survey

[Todd Brooks]

1. I think Mike is on the right track. And we will just have to wait and see what Tim gets back to us with what he is proposing.
 
2. I guess I misunderstood the $40-50-60k survey.  I didn't realize that we were planning to ask the potential members this so soon.  I thought that was for our situational decision making.  
I wouldn't ask the rest of them that right now, personally.  The first plane purchase should really be up to us.  Then we should tell them what we're doing and how it is going to work based on some initial simple input, otherwise we'll get too many opinions and noone will be happy.
 
At first I would simply ask something to the effect of:
1. Are you interested?  SOMEWHAT / VERY MUCH  / DEFINITELY
2. Do you prefer High Wings or Low Wings?  
3. What do you expect to be your price limit for monthly dues and for rentals (plane types depending)?  $100/150/200  -   $60/70/80/90
Then ask for comments.
 
That's my two cents on this one.
 


--- On Fri, 4/10/09, Mike Lysik <mike.lysik at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Mike Lysik <mike.lysik at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: survey
To: eefc-core at workingcode.com
Date: Friday, April 10, 2009, 5:18 PM


Let's only send and reply to eefc-core at workingcode.com from now on.  I'm 
getting double emails which make things more confusing than it has to be.

I agree, let's wait for Tim's #, and go from there.  My take on the 
financing was this...we agree on a final price including upgrades.  We go to 
a bank for a loan, and EE is the guarantor on the loan.  We own the plane, 
and EE gets paid the fair value of the plane in it's current state, plus the 
upgrades we're proposing.

Mike
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Carlson" <carlsonj at workingcode.com>
To: "Bob Irving" <rhirving at verizon.net>
Cc: <eefc-core at workingcode.com>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: survey


> Bob Irving writes:
>> Are we thinking that we will propose 3  different airplanes at different
>> price levels (40-50-60) and ask everyone to vote on what they want? I 
>> think
>> this approach would be a mistake. We will end up with 4 people choosing
>> option#1, 4 people choosing option#2, 3 choosing option#3, etc. Nobody 
>> will
>> be happy.
>
> I would offer the three options and request that people say (for each
> option):
>
> - would prefer this one if it were chosen
> - neither prefer nor reject
> - would not join club if it were chosen
>
> In other words, a vote of +1 / 0 / -1 on each plane.  We can figure
> the membership from the '-1' entries.  We need to eliminate from
> consideration any plane that has so many '-1' votes that we don't have
> enough people to continue, and eliminate from consideration for the
> initial membership anyone who doesn't answer.  We can figure the plane
> choice from the remaining votes and planes by looking at the '+1'
> entries.
>
> -- 
> James Carlson         42.703N 71.076W         <carlsonj at workingcode.com>
> _______________________________________________
> eefc-core mailing list
> eefc-core at workingcode.com
> https://www.workingcode.com/mailman/listinfo/eefc-core 

_______________________________________________
eefc-core mailing list
eefc-core at workingcode.com
https://www.workingcode.com/mailman/listinfo/eefc-core



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.workingcode.com/pipermail/eefc-core/attachments/20090410/fc14f614/attachment.html