68volksy Posted August 28, 2013 Author Share Posted August 28, 2013 Current lessee has the option to buy it for $2.5 million. Every other offer up until that one was around the $1mill to $1.5mill mark. You could build the entire facility for around $1.2 million so that seems to be a fair price to me. We've been trying to put forward the idea of Council leasing it to a non-profit for 5 years with another 5 year option to start with. Give the non-profit a very strict mandate in the lease agreement of what it can do (maintenance only etc.) to remove a lot of the possibility of things getting political. Basically leave the non-profit with "which contractor do we choose to do the mowing?" and "when does the runway need resurfacing?" as its only decisions. This seems to have most people's support in some form although there are a lot that still want to control the whole thing themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodo Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 http://www.goulburnpost.com.au/story/1746456/airport-sale-nosedives/?cs=180 I thought the comments about both the lack of skills to run an airport & the necessity for a locum service may be an opportunity for local flyers or the aero club. You could probably get assistance through RA or AOPA Also, someone should ping the council on their need for a budget. If a private operator can't make a go of it with council goodwill, the council needs to see the asset as of little saleable value. The council couldn't run it except at a large loss. A private operator can't run it except on a peppercorn rent, and certainly can't afford to run it while paying off a million or two. If you want to sell it for a million or two, work out where the value to the purchaser is. Or just work out where the value in the airport is - and forget the millions. dodo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 This is a bit delicate dodo; it wasn't that long ago that someone was trying to morph it into and Industrial estate, and it has certain value in that case. If the flyers can come together a 45/50 year loan might be worth looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodo Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Turboplanner, I am aware of (some of) the history. The core problems for council are that it costs them money to run, and they can't sell it except as an airport. So the best solution would be to resolve either of these problems, either by getting interested parties to help them run it without cost, or by selling to someone who will run it as an airport. However, the council can't bring themselves to realise that if it makes losses, it isn't worth much, and therefore, no one will pay much money for it. With any common sense, they would lease it to someone for a dollar a year, to be reviewed every year or two with conditions that ensured reasonable access and use to the community, but room for the incumbent to make it profitable (and incentives, preferably, to improve the place). Or get the local interested parties to find ways to make it cost neutral, again while making sure the community gets a non-commercial benefit (airport use for fire-fighting, medical transportation, training & recreation, etc..) Expecting someone to buy it and somehow turn a 30-40,000 loss into a profit of 80-120,000 in order to service a million dollar mortgage implies someone else must have a magic touch. Fantasy! dodo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted September 2, 2013 Author Share Posted September 2, 2013 Well regardless of what he was telling the papers last nights news stated that the lessee came up with the money and that he and Council have signed the sale contract. The lessee's flying school has lost its GA training privileges. The other school that used to be 5 days a week in Goulburn might keep plugging away with 1 day a week but they're certainly feeling the strain of the hostile environment. So unless you're a skydiver or want to pay a minimum of $2,400 to open your hanger doors it looks like it's all over for Goulburn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 If the RAAus had its game together they could have taken the place over and moved in. Admin, flying school, instructor school, maintenance school all in the one place. Stupid dream really. To practical to work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8768 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Maybe we can take it by force, launch an airstrike or something. Form a coalition of the willing........ Pity we can't make a night raid. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodo Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 About a mile out we turn the music on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8768 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Maybe flight of the valkyries 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soilmaster Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 More information about the lessee at: http://vocasupport.com/?page_id=1934 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodo Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 To both soilmaster and volksy68, many thanks for everything you have posted. I am very interested in hangering an aircraft in the area, but have had serious reservations about Goulburn airport (and council). I am very thankful for the helpful information you continue to post. Please keep it up, dodo PS honourable mention to Ian for the site! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 http://www.goulburnpost.com.au/story/1752467/airport-sale-flies-back-on-council-agenda/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted October 17, 2013 Author Share Posted October 17, 2013 Well the deal is finally done. New owner of the airport is now going to start "kicking arse" (to take his words to the local paper in the post above) in regards to collecting fees and charges that have been levied by him to landowners. My feeling is it's going to get very messy indeed if the law suits start flying. Not one landowner has paid his "neighborhood tax" as they believe (and I must say I agree) that no-one has a right to charge their neighbors a tax simply for being their neighbor. No matter where their properties are located. It certainly sounds and feels like the hostility is going to worsen even further... