mgforbes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:05 pm
Obtaining insurance as a Small Business Flight School, through membership in PASA, does not require
a minimum term and an investment in RRG ownership. Large Business Flight Schools, by contrast
are directly insured by the RRG, and must be part-owners of the RRG under federal law.
If this is true- and if you say it is then I have no doubt it's true- then it becomes much more understandable why Mike's shares must be transferred from his ownership.
Is the means of that transfer also stipulated by Fed law? Looking at this from the RRG's perspective, we could understand the need to 'rely' on a stable balance of available funds, and why people's investments would have a time requirement, and even why the RRG can not release that investment should the duration term be broken early.
*HOWEVER* - If the Federal law only states owners must also be insureds, and insureds must be owners... and if the RRG must protect it's financial reserves... couldn't Mike at least SELL his shares to another insured school, or to a school in the process of becoming insured? Then RRRG's account doesn't lose the $500, and Mike is no longer an uninsured owner, AND he can recoup at least some of his investment? Even if he sold his $500's worth of shares for $10... that's two beers worth he isn't getting now!
I think we get that these are the terms of the agreement, and that he signed it... and as such he's bound to these terms. Although if he wanted to operate as a hang gliding instructor, he didn't have a whole lot of choice but to sign... but still, it's a choice he made in order to continue teaching. It's just kinda sad to hear the RRG has language in there that says they'll eat your lunch if you leave them. Unless that buy-back-at-zero-dollers thing is defined by Fed law too?
If not... I would respectfully recommend/request that clause be revisited and hopefully revised to be more in the spirit of "take care of eachother" and "this insurance company was formed to support flight instructors and the sport of free flight"...
Lastly- I'd like to publicly thank Mark Forbes for all of his time and effort in all things free-flight-insurance related the past bunch-o-years. I'm certain not a single one of us can fathom quite how much he's put in to keep things going. And, knowing Mark personally, I can absolutely attest to his character- he is doing his very best, FOR ALL OF US. When faced with the myriad of choices that must be made, he's not just doing his best, but choosing what he believes to be best and right for all... often that means balancing many factors and seeking compromises... and often that leads to making VERY HARD choices with repercussions no one really wants. I certainly don't understand all this insurance mess like Mark does... probably no other human on the entire planet knows more about our specific little tiny unique thing we have going here. We are in many ways chartering new territory... and- like this clause that will hopefully be reviewed- it's a process, an evolution. Just like flying!
RV - out...
Shut up and fly.