as well as them having to pay for a site. The EAA actually have people that wander around and spend some time at each site discreetly making sure that every customer gets a receipt and that every transaction goes through the payment system. If someone starts skimming for example ice creams on a hot day and that is a lot of income lost by the EAA so they have people wandering around discreetly looking at the operations of the different food stalls. The cost of "winning" this food outlet location is not inexpensive either with site fees of over $20,000 just for a small 10 m x 10 m site. The EAA also have food inspectors which wander around randomly for the publics protection and they check that each food vendor is preparing food with gloves and they even use a temperature probe to check some of the items have been kept correctly stored in either cold storage or when they are cooked. They do this for the protection of the public and to avoid getting sued if somebody gets sick they can at least say well we check this site 4 times on that day and everything was in order. Another thing that just came to mind about restrictions for vendor's is that A&W is only allowed to sell softserve ice cream, they cannot sell packaged ice cream but then you will go a little bit further down the road and there will be a stand selling packaged ice cream. The packaged ice cream stands are completely run by the EAA. A company, let's say Peter's ice cream will again seek exclusive arrangements for packaged ice cream and sell a drumstick for $0.40 wholesale to the EAA and they in turn turn around and sell it for $3.50 retail to the public. This is again a commercial arrangement which Peter's ice cream have entered into with the EAA to boost their product and profitability.

As somebody said earlier you cannot buy a Coca-Cola product at AirVenture. Again this is a commercial consideration like a sponsorship package where the manufacturers of Pepsi-based products may pay $100,000 upfront to have their products sold exclusively. On a good year with hot temperatures I am sure they would make a killing, on a cold year the returns may be so so.

It is not unusual for any event like this to have preferred and exclusive supplier agreements. It is part of business. If someone goes to air venture and says that I sell a product and I would like to be able to sell/exhibit that product exclusively and here is my money transfer for XXX dollars then the deal gets done. It is nothing different to OzKosh or whatever our local event is being called at the moment.

mcoates

14th Aug 2017, 02:46

I forgot to mention also. As an exhibitor we are only allowed to give away 50 baseball caps for free to any of our customers without specific branding. If we want to give away more than 50 caps then we have to pay the EAA fee for each free cap we give away.

The idea of this is if all of the vendor's are giving away free caps then the EAA won't sell any of theirs. If you want a away more than 50 caps then you must pay the amount that the EAA will be losing their sales so they may charge you $5 for every cap that you give away above 50....

Same with a party at your site. Every year we host the Pod-A-Pooloosa on Wednesday night before the nighttime you show. This is a get together of media, pod casters and others selling the message that aviation is great to be involved with. To celebrate this event we give away lots of pizzas and soda to the hungry media before they head to the night airshow. All of this must be purchased through the EAA, we cannot ring the local pizza shop and have them deliver and you guessed it, it costs a lot of money, probably 3 times more than going direct to the pizza shop. And, you guessed it Papa John's is the exclusive pizza supplier to EAA air venture

no_one

14th Aug 2017, 05:32

mcoates,

EAA getting their cut of the food at Airventure is very different to what was going to happen here. It would be like Cessna being a sponsor and all other aircraft manufacturers being banned from attending or Lycoming being a sponsor and rotax being banned.

Ixixly

14th Aug 2017, 05:42

no one, I don't believe it would be quite the same thing, certainly not the same level at least. Someone else mentioned Similar before about how bad it would be if say "Cessna" decided to be the major sponsor and didn't allow any other Aircraft, this would be a killer for what is essentially an Airshow, I agree, BUT, Having only a single EFB provider represented there, IMHO, isn't a death knell and would sway only a very tiny percentage of people considering going.

If it's about getting it going at all and angering a very tiny minority as a result but having an actual Airshow, then it sounds like a no brainer.

no_one

14th Aug 2017, 06:07

Ixixly,

While it might have affected only Avplan we dont know the extent of the exclusivity arrangement. Was it just avplan or does it include other EFB suppliers like Garmin and Jeppesen?

