Liverpool Fuel Crisis for GA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liverpool Fuel Crisis for GA
If you fly out of Liverpool or indeed fly into Liverpool you need to know about changes operative from 1st September 2012.ESSO will cease to provide fuel from this date and you will have to buy it from Ravenair. We have received about 2-3 weeks notice of this change!
I am a member and Director of SMAC (Southport and Merseyside Aero Club), and we like other GA users/groups, as well as FBO's will only have access to this one supplier. The hike in price is 135%. Our price is increasing by some 60+ pence per litre.
There is an outcry about this and a User Group has been formed and we have involved AOPA. A meeting is scheduled at 19:30 hours on 10th September at Hale Village Hall L24 4AE, to discuss action that we can take. Martin Robinson of AOPA is attending the meeting. Any interested parties are welcome to come along. We have also created a www site for up to date information at liverpoolgausers.org.uk.
PPruners support would be helpful.
Jim Addison
PS The price per litre of AvGas will be £2.28594. Probably the most expensive around.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: FMMI
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS The price per litre of AvGas will be £2.28594. Probably the most expensive around.
At EHLE for example we pay just short of 3 euro's (£2,38) per liter.
Lelystad Airport Fuel info in Dutch
I do hope that you can solve this issue with the supplier. AvGas is a very slowly dying fuel type. We should be shifting to Diesel and Mogas alternatives.
Last edited by Immortal; 31st Aug 2012 at 14:45. Reason: grammar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have much sympathy with your situation, and wish you good luck in finding a solution.
But if you are to do that, I suggest that you conduct your campain in an open light and with honesty and clarity.
1. The price rise you have suggested is 35%, not 135%.
2. While £2.28 is in the top 15% of prices as shown here
Fuel Price League
it's certainly not the most expensive around.
I'm not saying this to be smart or to nit pick with you, but rather to help you so that you can discuss the issues with those who can facilite a solution, rather than getting caught up in arguments with them over minor details.
Keep your argument clean and correct, and then you can keep it focused on the issues rather than getting side tracked.
But if you are to do that, I suggest that you conduct your campain in an open light and with honesty and clarity.
1. The price rise you have suggested is 35%, not 135%.
2. While £2.28 is in the top 15% of prices as shown here
Fuel Price League
it's certainly not the most expensive around.
I'm not saying this to be smart or to nit pick with you, but rather to help you so that you can discuss the issues with those who can facilite a solution, rather than getting caught up in arguments with them over minor details.
Keep your argument clean and correct, and then you can keep it focused on the issues rather than getting side tracked.
Last edited by dublinpilot; 31st Aug 2012 at 12:30.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Back in the UK again.
Age: 77
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Options??
You say you have to buy it from a new supplier. Is this because the airport have decreed this or because they are the only company left supplying fuel once Esso leave??
Have you thought about talking to the fuel supplier who is leaving and "doing a deal" for an Avgas tanker and a regular supply??
As well as the major players (Exxon, Shell, BP, Total), there are independents out there who supply the smaller airfields.
What about Total's unleaded avgas?
Have you thought about talking to the fuel supplier who is leaving and "doing a deal" for an Avgas tanker and a regular supply??
As well as the major players (Exxon, Shell, BP, Total), there are independents out there who supply the smaller airfields.
What about Total's unleaded avgas?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 36
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish we had 100LL for £2.28 round these parts. That's actually quite cheap in comparison to some places. I know of a certain "big" airport that was charging £2.70/lt not long ago 
I feel sympathy however. When there is a monopoly it is inevitably milked, as was happening at the above. The attitude there was "if you don't like it, go elsewhere". Also regularly there was a long wait for fuel as the agent concentrated on Citations, Gulfstreams etc. first. When we asked about it, the attitude was the same. Good old British customer service
They didn't seem to care if it cost them custom.
My home base is currenly charging £2.33/lt. Think I'll start flying something that takes Unleaded!
Smithy
I feel sympathy however. When there is a monopoly it is inevitably milked, as was happening at the above. The attitude there was "if you don't like it, go elsewhere". Also regularly there was a long wait for fuel as the agent concentrated on Citations, Gulfstreams etc. first. When we asked about it, the attitude was the same. Good old British customer service
They didn't seem to care if it cost them custom.My home base is currenly charging £2.33/lt. Think I'll start flying something that takes Unleaded!
Smithy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monopoly
At present (until tomorrow), fuel is supplied by Shell & ESSO. From tomorrow only Shell via Ravenair.
