Southern_Man

If it is only fast (and not hard), why do you want to slow down the openings? "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

There can be 'percentage leasing' in commercial real estate. Usually it would be for large stores like Sears in malls. The big issue with the airport and their lease is probably consistency. When you operate multi-tenant commercial property you have to be consistent. Legally speaking, you can't rent to one tenant for for X and another for 3X. A lot of time you'll see signs on commercial buildings advertising $X per square foot and that's how they structure the leasing. If one space is 100 ft^2 you pay 100X and if the other is 120 ft^2 you pay 120X. Yeah, I know it is common in some industries (restaurants are another one), but I haven't really heard about that in skydiving. Although I'm not connected on the business end of it much. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

If you look at regulations.gov and type in "horry" a bunch of the background data is available...hundreds of pages. There is a lot of poor behavior by all sides. The Letter of Agreement is pretty restrictive...the DZ appears to have pushed the letter and spirit of the agreement several times. The bit above about operating on a towered airport seems spot on...what a pain in the ass. Granted, the airport was probably being a bit unduly restrictive when it comes to "approved" landing areas...but the DZ appeared to be rather inattentive to some of the Part 139 rules when it comes to gaining permission crossing active runways / taxiways...having golf carts and vehicles not getting permission etc. it seems that there was a system setup that may have been ignored in some instances. Given the relatively small size of the operation there did seem to be a fair number of documented "way off" landings...though why the airport mgr was pitching a fit about ppl landing out on a golf course is a bit silly. I'm *somewhat* sympathetic to the airport's annoyance about not knowing about beach jumps and possible traffic concerns about traffic conflicts with banner towing planes...if anyone has been to MB you know that there are a ton of those ops, beach-side. Among other complaints: - Cloud busts - Disallowed crowds, vehicles on the ramp, loose dogs running around etc etc - arguing with ATC over open frequencies - Part 105 problems with parachutists crossing runways etc below minimums and causing documented acft traffic problems etc I think that a lot of the "lease / security" stuff was simply a way for the county to ride the ass of the DZ because they didn't want them there. A shame. It also looks like the DZ was a little sloppy...the landing areas were a bit strictly enforced but there does seem to be a higher than average number of folks landing on actual runways or taxiways...then again, maybe it is a function of it being documented by an aggrieved party... Thanks for the summary. I knew it was all there, just didn't have time to read all the underlying stuff. Sounds like you have a good handle on the issues. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

It's really hard to tell from the story exactly what all the factors were. You would really have to go to the underlying documentation to get into the meat of it. There are also important questions about the difference between being allowed to rent a hanger and being allowed to use the airport for skydiving (without a hanger) which are really not addressed. I just have one question, for people who know better than I do. Is it common practice to have rent be a portion of revenues? I have pretty limited knowledge, but I'm pretty sure all the DZ's I know have had a flat rate lease. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Are you an Anarchist? Who would represent American skydiving to the FAI? Who would issue credentials? Who would train instructors? And most importantly, who would there be left to complain about? I am in favor of USPA doing those things (and representing us to the FAA for both airport access and rule making, which I think is one of the most effective and important things they do),. However, there is no reason there has to be a group membership for DZs to have any of that happen. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I believe all of the Virginia dropzones are open in the winter. Which doesn't necessarily mean every weekend (some weekends aren't jumpable), but they don't close down for extended periods. I don't know any of the details of winter operations anywhere north of that, though. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I clean then too, as long as they are there. I'd be interested in what rigger's impression was of how many jumpers were actually doing the recommended cleaning/lubing. In my experience I think 30% would be too high an estimate. I don't think most jumpers touch the three rings between repacks. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

You already know. Why ask for advice that you are determined to ignore? "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

So, you can do what you want, but he is already treating you as an employee. All I'm suggesting is that if he wants to treat you like an employee by having you sign a non-compete that you allow him to treat you like an employee in ALL respects. He is getting a free ride here by picking and choosing when to treat you like an employee and when to treat you like a contractor. Meanwhile you are stating you are helpless to contest...you aren't. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Have you considered filling an ss8 form? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fss8.pdf By signing you to a non-compete clause he has taken a very large step towards treating you as an employee in the eyes of the IRS. If he wants to treat you as an employee, let him, with all of the obligations and responsibilities that entails. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Sadly this is pretty much SOP at a lot of tandem factories. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

that wouldnt happen to be a 190 up in michigan would it? Mine was a 2010. I sold it to a guy in FLA, but I think he was buying it for a friend in Brazil or something. I downsized to jump a 190. About ready to move on from that. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

