VWA IS MISSING 12 AIRCRAFT THAT WERE SOLD AT $100

JJacobs · Post by **JJacobs** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:14 am

All of them were sold for 100 dollars and we are missing 190 million dollars from the budget any help is appreciated

JJacobs · Post by **JJacobs** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:14 am

also im the only pilot in the VA now i think we had 8

BigQ · Post by **BigQ** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:34 am

I bought I believe 6 of the aircraft that were sold by your CEO, mr. Aaron Z, at 100$. As for the 190 millions missing in your budget, look in the finances section of the airline, you may be able to find something there...

EDIT:
Confirmation - I did buy from VAWA the following aircraft:
A340-600
B777-200
B737-800
ATR-72
C-130
A319 (unknown whether VAWA or LESA, no record to show)

CAPFlyer · Post by **CAPFlyer** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:22 pm

BigQ wrote:I bought I believe 6 of the aircraft that were sold by your CEO, mr. Aaron Z, at 100$. As for the 190 millions missing in your budget, look in the finances section of the airline, you may be able to find something there...

EDIT:
Confirmation - I did buy from VAWA the following aircraft:
A340-600
B777-200
B737-800
ATR-72
C-130
A319 (unknown whether VAWA or LESA, no record to show)

BigQ,

Just FYI, some people don't appreciate people buying aircraft like that. If they post up at $100, then don't buy them. Konny made a statement to the effect of there being a penalty for buying and selling aircraft at artificially low prices if it became a problem. It's not fair to other users for you to purchase an aircraft at $100 when they have to pay 1000 times as much to get an airplane themselves.

BigQ · Post by **BigQ** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:05 pm

Well, isn't that what everybody does in life? Buy low, sell high? I truly wanted the triple seven, the 738 and the C-130... I'm ready to send all of them back to the owners if they request it and that the cause of all this is unveiled. (I heard rumours of sabotage, I'll definately send them back if that's the cause no questions asked)

I'm sure I shouldn't be considered the only one who does this, since I purchased the major part(but not all) of the aircraft for sale... Look around you, I am not the airline that bought massive planes at a very low price from airlines that were dropping everything... It's the airlines that are initiating their selloffs that you would need to criticize, not the buyers... I assumed total termination of Virtual Airlines World Alliance, and so I bought. And why shouldn't I buy planes that are open to the public? hmmm? Sorry for arriving there before you...

Post by **cmdrnmartin** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:32 pm

To be honest Capflyer, until theres a scrap airplane function, I'll continue liquidating types at about a million per frame, since I don't need them, someone else might want them etc. The scrap button will most likely stop part of this abuse.

kssyed · Post by **kssyed** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:20 pm

Not sure if this applies but I bought a B732 at $1v from Les.. If this is one of those that needs to be return I shall do so with no problem.

Just let me know!!

BigQ · Post by **BigQ** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:06 pm

Nah, LESA was not associated with VAWA, and had announced the closing of their airline about a week ago...

CAPFlyer · Post by **CAPFlyer** » Sun Apr 02, 2006 12:15 am

Justin, if you don't want them anymore, then just don't use them instead of selling them for "scrap". Also, if you're selling them for scrap, then you might want to make sure that their maintenance level is really low so that people have to make heavy repairs to them to fly them again. If you sell something for scrap, you sell it because either it's too badly damaged to fly again (ever), or it is in a bad enough condition that the company doesn't want to pay for it to be fixed.

What really needs to happen is not have a "scrap" button but have a function within the system that you can sell the airplane back to the database for a certain portion of the list value. This way you're getting money back without flooding the market with artificially low priced aircraft.

Also, markets and economies are buyer (demand) driven. If people don't buy the planes that are offered at $100 or $1,000,000 that are worth many times that, then people will stop trying to sell them at that price just as quickly as people will stop trying to sell them at that price if there is a penalty associated with it. To purchase the airplanes at the low price only encourages continue selling at those levels.

There was a discussion previously on this and it seemed to me that the general conclusion was that $1 and $100 aircraft weren't to be bought because it was unfair to the majority of the users since not everyone can buy a plane at that price (1 plane, 5 people want it, there's a problem).

JJacobs · Post by **JJacobs** » Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:11 am

10 have been found 2 are still missing, those are beleived to be C182's

Ionathan · Post by **Ionathan** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:11 pm

CAPFlyer wrote:Also, markets and economies are buyer (demand) driven. If people don't buy the planes that are offered at $100 or $1,000,000 that are worth many times that, then people will stop trying to sell them at that price just as quickly as people will stop trying to sell them at that price if there is a penalty associated with it. To purchase the airplanes at the low price only encourages continue selling at those levels.

Indeed sometimes aircrafts appear to be sold at 1$ and this is a known human-derived problem upon setting the price. I avoid buying aircrafts at the price of 1$ because (a) I know it is probably a bug unless differently announced and (b) I don't actually need them as my VA is big enough. I did it once as I did not know about the problem but we settled the issue with some money transfer with the help of Konny.

