Is RACWA on finals? YOU WERE WARNED!!
This came from the horses mouth back in 2004. If you remember, Murrayfield was not a registered aerodrome prior to this. With the proposals to close Jandakot and RACWA knowing the majority of their members were Perth northern suburbs based, it was a critical move to block the proposal of moving Jandakot to Mandurah.
It seems it worked, as we have not heard much about closing the place since then!
It seems it worked, as we have not heard much about closing the place since then!
Not sure which horse you were talking to! I do hope RACWA weren't taking the credit for the fact that the airport remains at the Jandakot site! That would be a bit rich! 
Besides, Murrayfield wasn't registered until 2008!!!
Besides, Murrayfield wasn't registered until 2008!!!
Last edited by YPJT; 16th Dec 2010 at 09:30.
There are others who can explain the intricacies of JAH / JT much better than I. Suffice it to say that JAH has NO AUTHORITY to 'sell off JT as an 'entity'.
It is, and remains an AIRPORT, owned by the Commonwealth, and leased out by the Commonwealth to JAH to operate - as an airport.
The sub-leasing of the surrounding real estate is just that - a sub-leasing.
Soon it will be an airport in the middle of an industrial estate - but an airport never-the-less, and still owned by the Commonwealth.
Thanks 'CFI', et al, sometimes its like swatting flies......
Cheers
It is, and remains an AIRPORT, owned by the Commonwealth, and leased out by the Commonwealth to JAH to operate - as an airport.
The sub-leasing of the surrounding real estate is just that - a sub-leasing.
Soon it will be an airport in the middle of an industrial estate - but an airport never-the-less, and still owned by the Commonwealth.
Thanks 'CFI', et al, sometimes its like swatting flies......
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Murray Field will ultimately become an Albatros around their neck, Costs will kill them.
JAH is absolutely supportive of RACWA and their efforts to stave off the probable inevitable.
Reality is with no cash flow, a significant debt for an asset that has no intrinsic value and a balance sheet that looks like something the cat dragged in, it is only a matter of time befor judgement day comes, no matter individually how smart the committee ( Directors ) are the culture in the place is abonimable.
Arrogance has no place in business, let alone in a collaborative venture like a "club"
JAH is absolutely supportive of RACWA and their efforts to stave off the probable inevitable.
Reality is with no cash flow, a significant debt for an asset that has no intrinsic value and a balance sheet that looks like something the cat dragged in, it is only a matter of time befor judgement day comes, no matter individually how smart the committee ( Directors ) are the culture in the place is abonimable.
Arrogance has no place in business, let alone in a collaborative venture like a "club"
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiley might just be smarter than the rest of the syncophants, YPJT you and I may never agree on most things , but the real issue is one of the ICONS of Australian Aviation is on the brink of insolvency.
And with it if it goes is the whole Aero Club movement, once the seminal core of young pilot aspirations.
Personally I don't think it can survive the reckless behavior of the previous Directors, how they found the value in JAA training in Australia on the other side of the world is a mystery that is quite baffling and then to pay out mega dollars for something tht had as its only real asset IP that is common to every flying school in the world is a travesty.
20 times C150 doesn't stack up to a lot of dollars and whilst the building is quite special it sits on leased land with no real suitors, in other words who wants a smart looking building on the Southern edge of a lease hold with no prospect of secondary use or a viable income stream.
It will be cathartic as the drama unfolds, but probably necessary to re establish the possibility of saving the Aero Club movement.
And with it if it goes is the whole Aero Club movement, once the seminal core of young pilot aspirations.
Personally I don't think it can survive the reckless behavior of the previous Directors, how they found the value in JAA training in Australia on the other side of the world is a mystery that is quite baffling and then to pay out mega dollars for something tht had as its only real asset IP that is common to every flying school in the world is a travesty.
20 times C150 doesn't stack up to a lot of dollars and whilst the building is quite special it sits on leased land with no real suitors, in other words who wants a smart looking building on the Southern edge of a lease hold with no prospect of secondary use or a viable income stream.
It will be cathartic as the drama unfolds, but probably necessary to re establish the possibility of saving the Aero Club movement.
Joker10, not disputing your take on the situation. However I do find it somewhat ironic on one hand that you call those who express support for RACWa as sychophants and at the same time try to justify a patronising comment from Wiley blowing smoke up your arse.
Moderator
Joker IMHO in the last few years the only thing that set RACWA aside from other large impersonal commercial operations was its tax status. The "club", (in terms of a friendly group of like minded people enjoying their flying and having a good laugh in the bar etc etc) side of it for most of us died in the mid nineties.
Perhaps in this day and age aero clubs and flying training should be kept separate? Perhaps having a bunch of people who weren't professional pilots trying to run a flying school was the whole problem?
As for JAA...well anyone could get the same qualification for about half the price and still do the bulk of the flying here in Australia if they went modular, so yes it was baffling and needed a certain kind of person to carry it off...and he timed his departure perfectly. Others including myself had looked at doing JAR training here and couldn't justify the enormous costs of approvals and audits, easier to be part of the modular training.
Perhaps in this day and age aero clubs and flying training should be kept separate? Perhaps having a bunch of people who weren't professional pilots trying to run a flying school was the whole problem?
As for JAA...well anyone could get the same qualification for about half the price and still do the bulk of the flying here in Australia if they went modular, so yes it was baffling and needed a certain kind of person to carry it off...and he timed his departure perfectly. Others including myself had looked at doing JAR training here and couldn't justify the enormous costs of approvals and audits, easier to be part of the modular training.
how relevant is their tax status if they're bleeding cash through every orifice?