This! All you have to do is file a form SS 8 with the IRS asking them to determine your tax status. Considering one of the main considerations of the IRS in determining subcontractor status is who controls the work terms and another is whether there is a contractual basis, well... You can likely win this in court, but the costs of winning can be high. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

How many packjobs? "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I sold mine in 2013. It only had ~400 jumps on it, so I think it is still being jumped elsewhere. I would jumpe one if I found a 170 in good condition. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

My advice is have just a little bit of patience. At that size and wanting that range of canopies you are in the sweet spot. Something will come up relatively quickly. Ask around, call dealers, etc. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Also, in this case, the insane laws against recording police officers. The union wouldn't have a leg to stand on (pun intended, unfortunately) if they couldn't argue, even with their most twisted of logic, that the recording was illegal. This really is insanely twisted logic. Courts have already ruled that it is legal to record police officers when they are performing their duties and that they have no expectation of a right to privacy. I have no idea why courts even entertain such arguments anymore. They were in public, they were performing public duties (Sort of). "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Last week, in another thread, there was a discussion about having a non-LEO as the head of all LEO organizations. As I posted then: The first step must be to decertify the unions. Everybody should read that at least one more time. It will never get any better until this happens. Jerry Baumchen Hi Jerry, Honestly I don't think Unions are really at the root of the problem. I don't think they are exactly helping anything, but I don't believe that is the root cause. Too much of this is cultural, from police having a view that everybody they come in contact with is the enemy and a threat. Such an attitude has many causes and contributors such as the increasing use of military technology in local police departments (because if I have a hammer...), the idea that they will not be held accountable, etc. Having civilian leadership would surely help. Decertifying unions might help (although the thick blue line is firmly in place in many localities with weak or nonexistent unions, etc. Just my thoughts. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

How can they justify stating that they wanted to physically abuse an amputee? How can they justify consuming marijuana on the job? "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Trump isn't in an presidential election right now. He is trying to be elected by the party to be allowed to run in the presidential campaign. Well there is already a public funding mechanism in place Not much of one but some of one. It covers primaries as well as general elections. Which exposes at least one huge hole in the idea--why should taxpayers be paying for the expenses of private political parties. Anyway, for all his negatives, which I share in the horror at his candidacy--Trump is self-funding his campaign which means he is less susceptible to the money corruption than any other candidate. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/the-chutzpah-of-a-police-union-in-orange-county-california/400502/ I am so tired of this. Guns drawn raid for a misdemeanor. Well past time for this nonesense to end. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

You pay your money, you take your chances. don't want to take your chances--pack it yourdamnself. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

"Getting Compliance" is not a valid reason to draw a gun or shoot anybody. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

No, it is much simpler: Stop sending out troops and money halfway around the globe under the pretense it is "defending our country". Yup. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Well, the problem is that you then have to know exactly what the label means and what the standards are of the labeling body. For instance free range poultry are often chickens that have been raised indoors only for the majority of their short lives and then are placed in a barn that has "access" to a small outdoor yard towards the very end of its life. however by then the chicken has been so habituated to be indoors that it never actually sets foot outdoors. Because USDA regulations for "free-range" poultry only require that the animal has have access to the outside. It says nothing about the quality of size of the ourdoor range, nor the length of time the animal has had access to that range. So, that's perfectly legal but not exactly what most consumers are after when they are buying free range poultry. Indeed, it is pretty much exactly what you say the label of free range is preventing--except they aren't actually letting the outside for the five minutes. Here's a good primer: http://www.salon.com/2011/01/20/what_chicken_labels_really_mean/ I may be naive, but I actually prefer to talk to the farmer and have an invitation to go see the farm any time I want. I generally believe the woman who sold me eggs at the farmer's market last saturday that they are actually organic and free-range. The Indutrial-organic complex is often pretty much the same as the other stuff and is just a way to charge more for the same product. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"