Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Opinion On Chalets

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,500

    Opinion On Chalets

    This is just my opinion on the question of having chalets, which is an enclosed viewing tent on the flight line that is usually sold to a corporate or group sponsor. It may have catered food and nice seating and of course be more expensive.

    Just for me, as a longtime EAA member, I am ok with this if it is kept a small part of the flight line and if it makes significant money for EAA.
    I think I read that last year they brought in $100 K to EAA. This is money that can be used to pay for other worthwhile programs or part of the convention costs.

    How much of the flight line is ok to give to chalets; 10%, 15%? I don't really know, and I usually watch the show, when I watch it, from the north end, so I may not see an obscured view the same as someone near show center where these tents are. Obviously it would be unacceptable if the tents took over a large part of the viewing area.

    This has been a hot topic of contention for some posters on this forum, and I understand the feeling that some people seem to hold that these chalets represent an elite section that gets away from the ordinary guy next door feeling that EAA/OSH has had in the past.
    I do think we need some growth upwards at Oshkosh, not just a focus on the simplest and most basic part of EAA.
    And if we err, let's do it on the side that serves the most regular folks.

    But, if those that plan the show ,keep it in proportion, then I think chalets can be on the right side of risk/reward. I'll trust them to do that, until it is shown that it goes too far.

    By the way, I liked the small ferris wheel for kids near the flymarket last year.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    850
    The funny thing about the chalets being on the flight line is that I'd bet the people inside them are paying as much attention to the airplanes as skybox people do to sporting events. Lots of schmoozing with some complaints about all the noise making it hard to talk about the witty tweet they just sent.

    I'd bet twenty bucks you could set up the same chalets at a different airport close to Oshkosh (limo service, natch), double the "Special VIP checks" for access* to make them feel even more special, have an "exclusive airshow" of nothing but executive jets doing a slow taxi past it every five minutes and generate twice the cash. They could get Mac to be the airshow announcer.

    * Better yet, have someone act like they recognize them as important and wave them through the velvet gates without checking.

    Have some volunteers show up with their seats right behind the chalets so their view is block. Bonus points if one can manage them to look wistfully envious at the VIPs.
    Last edited by Frank Giger; 01-30-2013 at 12:57 PM.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  3. #3
    I heard the same 100K number--its hard to complain about losing 8 parking spots and getting 100K in return.
    the normal members like Me may not like the idea---but the fact is, it Cost a lot to put on airventure--
    Kevin ( not a 1%er )

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    193
    I'm not sure that I have a fundemental problem with the concept of the chalets, but more of the location of them and the prime show plane parking spaces that they eliminated. Like Frank suggested, I wonder if they would be sucessfull if they were located on the west side of the taxiway. (i.e. in the area near the Honda tent) They can still see most of the air show and have the luxories that they are paying extra to receive.
    --
    Bob Leffler
    RV-10 Flying
    www.mykitlog.com/rleffler

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin O'Halloran View Post
    I heard the same 100K number--its hard to complain about losing 8 parking spots and getting 100K in return.
    the normal members like Me may not like the idea---but the fact is, it Cost a lot to put on airventure--
    Kevin ( not a 1%er )
    EAA didn't make $100k. If I recall correctly, the receipts were ~$140k and the profits were under $50k. That's a tangible profit.

    The tangible loss was something like a dozen parking spaces in the middle of the showplane area plus the loss of airshow seating for the great unwashed in that area. The intangible cost was the EAA ticking off a lot of its core members. Ultimately, I think that'll cost EAA a lot more than the ~$50k the EAA made from the chalets in 2012. Arguably, the chalets were the most visible reason Rod got pushed out the door.
    .
    To another poster's point, if EAA can relocate the chalets to second or third class real estate (as opposed to show center, flightline), I'm not sure the VIP's will miss much, and the everyday members probably won't have a problem with it.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,500
    Simple solutions:
    Reinstate the 12 homebuilt parking spaces and charge each owner $10,000 rent for them for the week. Viola, $120 K to EAA and no grumpy old men (EAA members) get their view blocked.

    Or Rent the parking as one big space to Boeing for $120K , for them to park a 787 there, and all the many craftsman, homebuilders, and general fiddle with it and maybe fix it guys in EAA come over and have a shot at solving the battery overheating problems that have resulted in the grounding of the 787.

    The grounding issue is really BIG money and if the EAA guys fix it, and get the 787 flying again, then Boeing could make a very BIG donation to EAA.
    Who knows, you might see a 787 with 93 Harley batteries duct taped together in a 787 and a solar panel on top of the fuselage.

    And by the way Kevin, there aren't any "normal members" in EAA are there? We, they, are a bunch of opinionated, self centered, smarter than the next guy, type A folks. It would be boring otherwise.

    And along this thought path, I am sure many EAA members will be taking Sun off from aviation to watch the Superbowl. EAAtypes will fit right in withall the other experts who know exactly what plays the losing coach should have called and what reciever the losing QB should have thrown to in order to avoid that interception, at what defense Ray Lewis should have beeen in when they gave up the touchdown. If only they had asked us!
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 01-31-2013 at 01:27 PM.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post
    We, they, are a bunch of opinionated, self centered, smarter than the next guy, type A folks. It would be boring otherwise.

    One of the more accurate statements I've seen in the forums! And I probably fit that description too.
    --
    Bob Leffler
    RV-10 Flying
    www.mykitlog.com/rleffler

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    25
    We have been to the last five Oshkosh's...We arrive in our fifth wheel camping rig...between airplanes at this time...we watch most of the airshows for the entire week...We have seen both chalet/non-chalet shows...we view the show from just south of show center, just south of where they park Duggie...there was a big private tent back by the street but nothing near the burn line...

    Reality for us is "no chalet interference yet"...The way they parked Duggie and the Junger TriMotor was a much bigger obstacle...without a "show plane", we are unaffected by the chalets to the North but understand why some may be offended. If given the chance to vote on chalets, we would say more are welcome but keep them back behind the street as already suggested. The additional money would be nice but do not block the views of the real attendees that care about aviation...JMO...YMMV...

    Regards

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post

    ...there aren't any "normal members" in EAA are there? We, they, are a bunch of opinionated, self centered, smarter than the next guy, type A folks. It would be boring otherwise.
    You forgot self absorbed, intolerant, arrogant, self righteous, sanctimonious, misinformed, too easily offended, too many statements expressed as false premises.....ya, that about completes your list.

  10. #10
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    You forgot self absorbed, intolerant, arrogant, self righteous, sanctimonious, misinformed, too easily offended, too many statements expressed as false premises.....ya, that about completes your list.
    You egotistical jerk. You beat me to pointing that out.

    (no offense intended of course....just running with the shtick)
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •