Well good for them. As we said at the time, when used responsibly, a private jet is an invaluable management tool. An executive lording it over a far-flung empire can use private transpo to gather otherwise unobtainable on-the-ground intelligence. (Body language is 65.7 percent of all human communication.) Not to mention instilling the fear of God by all-of-a-sudden showing-up amongst his or her minions. Of course, as far as we know, and they ain’t sayin’ nothin’ (surprise!), that justifiable jet set savvy doesn’t apply to Chrysler, Ford or GM.
Before Congress had a hypocritical hissy fit over the automakers’ airplane fleet, ChryCo CEO Bob Nardelli and Ford CEO Alan Mulally were both using their Gulfstreams as a taxi service home—for both themselves and their families. Not to mention FoMoCo’s El Presidente De Las Americas’ weekend flights to Miami. Oh, and you could write a book about what GM’s management doesn’t know about what’s going on at the sharp end (with or without jet transportation).
Anyway . . .
Nobody’s buying the automakers’ planes; they’re busy depreciating like a stone thrown into a deep dark well. Advertising Age reports on Cessna’s campaign to fight the bailout blowback.
The campaign, created by Grace/Dickerson, Denver, will run in national business newspapers and magazines as well as aviation trades, and will include a public-relations campaign. The PR push will follow the ads, emphasizing economically positive points such as the fact that general aviation (all civil aviation except airlines) is a $150 billion business that employs 1.2 million people. Mr. Stangarone said another point the company will make is that it’s one of the few industries with a positive balance of trade, exporting 40% of its products annually.
Hang on, this sounds a bit like a plea for a federal assistance. I’m Bailout Nation. Fly me! Meanwhike, we’ve got some BIG news brewing on the “jet gate” front. Stay tuned Tango Tango Alpha Charlie fans . . . .
Even if the jets were used as a taxi service by the execs, don’t they either/both pay back the companies for its usage or pay taxes on it as it is considered a form of compensation?
Regardless, the bozos in D.C. only showed off both their ignorance and their envy, that’s all. Compared to the extravagance of the Wall Street crowd (I’m looking at you, John Thain) flying on a company jet is chicken feed.
Thanks for that post, couldn’t agree more. I had to laugh when I saw Autoextremist’s defense of corporate jetting, without any conditionality. It was…lacking, to say the least.
James2 – I believe you are correct about them having to pay tax on the value of the personal usage of the jets but;
1. That assumes it is being tracked and reported on their year end compensation statements (T4 in Canada) as a taxable benefit, and that’s a pretty big assumption to make with these characters
2. Most executives have a gross up clause that bumps up their salaries to cover the cost of any taxable benefits so the corporation pays for it, not them
3. Even if they do pay the tax on the benefit out of pocket, it was the corporation and you and me as shareholders who paid for the expense to fly them and their families home – funds that would be better spent on focused brand marketing and product development
I agree that it was a case of Congress grandstanding, but if the auto execs had an ounce of contact with the real world and were in touch with the dissatisfaction of the general public seeing them begging for money for what was primarily of their own doing, they would have realized that sacrificing the private jet just this one time would have been a good idea.
And when Nancy Pelosi is forced to give up the BIGGER jet she asked for at the beginning of her term and when the rest of congress has to forego their indulgences and luxuries to live like the rest of us, and when the banks and wall street has to forego their massive paychecks and the planes they were allowed to HAVE BACK,then will I see a reason to bitch about the Detroit 3’s jets.
I agree that it was grandstaning on the part of Congress but at the same time it was just plain (plane) dumb on the part of the CEO’s. As evidenced by their return trip in hybrids which was equally as dumb especially Nardelli in an Aspen they don’t even produce any more.
@unseensightz
I have nothing staked on Dem vs Repub – but as this site goes for Truth over Truthiness:
Nancy Pelosi did not ask for a bigger jet. Dennis Hastert, her predecessor, had a much shorter hop from D.C. to his home state, and therefore made do with his C-20.
When Pelosi became speaker, the Sergeant at Arms of the Congress (in charge of security) informed Pelosi that she would be given a jet capable of making the flight from D.C. to her home constituency in one hop, coast-to-coast with fuel to spare, and that was the reason for the upgrade.
It was abused as a cheap talking point in the silly political game that is one of the reasons why the U.S. is FUBAR at present.
Here’s Snopes on the issue – it’s worth it to check stuff:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/pelosi/jet.asp
Even the Bush White House was exasperated by the untruth of the claim that she had asked for a larger jet. The Speaker is two heartbeats away from the presidency, and after 9/11 it was decided that they should have their own jet, for security reasons.
Not to mention instilling the fear of God by all-of-a-sudden showing-up amongst his or her minions.
Please.
I once worked at IBM with an old-timer who’d been with the company 40+ years. He had started out attached to a screw-driver on the mainframe assembly line and had risen through company re-education to senior programing. He could remember Old Man Watson appearing 2AM on third shift and chewing the rag with the line workers.
Without handlers.
Do you have all the tools you need? Do you have new ideas? Are they given a trial? Does your manager listen to you?
And God help the manager who didn’t pass.
While I was there, the ex-Nabisco cookie salesman turned IBM CEO and corporate number-fixer, Lou Gerstner swooped down in a helicopter and made a surprise visit to our cutting edge product department. Surrounded by his handlers, he gave a speech. He asked for questions and ducked what substantive ones those with balls and a death-wish asked.
