Page 1
TRANSPORT OF FLIGHT CREWS IN THE FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP INDUSTRY
by
Meghan E. Werkman
A Graduate Capstone Project Proposal Submitted to the Worldwide Campus
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Master of Aeronautical Science
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityWorldwide Campus
May 2009
Page 2
LOGISTICAL TRANSPORT OF FLIGHT CREWS IN THE FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP INDUSTRY
by
Meghan E. Werkman
This Graduate Capstone Project Proposal was prepared under the direction of the candidate’s Project Review Committee Chair,
Dr. John Denigris, Ph.D, Associate Professor, Worldwide Campus,and the candidate’s Project Review Committee Member,
Orin L. Godsey, Assicuate Professor, Worldwide Campus and has beenapproved by the Project Review Committee. It was submitted to the Extended Campus in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofMaster of Aeronautical Science
PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE:
____________________________________Dr. John Denigris, Ph.D.
Committee Chair
____________________________________Orin L. Godsey, MBA/MAS
Committee Member
Page 3
ABSTRACT
Researcher: Meghan E. Werkman
Title: Logistical Transport of Flight Crews in the Fractional Ownership Industry
Institution: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Degree: Master of Aeronautical Science
Year: 2009
This study will examine the issues of transporting flight crews in the fractional ownership
industry. This study will first delve into the business model of the fractional ownership
industry. Next, a comparison will be made between airline crew movement and how
fractional ownership companies move their crews. After the comparison has been made,
this study will examine the current efficiency issues associated with moving crew mem-
bers around the United States. Once the efficiency issues have been addressed, then al-
ternative possibilities to improve the issues will be investigated, and finally, recommen-
dations will be made.
Page 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page i
Review Committee Page ii
Abstract iii
I CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Problem 1
Researcher’s Work Setting and Role 2
Statement of the Problem 3
Limitations 4
Delimitations 4
Assumptions 5
Definitions of Terms 6
Acronyms 6
II REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE AND RESEARCH 7
Research Statement 10
Statement of the hypothesis 10
III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 11
Research Design and Method 11
Sources of Data 11
Data Reliability 12
Procedures 12
REFERENCES 16
Page 5
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem
Fractional ownership is a relatively new portion of the aviation industry. This type of
ownership of formally privately owned aircraft began in 1986, but did not gain popularity
until the late 1990s. Partial ownership gives owners or potential owners the ability to
have all the advantages of owning their own aircraft with only a fraction of the annual
costs. Unlike the major commercial airlines, which generally travel on a static schedule
working hub and spoke system, fractional ownership allows for “last minute” point-to-
point travel to many airports in the United States. An owner can schedule to be picked up
at an airport which is closest to his or her home or office with less than 24 hours notice
and be flown to any destination in the United States. With this flexibility a fractional
ownership program is cost effective to most of the clientele involved within this industry.
Therefore every minute spent in a commercial airport terminal equals money lost.
Individuals must weigh the cost of this program against the cost of lost time in airports
flying conventionally. Most will choose flying point to point at an added cost against the
lost time they would have had on the ground by flying commercially. Since these
individuals are not only the elite of the financial world but are also those in the arts as
well as those in the television and film industries, their time equals money. Not only
does time equal money but their anonymity is paramount.
Unlike commercial airlines which operate in over 500 airports in the United States,
private aircraft operate out of over 5,000 airports throughout the United States. While
most commercial airlines operate under a hub and spoke system, fractional ownership
Page 6
operates on a point-to-point system. A hub and spoke system works with a set of specific
airports (hubs) that act as a home base for individual airlines. The spokes are the less
frequented airports that an airline would travel to and from their hub to facilitate travelers
with ease. For example, if an individual wanted to travel from Savannah, Georgia to
Greensboro, North Carolina, they would need to connect through Charlotte, North
Carolina (the hub airport). Since most airlines do not fly from point to point, individuals
would have to take extra time to fly to the hub and then to be redirected to the "spoke "or
final destination airport. For the average traveler this extra stop would not be an issue.
However for those customers that needs to be at a destination with the utmost efficiency,
fractional ownership can meet their needs. Although there is an added cost burden, it is
up to the individual owner to determine if the benefit outweighs the additional cost.
