Major General James G. Blunt

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Ohio Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Mid-importance). Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments Aviation This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Sounds like a good idea to me, it's just the European division of the company and seems to be pretty identical. Merge. Iancaddy 23:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. IT should be merged as both companies operate the same programme and allow custonmers to interchange aircraft in both continents.

Whilst offerings are similar NetJets Europe is not a subsidiary - it exists as a company in its own right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.99.135.146 (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the merger tag. The two companies are not identical. They have different fleets, separate histories and operate in different commercial environments. NetJets Europe would certainly merit its own article if it was independent, and large subsidiaries often have their own articles. It would be much harder to maintain clarity and accuracy for both businesses in a single article. Honbicot (talk) 16:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking into it further, it is not a subsidiary of Netjets, but of Berkshire Hathaway, so it stands in exactly the same position as NetJets. Merging the articles would have perpetuated a factual error made by the people who made the proposal. Honbicot (talk) 16:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think it's a little muddier than this. NetJets, Inc. is comprised of NetJets Aviation (N. America) and NetJets Europe, but the NJE fleet is crewed and maintained by NetJets Transportes Aéreos, SA. NJA and NJE are both division of NetJets, Inc. which is the parent legal entity of both NJA and NJE (and NetJets International, NetJets Middle East, and Executive Jet Management.) NetJets, Inc. is a subsidary of Berkshire Hathoway. If your research contradicts this then let's discuss...

Should be supported by facts, which are not found later in the article. If NetJets is a smaller competitor (in fleet size, operations, flight hours, service level) in its market, please clarify or reference to that extent. Septimus 06:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the article on their safety record? ask123 (talk) 13:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We only list accidents and incidents if they are notable, as far as I know none of the four accidents concerning Netjets have been particularly notable. MilborneOne (talk) 19:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on NetJets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090416022716/http://www.netjets.com/about_netjets/timeline.asp to http://www.netjets.com/about_netjets/timeline.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110701010101/http://www.airportjournals.com/Display.cfm?varID%3D0306003 to http://www.airportjournals.com/Display.cfm?varID=0306003

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! User:NetJets rep JB here with a request for editors' consideration. You can see on my user page that I'm here to represent NetJets to help improve the current Wikipedia article, but I understand that Wiki rules are in place for a "COI editor" like me. I respect these guidelines and I won't ever edit the article myself. Instead, I'll post my recommendations here for other editors to weigh-in and help in my place when inclined to, as I'm doing here.

My first request is for editors to update details in the article about Elton De'Souza (also seen spelled "D'Sousa"). The infobox lists him as "CEO of NetJets Europe" which is incorrect as he was President, and also now outdated since he resigned and Christian Luwisch has taken his place. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the infobox could list NetJets Europe as a subsidiary of NetJets, but since the article is about NetJets, not NetJets Europe specifically, its president does not need to be included in the infobox's list of Key People. For these reasons, I'm asking if editors agree and are willing to make the following changes:

• Infobox: remove "Elton d'Sousa (CEO of NetJets Europe)" from Key People
• Subsidiaries: Remove or edit the sentence for accuracy, "Since August 2019, former TAP executive Elton d'Sousa has served as the president of NetJets Europe."

Since I'm asking for these details to be removed, I wonder if it's enough for editors to verify this change via LinkedIn and corporate profiles online? If not, I'm happy to look for a source to help volunteers, but it should be noted that there is not much coverage of NetJets Europe, especially about changing internal corporate roles.

Thanks editors, in advance, for any help! Many thanks, NetJets rep JB (talk) 21:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your post here, that is the right way to go about this. I can make the changes you want, but yes, we really need references to make the changes. Linkedin is not really a reliable source and generally you have to have an account there to see anything. If this info is on the company website that would suffice for factual information like employee names. Any refs from there? - Ahunt (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ahunt, thanks for your reply and for your willingness to assist! Unfamiliar personally with Brazilian media outlets, I'm unsure if this is a "quality" source in terms of use for Wikipedia, but I hope it will be helpful in demonstrating the legitimacy of my above request to remove irrelevant/outdated details about D'Souza's NetJets Europe role. This article by Anabela Campos on 28 August 2020 reads with a somewhat biased tone perhaps, and originates in Portuguese before translation...However, it verifies D'Souza's role was with NetJets Europe, and that it ended recently.

