President's Position: Merger Fever
FBO consolidation harms general aviation
AOPA advocates for protecting the freedom to fly, and everything that goes along with those freedoms. Sadly, we are seeing a small number of FBOs affecting access for aircraft owners and pilots by imposing egregious prices, and many times preventing pilots from doing what they love most. Many of these problematic FBOs have been part of recent industry consolidations at high-demand airports, and they are often the only FBO that serves an airport.
AOPA is concerned about the ongoing consolidation of the FBO market, which has accelerated over the past five years, and subsequent lack of competition in various locations across the country.
In 2016, merger fever really heated up. Rates for FBO fees and fuel prices continued to climb at these locations, where many times fees were demanded even when pilots didn’t request any services. Flash forward to 2017, where the chorus of complaints from members has skyrocketed, with fees reaching rates that pilots say are preventing them from accessing certain FBO locations.
We need a healthy FBO infrastructure for general aviation to thrive. Sadly, we are seeing a small number of FBOs affecting access for aircraft owners and pilots by imposing egregious prices.Airport sponsors—generally those municipalities or authorities that own airports—can influence prices at their facilities. In fact, when accepting federal grants for infrastructure improvements, they have a direct responsibility to guarantee fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory pricing. New regulations aren’t necessary to remedy the current circumstances facing general aviation. However, there should be transparency in fair and reasonable fees, especially when pilots arrive on a ramp and don’t require services.
From what we are currently seeing, airport sponsors and community leaders are the solution. Pricing concerns expressed to AOPA to date also include reports submitted by FBO managers who are aware that the outrageous prices charged at some locations have detrimental consequences on the entire pilot population. We are working with community leaders to find a solution that works for all parties involved, and that includes airport managers and sponsors who have asked for our help and guidance. Officials at California’s John Wayne Airport-Orange County took action to replace an FBO that was charging too much. In Jackson Hole, Wyoming, the airport board agreed to allow a competitive FBO after hearing complaints about high fees.
We need a healthy FBO infrastructure for general aviation to thrive. General aviation pilots are not looking for a free ride, and we are more than willing to pay fees that are reasonable and in line with services provided.
AOPA also has been working with the FAA regarding pricing complaints, and the association has asked for help in applying the rules and procedures previously implemented to ensure fairness for all, including pilots, aircraft operators, and FBOs. Ultimately, AOPA is looking to raise awareness regarding price transparency. Making information about fees easily accessible to all, as retail fuel prices already are, would help pilots make more informed decisions. Regardless, fees and prices at airports built with public funds must be reasonable and competitive, and access must be available to all.
While there may not be a quick solution to this problem, AOPA continues to work with the FAA and industry stakeholders to ensure that steps are taken to preserve profitability for FBOs and reasonable access for pilots at public-use airports.
AOPA continues to encourage input from our members and to work with stakeholders and communities to eliminate egregious prices. If you believe you have been the victim of unreasonable pricing at an FBO, please send us a report online (www.aopa.org/FBOfees).
Email [email protected]