The Liverpool Airport Management has refused to let the GA users have the type of service that you describe. One of the FBO's had permission for a bowser and Liverpool Airport Management have rescinded the permission!
The Liverpool Airport Management has refused to let the GA users have the type of service that you describe. One of the FBO's had permission for a bowser and Liverpool Airport Management have rescinded the permission!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thiink perhaps the reasons behind it are that the airport authority want to route business of this nature through the favoured FBO. Which, can I assume, is Ravenair at Liverpool.
Same at Glasgow, the club buys its fuel from Signature, who put a mark up on it. You can go direct to Signature and buy it cheaper, a short start up and taxi across the airfield.
I think a lot of the larger fields operate this way
Same at Glasgow, the club buys its fuel from Signature, who put a mark up on it. You can go direct to Signature and buy it cheaper, a short start up and taxi across the airfield.
I think a lot of the larger fields operate this way
Last edited by maxred; 31st Aug 2012 at 14:22.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norf West by West
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monopoly Supplier
The issue here is not primarily about price, although a 60ppl increase will have a major effect on the several GA operators at Liverpool.
The real issue is having a monopoly supplier who is also a competitor, Ravenair are not only an FBO but also operate a flying school,and obviously from 1st September will have a significant cost advantage over others on the field. Those others will have to form a queue for supplies, and guess where any priority is likely to be!
This situation pertained at Liverpool many years ago, before Ravenair's appearance on the scene, a monopoly supplier of Avgas made life very difficult for the other training providers, things like, no fuel on Friday afternoon - so program delayed on Saturday morning whilst waiting for fuel, bowser "breaking down" so no supply, driver away on other work etc etc. Whist I am not suggesting that these tactics will apply from now on, the temptation will be there and there will be no option to take custom elsewhere.
Posters above refer to other airports, I don't think that Signature operate flying training they are strictly an FBO whith no conflict of interest.
This monopoly situation can only lead to a reduction of GA at Liverpool, with a consquent increase in prices - which will lead to a reduction in flying etc etc etc
Not a good time to be a flying school at what in the past has been a vibrant and mostly harmonious location.
Good luck to Lomac, LFS, Helicentre et al in there fight against this iniquitous (sp) decision
TTWTDI
The real issue is having a monopoly supplier who is also a competitor, Ravenair are not only an FBO but also operate a flying school,and obviously from 1st September will have a significant cost advantage over others on the field. Those others will have to form a queue for supplies, and guess where any priority is likely to be!
This situation pertained at Liverpool many years ago, before Ravenair's appearance on the scene, a monopoly supplier of Avgas made life very difficult for the other training providers, things like, no fuel on Friday afternoon - so program delayed on Saturday morning whilst waiting for fuel, bowser "breaking down" so no supply, driver away on other work etc etc. Whist I am not suggesting that these tactics will apply from now on, the temptation will be there and there will be no option to take custom elsewhere.
Posters above refer to other airports, I don't think that Signature operate flying training they are strictly an FBO whith no conflict of interest.
This monopoly situation can only lead to a reduction of GA at Liverpool, with a consquent increase in prices - which will lead to a reduction in flying etc etc etc
Not a good time to be a flying school at what in the past has been a vibrant and mostly harmonious location.
Good luck to Lomac, LFS, Helicentre et al in there fight against this iniquitous (sp) decision
TTWTDI
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most licensed big airports won't allow this.
Even if there isn't a sole distributer of fuel contract they will just keep the H&S paper flowing in your direction. And in the very unlikely event you do succeed in ticking all the boxes the rules will be changed the next week.
I wouldn't be suprised if half of the fuel price increase in LVP is going straight to the airport.
Airports like monopolys and usually they try there very best to hedge out anything which doesn't give them a kick back. If there is nothing they can do about it they will try other means to limit the supplier.
I have always thought that the greggs baker at MAN was in this situation. 10 years ago everyone could get access to it. Now its in a back corner in arrivals and you have to know where it is to be able to get to it. Still always busy though as all operating crew know where it is, all the locals and airport workers do as well.
Even if there isn't a sole distributer of fuel contract they will just keep the H&S paper flowing in your direction. And in the very unlikely event you do succeed in ticking all the boxes the rules will be changed the next week.
I wouldn't be suprised if half of the fuel price increase in LVP is going straight to the airport.
Airports like monopolys and usually they try there very best to hedge out anything which doesn't give them a kick back. If there is nothing they can do about it they will try other means to limit the supplier.
