[nerfhammer]

Possibly by having the service on-demand they have fewer liabilities so you don't go out of business if demand drops off, which is what did in US Helicopter. Helicopters as a Service.

On the other hand if they're too successful maybe the company they're chartering from could decide to offer service themselves and cut them out

[imglorp]

Having it on-demand means they are possibly flying under FAA part 135 regs (charter/commuter) instead of 119 (scheduled carrier) so the expense might be a little lighter there.

That said, someone's got to pay the mortgage on a $2.6 million ship, plus fuel and maint and salaries etc etc.

[adevine]

They're not the carrier. From the bottom of the page:

Gotham Air is not a direct air carrier but rather provides technology and information services enabling consumers to obtain aircraft charter and shared aircraft charter services from FAA certified and DOT registered air carriers who exercise operational control over all flights .

[larrys]

Exactly I've seen a few services like this advertised exactly the same way (WSJ ads some run by former industry execs).

Interesting thought that the picture of the heli contradicts that (says "Gotham Air" on the side). That's no small point actually. Gives someone who doesn't read the fine print the idea that they do operate the aircraft. I understand why they do that but it is a bit deceptive.

[Animats]

The helicopter with "Gotham Air" on the side is a fake photo based on a New York Heli publicity shot. It's a Photoshop job.

Original: http://hereandtherewithoutacare.com/wp-content/gallery/new-y...

Faked, from Gotham Air site: http://static.wixstatic.com/media/b49883_4bfd352941a043ba83c...

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Wouldn't the livery on that helicopter in the photo just be a form of corporate advertising. Couldn't you paint your aircraft however you want so long as the correct registration / licensing marks are visible?

[lucaspiller]

Ryanair let you advertise on the exterior of their aircraft from €3000/month. Apparently the "cheapest outdoor medium in the world".

http://www.ryanair.com/doc/advertise/RyanairMediaCard.pdf

[bertil]

Uber also suggests driver feature their logo on the windshield of one of their category. Can’t remember which.

[ben1040]

I've taken UberX vehicles that had a logo card taped to the windshield.

[TeMPOraL]

Enough to sue them for misleading advertising or something like that? It needs to be done, just to make a point.

[larrys]

I would imagine that the chance of getting sued is quite small. What individual would sue and what harm would they claim? Government FTC most likely would not care and if they did all they would have to do is change the picture.

Likewise if there was an accident someone would have to say they relied on that information and was mislead. Unlikely (especially in the case of death how do you prove that?). Plus it is common practice to operate like this by similar parties.

Here is a similar company for jets:

http://www.bluestarjets.com/

Note how they do the same thing but don't have any logos on the jets.

http://www.bluestarjets.com/?page=company-payment-legal

My guess is that the "Gotham Air" will disappear from the home page picture.

[mikeash]

A significant chunk of US airline flights are operated by a company other than the one whose logo is on the airliner. It mostly applies to the smaller regional "feeder" names, like United Express (actually operated by Cape Air, CommutAir, ExpressJet, and a bunch of others), and American Eagle (operated by AVAir, Chaparral Airlines, Command Airways, and more).

I have no idea if Gotham plans to actually operate that way, but I'd be shocked if there were actually a legal problem if they did.

[nerfhammer]

Right, they don't own any aircraft or facilities. It's like uber pool for helicopters

[woah]

A helicopter company is going to have a hard time hiring iOS developers and managing a software development project, not to mention the most important part: the brand.