The main point I was trying to make was that there is a difference between an exclusivity arrangement over food and an exclusivity arrangement over an aviation product....

Ixixly

14th Aug 2017, 07:23

Fair point no_one, there is a difference between an arrangement over food, exclusivity over an aviation product and your example of a particular Aircraft Manufacturer, I'd say they would be the 3 levels infact, Food being insignificant and expected, EFB being middle ground, and an Aircraft manufacturer exclusivity being on the extreme end and I'd suggest unacceptable.

It should be mentioned that Garmin are listed as an Exhibitor on the Air Venture website, I'm assuming there may perhaps be some restrictions placed on them, I'd doubt it though, but it could also be that they are recognised as being substantially different, OzRunways being a sole EFB application whilst Garmin Products generally incorporate aspects of EFB into their products in a way that OzRunways cannot and likely don't want to.

The Jeppesen EFB IMHO isn't worth discussing anyway! haha.

Jabawocky

14th Aug 2017, 08:27

Guys and girls, you have all been told the truth already by others and seem unable to accept it.

BOTH parties were approached. One declined in person, the other went away to see what/how.

Edited.....just coz it needs less second guessing from me!

Clare Prop

14th Aug 2017, 10:41

The point seems to be that one potential participant didn't want to take up the offer and that you can't then turn up and set up a table and do your own thing when all the other exhibitors and vendors are trading under strict conditions so that the organisers can make a return on what is a considerable investment and have enough to set it up the next time.
I haven't organised airshows but I have been a tour manager for bands and most people have no idea of all the contracts and arrangements that have to be put into place long before the event. Someone can't just rock up and set up a stall and not give an agreed cut to the band, promoter and venue. There are many who try after all the arrangements are in place and then whine when they are excluded.

They are given the option to approach the council to see if they can set up their stall in the street outside. Funnily enough they never do.

Old Akro

15th Aug 2017, 08:59

The point seems to be that one potential participant didn't want to take up the offer and that you can't then turn up and set up a table and do your own thing

This is badly misrepresenting this situation.

One provider of aviation data & mapping took a sponsorship package - and good on them.

Another didn't want to, but did want to take up a commercial package for an exhibit booth that was available to others, that they had taken up in the past and was promoted by the organisers. The organisers not only disallowed this but banned AvPlan attending (taking the AvPlan statement at face value).

Derfred

15th Aug 2017, 15:00

This is what smells:

You would like to set up an exhibit stand? No worries, that will be $1000 (or whatever it is).

Oh, you sell EFB software? Well, just for you the price just went up to $30,000. Cough up or don't come.

This is the bit that the Trade Practices Act would likely have an issue with. Not to mention a fair go.

Was this directly aimed at excluding AvPlan? I don't know, but if I was launching an EFB startup and hoping to exhibit would I be excluded too? How on earth could I be expected to cough up $30,000?

There's effective marketing and healthy competition and uncompetitive/unethical behaviour. There is a line in the sand in there somewhere, and a significant portion of observers seem to be of the opinion that it was crossed, hence the social media backlash. AvPlan didn't manufacture the backlash.

OzRunways must have subsequently felt embarrassed about that so they withdrew as damage control. I don't have an issue with OzRunways, they are not big enough to have a professional PR team who might have predicted such a social backlash. I also don't have an issue with AvPlan for merely pointing out on their website why they were refused attendance. The rest of the news has come from the public, you and me.

I hope it doesn't happen again, and that the show can somehow go on.

Edit: This is a guess, but AvPlan's comment that they never received a formal request indicates that the $30,000 price theorised above was not even offered as part of their rejection notice. It was just "No." So after politely declining initial verbal sponsorship invitations, the next thing they knew was that they were refused attendance. I'd be miffed too.

Disclaimer: I use Jeppesen :) I have friends who use OzRunways and I have friends who use AvPlan. They both seem to be good products.

Jabawocky

16th Aug 2017, 00:10

Well that was a waste of a post :roll eyes:

The truth is in the first page or two, so if you missed it go back and take a look. Bevan is a mate of mine, and I can assure you he made a blunder, several actually.

