Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Flying School Owner makes AFR rich list

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Flying School Owner makes AFR rich list

Old 27th Oct 2019, 03:35
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 241
50 years ago Sunny I imagine that you didn’t pay much up front.

Its such a shame we are selling out on our youth. $120-150k at GA wages?

Its no wonder that not many want a bar of aviation in Oz...between CASAs f-cked-up regulation suite, costs of compliance, nepotism, privately owned infastructure....

Makes me wish I’d payed more attention playing Monopoly as a kid. I

There’s a goal for you youngsters - go places and turn Australia back into the smart hardworking country it used to be. Then we mightn’t need to be so Lucky.

I am sorry that my generation were such f-cking pushovers.



ramble on is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2019, 06:21
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,432
Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post


ĎMy experience, 50 years ago, is exactly the same as Squawks.
... and thatís where the similarities between us end!
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2019, 22:05
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by ramble on View Post
Back of a drink coaster: - a school with 10 aircraft
20 training slots per day
200 flights per week
10 instructors
5 flights per week per student
Does 40 students per week seem reasonable?
It does to me......for a bloody busy flying school.
So it would be reasonable for them to hold themselves out to 200 students with VET fees as being able to train them?
10 aircraft and 20 training slots per day is actually 200 flights per day, not 200 a week, but I'm not sure how you get 20 training slots per day.

10 aircraft, 14 training hrs per day (assuming you have people doing night/IFR) - 10 hrs actually flown

Assuming 1 aircraft US per day (100hrly once every ten days) = 90 flying hrs per day

630 flying hrs per week lets you have 3 hrs per week per student at 200 students

once they're past PPL stage the dual load is less so say 1/3 of those hours are dual

200 dual hours per week = 10000 dual hours per year = 10 instructors.

outlandishoutlanding is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 00:28
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Melbourne , AU
Posts: 3
"Department of Education figures showed that last year, more than $11m was loaned to 402 students of Box Hill.
In the same year, only six people were recorded as graduating from the CPL"

Hello!!! what is actually wrong with these people ...... that amount of money into someone's pocket for what seems for nothing!
heli_azz is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 03:54
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,182
outlandishoutlanding you're assuming only 1 out of 10 US per day? What about when they have a week or two of terrible weather in a row (annually according to climate data they have about 82days per year with over 1mm of rainfall, that's about 20%)? What about Instructors being sick and having to cancel? I'd be keen to hear from someone who has better knowledge as to what their actual Aircraft Hours Utilisation Rate is? I'm guessing around the 50-60% mark for a busy school? And besides these are all fictitious numbers pulled out as a starting point, not actual fleet numbers or student numbers for Soar.

For those who mentioned it, there is meant to be high scrutiny from the Education Department in terms of number of students that are passing in the allotted timeframes for providers who have access to VET FEE, so undoubtedly these will be getting extra scrutiny now in light of the number of people that have made reports. Either they'll find this rate is indeed abysmally low and wonder why they haven't noticed it sooner or they'll find the rate is acceptable and either that's because the rate is actually acceptable and they're doing the right thing or they're doing the wrong thing to meet that quotient. All of this is to say that whilst it is more accessible to people these days to get Government backed funding there are checks and balances that are put in place to stop people being taken in that shouldn't.

That being said I don't know what the requirement is like these days in terms of the Flight School or Provider to do interviews prior to entry to make sure they take on those that are capable. I'm pretty sure in New Zealand they're strict on it due to availability of training slots and they well should be here too to make sure that people are fully aware of what they're signing up for with such a massive debt.
Ixixly is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 04:22
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 814
How about when the students are sick or no-shows.

Disclaimer, I don't know anything about this particular school and keep an open mind, some people just don't have what it takes to be a pilot no matter how many hors they fly and there are always two sides to these stories...but how many flying schools are going to tell them that before squeezing 150 grand out of the feds on their behalf? I've heard of some places that will charge their account for the full lesson anyway and the student doesn't care as it's not "their" money. One friend, who worked at one of the many big schools that had VET approval then collapsed in a heap and left instructors unpaid and students with a big debt and not even a logbook to show for it despite this manna from heaven, said a huge chunk of that taxpayers' money goes in these "no show" fees.

