Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Wannabes Forums > Interviews, jobs & sponsorship
Reload this Page >

BBVA Stop Funding Pilot Loans

Interviews, jobs & sponsorship The forum where interviews, job offers and selection criteria can be discussed and exchanged.

BBVA Stop Funding Pilot Loans

Old 7th May 2017, 09:33
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 153
Rupert369, totally wrong and disagree with you.

Even in UKwith minimum salary of 6 pounds per hour a single person can make around 1000 pounds per month net (at least), and after paying your cost of life, it left you with 600 pounds per month, allowing you to save 7200 per year, and that“s on the minimum wage! if you start working with 18 years, at the age of 30, you are mentioning, and supposed you didn“t progress anyhow in your life you will have close to 87K pounds.

However, in my case as IT engineer, I was doing way much more than this, and my salary in Milton Keynes was around 2500 pounds per month net, allowing me to safe around 1500 pounds per month (and before you ask: hey but you mention you can live with 400 and now you are expending 1000? yes you are right, instead of sharing an apartment had my own, and keep going out with friends time by time, however I didn“t on the past!).

And I can tell you more examples, of people who progressed in multiple fields, even startin in a supermarket, after a year or two you are promoted to team manager, supervisor, etc...

So it“s totally feasable to have the money even before 25 years old, and at the same time, study a degree, or anything else, but the problem is that some of the youngster wanted to have it now.

And also there“s no need to expend 100K on a pilot license, only if you go for CTC/OAA/FTE, if you do it modular, or even integrated in some other places, you can get your license for 60-80K? and even less if you go through US and then an EASA conversion.
spaflyer is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 10:08
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 50
spaflyer, without getting bogged-down in figures, I'd absolutely love to know where you suggest living for £400 per month including bills, not to forget the possibility of a car to get to work, insurance, maintenance etc - sounds like a place where I'd very much like to base myself!

The only thing that's 'totally wrong' is your assumption that students at CTC/CAE/FTE haven't 'considered working' before getting here. Again, that is complete and utter nonsense.

Moving to your point about modular training, after careful consideration, I felt in the end that the risks of the modular route in my position outweighed the benefits. With a young family, I simply couldn't afford to take the risk of paying for the training with no job lined-up at the end. I appreciate that this isn't the case for everyone, it's just how things worked for me. So I spent three years working really hard to get on to the mentored scheme of my airline of choice.

I'm very pleased that it's worked out for you, and you've obviously done it for less money than me (although the scheme I'm on is very competitively priced and includes TR), but then I have to wonder why you feel the need to come and troll a student pilot board if things have been so successful?

Finally, I don't know anyone who is here because they 'want to have it now.' They're all here after carefully evaluating the pros and cons of their situations. No one comes to a school like CTC/CAE/FTE without also thinking about modular. People know that they will be repaying money for a long time to come.

If anything, I'd argue that the ones who think about BBVA or similar finance are most likely to be those who have given really careful consideration to their options, as they're the ones who don't happen to have £100k knocking around in the family.
Rupert369 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 10:58
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 153
There“s plenty of places all around UK, but Northahmtpon, Berdford, Milton Keynes... and all of them with plenty of jobs.

I“m not troling anyone, I“m just stating that people crying because banks don“t make anymore loans is pathetic, and :
lthough the scheme I'm on is very competitively priced and includes TR), but then I have to wonder why you feel the need to come and troll a student pilot board if things have been so successful?
is nice to see how people expend money the don“t have, and later come here again to cry of how hard is to get a job, and competitive, and payments that they don“t are even able to afford to pay back the loan to the bank.

but then I have to wonder why you feel the need to come and troll a student pilot board if things have been so successful?
Wrong board, this is not about students is about Pilot looking for jobs.

And yes I really really hope, all banks stop giving loans, and the end of this ripping schemas of Integrated course of some schools, and pay to fly, and companys not paying for type ratings, only once all of this happen we will go back on time where pilot where making decent salary and have good work conditions, and this will be a WIN for all of us, not just some with mum and dad behind...
spaflyer is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 11:25
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 227
There are not many things that annoy me... but the tone of some people on this forum beggars belief! To insinuate every person seeking help from a bank is irresponsible is far from reality. In fact, speaking with truth here, the majority I know whom have borrowed from the bank - myself included - ARE those who are the most respectful about money!

I'm 23, have a First Class BSc degree and have worked flat out since the age of 16. If there's one thing I'll say, the student loan company sure as hell didn't support me through university with their incorrect methodology for the assessment of parents earnings. It was tough, but I did it.

