I’m guessing this topic has been discussed here before plenty of times, so I apologize if I’m being repetitive. I am considering the idea of taking on a partner or forming a syndicate, and I’d like to hear from other members regarding their experience.
There are two scenarios I would specifically consider:
My primary reasons for taking on a partner would be:
Possible advantages of a multi-aircraft syndicate:
Things I’m concerned about:
Looking forward to hearing from your collective wisdom! 
dutch_flyer wrote:
Possible advantages of a multi-aircraft syndicate:
When I bought my TB-10, I also considered the TB-20 or similar HP retract. Could be nice to have both depending on the mission.
Potentially higher dispatch rate in case one aircraft is down for maintenance
I was expecting multi-aircraft syndicate = TB10 & Cub or Vagabond? I have not expected TB10 & TB20 :)
I have been in 3 syndicates (Mooney, Astir Glider, Currie Wot) plus I may rent other aircrafts (Turbulent & Cub & DA40/42)
The main advantage was I fly anytime I want in the right aircraft for the right mission & weather
Sole ownership would be very boring and painful tradeoff
In winter, there is little touring going on an when it rains grass is muddy and I can’t fly tailwheels, so I fly Mooney on tarmac but when the wind is past +30kts, I fly DA40, rarely missing any opportunity to fly…
Ibra wrote:
I have been in 3 syndicates
How were those structured?
dutch_flyer wrote:
How were those structured?
- Astir, I owned the glider and sold two shares as not flying it much, one of the guys is local and helped a lot when it comes to keep an eye on it (I need 2h drive)
- Mooney, two guys owned aircraft since 1990 and flew it for 20years, one left and decided to sell his share to 2 other pilots and we recently add 1 non-equity
- Wot, 3 people decided to buy something on LAA permit
I think the key thing for syndicates (equity or non-equity), is huge monthly cost (upgrades & engine pot) and very low hourly cost (barely cost of fuel)
I would say, max 4 people, about 150h of fuel burn goes to monthly payments and 1h fuel burn per each hour of flying
Now finding people who fly very often for those financial arrangements & commitments to make sense and keep current to operate aircraft safely is very tough (those who fly 12h per year will be puzzled to pay +300E/h in syndicate than in rental), most members should be able to fly an aircraft one week/weekend in a month (pilot who fly 100h/year should not share or rent one single aircraft, they better be the sole owner, the same for owners who fly 20h/year but still want exclusive use of their toy, they should not share it or rent it, just afford all of it)
I joined the Cawdor Flying Group January 1990. Six members operating a Jodel DR1050. They’d been in existence for several years, and had written-off their first Jodel.
The big problem we eventually ran into was illness and old age.
Last year we sold the Jodel. I was the only one wanting to continue.
With arguments over the years, accidents, (one fatal), that was a successful group. The Jodel was replaced with the Bolkow from the disastrous group below
Members who’ve made a wrong decision are good. They pay the monthly but don’t fly.
In 1995 I joined as a start member a large 15 member, group to buy a Pa28. I sold my share after a year. That group continued until the aircraft needed wing repair, and it was sold as a project about 2018.
It was a successful group.
As the Jodel was undergoing restoration, I joined a newly-forming group to buy a Bolkow Junior. It was a disaster. The youngest guy tried to dominate. We’d let him be maintenance guy, and his mate treasurer. The necessary work to keep flying was not done. It went from shouting and swearing between him and me to consulting lawyers. ( The other 2 never swore )
I bought the two out, leaving a group of 2. It took little money and time to fix the tach cable and brakes. I’m now offering shares for sale, based at Inverness, continuing the Cawdor Flying Group.
The general rule for sharing an aircraft is: One (partner) is non, two is many. If it is just a two pilot partnership (and if it is not an exceptional case) the organization of "operations) is simple as you can just call and discuss. The case that at a specific Sunday both have an extremely critical plan and no one is willing to step back for the other is extremely unlikely.
Starting with 3 partners things get more complex, you need establish more strict rules on how to distribute time, etc. Obviously there are always exceptions (e.g. if you are the only one heavily using the plane with 2-4 others who fly much less…) but in general starting with 3 people it feels more like a club than like having owning your plane.