Literally, money for nothing for the flying school.

Good to hear there is scrutiny bearing in mind the stories of the rorts when these loans first came in. For schools that don't want to do this kind of bulk training it is difficult to compete with what students perceive as "free" training and I would have probably fallen for it too, you can't blame the students who think they have found an easy cheap short cut, the marketing hook.

I think there is a place for government help, but it should be for people already in industry with a good employment track record to upgrade with ratings etc. Does having an endless supply of fugly CPLs really do anything to reduce the so-called shortage?

Final question, The stories of this fellow being sacked for making a suggestion that the boss try using different aircraft, surely there is a bit more to it than that?

This is all interesting to me because when people make reports like that in the national media a bit of mud sticks to all flying schools.
Clare Prop is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 04:35
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,276
Recent shenanigans in other "training schemes" spruiked by politicians and neglected by the bureaucrazys that fail in their oversight of the organizations that offer the training...and the dismal end results. But think of the $$$s YOURS. GONE.
Why would the Govt throw money at them even BEFORE they get a result.?
Smarties that can smell govt money a mile off, are right in there to enrich themselves....at taxpayer expense.

In the dim dark past the Aero Club that got me out the door with a fully fledged PPL got a costs subsidy to top up the rate /hour paid by the student. After the event of a dinkum outcome.

Govts and bureaurats should get the hell out of dabbling in businesses .
Leave it to free enterprise. A training organisation will work ok if it does happy students...ie satisfied with the training and value for their money.
If they persevere and struggle financially... all to the good. It means they really do want to be a pilot ...and will value the end result accordingly.
Someone who gets a 'free' licence . if even they go that far, will forget the debt and vanish into the woodwork.

Be very interesting to see a stats analysis...No.of students, hours flown, hours lectured, no of different instructors each student had., amount of $$s involved, no of days nothing happened due wxand etc Could be very informative.

Its not only flying students that need hand /eye coordination.!!
aroa is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 04:51
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,432
Final question, The stories of this fellow being sacked for making a suggestion that the boss try using different aircraft, surely there is a bit more to it than that?
It said in the article it was a conversation over beers after work; didnít sound overly formal.

Some of the articles said Groupon and some said Scoopon.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 05:16
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 122
Originally Posted by Clare Prop View Post
Final question, The stories of this fellow being sacked for making a suggestion that the boss try using different aircraft, surely there is a bit more to it than that?
At a guess, that's a positive spin, maybe a bit one-sided, on a situation as recounted to the reporters writing the article. The boss may have been reacting to being told how to run his flying school and phrased it as "If you're so smart you can go do your own thing, and don't let the door hit your bum on the way out". One person's transmission of "you're a pain in the backside and fired for constant insubordination" might be received as, or told later to the reporters as, "I'm encouraging you to grow as an independent businessman, elsewhere" - not that that is automatically what happened, but it could have been the case.
De_flieger is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 05:22
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 446
Sacked over fleet suggestion

Im going to somewhat lend my support to Neel on this.

It is true what he says. I assume that its me he is talking about. Neel did work for me at MFT after leaving another school.

He did approach me with a business model. At the time, I had my own business model, which differed somewhat to his. I was happy with mine, and it provided me with the work environment that was important to me.

He believed very strongly in his concept, I wouldn't budge on mine. We parted ways. There was slightly more to it, but nothing sinister.


The article was primarily about something else. If he was to summarise it in a sentence, as he did, he is being truthful.

Do I have any regrets. None at all. I will say, he had a plan, he executed it, and he achieved the business model he was after. Not many achieve that.

Are we on each others Christmas card list, maybe not, but i must somewhat take my hat off to him.

glenb is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 05:24
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 814
There was much discussion over on another thread a while ago about how some overseas school had put pre paid flying in the assets rather than the liabilities column....made the balance sheet look great even though they would have been insolvent if they had had to refund all pre paid money. I think that included groupons or something similar, there are many of them.

I would like to see how any of these schools that are being heavily subsidised by the government would still be around if the taxpayers' money tap was turned off.

