In a club, its members care for the planes, out of their responsibility towards the club, and the knowledge everyone is in the same boat. Costs are low because much is being done voluntarily, free of charge, by the members themselves.
Renting out a plane is hell. Because, out of 100 people renting it, only 5 will have the sense of honour to actually tell me what happened. The other 95 tell me nothing, leave the plane, and devil-may-care. Exactly like what_next said. The missing knob, the broken window handle, the loose plug, the completely readjusted avionics, the dent in the wing, the little tailstrike, the tire with a flat spot, and all that stuff. Costs a lot, is a lot of hassle, and whodunnit ?
In English, there is the term “Not-for-profit organization”… Same thing
Yes – see my post #14. The accounting rules of the organisation do not change the cost of replacement parts, etc.
Costs are low because much is being done voluntarily, free of charge, by the members themselves.
That will reduce the labour component, but has a limited “life” in reality because people eventually want some sort of payback, especially if most of the damage comes from a specific group of renters / club members 
These are all reasons why renting planes in a good condition is often difficult.
The phenomenon “aeroclub” must really be little known, in old Blighty… I have belonged to a couple of clubs, according to plane availability. Each and all of them saw everybody taking care (to a variable degree, though) of everything. And no, people do not want a payback, they realise this is their way to private flying under a formula they can afford. It really is a matter of tradition and of culture.
BTW regarding the matter of making a profit: in this country, nothing forbids a “not-for-profit” organisation to make a profit. As said, it is only wise to build some reserves against eventual mishaps. What a “not-for-profit” can not do, is to pay out (part of) its profits to its constituents – be they members or shareholders or whatever.
There may be other reasons however to make neither profit nor loss, and it is not too difficult to achieve that – transfer some cost or some revenue to the next fiscal year, under the guise of a provision, and you’re done. Every accountant knows how to do it, and so does our government. A bit like elevator trim in an aeroplane 
if one wishes to neither climb nor descend.
The phenomenon “aeroclub” must really be little known, in old Blighty
Since the OP is in France, I don’t see the relevance.
Peter wrote:
Yes – see my post #14. The accounting rules of the organisation do not change the cost of replacement parts, etc.
Indeed – sorry for not reading very carefully here!
Peter wrote:
IMHO the real difference is that the FTO needs to keep its planes functioning to a reasonable level while a “club” can just put INOP stickers on the broken stuff, because the vast majority of its members rarely venture very far
I think we are going in circles with this topic, but anyway: There is FTOs where planes and customers hardly ever venture far and there’s is clubs where members venture very far – I don’t think there is a correlation per se. But this will lead us to the old argument of comparing aeroclubs in different countries and then individual aeroclubs, etc..
Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
A bit like elevator trim in an aeroplane
+1 for this continued analogy!
I think, Patrick, based on your many past posts on this topic, your own rental situation is highly unusual. You can rent great quality hardware for little money and take it away for weeks, with great availability, without needing to comply with pilot currency requirements etc. That is incredibly rare. Obviously most statements one can make about anything are not going to be universally true, and people are always quick to point out exceptions no matter how rare (especially when the general statement was made by an admin/mod) but a useful discussion involves the appreciation of significant correlations. And in this department they are blindingly obvious, as the other posts indicate. BTW did you read about the 70 (seventy) EuroGA leaflet packs mailed to aeroclubs in Germany, France, Sweden and Norway?
Jan – the elevator trim analogy is complete nonsense. Have you ever done even the simplest kind of accounting, or attempted the running of any kind of enterprise involving homo sapiens which has money going in at one end, money coming out at the other end, and tries to deliver some kind of service in the middle, in a scenario where the demand is not guaranteed for an infinite period into the future? BTW we have a planned meet-up at LFAT on Sunday – just up the road from you!
@Peter, I am self-employed and do my own daily bookkeeping including VAT declarations; yearly income tax declarations are left to a professional though, mainly because of the instability of relevant laws and rules over here. And in an earlier life, I installed professional software at accountancy offices, and trained staff in its use. Yes, I think I may say I know about accounting. But perhaps accountancy in the UK is just as different from what continental countries do than flying ?
Regarding LFAT next Sunday: thanks for the tip, but it seems unlikely I’ll be flying at all – lots of wind forecast, gusting 30 kts and perhaps more. In which case my homefield would not even open, or – worse! – might have closed when I turn in in the afternoon. And excuse me for pointing out that, in terms of flying time, LFAT is not really on my doorstep – it is closer to yours!
