孔林山:我不看好地方公务机公司的前景

开篇：润墨网以专业的文秘视角，为您筛选了一篇孔林山:我不看好地方公务机公司的前景范文，如需获取更多写作素材，在线客服老师一对一协助。欢迎您的阅读与分享！

编者按：

本刊2012年1月刊“公务机诸侯风起云涌”一文，引发业界热议。许多业内人士、读者致电致信本刊，发表对各地公务机公司兴起这一现象的看法。在中国鼓励和引导民间投资健康发展的当下，投资的“”已少而又少。一篇专题报道引来观点争鸣，我们更愿理解为，这源自公众对中国公务机和通航事业的普遍关注，源自于行业萌动之初对普遍规律和行业真知的急切找寻。

在这里，我们摘编两位行业权威人士的观点，以飨读者。无论赞同或批评，思考总有价值；而在思辨中，我们切莫停下脚步，因为事实只有时间才可验证。

Editor’s note: U-Jet’s January article “The Operating Lords” has attracted a lot of attention and debate in the industry. They called and wrote to us sharing their insight.

Only time will you. But let’s hear from two experts.

《私人飞机》关于地方公务机公司发展前景的思考，是个非常好的问题。就民生租赁来说，现在找我们买飞机的也很多，但民生的政策很明确，就是对私人用飞机优先考虑和重点支持；对地方小型公务机公司客户谨慎支持，提高其成本，门槛要求也会比较高。我们不希望看到行业从“一哄而上”到“一哄而散”的局面，我们会全力支持旗舰企业使其成为行业龙头。

公务机公司业务主要是执管和包机，小型公务机公司没有生命力，风险是比较大的。首先，执管需要很强的专业能力，在飞行员资源短缺的背景下，没有大航空公司的资源支持，小公司经营会举步维艰。而包机业务需要规模效益，要有上百架飞机才能运转自如并盈利。

比如客户在云南需要飞回北京，而小公司公务机只有两架，还在天津，需要先飞云南再返回，客户要承担几乎双倍的费用。相比之下，对于拥有上百架机队的规模、在全国能够网络化布点调度的公司来说，降低成本提高效率的优势是非常明显的。要看到，在公务机行业，即便是小公司的成本也是固定的，有些企业一年亏得起一两千万，但亏三年就承受不了。虽然现在大家热情很高，但将来一定会有一大批这样的公司经营不下去。

在我们看来，中国需要旗舰式的公务机执管公司，首先得拥有足够数量的公务机，并有大型航空公司做依托，有飞行员资源和成熟的管理经验。最近一段时间，也有很多朋友找上门来，向我表示想做公务机公司，我都规劝他们不要盲目进入，即使想投资也应该寻找能成为旗舰型的公务机公司入股，不一定非要自己办企业。这是一个资金、技术、人力密集型的行业，注册资本没有50亿根本做不了旗舰。

现在民间资本迫切希望进入这一领域，对此，我是很理解的，因此现在市场需求、趋势很明确。问题在于，市场缺乏组织者，政府主管部门应该走得再快一点，出台措施让投资者从正规渠道参与进来，防止打游击现象出现，否则会有不少人付出惨重代价。

实际上，我个人认为，通航产业还有许多其他商机。基础设施如通用机场、FBO运营基地等等，都是投资参股的理智选择；退一步说，办公务机公司也不如去办飞行培训，未来中国上千架公务机的保有量，对飞行员市场需求巨大，估计至少需要3000名飞行员，这都是看得到的投资机会。

I think U-Jet is very smart in initiating discussions about the prospect of local operators. Many people come to us wanting to buy planes. We are very clear about our policy: we give preference to individuals and are very cautious about small local operators. We set a high threshold for them. We don’t want to fuel a boom to bust. We would like to back the flagships.

Operators are mainly engaged in custody and charter services. It is risky for small operators. You have to be true specialists. There are not enough pilots today. Without the support of a big airline, small operators cannot survive. On the other side, you need scale, I mean over 100 planes to deliver charter services.

For example, you are a small operator with only two planes in Tianjin. If your client wants to fly back to Beijing from Yunnan, you have to fly to Yunnan to pick them and then fly for Beijing. Your clients need to bear double the expenses. For a national operator of a fleet of 100 all over the country, the situation is completely different. Its costs are greatly reduced and efficiency enhanced. Fixed costs are high for operators big and small. Can you sustain 10 million, 20 million loss year after year? People are passionate but how many can last for more than three years?

We think China needs flagship operators with a large fleet and backed by a large airline, having access to pilots and sophisticated management. Many people come to me wanting to be operators, and I ask them to forget it. If you are desperate to invest, why not having a stake in a flagship operator? You don’t have to set up shop yourself. This industry is capital, technology and human resources intensive. You need Rmb5 billion registered capital to become a flagship.

I understand why private capital is so keen. People see the need and the trend. But there is not an organizer in the market. I think regulators should move faster, encouraging investors to come in following certain rules and policies, and pre-empt a guerilla’s game; otherwise some people have to pay dearly.

In fact, personally, I advise people to consider other opportunities in general aviation. Airports and FBOs can be wise choices. And why not opening a flying school? One thousand jets will need 3,000 pilots. Consider the implications.