I have always thought that the greggs baker at MAN was in this situation. 10 years ago everyone could get access to it. Now its in a back corner in arrivals and you have to know where it is to be able to get to it. Still always busy though as all operating crew know where it is, all the locals and airport workers do as well.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a Liverpool based owner and with a vested interest in finding out the facts I spent a very interesting hour or so over the weekend with Wayne Barrett, Ops Director of Ravenair.
Before we all get too exercised about this, there is an awful lot of misinformation around and it might be beneficial to take a breath and consider some of the facts, which Wayne took the time to share very openly with me.
Firstly, the price which Ravenair are going to be charging us is the same as the rate at which they charge all of their other GA customers (this has been verified by members of the existing Cirrus and Commander groups). Wayne made the point that it would become obvious very quickly if they tried to profit excessively from the "new"customers, as many of us know each other. It's also worth noting that with their own fleet of 30+ aircraft (half of which are twins) they are in a relatively good buying position and their customers do actually benefit from that (you won't believe that part until you read on). The key point however is that the pricing policy to new customers exactly matches that for existing customers and it is clear to me that this has not changed in light of the sole supply status. Their prices have simply followed the market only, i.e there is no additional markup due to their sole supply status.
Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, Ravenair do not buy their Avgas from Exxon, they buy it from Shell, so it really isn't a case of buying it at our "old" price and marking it up. Wayne went through 18 month historical average supply prices for Exxon and Shell. This was fascinating; about 9 months ago they were both very similar. Then, over the more recent months as fuel costs from all suppliers continued to rise, Shell increased their prices in line with the market but Exxon did not. (By the way, this is all publicly available information if anyone wants to verify the facts). One can only guess at why Exxon let their price rises lag behind the others, but it's worth noting that there are at least four different factors which can affect pricing (the cost of crude, the cost of shipping, the exchange rate against the dollar and the oil companies profit multipliers). Even more surprising is the fact that (AIUI) Exxon buy their fuel from Shell anyway! Anyway, the net result is that Exxon has been (in aviation terms) something of a bargain.
Now, turning to the situation al LPL, Exxon gave notice (in fact, insufficient notice according to their contract) that they would no longer be prepared to supply Avgas on the GA Apron. Several of the residents asked to have their own mobile bowser, but the airport had already reached agreement with the CAA and the HSE that they would try to reduce the number of mobile bowsers rather than increase them (there is apparently national pressure to do this due to "safety concerns" at GA airfields which may or may not be unfounded).
Just as an aside, if you saw the extent of the Risk Assessment documentation, licensing and insurance requirements which Ravenair have to fulfil, you'll see this is not for the faint hearted, and I would surmise that some of the LPL residents who applied for mobile bowsers may not have been in a position to comply anyway. Ravenair obviously already had all of this in place as an existing supplier of many years' standing.
There is also the issue of who stores the fuel. At the moment bulk storage is in tanks jointly owned by Exxon and Shell, so this precludes (for example) Total fuel being bought and stored if their rate happens to be better. Any other supplier would have to be agreed with the airport (and a commercial agreement put in place) and have a point of delivery to allow storage.
So, if I were to summarise, we have been getting a better deal than most for many months, and this deal is no longer available to us. The rate which we pay now will (as always) suffer from the ups and downs of fuel prices just like it did with Exxon. Granted, it's no bargain, but as the old fuel stocks at various airfields get replaced at current rates it should become clear that we aren't wildly out of kilter. In a way, had we had lots of gradual rises over the last 9 months we wouldn't even be discussing it now, but the apparent jump is what has caused the upset.
One thing which has become clear is that it is often difficult to compare like with like due to the different practices of the fuel companies. One good method is an average over a 12-18 month period which is what we will do from now on (and, just for the record, what Ravenair do as part of their procurement and purchase procedures).
On a more practical basis, I arrived at 11:30 on Saturday and the aircraft needed fuel. 5 mins later the Ravenair fueller was there with no fuss and a cheery smile. Anyone who knows the deal with Exxon will realise what an achievement this is (most importantly, there was no taxying down to Stand 14 and waiting half-an-hour while the Exxon guy finishes his sandwich).
Overall I think we had a great deal, but it has now ended, however, the alternative arrangements do have some positives too.
Hope that's helpful
Before we all get too exercised about this, there is an awful lot of misinformation around and it might be beneficial to take a breath and consider some of the facts, which Wayne took the time to share very openly with me.