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Who bought it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8768 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Kicking the prospective hand that feeds you and other parts of the anatomy is a novel business model, but I guess he has a monopoly. Charging a proximity tax or quasi-council rate - has the council offered an opinion or have they just wiped their hands of it? Sounds like a class action is on the cards - there are some people who are just beyond negotiating with - a bit like a far right republican congressman. A legal baseball bat is the only way to handle mecurial types, beyond getting ideas from the sopranos. What is happening to Goulburn aviation in short and long term? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 If somebody provides a facility surely they are entitled to levy people for the use of it. If you give it (the levy/charge) a funny title so what?. If the Council have to retain this "facility" as an aerodrome/airfield, that restricts things somewhat but surely it achieves something of some assurance into the future. Most aerodromes have been swallowed up as industrial estates. Perhaps there is some potential for coexistence, but the "CAVEAT" may preclude that. Airparks have been tried here and there. The Council position of not wanting to have to spend/lose money is understandable. I apologise for entering this conversation late in the process. I have driven through Goulburn (bypassed) a few times lately and would have dropped in if I had a bit of extra time. Aerodromes are an asset to anyplace and Sydney basin has had it's problems over time and Goulburn is situated en route to a lot of places where the weather could cause a need to go there. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 The Goulburn Council GM, Chris Berry, seems to think that the Council doesn't have the resources to run the Airport. This might beg the question of what Mr Berry and his council are capable of running? roads? rubbish, sewerage? and all the rest that council does. Perhaps it is time that Berry and Co packed their bags and got a job within their capabilities instead of outsourcing their responsibilities and reducing their jobs down to bugger all with a large salary 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 I have never found a place that likes it's Shire Cancel. Seems to be a universal failure of the democratic process. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68volksy Posted October 20, 2013 Author Share Posted October 20, 2013 Kicking the prospective hand that feeds you and other parts of the anatomy is a novel business model, but I guess he has a monopoly.Charging a proximity tax or quasi-council rate - has the council offered an opinion or have they just wiped their hands of it? Sounds like a class action is on the cards - there are some people who are just beyond negotiating with - a bit like a far right republican congressman. A legal baseball bat is the only way to handle mecurial types, beyond getting ideas from the sopranos. What is happening to Goulburn aviation in short and long term? Council has wiped their hands of it entirely. Sounds like the solution for most landholders out there is to continue to keep their doors shut. Vast majority of the haven't opened their doors in the last two years so they will most likely continue as sarcophagi to the decomposing aircraft within. The smallest hanger out there has been told they have to pay $2,600 per annum if they want to step over their threshold onto the taxiway. The largest hanger owner has been asked for $54,000 per annum! Then there are the parking and landing fees on top of that and a main runway that's so full of loose gravel and weeds it's avoided whenever possible. Everyone's trying to avoid a legal stoush due to the costs involved and i'm not sure there would be enough takers to make a class action affordable. Goulburn aviation will continue to plod along in some form so long as people still want to fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 Sounds pretty terminal. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 The Goulburn Council GM, Chris Berry, seems to think that the Council doesn't have the resources to run the Airport. This might beg the question of what Mr Berry and his council are capable of running? roads? rubbish, sewerage? councils are only interested in profit centres, put a shopping centre on the airport and the rates cash just rolls in. The Toowoomba council outsourced rubbish many years ago, so you know the answer to the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Sounds like a sinking ship. Ripe for the picking by developers. Shame, another airfield looks threatened by mismanagement. To be honest, the place could do with a working bee. Its tired and unkept. For all the fees it doesnt show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAA up-into-the-air Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Goulburn airport operator hits operators with a restrictive NOTAM. Details are: http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/540919-goulburn-final-death-throws.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 another airport gone to the dogs, sad how a once public asset end up in the hands of one person, and is mismanaged into the ground. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 It is, very sad, and it hasn't been for lack of trying in a number of areas, with some fascinating activities and some big risks in the early days. When a Council seems determined to sell of its assets it seems the only way to counter this is to involve the State Government. On the other hand I was disappointed today after posting a story from Victoria's Gordon Rich-Phillips, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Technology, Minister for the Aviation Industry about upgrading an airfield in Victoria to see the story drop like a rock without a comment. What do you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now