Similar to most commercial airlines, most fractional ownership companies tend to
require that their crew members live with in certain proximity of the company’s assigned
“gateways”. A “gateway” is considered an airport designated by the company to be with
in a crew member's specific time or distance parameters from that airport. Crew
members are assigned to particular gateways but the aircraft are located at different
airports throughout the country on a regular basis. Therefore, crew members have to be
moved via the airlines to wherever the aircraft is located at that time of each aircraft's
need. This results in an increased use of airline travel to move the crews to their assigned
destinations.
Researcher’s Work Setting and Role
The researcher has been involved in the study of aviation for over seven years, and
has worked within the professional aviation field for over five years. The researcher holds
Page 7
a Bachelor of Science degree in Professional Aeronautics from Embry-Riddle Aeronauti-
cal University. She has completed this extensive research on the subject of aviation man-
agement as a partial requirement for obtaining the degree of Master of Aeronautical Sci-
ence. This researcher has worked as both Customer Service Representative for the Fixed
Base Operator and a Maintenance Customer Service Manager for the Maintenance de-
partment at Landmark Aviation, and is now an International Corporate Flight Specialist
for Jeppesen.
Statement of the Problem
The fractional ownership of private aircraft was an idea that was founded in 1964
and started its operations in 1986 (Our History Leading, 2008). It was a program that
offered the ability for individuals to share ownership of an aircraft with others who were
not interested in owning their own aircraft as a sole proprietor. This type of ownership
allows the individuals involved to enjoy the advantages of privately flying with only a
portion of the major expenses. Offering this program entails point to point travel to
smaller airports which are closer to the final destination of the owners. One of the major
advantages associated with owning a share in an aircraft, is the ability to go from one
point to another anywhere in the United States with less than 24 hours notice. Fractional
ownership companies do not have the need to return to a certain airport-like hubs for
airlines, thus causing potential issues with crews having to be sent to an aircraft which are
not located at their assigned gateway airport. As a result, aircraft can be scattered
throughout the United States, and could potentially be located at airports not serviced by
the airlines.
Page 8
Transporting crew members from their gateways to where the aircraft that they are
assigned to is not only a fiscal cost but also a time costs that becomes an issue to a
company. In a world of cost cutting measures, and additional charges being passed on to
the customer, operational efficiency within the aviation industry is critical. Limiting
costly fares and crew down time associated with travel is a consideration most companies
have begun to take a harder look at. In the current state of economic turmoil, it is now
essential to find ways to operate more efficiently and continue to remain profitable. This
study is designed to look at the current methods which fractional ownership companies
are utilizing to move their crew members from assignment to assignment. Also, this
researcher will be taking a look to see if any more efficient methods of moving their
crews are available. This researcher’s goal is to determine which method is most
financially advantageous to these companies.
Limitations
There are potentially a number of limiting factors involved in this study. The study is
limited to only Fractional Ownership companies in the aviation industry. This study will
only look at crew movement throughout the United States. This study will only use av-
erage airline ticket costs. Although these limitations may not give an accurate representa-
tion of working conditions for all situations, keeping a tight and narrow focus will allow
for successful project completion.
Delimitations
This study will not take into account the cost of fuel or pilot salaries. International
crew movement will not be a factor in this study. Any nonstandard deals that companies
may have with airlines will not be taken into consideration for this study. This study is
Page 9
solely based on cost savings and does not account for any pre-existing labor contract that
may be in place. Finally, the downtime for aircraft maintenance will not be taken into
consideration for the purpose of this research.
Assumptions
This researcher assumes that the information provided and the results of data col-
lected are an accurate and true description of the current methods and procedures cur-
rently used by fractional ownership companies. It is assumed that the information found
in this study will work for other companies that are similar enough to the ones used in
this study. Furthermore, it is the hope of the researcher that many of the findings will be
applicable across the board to all Fractional Ownership companies in the aviation indus-
try.
Page 10
Definitions of Terms
Hub – the central airport that flight are routed through
Gateway - a specific airport(s) denoted by a company
Spoke – the routes that planes take out of the hub airports
Acronyms
FAA – Federal Aviation Administration
FAR – Federal Aviation Regulation
GAVA- General Aviation Value Analysis
HR - Hour(s)
ROI – Return on Investment
US – United States
VLJ - Very Light Jet
Page 11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE AND RESEARCH
Background of Fractional Ownership Industry
Fractional Jet Ownership was originally founded in 1964 by four very well known
and respected men in aviation. These men were General O.F Lassiter, General Curtis
LeMay, Arthur Godfrey, and Jimmy Stewart. These men created a company that was
used as the civilian version of the United States Air Force Special Air Mission Squadron.