As a taxpayer I am not happy that the amount these people have lobbied for has been approved to increase to $150G per student. In my experience we had a stude who had nearly finished PPL, then got sucked into one of these courses "Sorry to leave but they are offering me free flying" he said.. They made him start all over again. They bled him dry then went bust. He still had no PPL and a massive debt. Understandably, he gave it up. For the amount he was loaned, he could have finished his CPL with us and would be in an airline by now.
Clare Prop is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 07:15
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,182
You can't be serious glenb? If he is running what amounts to essentially a scam then whether he is making money or not right now is completely redundant as it seems it's about to all fall apart on him and I don't doubt the Education Department will be out for every penny they can scrape off him for it. A business model that relies on pulling the wool over the eyes of their customers and the government cannot be considered good in any way, shape or form.

And the worst part is that we all her are partly paying for it, the $11million that has gone to them through VET-FEE, that's our personal tax dollars at work and the tax charged on your business and mine too. They're a drain on everyone and should NEVER be commended.
Ixixly is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 09:33
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 446
ixixly

Absolutely I concur. I may not have made my view clear, but the issue is somewhat important to me.

Nothing is proven until a fair process has been conducted. Businesses, and peoples livelihoods can be destroyed in a moment, in this day and age. I have heard all the stories, and if proven, the due processes will be followed. But quite simply, it is an article at this stage.

At the moment the allegations I believe have stemmed from an article in the Australian. That alone, shouldn't be able to destroy a business. I am sure the Owners interest is to move out of the area of speculation, and into a more factual arena ASAP. The outcome of that, is what a business should live or die on, in my opinion.

Presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Its important. It really is.

The entire aviation industry needs to operate in that environment, if we expect growth and investment. There needs to be stability.

Trust in fair processes. For clarification, I aint blindly leaping to anyones defence, remember it was me that sacked him. Be mindful, its not a business model that appeals to me or most flying school owners, but that doesn't mean its wrong.

A fair and controlled process is what needs to happen, with opportunities to demonstrate good intent, and improve. That's the first step, in getting confidence into the industry.

Sorry folk, I don't want to get too controversial, Ive got my hands full somewhere else....
glenb is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 09:49
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,182
glenb, that's a very fair point as well. I sincerely hope it gets dealt with properly and that those that have done the wrong thing are held to account.
Ixixly is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 09:50
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 446
ixixly

Cheers. More good people keep their livelihoods that way.
glenb is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 12:58
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 31
G’day Glen!

I hope you’re doing well mate.

I had to laugh.. I remember a story I once heard; With regard to your old Ops manual at MFT.. what was the colour of the football that the Ops manual instructed be wedged into the door during a Forced Landing?
Superfly Slick Dick is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2019, 20:56
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 446
It was a bright green one. Sat in the ops manual for many many years.

Hundreds read the ops manual, and few ever saw it.

True story. Whoever told you that, obviously read the ops manual. Ahhh, the good old days when GA was fun.
glenb is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 10:04
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 814
Who would be refunding the loans to them should they be successful, the Rich List owner, the TAFE or us taxpayers? It's our money that has already been thrown away so I would be hoping we taxpayers would be getting it back, rather than paying twice.

From The Australian: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...db66edec0b5a24 Enrolments in aviation courses with Box Hill Institute are believed to be on hold as the TAFE college responds to an audit by the Australian Skills Quality Authority.

As The Australian revealed last week, 15 former students of Box Hill and Soar Aviation were seeking refunds of their VET loans because they were unhappy with the training they received. That figure has grown to 35 students, including 30 from Melbourne and five from Sydney.

It followed revelations more than 400 students were enrolled in two-year commercial pilotsí licence courses at Box Hill in 2018, which had received $11m in loan payments in return.


Department of Education figures showed only six people had graduated from the diploma course but Soar Aviation CEO Neel Khokhani said the figure was as high as 61. Box Hill CEO Vivienne King confirmed ASQA had audited aviation delivery at the institute and it was currently responding to the audit report as requested.

Robyn Ironside
Clare Prop is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2019, 15:11
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,182
I bet the number of people asking for refunds is about to... "Soar"
Ixixly is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2019, 11:26
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,182
Reports of fleet grounded...guessing business decision by the owner. Anyone able to comment?
Ixixly 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 © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.