Adagold Aviation
 

These guys seem to be doing OK out of the new "high frequency" charter market that now joins Cocos, Xmas Is, Curtin, Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Manus and Nauru.

"Our Airline" indeed...well I guess it is true because we are all paying for it.

Apart from their MOD charters the following is the list of contracts with the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.

Adagold, I believe is the primary contractor for DIAC in sourcing aircraft for moving the pegs around the board.

There may well be others, including the RAAF who are doing some of this work, especially when it comes to supplies.

The annual billings from Adagold to DIAC are as follows:

2007 - $734,160
2008 - $742,880
2009 - $ 5,363,203.86
2010 - $ 9,802,316.83
2011 - $ 9,013,289.26
2012 - $ 24,988,852.78
2013 - $ 29,543,000 ( for Jan-Jun)

TOTAL $ 80 million and counting. The second half of 2013 should be at least double the first half.

Has anyone ever seen their AOC?

With such a significant increase in revenue, you'd have to think that the larger operators will now be having a close look at getting a slice of the action. The obvious projection for 2013 is over $50m of tax payers money being spent on this operation (thanks Juliar/ALP) so it's something that the bigger operators "may" be able to do at a lower price due to economy of scale - not personally advocating this as we need the smaller operators around to "keep the b@stards honest".

601... Why do they need an AOC? They are a charter / brokering agent.

Interesting point! Can a charter broker make money out of chartering aircraft without an AOC? If they can, why should they?

They directly compete with and undercut those of us who have gone through the pain and expense of acquiring an AOC. :=

Before you start with the "They only arrange charters for aircraft that are on an AOC etc."!

I don't mind, (so much :sad:) competing with the clowns that charter out their aircraft below cost. :ugh: However I do mind trying to compete with third party charter/brokering agents who use said clowns to further their own needs without incurring any of the costs and responsibilities that go with having an AOC.

WHY USE A BROKER?

Finance – Insurance – Mortgage – Property & Real Estate – Cars – Stocks...

Brokers are specialists in their chosen fields all with an intimate knowledge of their industry and all well versed to provide a solution to meet your needs.

Adagold don’t own or have any financial interest in anything that flies so we focus on the best result for you – unbiased and fast!

You could call each and every aircraft owner / operator in the book and still not find an effective solution.


In other words if you know nothing about aircraft, call them and get stitched up

Why should Adagold have an AOC? I would've thought this might have something to do with it...

CAR 1998:

210 Restriction of advertising of commercial operations

(1) A person must not give a public notice, by newspaper advertisement, broadcast statement or any other means of public announcement, to the effect that a person is willing to undertake by use of an Australian aircraft any commercial operations if the last‑mentioned person has not obtained an Air Operator’s Certificate authorising the conduct of those operations.

Penalty: 10 penalty units.

(2) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability.

Note: For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.

CASA doesn't seem to to have any problems with the arrangement
Adagold probably now make more profit than any aviation outfit in Aus and you have to hand it to them, even they must be amazed with their own success

Had a few dealings with them in the past.

I gave them a quote for a flight stating in the quote that we could only carry x pax.

Arrived to be met by a "representative" to find out that the pax were clients of ours who were surprised that I had turned up as they had more pax that we could carry. They had already established that fact in correspondence with us.

Representative requested that we carry one extra pax on a jump seat and one on a toilet seat.

Extra paxs went by airline.

Where does this sit with the latest decisions regarding "charters"

I would image the $29 million figure would be their revenue which would include the cost of the charters. Even if they made 1% on that it's not a bad business to be in and that's only one client!

Also had dealings with them only to figure who they were and then call the client directly and cut them out of the action:E

I too fail to see how they are allowed to exist given that CASA have shut down operators in Darwin over the whole Tiwi Travel business which is basically the same thing. (travel agent sells tickets then charters aircraft but CASA were arguing it was RPT which this isn't.)

I can only guess they send you a letter when you sign the contract saying they are only a broker and you are flying under XYZ's AOC and insurance policy.

What I do not understand is how they can advertise aircraft they don't own. Obviously it is all legal as they have been going a while now.

Nope, I am told its only illegal if you get caught, isn't that how it all works, the bold prosper.

But as you say they must be completely legal to get awarded such big government contracts:suspect:

So long as any seats aren't available generally to the public(CASA v CAPER) it must also be all closed charter work or the AOC holder that they use would also be in big trouble as well unless they are RPT AOC holders.

Ahhhh. I think someone is onto it.

Incidentally, how many operators have applied for a K-mart RPT AOC now that Johnny Mac has said anyone can apply and get exemptions against the requirements? :ugh:

I thought the idea was to bring CHTR up to RPT standard, not send RPT down to CHTR standard? :confused:

HL

Yep, Muggins thought is was worth a cheeky go:ok: went in waving my letter and was laughed at by the local office, exemptions don't and wont be given unless you are have a RPT AOC application in the system:= and are at RPT level with check and training and basically all aspects of operations.

Then good luck with the maintenance if you haven't gone over to CASR Part 42 CAMO and found a Part 145 AMO.:ugh:

Subversive, completely agree

One thing that now gets brokers is BARS accreditation.

I know the mining is now starting to head in this direction (only using those approved) especially with the corporate charters in which I do.

FALCON X IDENTITY EXPOSED
 

News Flash.. Falcon X reveals his identity with a simple slip of the "WE" word

Explains a LOT of other posts as well!:O

Read it and think about it

Judging by the many and varied interpretations proffered by CAsA, how would a bureaucrat in a non-aviation related department know what the difference is between RPT, "closed charter", "private charter?" and charter and the requirements for such endeavors.

About the only thing missing from their web site is a copy of an AOC. A layman reading it would surmise that this company chartered aircraft.

Subversive

So you are saying Adagold only has a portion of the charter work done for the Dept of Immigration?

No personal axe to grind but find it very interesting that these guys are spending zillions of dollars of taxpayers money with only limited transparency.

Surely a fleet of tired QF 734's could do the job and be good for QF bottomline at the same time:ugh:

601

Not suggesting collusion are you?

As I would have thought that to get such a big government contract worth so much that due diligence would have been done on the departments side and a copy of the AOC sighted and certificate of currency for all insurances would have to be also kept on file.

Thought that should have been part of the original tender process and a box ticking exercise unless, like you say the public servant has no experience in Aviation.

If so what are they doing in charge of assessing such a large air transport tender, that's if it all even went to tender.

If it didn't go to tender and was just handed out then for such a large expenditure of public funds that's also a bit naughty.

Correct. Just ask Strategic and Mr James about that :=

It would not surprise me in the least that with Rudds knee jerk asylum seeker policy to quickly start virtually overnight that they would be scrambling to shove those naughty boaties on any operators aircraft to get them off AUS soil ASAP.
As for 'due diligence', that is a stumbling block this day and age to getting the job done, and when politicians asses and votes are at stake that 'due diligence' is the furtherest thing on their minds.