People can hark on about the good ol' days as much as they want, but I'm sorry the days of airlines paying you generously are long gone. In fact, to me - the supposedly ignorant 23 year old - an airline paying me £40,000 to fly a jet as a starting rate is a reasonable salary to begin with! If you're entering this industry these days to have a girl under each arm and a briefcase full of cash (as a homage to Leonardo DiCaprio) then quite clearly you're in it for the wrong reasons. The dream is to fly, at least in my eyes! The aforementioned airline schemes also pay much lower considering the loan security or repayments inclusive too!

The medical industry is just as expensive and I know many whom are in exactly the same situation there too! The NHS in the UK is funding sod all anymore.

As for the schools, I know plenty of people who have struggled to find work from a modular capacity who eventually join the big few for their AQC etc. These large schools may charge a lot - that I can't deny - but the relationships with airlines have quite clearly been forged out of delivering pilots to the same standards. Example; i train with a couple PPL holders whom are essentially being retaught core flying skills as each have said how the procedures and concepts here are different.

EDIT: that last statement is not me saying every private /school modular school is terrible. It's far from that. I'm simply sharing my observations.

Rant over!

Last edited by gbotley; 7th May 2017 at 22:27.
gbotley is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 11:57
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 243
I think one of the reasons why CTC/OAA/FTE are able to charge so much is access to money. In some ways, it's a bit like the housing market, when loans were easily accessible, prices went through the roof simply due to the fact that a lot of money was simply floating around, waiting to be borrowed.

Ten years ago, CTC was £60k with a type rating included, these days with a type rating it's double that. Modular, however, is still available for less than £50k. Now that loans are going to be less easy to obtain, hopefully the large integrated schools will have to re-think their pricing strategy and/or airlines will have to offer fully sponsored programmes in order to obtain a sufficient number of high-quality candidates.
Chris the Robot is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 12:55
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rome
Posts: 195
Adding to the discussion, if the lack of financing does trigger a reduced number of wannabes applying, maybe the airlines will start to look at the "forgotten ones".

Those cadets, like myself, who worked their arses off to fund their own training through the modular route, as they thought resilience and commitment was worth something in aviation(not really).

Still struggling to find employment as I'm not from the top 3 schools. It is funny to visit the Pilot careers fair and hear the rhetoric " there is a tremendous shortage", when the very few opportunities to modular cadets are often oversubscribed with applicants.

My point is, the MPL scheme that Easyjet runs can close for a year and they will still be able to find cadets already trained to fill those seats. If there is an issue with standard, there are courses available to bridge the gap. I was told by CTC that Flybe first officer database was 1.500 strong, with the vast majority being low hour cadets. Imagine how big is Ryanair's?

It is ridiculous to pay £120K for a course, and it is even worse that the price went up so fast in a short period of time, with little change to the product. It won't be a bad thing for young wannabes to wait, I know I did and worked to save part of the cash, it is a good character builder after all and it will open opportunities for us that were left behind due to CTC/OAA/FTE greed.

Also, talking about high quality candidates, I have met CTC and OAA grads who really struggled through training, with a pretty poor record and were ''pushed" through the hoops, one wouldn't fly solo too far from the airfield in NZ as he was scared, now flies for the big Orange.

That arrogant attitude that if you haven't joined those schools you must be needs some revisiting. My instructors were all fighter pilots and the standard was high, its quite insulting to hear that sort of thing. There are several outfits in Europe and UK with a lot of quality and I do hope these 3 schools lose their monopoly for the sake of fairness.
Anunaki is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 14:14
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 283
Modular v Integrated is a difficult decision and has been discussed to death on here before. To suggest that people only choose integrated because they can't be bothered to wait and/or work is ridiculous.

I'd also remind people talking of the "good ol' days" that, whilst modular training may have been more common back then, a good chunk of todays pilots were also lucky enough to complete fully-sponsored integrated courses. If similar opportunities existed today then CTC/FTE/OAA wouldn't be able to charge the prices they do.

I hope that the price does fall over time, but as others have mentioned, it may yet be still to peak.
A couple of years ago CTC/OAA/FTE had a virtual monopoly. Opportunities for modular cadets were few and far between and other integrated schools all charged similar prices.

This has changed somewhat recently though. The likes of Kura Aviation and Wings Alliance have done a lot to make modular more attractive IMO and the job market has improved to the point where numerous airlines (TCX, Flybe etc) are now at least open to applications from modular cadets. Added to that, other schools (eg, Baltic Aviation) offer integrated training with airline placements at significantly lower prices (or rather, they haven't doubled their prices over the last 5-10 years).