This company was called Executive Jet. (Our History Leading, 2008). In 1984, Richard
Santulli bought Executive Jet. He had a vision of the concept of selling fractional
ownerships in business jets to companies and individuals. He introduced his new concept
at the National Business Aviation Association convention in 1986. “In 1997 Executive
Jet was renamed NetJets, with the new launch of fractional aircraft ownership (Our
History Leading, 2008). Today, NetJets is the leader in the fractional ownership industry.
NetJets continues to be the largest fractional jet company and surpasses its competition
when it comes to fleet size and number of trips flown annually.
Mr. Santulli’s concept idea came about because he determined that he would only fly
on average about 100-500 hours per year. He realized that by only flying that much, he
could not justify the cost of acquiring and operating his own aircraft. He had a few
friends who were in the same predicament as he was. Simple economics spawned the
idea of sharing the annual expenses of owning a private aircraft with his three friends. To
all of the men, this "fractional ownership" seemed like the perfect idea. Mr. Santulli
would later realize that one of the major advantages of owning his own jet was the ability
to leave whenever he wanted to. Freedom becomes null and void when you have three
Page 12
other owners. It was at that point Mr. Santulli decided that if he could devise “a program
with the economics of multiple ownership, but with the guarantee service, he would
create something with an enormous market potential (Our History Leading, 2008).” This
idea was like no other of its time. The fractional jet ownership concept allowed
individuals and companies to travel on their own private jet, at their own convenience,
without having the burden of owning the individual aircraft.
Fractional aircraft ownership allows two or more people or businesses to own an
aircraft. The portion of the aircraft that an individual or company owns is based on how
much they are willing to spend. Fractions start at 1/16th which usually represents 50 hours
of flight time per year. The major benefits to fractionally owning an aircraft is the
minimal cost of ownership, maintenance and upkeep for each company. Aircraft
fractional ownership is not necessarily meant for the average Joe, it is more for the elite
companies and individuals who do not want to deal with the stress of the airlines. By
buying into these fractionally owned aircrafts, individuals and companies can experience
the quality, convenience, safety and comfort that they would if they solely owned their
own aircraft. They are able to fly out of smaller airports closer to where they live or
work, and fly to airports closer to their final destination. These clients’ time is extremely
valuable, so the ability to fly to these smaller airports closer to their final destination is
not only a time cost saver but ultimately a fiscal cost saver. Another benefit of investing
in a fractionally owned aircraft is that no matter where the aircraft is the day before, it
will be waiting for you in the morning at the closest suitable airport of the owner’s
choice. (Fractional-Aircraft, n. d.)
Page 13
During a phone interview with Citation Shares’ Chief Operating Officer William
Schultz, he explains that covering the customer trip is the most important thing for a
fractional ownership company. When a company is unable to fulfill the customer trips,
those trips must be sold off to third party charter companies. The cost incurred when
selling these trips off is one of the largest expenses for a fractional company. In order to
prevent the high cost of hiring outside charter companies to cover customer trips and to
continue a successful operation, a company has to have both airworthy aircrafts and
crews. An airworthy aircraft has to meet all maintenance schedules including but not
limited to minimum equipment list (MEL) schedules, flight hour/ calendar time limitation
items, service bulletins (SB), and airworthiness directives (AD). These maintenance
schedules have to be strategically coordinated to fit between owner trips. With regard to
crews, scheduling can be at times a daunting task. Crew tour schedules can vary in
number of days but typically companies have their crews on either a seven day on and
seven day off or six days on and six days off schedule. Crewmembers start and stop their
work tours out of their gateway. Depending on the company, there can either be
designated gateways or crewmembers are able to live anywhere that is close to a major
airport that offers airline service. For companies who have designated gateways, the
number of gateways is typically driven by the need to hire pilots. Gateway airports are
typically determined by three factors. These factors are: what airports are the aircraft in
the fleet most likely to be located, what airports have a variety of airline services, and the
final factor that is taken into consideration is what airports have maintenance facilities
that can services the aircraft in a company fleet. Developing optimal schedules by
Page 14
utilizing both crews and aircrafts as efficiently as possible is what a company strives for
every day.