To your question:
dutch_flyer wrote:
Taking on a few more partners plus another airplane (maybe a TB-20 to add to the current TB-10 for example)
That is then definitely founding your own flight club (with all the pro’s and con’s). Challenge (as in flight clubs) is that it is quite hard to agree on the flight line. Some like to have “just more capacity” and therefore buying multiple clones of the same plane while others look for variety and thus adding a taildragger and a twin to your TB-10.
dutch_flyer wrote:
Share logistics burden for things like maintenance and record-keeping
Have actually never seen that – in small (as in 2 people) syndicates this is typically done by one of the partners, while large (as in >2) typically outsource most of this to a professional service provider (like a CAMO). You need to consider that maintenance and record keeping includes a substantial liability risk which is typically not insured (i.e. by doing a mistake in record keeping you could worst case render a x00k plane worthless). You don’t want to bear that risk for others…
dutch_flyer wrote:
Structuring the ownership model correctly
That is the key to also your other questions. How do you structure from a “pseudo syndicate” (i.e. you fully own the plane and give out block charters to others) to aircraft operating LLCs there are many different models – also including professional fractional ownership providers.
Most important question is how to deal with members that no longer want to participate.
Based on the feedback so far, it seems like one airplane + one partner may be the right model for me. I want to retain most of the benefits of sole ownership, and it seems like it would probably be easier to manage with just one other person. In this case does it make sense to have corporate ownership and shares? What about just finding someone who wants to pay a monthly subscription without actually owning anything? I don’t care per se about recouping the upfront cost, but not sure if that’s a “thing”…
@dutch_flyer one thing I would strongly advise you to do is to have a conversation with your insurers. There are several rules governing the various options discussed here and you may well find that one is vastly cheaper / more expensive / onerous than the other.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Have actually never seen that – in small (as in 2 people) syndicates this is typically done by one of the partners, while large (as in >2) typically outsource most of this to a professional service provider (like a CAMO). You need to consider that maintenance and record keeping includes a substantial liability risk which is typically not insured (i.e. by doing a mistake in record keeping you could worst case render a x00k plane worthless). You don’t want to bear that risk for others…
Don’t suggest adding mechanic to the group, worst “flying partners” when it comes to finances & opinions, don’t ask me how I know
My experience is limited:
1) I owned my own aircraft then sold a half share, which I rapidly bought back when I found out that the other person was potentially about to go bankrupt – which could have landed the airplane as ‘a frozen asset’ in the middle of his bankruptcy – something to watch out for
2) now in a great syndicate of 4 owners of an airplane
~~~
From my limited experience, a few suggestions – it seems to me that you need:
a) people who are like-minded in that they won’t skimp on maintenance – may seem intrusive but you need to know a bit about their financial situation as to how easily they will shell out cash
b) a well-run group where everyone takes responsibility for doing some things. In our group, one does all the accounts, two do most of the maintenance we can do ourselves, I do almost all of the flying to take the aircraft for maintenance – everyone needs to be willing to split the tasks
c) a group who will fly not vastly dis-similar amounts. E.g. in my group we all fly 30-60 hours per year. This gives good availability and means that one person is not hogging the aircraft. We had one person wanting to join, to do hour building, who wanted to do hundreds hours per year – so a no go for us.
d) a group where the pilots have similar flying aims/abilities – e.g. a fresh PPL who wants to do local bimbles versus someone who does long trips hard IFR. The latter will want a good IFR fit of avionics, likely with expensive upgrades whereas the former not – so the former may well not want to shell out £5k as his/her share of an avionics/FIKI upgrade that he/she never sees themself using.
e) make sure the group has a reasonable fund built up for engine/prop etc. and has realistic charging costs per hour
Regarding someone joining a group due to saving money, yes, this was one reason for me – but actually being one of 4 means the maintenance costs are divided by 4 so are never a concern [I am not impecunious either].
But one of the main benefits I have found is spreading the maintenance and admin workload – which comes back to like-minded people, willing to do this.
And one final thing: you need a good group agreement that covers things is something does go wrong (e.g. which allowed me to buy back the share in my own aircraft) – but FYI, not even looked at the agreement for my current group since joining a year ago.
