MedEwok wrote:
The bit about how “true” (non-profit) clubs work, aeroclubs in particular. If you take say 100 or 200 Germans/French/Swedish whatever people of average or slightly above average income and have them pool their financial resources, they all can suddenly afford to buy and fly aircraft. Moreover, by doing certain labour “for free” as part of their club membership, they can further decrease their overall cost (of course, since time is money, that cost is in theory equal to their hourly pay times the hours they worked for the club, so not “free” in the strictest sense of the word).Inevitably, some members (flying less hours) will subsidise others (flying more) indirectly, but nobody is bothered by that (or they leave the club if they are, but many “Karteileichen” pay until death). Also, since the club is tax exempt, it’s costs are limited to the direct operating cost of the aircraft and rent for club premises (although many clubs own their airfield outright).
This model is quite financially sustainable but still makes the activity of flying more affordable than ot would be otherwise.
This is the big difference between the UK and the continent. Over here very few (I am not personally aware of any) ‘flying clubs’ are actually true member-owned clubs in the way you describe. They are mostly businesses (and pretty marginal businesses at that) that someone is attempting to make a profit from.
Traditional private golf clubs in the UK, on the other hand, are member-owned. There are for-profit golf ‘clubs’ – which like flying clubs are businesses that attempt to give the illusion of being a club, but they are very much the second tier and members of private clubs would tend to look down on the model.
It would be a good thing if the protected status and privileges of a member-owned club were codified in UK law the way it is on the continent. As a minimum the use of the term ought to be protected – a for-profit business with a beneficial owner should not be able to describe itself as a club when it is nothing of the sort.
There is no theoretical reason why a genuine member-owned flying club should not be set up in the UK, but the enormous problems would be:
1) Deciding where it should be – many pilots would be interested but only if it were close to them.
2) Actually getting somewhere to operate – a lease at an airfield would be very hard to get because no for-profit operator wants a not-for-profit competitor on their doorstep, and purchasing an airfield would be prohibitively expensive.
3) Getting members to commit initial funds for purchase of club aircraft and other such expenses.
Perhaps the most viable model would be a club that had no fixed location, existed mainly online and owned aircraft which were hangered/parked wherever suitable terms could be negotiated and according to member demand – not necessarily with all aircraft in the same place. Not having a clubhouse ruins the social side though.
Graham wrote:
Over here very few (I am not personally aware of any) ‘flying clubs’ are actually true member-owned clubs in the way you describe
I think typically glider clubs are true member owned clubs, but it seems many powered flying clubs are standard for-profit businesses.
This is getting way off topic for “climate change” but I am not sure what to do with it 
Many similar threads. And this one which generated some heat
The tax free aspect is practically immaterial because most “clubs” do not make a taxable profit anyway. In some countries it gets used to get around some things e.g. in Italy and Greece.
In the UK there is an accounting structure which “clubs” can use (e.g. model aeroplane flying clubs use it – @fuji_abound and @howard may know more) and I looked at this when I inherited the admin of EuroGA, but there was no advantage unless making a taxable profit, which was never going to happen Any setup around a for-rental plane(s) can do the same: adjust the rates so no taxable profit is made, but of course it must remain cash-positive otherwise it will eventually go bust.
I’m sorry Peter I did not intend to derail the topic.
I think @Graham ’s post showed that while the concept of a member-owned not-for-profit club exists in the UK, the culture behind it is not very widespread, unlike here. In Germany statistically half of the population is in one such club, they are existing for practically all activities imaginable.
To get this back on topic, it’s imaginable that a city council strips an aeroclub of support citing climate change as a reason. I disapprove of this, but if I weren’t interested in aviation I could understand why this activity is considered harmful to the environment and thus not “gemeinnützig”, THE key criteria for a German club (I’d translate it as “useful/beneficial for society”).
I think @Graham ’s post showed that while the concept of a member-owned not-for-profit club exists in the UK, the culture behind it is not very widespread, unlike here. In Germany statistically half of the population is in one such club, they are existing for practically all activities imaginable.
On the contrary; I think the UK is full of clubs exactly like you describe. It is a well established structure. Just not in GA. Why not, is another Q and I don’t know the answer. Probably to do with a perceived limitation of liability of the proprietors (a lot of syndicates are Ltd for this reason) plus a lot of people go into GA business because they watched too many movies with Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, DC3s, etc, and they think they will make a lot of money and will end up with lots of long legged women, so a Ltd Co is the obvious corporate structure The fact that many go this way doesn’t stop the next one doing it.