As for your assumptions they are wild inaccurate :ok:

rjtjrt

16th Aug 2017, 00:27

As an aside, it is in all OUR interests for BOTH Avplan and Ozrunways to thrive.
Healthy competition keeps both more affordable, and both improving their software regularly.
Heaven help us if there was a monopoly - eg just look how the major airports corporations (monopolies) charge and go on.

Old Akro

16th Aug 2017, 01:18

As an aside, it is in all OUR interests for BOTH Avplan and Ozrunways to thrive.

Agreed. But lets not forget that OzRunways & AvPlan are just aviation mapping & data providers and that there are others.

From memory there are 4 licenced providers other than Airservices Australia - OzRunways, AvPlan, Jeppesen, and Lido (a programme that is from an offshoot of Lufthansa). Plus, you can pretty much now rely on data from Garmin on one of its new moving map panel or handheld GPS units and soon (if not already) Dynon.

And you've got to expect that one day ForeFlight's dominance in the US will lead it to branch out in Australia. And Jepp has a VFR product in the US which you've got to expect will come to Australia one day also.

And it is still actually legal to use AsA paper maps and documents.

OzRunways & Avplan are both good products and both deserve to succeed, but its not a 2 horse race and its a reasonably crowded space with probably a further shake out looming.

Which makes Air Venture's singling out of AvPlan look all the more bizarre

rjtjrt

16th Aug 2017, 02:56

......... Plus, you can pretty much now rely on data from Garmin on one of its new moving map panel or handheld GPS units and soon (if not already) Dynon.
......

I wish that were true.
Currently Dynon have arranged access to Airservices Aust Maps through Ozrunways and Avplan as resellers.

Garmin steadfastly refuse to arrange any access to our local maps/charts.

Garmin appear to have decided to punish Australian customers as a tactic because they are pissed off with Airservices refusing to allow 3rd party companies free access to their mapping product.

Dynon, to their credit, have shown a way it can be done at no expense to themselves other than enabling it in their software. They are responsive and supportive of their non US customers. Garmin not so.

Eljay

17th Aug 2017, 04:47

This reeks of SAAA arrogance and incompetency. Rip everyone off so they can go away with a profit. The did it in Mangalore, Wagga, Cowra and now Narromine. The AOPA and RaAus should kick SAAA out of any partnership and GA would be a lot better off.

Vag277

17th Aug 2017, 08:17

no_one

17th Aug 2017, 08:20

Article from Australian Flying about the situation. Hopefully the event can be saved...
The Last Minute Hitch: 11 August 2017 - Australian Flying (http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-last-minute-hitch/the-last-minute-hitch-11-august-2017)

Egipps

17th Aug 2017, 09:06

Eljay
A bold claim. What evidence do you have?

Below is what LJ posted in 2014. Does something become true if you repeat it often enough?

Eljay's AvatarEljay , 23rd Jun 2014 16:13
Typical SAAA administration. They have burned everyone that ever tried to help them. Mangalore, promised the world, used everyone, then moved on.Wagga, promised the world, used everyone, then moved on. Cowra, promised the world, used everyone then moved on. Looks like it's Narromines turn.

no_one

22nd Aug 2017, 07:46

From an SAAA email today:

AirVenture 2017
Is it On? Or is it Not?
Dear Members and fellow aviators,

Airventure Australia is it On or Off - SAAA don't know.

SAAA have done our very best to address our Corporate governance and protect our Members interests.

SAAA are listed on the Airventure Australia website as an event organiser along with RAAus, but SAAA are precluded from that role.

SAAA are one of four beneficiaries in the Oz-Kosh Trust.

The Oz-Kosh Trustee is AVA Pty Ltd of whom there is a single shareholder and director, Mr David Young.

The event Organiser is Mr David Young, and he is the only person whom knows.

If you are concerned about confirming your travel arrangements to Narromine please contact Mr David Young for confirmation of the event.

