|
|
 |
|
| Features |
Comfort without Commitment
Michelle Seaton
07/01/2004
|
There is an even simpler
reason for Lemke and the lawyers to choose charter: for the amount of hours they
are flying, it is the least expensive way to fly privately. “Regardless of the
type of program, you’re going to pay less for charter on a mile-for-mile basis,”
says Walt Lamon, president of Wyvern Consulting, a New Jersey-based firm that
rates local and national charter providers.
This cost comparison
includes jet membership programs offered by national charter brokers and
fractional companies. Membership programs counter that they offer more than a
charter company can. In the case of Marquis Jet Partners, membership means
access to the fleet and customer service of NetJets, its parent company. In the
case of Sentient or Blue Star Jets—national charter brokers—it means access to a
nationwide group of charter providers that have been prescreened for service and
safety.
Fractional companies offering both ownership and jet membership have
successfully marketed against charter operators for the past decade by selling
the notion that ownership trumps charter in both safety and service, and that
these advantages justify considerably higher costs. According to Averitt Air’s
Gregory, these sales pitches succeeded because several years ago they were true.
“The fractionals have sold one thing: standardization of service. You get the
same thing every time you go out, and the charter companies have been terrible
at that,” he says. “Thanks to fractional, charter companies have begun to
standardize themselves. Now charter companies can give the same level of service
as the fractionals for significantly less cost,” he adds. Additional Information
 Expert Advice
 Safety Check
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