I hope that this, combined with a reduction in available funding, could put some pressure on the big 3 to reduce prices and/or boost accessibility but overall it still seems unlikely.

Adding to the discussion, if the lack of financing does trigger a reduced number of wannabes applying, maybe the airlines will start to look at the "forgotten ones".
Hopefully we can all agree on that one.
ManUtd1999 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 14:43
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 127
I've said this on other threads that I've yet to meet anyone at a top school who's actually had the BBVA loan. Everybody I know has help from parents, grandparents, re-mortaged, savings, etc. There are the odd few people who are from some serious wealth, but they're definitely in the minority, and these super-rich tend to be from the middle-east.

I can't imagine the BBVA stopping their loans having much of an impact at all, I honestly don't know anyone who's funded their integrated training this way. There seems to be a big stigma connected to the top schools that everyone is walking around with a £100k BBVA loan, paying-back £1200 per month, but I assure you this isn't the case. The BBVA will have little impact on the number of people going to the likes of CTC, CAE and FTE.
Rottweiler22 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 14:56
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 283
There seems to be a big stigma connected to the top schools that everyone is walking around with a £100k BBVA loan, paying-back £1200 per month, but I assure you this isn't the case.
If I've learnt anything from this thread then this is it. I too subscribed to the view that most people used BBVA but it appears not.
ManUtd1999 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 15:19
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Farnborough
Age: 33
Posts: 44
I can only see 3 types of students/customers going to the big schools:
-BBVA funded students.
-The rich kids of InstaCTC who can thank their parents for a 100K+ GBP gift.
-The people who've worked hard and saved the majority of the 100K GBP over at least 5-10 years I guess.
AA757 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 16:17
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,307
What so many people fail to understand these days, is that a CPL and 200 (odd) hours is simply not the benchmark level for airline employment. It wasn't in 1967 and it isn't in 2017.

If you substitute (and there is something of a blurred distinction) the terms " Modular and integrated" with "Approved and Non-approved," it facilitates a slightly better understanding of the evolution that took place over the last 50 years in order to arrive at this point.

Airlines (or rather those that run them) have never been interested in fresh pilots with 200 hours. At that quantitive plateau, the median level of experience and skill set is simply insufficient for the majority to make a transition that is either desirable or cost efficient. However, in 1967 a handful of airlines took on cadet pilots into their fleets with broadly this number of hours, why? The answer is that they were selected and "approved school" trained to a much higher than median level standard. In short the selection and training process provided those were likely to succeed in an accelerated "fast track" programme to the right hand seat of a commercial airliner. These programmes were highly selective and full time "apprenticeship" courses, designed to dovetail into an airlines own advanced training programmes. Those airlines that employed these programmes (with a very few notable exceptions) normally sourced the majority of their recruitment from a combination of military career changers and civilian career advancers. Of this latter group, a great many pilots had worked their way up through self funded training and "stepping stone" employment opportunities. The vast majority were "modular" in today's terms.

The distinction is, that in 1967 and the decades that followed (in the UK) a CPL done this "modular" or "non-approved" way, involved acquiring a minimum of 700 hours before an individual could even consider embarking on the relevant tests and exams. This level of experience was often acquired by such routes as PPL flight instruction (for which there was an employment derogation) and general aviation "jobs" such as glider towing, parachute dropping and other general aviation opportunities. The availability of such "stepping stones" as well as the experience levels required, served as a natural brake on numbers and provided the attrition that meant only a limited number of starters worked their way through the system into the right seat of turboprops and eventually jets. Despite this, there were still very large numbers of pilots who embarked on this progression and invariably far, far more than the market could ever absorb. Even at the average (2500-3000 hour) level of airline recruitment, the failure and drop-out rates were still relatively high. Military career change and "approved school" cadets, had significantly lower failure rates, but were also much smaller (in relative terms) sources of supply.

Towards the end of the last century and in the early years of this one, there was a change and re-alignment in licensing (in the U.K.) to bring it into commonality with that existing in most of the rest of the world. The aerial work derogations (referred to above) were dispensed with. The CPL was in essence to be the new "aerial work" licence, and with that the base experience level was dropped to 200 hours. In other words it was the new benchmark level for the "stepping stone" opportunities. For the "approved" integrated training courses there was little change as they had always (albeit to a much more selective input) operated at these baseline hard numbers.

What this served to do in reality was to open the floodgate to a Tsunami of new CPL holders who felt they had skipped the need to follow the "stepping stones" and were now just what "the airlines" wanted! They weren't! Not only that, but there were thousands and thousands of fresh license holders who found that the "stepping stones" had largely been washed away in the flood, and the airlines were still recruiting from many of their traditional sources.