Airventure Australia -INFORMATION

[email protected]

Sunfish

22nd Aug 2017, 07:59

sounds ominous on two fronts:

a) the event going ahead, and

b) the relationship between SAAA and everyone else.

Infighting is a great way to destroy what's left of Australian aviation.

Jabawocky

22nd Aug 2017, 09:42

Interesting that the author has had a complete turn around where he praised the event and the organiser and promised the event would go ahead after SAAA had sent the hat around to raise funds to under write the show.

What has changed I hear you ask? Rumour has it that SAAA have not only failed to provide promised funding, but have withdrawn financial support from the event.

I know for a fact that many chapters were not even approached. I smell a rat.

Given the last week or so, I would have to question what role the SAAA and the emails author had in the previous debacle.

I leave it up to y'all to join the dots, leopards and spots and all that. :ok:

andrewr

22nd Aug 2017, 11:39

A bit childish to send someone's name and phone number to all SAAA members and suggest they contact them direct, I thought.

YPJT

22nd Aug 2017, 19:44

Infighting is a great way to destroy what's left of Australian aviation.
Hmmm reminiscent of the AOPA goings on back in the mid - late 90s.
It really was pathetic and probably lead that association to a sad state from which it never fully recovered.

Capn Bloggs

23rd Aug 2017, 23:05

Hijack!!!!

Sunfish

23rd Aug 2017, 23:24

i was hoping to find out about the certification process at OzKosh.

Eljay

25th Aug 2017, 03:23

I hate to say that I told you so, but as was said before, leopards don't change their spots.
What more evidence do you need?

roundsounds

28th Aug 2017, 22:19

I see the latest version of the AVA website shows RAA and APF as the organisers. Anyone know if AOPA and SAAA will be involved?
I'd really like to see the leaders of these organisations sit down together in a Q n A session for members to ask them how they will support GA into the future. They need to work together and not against each other to save GA.

Jabawocky

29th Aug 2017, 11:22

SAAA despite all their huffing and puffing have been caught out. APF seem to have returned due to SAAA being found to be erectile dysfunctional.

Or just my observation at least.

mcoates

28th Sep 2017, 05:53

It is funny that RAA and APF are now the only organisations listed as the organisers. I still however received an RAA newsletter the other day which mentioned the SAAA is still having some sort of awards at the event for the different aircraft categories so it must be they are in attendance but not organisers. I am sure lots of information will come out in the days prior, during and after the event. He said she said, repeat

CHAIRMAN

28th Sep 2017, 13:21

Just sent an email to AOPA asking why it's not even on their agenda for this year. See what the story is.
I gave up a couple of years ago on the AAA and resigned - didn't even get a phone call when I left my number.
As bad a politicians, the bloody lot of them it seems.
There's no hope unless these alphabet groups can get their act together.

mcoates

5th Oct 2017, 00:25

From accurate industry sources, AOPA and SAAA claim to have raised thousands of dollars from their members for this year's event when there was a chance that the event may not continue, but not a single cent has been passed on to the organisers.

Is this fraud ?

Or will they refund the donations or will they pass the money on to the organisers in a clear and auditable manner ?

Jabawocky

5th Oct 2017, 12:49

Not sure it is fraud, but I am VERY experienced in this thread matter. I ran the show for many years and know all the players.

SAAA and AOPA (mostly two or three individuals) have been playing silly buggers (as nice as I can put it) for some weeks.

To be frank, SAAA have screwed all the years of my hard work. I spent months, cost me 6 figure amounts (personally) and look what they have done to it. Disgraceful.

The new event organisers and RAAus along with a few helpers deserve all the support they can get. I have recently compared notes, and they have more exhibitors and more of everything, so from my view they have done a great job so far despite the wankers being.......wankers.

Make of that what you will, but I will be there with the Unicom and wandering around when not busy. Anyone wants to catch up, I look forward to it.

As for all the train wreckers......just pharque off quietly would you. Nobody cares about you. Leave the rest of us to enjoy the weekend.