All
← Back to Squawk list
FBOs Confront Competition From Airport-operated FBOs
There is a growing trend for airport authorities to underwrite and operate FBOs in competition with other FBOs on that same airport. Airports say they need to do it for the sake of 'competition,' and FBOs say, 'compete on a level playing field.' (www.ainonline.com) More...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Pro and Con. It is unfair using public funds but there ought to be something written in the lease/contract about that type of competetition or any kind of competetition for that matter. Doesn't matter to me as when I flew our 757 and same now as new crew has 767, a lot of FBO's can't handle a plane that size and you have to use an Airline anyway. Tried not to on account of security and all but sometimes had too.
I think a lot of people have a skewed view on this and maybe base most of their opinions on larger airports. Airport operated FBOs are an absolute must at many smaller GA airports and are the only viable option sometimes these days. Many people seem to think that there is just endless amounts of money being made at FBOs anymore and that's just not the case. The last two airports/FBOs that I've managed only survive because their sponsoring municipalities see them as an asset to the community. I understand this article probably refers more to airports edging out privately owned FBOs at larger fields, but I've read this almost exact same article in several different publications as of late and must say that we are all being lumped into one big pot. One author even went so far as to directly discourage pilots from visiting ANY FBO that was operated by an airport saying that the don't provide the same level of service and that he bypasses them every chance he gets. That's really not fair.
Agreed. The discussion should really center on whether or not it is appropriate to use taxpayer dollars to compete with private enterprise.
Keeping in mind, if the municiplaity sponsor the FBO, doesn't that make the FBO employees government employees? And if they are govenrment employees then you are placing govenrment dollars right up against private enterprise, not good. Private enterprises can innovate but the govenrment will be regulating from permits, inspections, access and overall taxiway maintenance to include plowing and mowing will there be favoritism at that time?
This is not always so. My airport is sponsored by a municipality, but the way the airport board was structured many many years ago, I do not report to, nor am I employed by, it (the municipality). How I wish I were a government employee with benefits and so forth! All of my decisions are based on what I feel is best for the airport, and I absolutely despise favoritism as it never ends up working out for the best.
The bottom line is that I think you will see more and more sponsors actually having to run the airport as well as pump the gas and everything else that goes along with the FBO. These types of operations are only profitable at larger style airports. Even many of the private FBOs that I see nearby to me at what I consider smaller airports still receive some kind of subsidy to stay in business. Other than that I've watched several private people start up FBOs in the recent years with the best of intentions, only to watch the fail and walk away nearly bankrupt because there just (typically) isn't enough money coming in to sustain their operation. Not only is this bad for the individual/small operator, but it leaves the sponsoring municipality in a lurch. Many of you may not like it, but it's what is happening in our industry right now to keep GA going.
The bottom line is that I think you will see more and more sponsors actually having to run the airport as well as pump the gas and everything else that goes along with the FBO. These types of operations are only profitable at larger style airports. Even many of the private FBOs that I see nearby to me at what I consider smaller airports still receive some kind of subsidy to stay in business. Other than that I've watched several private people start up FBOs in the recent years with the best of intentions, only to watch the fail and walk away nearly bankrupt because there just (typically) isn't enough money coming in to sustain their operation. Not only is this bad for the individual/small operator, but it leaves the sponsoring municipality in a lurch. Many of you may not like it, but it's what is happening in our industry right now to keep GA going.
I think you just make tac air's point for them wayne. fbos compete with each other, even if there isn't another fbo on the field. i'm not sure why you claim 'monopoly' when the customer has a choice to buy fuel somewhere else, as you just clearly demonstrated with your example.