ULM, experimental, orphans etc, because the clubs and some schools etc, maintain them in house would normally cost around €70 euros an hour wet. Young people who get involved with gliding, or cleaning aircraft within clubs will often get free flights, sometimes with an instructor which will count towards a licence.
The drinks at our club are generally cheaper than in cafés and bars in the town even if the surroundings might be basic.
We hosted the two seat aerobatic championships of France a few years ago, a young lady and her father helped out with the organisation, putting up the marquee etc. To thank them, the club did a deal with one of the aerobatic instructors and she went, free of charge through an aerobatic routine during which she was allowed to take control, the club simply paid for the fuel. The smile on her face was well worth the money.
Every year except last year, the Kiwanis (a bit like the rotary club or the lions) come to the club and we take them in groups of 2 or 3 for a tour of the area, only about 20mins or so but we try to fly over an area they know. Club pays some, Kiwanis pays some. I am fortunate to be one of the pilots. It costs me nothing but I would gladly pay to see the glee which these unfortunate children (often with Downs syndrome or autistic or crippled in some way) get from just a short flight in a small aircraft. Year 6 school classes of kids, I think 8 or 9 years old.Many of these kids return several years later as young students on the Brevet Initiation Aeronautique or even as student pilots.
At the club attached to the ATO one young man would turn up everyday to take planes out of the hangar and put them back in in the evening. Refuel them, clear ice etc. He was able to sneak in to theory lessons and fly in the back during instructional flights. He received low cost or zero cost training and is now CPL and has passed all his ATPL exams.
It is difficult to say how many hours club pilots in France fly each year, I know some who do 150hrs and others just the bare minimum to keep their licence. But most French pilots go off in groupd of 2 or 3 sharing the PIC role. Usually each pilot will get 1 to 2 hours PIC but is this any less experience than a long voyage on auto pilot
I think I have written too much but I am passionate about finding ways to help the whole community to take part in GA in one way or another.
Peter wrote:
fuel cost dominates the DOC these days
At least in Poland many flights (even proper cross country trips) in Aeroklub planes can be done on noticeably cheaper fuel. At Aeroklub Slaski/EPKM almost everything that could be even remotely regarded as flight training – not necessarily towards a license or a rating – is just labelled as training. And because of all the legal framework the Aeroklubs have here – being often ATOs, dealing in fuel, sometimes even having an A-A AOC – this means the member’s wet hour rate, compared to flying your own plane or in a syndicate, is often less excise duty. I switched from a 35 l/h Aeroklub C172 to a “private” 50 l/h Bonanza and the increase is eye watering… ;)
@Peter wrote:
In the UK there is an accounting structure which “clubs” can use (e.g. model aeroplane flying clubs use it – @fuji_abound and @howard may know more) and I looked at this when I inherited the admin of EuroGA, but there was no advantage unless making a taxable profit,
Hello Peter, I believe you are referring to Mutual Businesses, around which the technicalities are strict, but if met, then the profit from such activities are free of UK income tax. The strict technicalities of course include no withdrawal of any profits ever (which have instead to be reinvested) and the profits have to be reinvested only for the benefit of the members and the business must trade only between the members, or the resultant profit is taxable. One can read the regulations in full in the UK tax authority’s (HMRC) guidance to its own tax inspectors here HMRC Inspectors’ manual reference BIM 24015.
I think the mutual trading model can be really good and helpful for clubs that are run strictly and solely for their members.
Howard
Flying needs a fair bit of money everywhere;
A friend of mine flies around 400hours on €800 per year. All gliding though, but still. If you fly to fly, there is no way around gliding anyway.
He has now compensated all his gliding incuced emitted CO2 for more than a decade of flying for less than 200€.
Graham wrote:
This is the big difference between the UK and the continent. Over here very few (I am not personally aware of any) ‘flying clubs’ are actually true member-owned clubs in the way you describe. They are mostly businesses (and pretty marginal businesses at that) that someone is attempting to make a profit from.Traditional private golf clubs in the UK, on the other hand, are member-owned.
Cool thing: In Germany it’s exactly the other way around: Flying clubs are “member owned” while golf clubs are mostly businesses …