Comparison of airlines to fractional ownership companies
in crew movements
Airline crews bid for the gateway they desire. These gateways are then based on
seniority and availability. Crew members start and stop their rotations from these
designated bases. Crew members may live wherever they desire; it is however each crew
member's responsibility to arrive at their designated gateway at their assigned time.
Sometimes this means the crew member must expend their own time and money. They
are able to ride standby or ride in the jump seat if there is no room available. Depending
on location or base these transports can be fairly easy or very difficult. If crews change
aircraft during their work rotation, the airline will coordinate their transportation to other
aircraft. Most times crews will ride in the jump seat so that the airline does not have to
give up a revenue seat. Other methods of crew movement that the airlines utilize will be
explored later in this study.
With regards to the fractional ownership industry, there are a variety of methods and
rules regarding crew member living locations and crew movement. Depending on the
company, some companies require their crew members to live near specific
gateways/bases. Others allow their crew members to live anywhere in the lower 48 states
but have some specifications. If there are no assigned gateways/bases, usually crews are
required to live a specific distance or time from a “large” airport. A “large” airport can
be denoted by either a specific number of airlines that have service at that airport or it has
to be an airport that offers international flights. These airport specifications are at the
Page 15
company’s discretion. Even companies with specified bases/gateways have a required
amount of travel time to be at the airport that crew members have to live within. The
companies will then utilize a variety of methods to transport the crew members from their
gateways to wherever the aircraft they are assigned to is located.
Fractional ownership companies can utilize different methods of moving crew
members. They can send their crew members on the airlines, utilize car services for short
distances, or aircraft within the company fleet to ferry crew members. Sometimes
companies might even have an aircraft whose purpose is to move members.
When traveling on the airlines there are some repercussions that a company incurs.
Airlines are notorious for being delayed. The airlines operate on a hub and spoke system,
which means that crew members will have connection flights. If there is a delay, there is
a probable chance that a crew member could miss their connection flight. Although
airline tickets are relatively cheaper than ever before, typically fractional ownership
companies will have to buy last minute tickets or refundable tickets. Last minute tickets
or refundable tickets are normally more expensive than regular tickets. This cost can add
up to a large expense over the course of a year.
Not only is there a fiscal cost of utilizing the airlines but there is a time cost that
needs to be taken into account. When taking into consideration the time it takes for a
crew member to drive to the airport, it must be kept in mind that they typically need to
arrive two hours prior to departure, park, check in, get through the security lines, any
flight delays, the connection time, and the total flight time. A trip that could have only
taken a few hours, now has taken half a day. Crew members can only be on duty for a
certain number of hours in a twenty-four hour period. Duty and rest time is governed by
Page 16
rules set forth by the FAA. Crew member travel on the airlines is taken into account with
regard to their duty day, limiting the actual time a crew member can actually fly for the
company.
Some companies may utilize aircrafts within their own fleet to move their crew
members. Ferrying an aircraft to move crew members could potentially save time,
however the operational cost incurred is very expensive. Another repercussion of using
aircrafts within a company’s fleet for crew movement is that the company is operating an
aircraft that could potentially be used for revenue trips. Utilizing a company’s aircraft,
does allow for crew movement trips to depart when the company needs the crew to go
instead of trying to work around the airline’s schedule. In addition to departing on the
company’s schedule, these flights can go point to point instead of the hub and spoke
system that the airlines operate on.
The acquisition of an aircraft that is solely responsible for company use has several
benefits. A company can receive tax deductions and other tax benefits. In addition, this
aircraft becomes an asset to a company. When the aircraft is not being used to move
crew members it can be utilized to move parts or other company employees. Although
there are several benefits to owning a separate aircraft for moving crew members, there
are a few potential negative affects that are endured. Having a separate aircraft results in
high initial acquisition, upkeep and operating costs. No matter what method a company
utilizes, there are benefits and repercussions for each that need to be evaluated.
Page 17
The Value of Time
Many corporations do not adequately investigate the tangible and intangible benefits that
business aviation provides. The common misperception is that business aviation is more
of an executive perk rather than a cost-effective tool. (Kovach, 2000). There are both
tangible and intangible benefits when it comes to calculating the value of time.