As the century rolled over, it brought a few other ingredients to the evolutionary mix. The growth in "low cost" carriers increased exponentially. By definition that meant the input costs of these companies had to be constrained to previously unheard of levels. Deregulation, whilst aiding their cause, didn't go far enough to completely give them carte blanche. If they could have done away with the co-pilots seat a few of them would have. Instead, they sought to reduce their costs by taking advantage of the massive oversupply in licence holders. This was achieved by a corresponding expansion in the number of "approved" integrated training courses (largely from evolutionary emanations of the same preeminent approved training schools you still see here today.) Also, from their own (in some cases) selection procedures for the best presenting applicants. Indeed there were so many applicants that a few airlines started charging for interviews and pre-selection requirements. As the marketplace grew, so naturally did the training industry that supplied this market.

Airlines are businesses who moreso now than ever before survive in a world of narrow margins. They are a hostage to their input costs, and one of those costs is training. They need pilots who are pretty much "ready to go" from day one. In reality that means the very best background training in order to minimize their own input training risk. It means the best level of "guarantee" on new cadets. It means cadets presenting at significantly higher levels of ability and demonstrated achievement in order to survive the very real "fast track" requirements. I am afraid the "my licence is the same colour as everyone else's" type comment, that you read so often in these forums, just doesn't cut it. Never has, and never will!

Today (just as it has always been) airlines want the very best product, for the least amount of money. The market is in their favour. Increasingly, they expect the candidate to be well above the median level in their own skill set. They expect the candidate to assume their own financial risks, and as hard nosed businesses they don't care how difficult that may be. They don't care that you have the "same licence as everybody else." Your application wouldnt have seen the light of day were that not the case. They do care that you are one of the best applicants presenting. To that end they are likely to assure themselves that you have been (in their eyes) well trained with an excellent achievement record. They will expect to be disappointed very rarely, and in those rare cases they expect to be able to go back to their supplier to replace the "product", and/or for the successful applicant to assume a very high level of the financial risk commitment.

I have always strongly recommended that "wannabes" take the time to understand the history and the evolution of the industry on which they hope to embark, in order to give themselves an advantage. It is not a charity or an egalitarian academia with level well manicured playing fields. This is an achievable occupation but certainly not for the majority. It never has been. The attrition rate is enormous, as are the financial risks. The potential supply massively outstrips the demand (historically it nearly always has.) It gets more and more expensive every year and that is unlikely to ever change!

On the opening subject of this thread. BBVA is a Spanish bank with a small commercial presence in the U.K. It found a niche marketplace in the pilot training loan marketplace (itself a niche market in the grand scheme.) It's predecessor was HSBC in this particular segment, who offered loans with a smaller security footprint, and chose to withdraw from the market as defaults and the level of profit made it uneconomic for them. No doubt somebody else will dip their toe in at some point, and as already been pointed out, there are other secured options with similar security requirements but perhaps lower overall costs and less "flexibility".

I will finish by saying that given the fall in the value of sterling over the last 12 months, coupled with a slowly rebounding forward trend on interest rates. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see ab initio pilot training costs rise in the region of 25-30% over the course of the next 12 months, in line with other luxury goods and even many staples.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 18:18
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Funny, there were rumours that the EZY type-rating was going up to a straight €40k, if this is true, Bealzebub could very well be right.

Then again, nothing to worry about if you're female, as EZY are paying for everything. Can't mention that, I'd be way too sexist!
Rottweiler22 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 19:16
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rome
Posts: 195
Considering the feminist "affirmative action", it is the only thing that it becomes (using Bealzebub comments) a charity. Certainly not level playing field, but then, those are some great Instagram photos....

Rotweiler22 I agree. If they really cared about equality, there would be programs to support minorities and those who don't have the structure at home to even begin to think, of pursuing a career in aviation when they finish school. Those kids living below poverty lines for example, struggling to meet the expectations in education which would be needed to embark in training, never mind the financial costs later.

Easyjet bangs the drum about the number of females in the flight deck being less than 5%, and how nice they are to women, nonsense. Gender politics helped put Trump in the white house(another topic). The number is actually 4.1% in the UK, Easyjet is pushing to 20% in their ranks. But theres only 2.7% black & asians in the UK for example.

Airlines do not care and the whole equality drive are smokescreens. I have seen the Are Lingus, BA, Easyjet marketing and call me cynical if you like, but I think its all political point scoring.