Firstly, the price which Ravenair are going to be charging us is the same as the rate at which they charge all of their other GA customers (this has been verified by members of the existing Cirrus and Commander groups). Wayne made the point that it would become obvious very quickly if they tried to profit excessively from the "new"customers, as many of us know each other. It's also worth noting that with their own fleet of 30+ aircraft (half of which are twins) they are in a relatively good buying position and their customers do actually benefit from that (you won't believe that part until you read on). The key point however is that the pricing policy to new customers exactly matches that for existing customers and it is clear to me that this has not changed in light of the sole supply status. Their prices have simply followed the market only, i.e there is no additional markup due to their sole supply status.
Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, Ravenair do not buy their Avgas from Exxon, they buy it from Shell, so it really isn't a case of buying it at our "old" price and marking it up. Wayne went through 18 month historical average supply prices for Exxon and Shell. This was fascinating; about 9 months ago they were both very similar. Then, over the more recent months as fuel costs from all suppliers continued to rise, Shell increased their prices in line with the market but Exxon did not. (By the way, this is all publicly available information if anyone wants to verify the facts). One can only guess at why Exxon let their price rises lag behind the others, but it's worth noting that there are at least four different factors which can affect pricing (the cost of crude, the cost of shipping, the exchange rate against the dollar and the oil companies profit multipliers). Even more surprising is the fact that (AIUI) Exxon buy their fuel from Shell anyway! Anyway, the net result is that Exxon has been (in aviation terms) something of a bargain.
Now, turning to the situation al LPL, Exxon gave notice (in fact, insufficient notice according to their contract) that they would no longer be prepared to supply Avgas on the GA Apron. Several of the residents asked to have their own mobile bowser, but the airport had already reached agreement with the CAA and the HSE that they would try to reduce the number of mobile bowsers rather than increase them (there is apparently national pressure to do this due to "safety concerns" at GA airfields which may or may not be unfounded).
Just as an aside, if you saw the extent of the Risk Assessment documentation, licensing and insurance requirements which Ravenair have to fulfil, you'll see this is not for the faint hearted, and I would surmise that some of the LPL residents who applied for mobile bowsers may not have been in a position to comply anyway. Ravenair obviously already had all of this in place as an existing supplier of many years' standing.
There is also the issue of who stores the fuel. At the moment bulk storage is in tanks jointly owned by Exxon and Shell, so this precludes (for example) Total fuel being bought and stored if their rate happens to be better. Any other supplier would have to be agreed with the airport (and a commercial agreement put in place) and have a point of delivery to allow storage.
So, if I were to summarise, we have been getting a better deal than most for many months, and this deal is no longer available to us. The rate which we pay now will (as always) suffer from the ups and downs of fuel prices just like it did with Exxon. Granted, it's no bargain, but as the old fuel stocks at various airfields get replaced at current rates it should become clear that we aren't wildly out of kilter. In a way, had we had lots of gradual rises over the last 9 months we wouldn't even be discussing it now, but the apparent jump is what has caused the upset.
One thing which has become clear is that it is often difficult to compare like with like due to the different practices of the fuel companies. One good method is an average over a 12-18 month period which is what we will do from now on (and, just for the record, what Ravenair do as part of their procurement and purchase procedures).
On a more practical basis, I arrived at 11:30 on Saturday and the aircraft needed fuel. 5 mins later the Ravenair fueller was there with no fuss and a cheery smile. Anyone who knows the deal with Exxon will realise what an achievement this is (most importantly, there was no taxying down to Stand 14 and waiting half-an-hour while the Exxon guy finishes his sandwich).
Overall I think we had a great deal, but it has now ended, however, the alternative arrangements do have some positives too.
Hope that's helpful
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that there's a big difference between "operating at a loss" and "not making as much profit as the shareholders might want"!
I'm guessing the latter rather than the former.
I'm guessing the latter rather than the former.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand via one of the FBO's that Esso would be prepared to provide fuel to a GA Bowser at previously established rates, plus the recent 5% general rise in fuel prices.
Liverpool Airport management are, at present, not allowing an additional bowser in this area. They (LAM) claim this is for H&S reasons, with CAA and DfT pressure?
I also know that Total would also be interested and would be prepared to do a joint project with a suitable FBO.
Liverpool Airport management are, at present, not allowing an additional bowser in this area. They (LAM) claim this is for H&S reasons, with CAA and DfT pressure?
I also know that Total would also be interested and would be prepared to do a joint project with a suitable FBO.