According to Business and Corporate Aviation Management, “the most obvious and
quantifiable advantage of on-demand air transportation is the amount of time saved for
passengers. Access to 10 times the number of airline airports, fewer check-in formalities,
direct routing, landing near the business destination, an no waiting for luggage save
major portions of days for single trips and full days for multiple-leg trips”(Sheehan, J p
1.19). The book also gives an example of how to fiscally calculate the value of time. “a
coach airline fare to ft. Wayne will cost x$, where as the company airplane (or charter)
will cost $X+__” (Sheehan, J p 1.20) This vice president is trying to get to a meeting.
When looking at cost, the company will look at the value of an employee’s time. “Many
companies mistakenly equate the value of an employee’s time with his or her
compensation level” (Sheehan, J p 1.20). For example, an employee who makes
$250,000 per year is worth $125 per hour ($250,000 divided by 2000 hr of work per
year). “If this executive has to leave the office 3 hours before a scheduled airline
departure, stay overnight at the destination due to inadequate airline schedules, drive a
rental car 1 hour from destination airport to the real destination, and invest another day
returning to base, the waist of time, talent, and ultimately, dollars add up rapidly.”
(Sheehan, J p 1.20)
Page 18
Research Statement
This research is intended to determine if aircraft fractional ownership companies are
using the most efficient method possible to move their crews across the United States.
Initially, it is hypothesized that there is a more efficient method to move crews around the
United States rather than solely utilizing the airlines or utilizing their current fleet that
could potentially be used for revenue trips. This researcher is attempting to determine if
aircraft fractional ownership companies can save money in crew transportation; specifi-
cally focusing on more efficient methods of moving crews across the United States.
Statement of the Hypothesis
This researcher’s hypothesis states: Solely utilizing airline services to transport
crews diminishes the Return on Investment for a fractional ownership company.
This researcher’s null hypothesis states: The current method of solely utilizing airline
service has the highest Return on Investment for a fractional ownership company.
CHAPTER III
Page 19
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Method
The objective of this research is to determine if aircraft fractional ownership compa-
nies are using the most efficient method possible to move their crew members around the
United States. This quantitative study will take a look at the current methods being used.
The researcher will then look at any other possible methods of crew movements. Next,
the efficiency issues from the current methods will be looked at and evaluated. From
there, a cost benefit analysis will be prepared to show if the current method are the most
proficient method or if the company should follow another method presented.
Sources of Data
The research design consists of two parts. 1) Three different scenarios will be given.
Within each of the scenarios, different methods of crew movement will be studied. These
scenarios will be described in further detail in the procedures section of this study. Data
will be collected from a variety of sources that will include but will not be limited to
internet websites as Orbitz, Expedia, etc. to obtain an average cost of airline tickets.
Operational, acquisition, and time costs will be evaluated in accordance with industry
averages. 2) A cost benefit analysis, General Aviation Value Analysis, and a Return on
Investment (ROI) equation will be used to analyze the current efficiency issues, along
with any possible alternative methods for crew movement.
A GAVA, also known as a value analysis is a “quantitative comparison that depicts
the differences in travel costs, travel time, overnight stays, and per man-hour required be-
tween the present travel modes and the other modes under consideration. This compari-
son will validate the relative equivalence of the airplane’s direct cost versus the present
Page 20
travel costs. In addition, it provides a very clear indication of the manpower savings that
are likely to result through the utilization of a business airplane.” (Wells & Chadbourne,
2003, p.180). Typically this type of analysis is done when a company is trying to decide
if they can justify the acquisition of a business aircraft, or if the current travel mode, nor-
mally being the utilization of the airlines, is the best method of moving their employees
and executives around. Not only is the tangible cost of what expenditures associated with
acquiring a business aircraft taken into consideration, but the time savings is also taken
into account.
“There are several factors to consider when determining just what ‘saved
time’ is worth. One is comfort and its relationship to morale and produc-
tivity. The frustrations involved in fighting heavy automobile traffic,
standing in line at the check-in counters or gates, or even waiting to make
connecting flights can substantially reduce a person’s energy and morale.
The more discomfort and inconvenience that is eliminated, the better a
person is apt to perform.” (Wells et. al., p.180).
With this, the value analysis addresses the very real factors brought up in the aviation in-
dustry factors like time management, fiscal responsibility and overall efficiency. A com-
pany’s employees/ crew members are on extreme time constraints and by using the analy-
sis to determine the most resourceful way of transportation could make the difference of a
few dollars to a few thousand dollars in the grand scheme.