Back to topic.

I never expected handouts and as he rightly mentioned, we have to be aware that 200Hr is not the benchmark.

However, I have taken an FI rating and I have met many who cannot get interviews whilst the young guns of said schools with the mentioned level of experience, get jobs before even qualifying in certain cases.

I agree that there will always be people with pockets deep enough to start their flight training, my comment was more of wishful thinking. I feel, like many others, betrayed, and you can't really judge on this as I have done what I could to be as competitive and ready as ever without expecting any favours.

My point is, there are people who did not get the massive loan, that gave a serious 10 years focusing on getting the right qualifications and experience. And most importantly, didn't fell to pay to fly schemes and instead followed the "stepping stones", and still, they do not want to look at us.

The FTO's made their cash out of us and cut us lose, then sell the £100K plus dream elsewhere and when we compete with their kids for the job, we are told we are not "cream of the crop" by the same people who trained us in some cases.

Not an attack on anyone, I think that not having that facility in place for a little while may be a good thing for everyone. Those who can afford will still go ahead, those who can't will do like myself and many others did and theres nothing wrong with that, and theres nothing wrong with me wanting a fairer industry.

A little more transparency wouldn't hurt.

To be honest, thinking carefully here, the jokes are on us for choosing an industry full of a****.
Anunaki is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 22:24
  #34 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 667
Originally Posted by spaflyer View Post
Even in UKwith minimum salary of 6 pounds per hour a single person can make around 1000 pounds per month net (at least), and after paying your cost of life, it left you with 600 pounds per month, allowing you to save 7200 per year, and that“s on the minimum wage! if you start working with 18 years, at the age of 30, you are mentioning, and supposed you didn“t progress anyhow in your life you will have close to 87K pounds.
Forgive my bluntness, but what utter codswallop.

Live on £400 a month? save £600? You are aware we are talking about living in the UK and not Ouagadougou?
Officer Kite is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 22:42
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Farnborough
Age: 33
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by Officer Kite View Post
Forgive my bluntness, but what utter codswallop.

Live on £400 a month? save £600? You are aware we are talking about living in the UK and not Ouagadougou?
Yes, this is madness, well it's possible if you live like a monk in your parent's house, don't own a car and don't have to pay any bill
AA757 is offline  
Old 7th May 2017, 23:54
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Cornwall
Age: 31
Posts: 202
Agreed! Factor in student loan repayments, Ni, pension, living/working in a city, the odd trip home, car/car costs, having something that resembles a social life (i.e. not a recluse) etc etc. My rent alone exceeds £500pcm. I try and save hard, and it's bloody tough!
FlyVeryHigh- is offline  
Old 8th May 2017, 02:21
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 23
Hi sorry if i asking out of topic question.

Is there anyone knows what are the requirement for a non EU nor US citizen to apply a pilot loan ?
I have a cosigner living in EU, he's my uncle, and he's willing to take care the rest of the loan for me, but i just wondering what items or information do i need to provide him for the loan ?

Because he's already taking the loan, but he's just asking me where i want to school, without asking my full personal data, previous education history, etc.

Thanks
TrevorPhillips is offline  
Old 8th May 2017, 02:44
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 227
That's a question best directed at the bank in question or the individual taking the loan. Are you going to be training in the UK/EU as there are often residence requirements too.
gbotley is offline  
Old 8th May 2017, 06:14
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 153
Forgive my bluntness, but what utter codswallop.

Live on £400 a month? save £600? You are aware we are talking about living in the UK and not Ouagadougou?
Yes sir, 3 years in Milton Keynes, sharing apartments with other 5 people, renting a room for 220 pounds per month, another 20 for mobile phone, and 120 for food, and 40 for pocket expenses. But ones again I see comments, like without a car... without an Iphone... without beers... yes sir without all of those, and that“s the way to save money....
spaflyer is offline  
Old 8th May 2017, 06:42
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rome
Posts: 195
I'm surprised, a quick search on the going rate in Milton Keynes and the results aren't much different than London suburbs, averaging £400pcm. When I was studying I was paying £450pcm outside london.

My phone contract was a sim only deal for £15, alcohol was a once month thing.No car at that time but nowadays I need it for work, but then, public transport in the UK is not cheap anymore.

About spending £120 in food, you must have no meat on your bones then, as a bloke who stands at 6'' ft and 100kg(muscle), that figure is not enough.

Not sure if you are trolling us, I think you can achieve those savings if you're living with you parents and they are kind enough to let you off the hook, otherwise I'm not so sure.
Anunaki is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.