However, I don't see why someone who needs an aircraft and finds it at a low price, not refering here to the previously described bug, should not buy it. As you said it is an offer and demand driven market and a penalty for selling or buying at low prices is not a practice in the real market. In fact real world airlines could even donate aircrafts nomatter how rare this may be.

If I found a low price aircfraft available which I want it I will buy it. If then the other VA explains it was made by a mistake or by an issue like the one described in this case I would returned the aircraft back to the owner. As we have said many times in the past FlyNet is an Honor based environment and I respect this as I believe everyone does but on the other hand I don't see an adequate supporting philosophy behind preventing me from selling an aircraft really cheap to help someone. After all money donations to smaller VAs is a common practice within alliances and partnerships and can be done in many ways without actually selling an aircraft to the open market at a low price. Doesn't it have the same effect in terms of a small VA's evolution?

My concluding statement is we don't need a kind of penalty to prevent sabotage sells. I believe we all are enough honored people and mature no matter our age (maybe I am a grand father in FlyNet lol) to respect each other without exploiting situations causing damage to others even without penalties.

CAPFlyer · Post by **CAPFlyer** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:15 pm

Nikos,

Right now, with FlyNET still relatively small, Honor is great. The problem is when this goes fully public and the "masses" start coming. When this occurs, there need to be controls in place to prevent such things from happening and allowing unfair general selling of aircraft at prices much lower than realistic.

Now, I hold sales of aircraft to specific people in a different regard. If you make a deal with someone else to transfer an aircraft to them (even for a single dollar) that is one thing. That does happen in the real world. We call it a "paper transfer". US law prevents people from using an item for revenue after having gained it as a gift except in specific circumstances. To avoid this, there are times when airlines, railroads, and other major transportation companies make transfers of equipment to other companies (usually a spin-off of the parent, but occasionally an independent startup) for a dollar.

BigQ bought an aircraft for $100 that was up for general sale, not one that was being sold to him by another VA by specific agreement. I think that to be a tad dishonest for all involved being that this is a hobby and not real business, and there should be controls in place to ensure it doesn't become a major problem in the future.

Now, if I saw a good deal on a plane I wanted (like a $10 Million aircraft for $5 Million) I'd go for it. But I wouldn't buy one for $50,000. Firstly, I'd be worried that it had a maintenance rating of 5% (and thus cost me many millions to fix) or that there was something else fishy going on with the sale. That is personal preference and I believe that most on here now have that same honesty. However, in this hobby, there are many (and at times it seems far too many) who don't have that same level of honesty or "morals" (that's the best term I can think of to describe it) that we do and are perfectly happy to buy several hundred aircraft at rediculously low prices and then build a massive empire in a few short weeks with very little outlay and with none of the other VA's specifically helping them.

BigQ · Post by **BigQ** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:44 pm

CAPFlyer wrote:Nikos,
BigQ bought an aircraft for $100 that was up for general sale, not one that was being sold to him by another VA by specific agreement.

Actually, it was an agreement between LESAirways and another airline, and I happenned to have bought the aircraft before that other airline. After talking to the CEO of that airline, I was allowed to keep the aircraft, but I repaid him by a brand new one less than 3 days after purchase.

But I agree with you, one day the price of aircraft sold by airlines will have to be more than 2/3s of the current value of the aircraft to be honest and so that it doesn't create a aircraft "black market".

In the meantime, if airlines want to get rid of an airplane, they should be able to do it at any price.

Ionathan · Post by **Ionathan** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:54 pm

Well, CAP, I may personally not buy an aircraft which appears at an unusually low price as I have already mentioned. I just don't consider it as something "bad" if someone does it provided he keeps in mind the possibility (not a small possibility indeed) of a bug in which case he must cooperate with the owner to deal with the issue as I have done in one instance.

I agree with you that despite we can bet on people honor as we are now things may change in the future when a lot more people and VAs will hopefully join. Personally speaking, I don't care if I cannot sell an aircraft at a very low price in the open market provided a functionality which would enable me (and anyone) to sell an aircraft (at any price) to an individual airline is implemented. This I could help a specific airline or even more small VAs to start an easier way.

You comment about aircrafts "black market" brings up another issue which I am sure is in many members' minds. FlyNet ethics. Currently FlyNet seems like US of 18th century: No much "legal" precaution and vast space for someone to exploit system weaknesses. For sure some set of rules must be set for the future. As I said before and as you said, now we are a few people (most VAs are actually just listed but completely inactive) knowing each other virtually. It's like a small vilagge where whatever anyone does is easily handled by the same community. When the vilage becomes a city things change.
However, when I hear about setting rules, although they are necessary, I can't help thinking about the danger to pass from "Indians and Cowboys" to "Orwell's world". This is my concern I always try to express by talking about balance.

mritchey · Post by **mritchey** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:59 pm

I purchased 2 airplanes for $1 each. I hadn't read the forums yet and assumed they were from an airline that was closing or whatever. If anyone has a problem with it and can identify the planes (I forgot which ones they were) let me know.