Data Reliability
Page 21
The data used in this study will come from various company web sites and industry
statistics. Data will be collected from companies such as NetJets, FlexJets, Citation
Shares, and Avant Air. These companies are leaders in the fractional ownership industry
and provide very valuable information for the purpose of this study. Operating cost and
various other data will be provided and verified according to the National Business
Aviation Association and other industry resources.
Procedures
For this study Daytona Beach International Airport (KDAB) has been chosen as the
“gateway” airport. From here, four other airports have been randomly selected based on
their distance in nautical miles from Dayton Beach International. These airports will fit
within a distance range set by this researcher that represents the base line for this test.
The range will be 0-100, 100-500, 500-1000, and greater than 1000 nautical miles. These
airports are Orlando Executive (KORL), Atlanta Peachtree-Dekalb (KPDK), Teterboro
(KTEB), and Phoenix Sky Harbor International (KPHX). All of these airports have been
listed in the top twenty general aviation airports in the United States.
Next, each city pair will be put through different tests that will look at time, trip, and
crew member cost to the company. The different tests will look each trip utilizing the
airline services, aircraft within a company’s fleet, and an aircraft outside the company
fleet.
Following collection of data by use of the previous mentioned tests, statistical tem-
plates and spreadsheets along with SPSS will be used to compile and calculate the find-
ings. This data will then be used to provide descriptive statistics and construct graphic il-
lustrations that describe and assisted in interpretation of the research findings. The hope
Page 22
of this researcher is to use statistical analysis to develop inferences, their significance,
and establish a confidence level in the sampling representation of the aviation population.
In addition a cost benefit will be included to offer suggestions as to the most fiscally re-
sponsible plan of action. These findings along with conclusions based on an evaluation
of the research hypothesis will be presented in the closing or conclusion of this study.
These recommendations will be presented in the final chapters of this study.
Page 23
REFERENCES
Avantair Investor Information. (2008). Retrieved January 15, 2009, from Avantair Web
site: http://www.avantair.com/investors.htm
Butler, James D. (2008). The fundamentals of fractional ownership. Retrieved January 3,
2009, from Business Jet Traveler Web site: http://www.bjtonline.com/print-
article/article/the-fundamentals-of-fractional-ownership-512.html
Butler, James D. (2008). Looking Back...and Ahead. Retrieved December 21, 2008, from
Business Jet Traveler Web site: http://www.bjtonline.com/flying/inside-
fractionals/s/article/looking-backand_ahead-750.html
Federal Aviation Administration. (2007). In Nancy. Graham (Ed.), Business Aviation in
the United States (APC-1). . Retrieved November 22, 2008, from Federal Avia-
tion Administration Website Web site: http://www.faa.gov
Fractional Aircraft. (n. d.). Retrieved January 3, 2009, from Airplane Post Web site:
http://www.airplanepost.com/fractional_aircraft.htm
Fractional-Aircraft. (n. d.). Retrieved November 22, 2008, from Fractional Aircraft Web
site: http://www.fractional-aircraft.com
Fractional Aircraft Ownership. (n. d.). Retrieved January 8, 2009, from Frational Jet
Ownership Web site: http://consumbertipsheet.com/fractionaljet.html
Our History Leading Since the Beginning. (2008). Retrieved October 13, 2008, from Net-
Jets Web site: http://www.netjets.com/About_NetJets/History.asp
Sheehan, John J. Business and Corporate Aviation Management. McGraw Hill, 2003
Page 24
The Advantages of Fractional Jet Ownership. (2008). Retrieved November 30, 2008,
from Fractional Jet Ownership Web site: http://www.fractionaljetownership.com/
content/adv_FJO.html
Thuber, Matt. (2008). Fractional Market Update. Retrieved October 14, 2008, from
Business Jet Traveler Web site: http://www.bjtonline.com/flying/inside-
fractionals/s/npage/4/article/fractional-market-update-356.html
Wells, Alexander T. & Chadbourne, Bruce D. (Eds.). (2003). General Aviation
Marketing and Management. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
What is Fractional Aircraft Ownership. (n. d.). Retrieved January 3, 2009, from AirSprint
Web site: http://airsprint.com/fractional.htm