In other thoughts just in...
Perhaps it's time for Sandgropers to form another aero club, cash it up to the gills and just circle in wait for a wholesale bite at the carcass of RACWA.
In other thoughts just in...
Perhaps it's time for Sandgropers to form another aero club, cash it up to the gills and just circle in wait for a wholesale bite at the carcass of RACWA.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YPJT, the syncophants I refer to are the body of folk who endorsed the purchase at mega dollars of a singularly low value "asset" that could be replicated at any other viable W.A. flying school at minmal cost.
Replication is a well practiced business tactic, the real test of an asset value is what barriers to replication exist, the the RACWA case very low barriers, they paid dearly for a ground school that really was not producing the revenue it should have and based on a syallbus that was and is available to any competent flying school who spends the time and effort to establish it self in accord with the JAA/EASA rules.
The "asset" is unsaleable so its carrying value on the balance sheet should be zero, no doubt the lenders to RACWA have woken up to this, and refinancing without significant guarantees in place will be difficult in a declining cash flow situation.
Replication is a well practiced business tactic, the real test of an asset value is what barriers to replication exist, the the RACWA case very low barriers, they paid dearly for a ground school that really was not producing the revenue it should have and based on a syallbus that was and is available to any competent flying school who spends the time and effort to establish it self in accord with the JAA/EASA rules.
The "asset" is unsaleable so its carrying value on the balance sheet should be zero, no doubt the lenders to RACWA have woken up to this, and refinancing without significant guarantees in place will be difficult in a declining cash flow situation.
YPJT, the syncophants I refer to are the body of folk who endorsed the purchase at mega dollars of a singularly low value "asset" that could be replicated at any other viable W.A. flying school at minmal cost.
Many will say that the only real asset that came with the purchase was some crappy second hand furniture. Gotta hand it to the slick salesman that pulled that one off.
I don't think you can blame the salesman! What's the legal term? Caveat Emptor, i think - Buyer be ware. It seems like, with the benefit of hindsight, everyone can see how little value the club got, was that not obvious at the time?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Left Right Out
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6 little ducks....
according to the president, there are negotiations underway with parties interested in Murrayfield.....
according to CEO, those negotiations are CONVERSATIONS (a big difference) and there are 6 of them!
forget the sandgropers cashing up and circling etc...
there are others well ahead of the game I suspect.
according to CEO, those negotiations are CONVERSATIONS (a big difference) and there are 6 of them!
forget the sandgropers cashing up and circling etc...
there are others well ahead of the game I suspect.
Just an an 'aside'.....
I do hear that the 'Chippy', RWI, is THE LAST "AERO CLUB CHIPPY IN AUS."
"Last of the breed 'in captivity".....how GOOD IS THAT!!!
Cheers
I do hear that the 'Chippy', RWI, is THE LAST "AERO CLUB CHIPPY IN AUS."
"Last of the breed 'in captivity".....how GOOD IS THAT!!!
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who is a half smart business person will wait until the Voluntary Administration starts then deal with the Administrators, Murray Field lost a lot of its appeal when the club flogged of the majority of the developable areas last year for $500,000.00 a bargain basement price then the bank jumped on the cleared funds.
The Due Diligence that was supposed to be done prior to the purchase of the ground schoo; cannot have been in any way thorough, it must have been a white wash, the previous Directors have a lot to answer for !! there remains a probability of legal liability individually and collectively depending on the state of the minutes of meetings.
The Due Diligence that was supposed to be done prior to the purchase of the ground schoo; cannot have been in any way thorough, it must have been a white wash, the previous Directors have a lot to answer for !! there remains a probability of legal liability individually and collectively depending on the state of the minutes of meetings.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Left Right Out
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you had me right up till your last...
Joker..
As the title suggests...
A SMALL part of Murrayfield was sold earlier in the year.
It is a matter of public record that the portion sold WAS NOT DEVELOP land as it was quarantined by CALM due to the nature of vegetation located in that area. It was sold to WESTNET for their pressure relief valve in their gas pipe AS WELL as Green Credit.
The remainder of Murrayfield IS VERY MUCH ZONED AND READY FOR DEVELOPMENT!!!!!!
The question remains .....to whom and how much $$$.
The members will VERY QUICKLY have to get their heads around the fact that Murrayfield IS GOING.....GONE!
As the CEO said the other night....just what sort of leverage they can get remains to be seen. The land is costing them more than any benefit of keeping it.
Even air operations at Murrayfield from RACWA can not be justified. This was mentioned by the CEO on Wednesday. He is having difficulty justifying having a/c and staff down there.
The question is this......
Is RACWA a land developer or a flying club - institution?
As the title suggests...
A SMALL part of Murrayfield was sold earlier in the year.
It is a matter of public record that the portion sold WAS NOT DEVELOP land as it was quarantined by CALM due to the nature of vegetation located in that area. It was sold to WESTNET for their pressure relief valve in their gas pipe AS WELL as Green Credit.
The remainder of Murrayfield IS VERY MUCH ZONED AND READY FOR DEVELOPMENT!!!!!!
The question remains .....to whom and how much $$$.
The members will VERY QUICKLY have to get their heads around the fact that Murrayfield IS GOING.....GONE!
As the CEO said the other night....just what sort of leverage they can get remains to be seen. The land is costing them more than any benefit of keeping it.
Even air operations at Murrayfield from RACWA can not be justified. This was mentioned by the CEO on Wednesday. He is having difficulty justifying having a/c and staff down there.
The question is this......
Is RACWA a land developer or a flying club - institution?