Who do you think was really growing the company, Watson or Gerstner?
I thought the employee survey should be simplified…from a multipage that no longer got much action, they should have shoulder-launched AA missiles and have Gerstner fly by in his helicopter. If no one blew him out of the sky, that would indicate a positive employee attitude.
Swooping down from the sky…what crap. What the MBA crowd knows about these days is how to fly a spreadsheet into Never-Never Land
The ad says “leaders recognize it’s not about ego. Or artifice.”
Yeah, it’s about avarice.
Come on, folks, let’s get real. Having a plane at your disposal is perhaps the greatest perk of all. Sure, it saves time and bother on business trips. But it’s also a marvelous personal benefit, so we should always be wary of the justifications given for such an expensive means of travel. (And the trips as well, for that matter.)
James2, even if honchos pay out of their own pocket the taxes on personal use of the aircraft, wouldn’t you like to pay only about 35-40% (i.e., the marginal tax rate) of your personal travel expense? Plus be treated royally?
Now, as to Pelosi: Would you buy my line that I didn’t ask for a yacht, just for a boat that could make non-stop transatlantic voyages? Yes, that plane Hastert used (which is not a Piper Cub; it has a five-person crew) can’t always make a 3,000 mile trip with fuel to spare. So what is so horrible about a refueling stop? There are Air Force bases available for that purpose. For example, Air Force One has been at Tinker AFB in Oklahoma several times. And the Speaker is assured of unbeatable service.
The D3 CEOs’ executive jet travel hit a nerve because it reminded everybody that these beggars live like kings. As do prominent politicians. I don’t care if Pelosi is “two heartbeats away from the presidency.” (In my view, a bug rather than a feature.) She can occasionally be treated like a mortal. Indeed, it would be good for her to have more contact with ordinary Americans.
When I lived in DC a tourist could wander at will all over the Capitol. In the 1930s, there wasn’t even a fence around the White House and people would picnic on the lawn. Until WW I, presidents were expected to stand at the White House door on New Years Day and shake the hand of anyone who came by. We are well on the way to Versailles.
“Until WW I, presidents were expected to stand at the White House door on New Years Day and shake the hand of anyone who came by.”
:(
unseensightz said:
And when Nancy Pelosi is forced to give up the BIGGER jet she asked for at the beginning of her term and when the rest of congress has to forego their indulgences and luxuries to live like the rest of us, and when the banks and wall street has to forego their massive paychecks and the planes they were allowed to HAVE BACK,then will I see a reason to bitch about the Detroit 3’s jets.
Nancy Pelosi is democratically elected. So, in whatever way she spends tax money is OK. In the worst case, we still can choose not to vote for her or her party the next time.
However, we didn’t get to choose the management team of D2.8. And they are using our money. So, we have every reason to bitch about their jets or anything else. I will shut up the moment when they repay our money in full, or when the voters get to choose the next CEO’s.
@Stein X Leikanger
Thanks for the link and the info. I can see the point of getting a bigger jet, but why should she need a jet to fly from DC to her home constituency. Using our money for something like that seems like a waste of money and a luxury. “Security reasons” is a poor excuse for not wanting to be like the average person and wait in line at a terminal like everyone else and fly back, or *gasp*.. drive back. But then that can be directly applied to the Detroit 3, so I’m not sure, its up in the air. I just feel everyone, from Congress to corporations should be showed in the same light and treated in the same way. If one thing is done to one, the same should be done to the other. Congress is a bunch of hypocrites.
@wsn
It is NOT OK for her to spend OUR money is any way she wants just because she is an elected official. We elect her to do a job that is needed, but we do not elect her to spend our money on frivelous things. And Congress/government is USING OUR MONEY also so I have every right to bitch about how they use our money also. And I GLADLY would give my money to the Detroit 3 before the government, because atleast with the Detroit 3 I can get a car, with government I get a lot of slow, wasteful projects and no real improvements. Also, if it hadn’t been for the credit crunch the Big 3 would be in much better shape, and I realize it hasn’t been all of their undoing, but the credit crunch certainly didn’t help them in any way.
Once again, did anyone complain (or even ask) if the Wall Street Masters of the Universe took corporate jets to their Congressional hearings?
Class warfare, much?
A contrarian view: I’ve never set foot in a private Jet, and my one Concorde experience was at the Intrepid Docked in NYC.
For some folks, the corporate jet does make business sense. Many Bizjets can access hundreds of airports that are too small for the normal heavy jet liners. Suddenly you can get more places way faster and with less ground travel hassle.
Did you know that Bizjets also fly faster than your regularly scheduled cattle pens ?
While the excess is that the jet is then dispatched at company expense to ski in Aspen, if you have a large enough group, it makes sense to get them there fast, easy and together.
An acquaintance who works in the ad biz had to pitch a major supplier of sugared water. The whole team got on a jet in NYC, flew to the home base of this soda seller, pitched, and returned, all in one easy day. Compared to the airfares for the ten folks and getting to, from, and through the airports, the Bizjet made sense.
I can’t get this worked up about it. Letting 50k/week CEO sit in an airport lounge while the planes backup, the Air Crew “times out” and quietly leaves, and the airline takes four hours to find another crew, is a waste of money.