Boom! Rachael Reeves....

[fozy tornip]

There's a girl with alopecia who attends my daughters school - guess why?

Because her parents have made sacrifices?

 

[All uphill]

I'm starting to feel that you are really over labouring an analogy that just doesn't work as well as taking the pi$$ out of children with special needs. There's a girl with alopecia who attends my daughters school - guess why? Also girls with anxiety, eating disorders, autism etc. Oh - and some rich kids too.

Interestingly I discovered that a flight from London Heathrow to Paris on a private jet starts at about £6100 not including VAT or taxes. So a little bit more than the £14 to £75 with Vueling. To be fair, on a Private Jet you get to go to Charles de Gaulle rather than Orly.
I suppose for businesses it's a combination of prestige and being able to fly *exactly* when you want to fly. Plus you go through a private customs channel rather than the normal one.

My guess is that its a way for companies to show off to those they wish to show off to. For celebs and pop stars its a way to get around the world quickly, safely and with all the costumes and such like. If you want your own jet it's going to cost between £1 million and £100 million plus depending on what kind of jet you want.

The other thing I discovered is you can get "empty leg" flights. So when a jet has to go somewhere else but has no passengers the owner will often sell the seats at a 75% discount to help pay for the flight.

There's some interesting stuff out there about safety standards on executive flights not being to the same high standards as budget airlines.

 

[winjim]

Even more peculiar is that most of that time is getting from London City Airport to Waterloo. London to Farnborough itself can be as fast as 35 minutes on the right train.

Yeah but Farnborough's a shithole, you want to fly in and out of there as quickly as possible. It is a bit of a wonder that despite the airfield reinventing itself as a transport hub for the rich and famous, the most remarkable thing about Farnborough town centre is that Queensmead still has a Wimpy.

It's got good transport links to the capital but I can't imagine royalty and celebrities waiting on the platform at Farnborough Main.

 

[monkers]

Presumably these people would get a car to the airport at one end of the journey, and a car at the other. They may as well just make it one car journey. This is all just about self-styling status grabbing, narcissism, and an overwhelming sense of entitlement. Stupid polluting bastards.

 

[icowden]

Because her parents have made sacrifices?

And because, like many others, she has been failed by the state sector.

 

[Mark999]

So, two different, separate things to address here:
- We may have to disagree about definitions of "uncommon". Plenty of high-rollers travel on public flights (maybe 1st class, of course). I've known business travellers all my life, and not a single one has used corporate jets. So yes, there are too many private jet flights, but they are being made by quite a small elite of society.
- Is tax a disincentive? Well, does your corporation not consider the costs of activities? Can you just willy-nilly ask for gold-plated stationary without anyone questioning your purchase request? If so, you don't work anywhere that I am familiar with.

Hi. Large corporations, those listed in the Fortune 100 for example (many have globally registered entities), often have multiple planes/jets (long term lease agreements) allowing hundreds of employees to get to offices/factories daily (not commuting per say, but needed for a day or 2 at alternative site). It’s simply a case of economics. Not only is it more cost effective than commercial (at scale) but it is also a more efficient use of employees time.
Within the fortune 100, it’s really not uncommon.
For example, last week (happened to be outside UK), I boarded my shuttle (generic term for corporate plane) next to a technology firm’s shuttle and a global manufacturing firm’s shuttle. All with mostly mid level engineers onboard heading to their factories/place of work for the day. If I am visiting many sites within NA for example, I can board the shuttle daily.
Less so within the UK, due to geographical difference in land mass, but from the UK company entity to our one of many European company entities, common among the large corporations. At least for the past couple of decades.
Not passing comment on the ethics or green (lack of) credentials in this space, just stating that I would imagine the vast majority of UK leased jets (not available for the general public) are corporate shuttles/leased to corporations as opposed to owned by individuals. Just my tuppence.
Regards.

 

[Salty seadog]

Thank goodness the flagship employers NI rise will be paid for by the lower paid workers like myself who can least afford it.

Now that is trickle down economics.🧐

 

[matticus]

Not only is it more cost effective than commercial (at scale) but it is also a more efficient use of employees time.

So these corporations now need to allocate more funding to this expenditure line? If so, that won’t be an issue of any kind to these corporations.

Seems rather contradictory to me! You're saying it happens because it's cost-effective
AND YET
additional tax won't be an issue.

Jog on ...

 

[matticus]

The other thing I discovered is you can get "empty leg" flights. So when a jet has to go somewhere else but has no passengers the owner will often sell the seats at a 75% discount to help pay for the flight.

How wonderfully green! 👍

 

[Bazzer]

Presumably these people would get a car to the airport at one end of the journey, and a car at the other. They may as well just make it one car journey. This is all just about self-styling status grabbing, narcissism, and an overwhelming sense of entitlement. Stupid polluting bastards.

Re the transport, not necessarily, although I agree with you about the entitlement etc.
I knew of one individual who would fly by helicopter or twin engined Cessna, from his Cheshire home to Liverpool where his jet was hangered, despite good transport connections to and from Liverpool.
Or if he was unable to use the jet to get to his destination, the Cessna or helicopter would be used.
His sense of entitlement was off the charts.

 

[Mark999]

Seems rather contradictory to me! You're saying it happens because it's cost-effective
AND YET
additional tax won't be an issue.

Jog on ...

Hi. Perhaps you are misunderstanding. A rather small increase in cost to the corporations for operating UK ‘private planes’ is neither here nor there. It’s simply a more cost effective method of transportation Vs commercially flying many employees to sites/plants daily.

 

[monkers]

Hi. Perhaps you are misunderstanding. A rather small increase in cost to the corporations for operating UK ‘private planes’ is neither here nor there. It’s simply a more cost effective method of transportation Vs commercially flying many employees to sites/plants daily.

The more cost effective method can not negate the environmental concerns. It really need to be stopped.

This talk of 'high value individuals' is nonsense. This is a group of people saying that their human rights are greater than the great unwashed as they tend to view the rest of us.

They can fark right off with those entitlements. It isn't wealth that's trickling down, it's their pollution. Pricks.

 

[matticus]

Hi. Perhaps you are misunderstanding. A rather small increase in cost to the corporations for operating UK ‘private planes’ is neither here nor there. It’s simply a more cost effective method of transportation Vs commercially flying many employees to sites/plants daily.

If the tax is high enough, your method won't be cost-effective.
(and even before that stage, at least we're getting the Polluter to Pay. win-win!)

Comprendez?

 

[Bromptonaut]

According to the link I posted above, there were in that year of analysis 1343 flights by private jet between Farnborough and London, a distance of just 31 miles that take just 90 minutes by train.

Were those flights actually carrying passengers whose sole purpose was to get to to London?

I suspect they belong to operators based at Farnborough and position to one of the London airports to pick up people who've hired the aircraft.

EDIT; I see this point was made by a previous poster.

 

[monkers]

Were those flights actually carrying passengers whose sole purpose was to get to to London?

I suspect they belong to operators based at Farnborough and position to one of the London airports to pick up people who've hired the aircraft.

EDIT; I see this point was made by a previous poster.

I'm unable to say from the data. I'm also unable to say how many were outward flights with passengers, and how many were returns with passengers. The overall result is the same, there is a lot of unnecessary pollution over the same area in the service of over-entitled idiots.