If you wish to replace Elton D'Souza's name with those more relevant/current for Key people in the infobox, you'll find a list of the current executive leadership for NetJets on the corporate website here. Does this help? Let me know if there's anything more I can offer for you to make this change. Thanks again for your assistance so that I may remain hands-off with my COI. NetJets rep JB (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info here. I have fixed both of those. We don't usually list the entire executive suite in the infobox, but I did add the COO's name. See what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, Thanks so much for your assistance with these edits regarding Elton De Souza's removal from the page! I'll reply to your note about Key people along with some other thoughts about the infobox in a separate post below. Thanks again, NetJets rep JB (talk) 14:30, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, NetJets rep JB here with some new suggestions for updating the current article's infobox, as follows:

• Infobox template - I noticed that other articles' infoboxes may sometimes include more relevant details pertaining to the industry. If editors agree, I suggest converting the current article's infobox template to use Template:Infobox airline

and incorporate the following updates:

• • Key people -
    • a) replace Alan Bobo (COO) with Patrick Gallagher who seems like a better fit. He's the President of Sales, Marketing and Service at NetJets and serves as the company spokesperson.

• • • b) alternatively, keep this parameter simple with mention only of Chairman and CEO Adam Johnson, removing Alan Bobo (COO) **Fleet size - This Aug 2020 article from Barrons as well as this Aug 2019 article from Courthouse News Service can both be used to verify Fleet size of 750

• • Employee count - Our employee count has risen to 7,000 but this has not been widely published journalistically, and I'm struggling to locate an appropriate source for verification. I'll defer to editors' best judgement and provide updated sourcing when found/available.

• • Subsidiaries - ***Based on this source here, add QS Security Services to Subsidiaries

• • • Remove Marquis Jet Partners, Inc. from Subsidiaries because it is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, as verified in sourcing provided. This makes it a sister company to NetJets as such, rather than a subsidiary of the NetJets brand.

I'm pinging Ahunt both in reply to your inquiry above, and in case you have any thoughts about my suggestions here and are willing to assist further.

I'll continue to post my recommendations here and ask for community volunteers to help adjust the article itself, as I respect Wikipedia's rules about my conflict of interest. Thanks for any consideration or advice. NetJets rep JB (talk) 14:33, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done See what you think. I have left the employee count at 6,000 until a ref can be found, since that is alreasdy sourced. Perhaps you can convince the company to put that on an "about us" page? It already does use Template:Infobox airline, just not showing all parameters! - Ahunt (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, these adjustments look great, thanks so much for your assistance! One question: Does it make sense to complement these changes to the infobox with adjustments to the body of the article? Namely:

• Remove mention of Marquis Jet Partners, Inc. from the Operations section:

"For companies or individuals that require less than the minimum 50 flight hours and the five-year commitment of fractional ownership, they can buy flight hours in 25-hour increments via its Marquis Jet and NetJets jet card programs the NetJets card"

• Add mention of QS Security Services within the Subsidiaries section:

[SUGGESTED DRAFT] - QS Security Services Launched by NetJets in October 2019 with "tiered security packages" adjusted based on needs of passengers and the "threat level" of their destinations. Upon launch, packages were only available at Paris Le Bourget and in Mexico with plans for expansion for coverage worldwide by 2023.^[1]

If you agree, I've tried to make the above easy to implement. Thanks again for all of your help with these edits so I may be respectful of COI guidelines. Best, NetJets rep JB (talk) 15:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, I tightened up the wording a bit. - Ahunt (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, thanks again for all of your help here. These changes have certainly helped to improve the article's accuracy with these high-level details. Many thanks, NetJets rep JB (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that was helpful collaboration. When there are more changes just post back here! - Ahunt (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, I'm back with more observations of update opportunities, specifically within the Fleet section of the article. Once again, I won't implement any direct changes myself because of my paid conflict of interest. Specifically, I recommend the following changes:

Updates to table entitled "NetJets Fleet (excluding NetJetsEurope) As of 23 October 2019":

(According to the source used in the current article^[1])

• Table title: update to say "As of 18 Feb 2021"

• Bombardier Challenger 350 | ICAO code CL35: update "in service" to 69

• Bombardier Challenger 650 | ICAO code CL60: update "in service" to 25

• Bombardier Global 5000 | ICAO code GL5T: update "in service" to 13

• Bombardier Global 6000 | ICAO code GLEX: update "in service" to

16

• Cessna 560 Citation Encore | ICAO code C560: update "in service" to 21

• Cessna 560XL Citation Excel | ICAO code C56X: update "in service" to 77

• Cessna 680A Citation Latitude | ICAO code C68A: update "in service" to 108

• Cessna 750 Citation X | ICAO code C750: update "in service" to 49

• Embraer Phenom 300 | ICAO code E55P: update "in service" to 82

• Gulfstream G200 Galaxy | ICAO code GALX: update "in service" code to 12

• Gulfstream IV/G400/G450/4SP | ICAO code GLF4: update "in service" to 29

• Hawker 800XP | ICAO code H25B: update "in service" to 37

• ADD to table:

• • Cessna 700 Citation Longitude | ICAO code C700 | In service: 9

• • Bombardier Challenger 300 | ICAO code CL30 | In service: 1

• Update Total: 634

ADD to section:

If editors agree that the following break-down of the U.S. and Europe Fleet by aircraft type is helpful for readers, I'm including it here as well to be considered for addition within the Fleet section as editors see fit. (Note that the source I'm providing for verification is a primary one, although it is an updated (2021) fact sheet like one (2018) seen referenced in the current article.)

U.S. and Europe Fleet:

• Light Cabin

• • 90 Phenom 300

• • 71 Citation XLS

• Midsize Cabin

• • 38 Citation Sovereign

• • 128 Citation Latitude

• Super-midsize cabin

• • 83 Challenger 350

• • 10 Citation Longitude

• Large Cabin

• • 14 Falcon 2000EX

• • 25 Challenger 650

• • 14 Gulfstream G450

• • 14 Global 5000

• • 25 Global 6000

Other sources for reference:

If helpful, I am also providing a few recent, industry sources that may help editors to verify recent changes to the fleet in response to COVID-19 pandemic-related demand: *Reuters, Nov 2020 *AINOnline, April 2020 *RUSTourismNews, Oct 2020

Are there any volunteers willing to check my work and apply these updates within the article on my behalf? Thanks for your consideration! NetJets rep JB (talk) 19:41, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the updated info.  Done

I have updated the table of aircraft in the fleet and the reference for it. However I am a bit reluctant to add the list you have indicated of aircraft by cabin size as it is redundant to the table listing (the aircraft type links explain the cabin sizes for each type) and also because it is too close to marketing information. - Ahunt (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, fair enough, and thank you for yet another assist! Looking more at this section and recent addition, I wonder if more improvements can be made, specifically to the Orders subsection below the Fleet table:

Orders content within Fleet:

• I noticed that other articles within the industry don't go to this level of detail about fleet orders. I wonder if it is interesting to readers, or is it viewed as too internal to the company's operations? Also the dedicated subsection and heading adds unnecessary complexity to the article's outline in my opinion. I propose removing the "Orders" subsection heading to simplify the TOC outline at the top. See my proposed rewrite of its content below, attempting to bring it up-to-date while highlighting only the info that I suspect is pertinent to readers today.

• In general, the current content within Orders appears out-of-date and leaves room for improvement to sourcing. I have attempted to draft updated Orders content below, retaining Wikipedia-appropriate sources to the best of my knowledge, and adding more recent ones.

• Suggest removal of outdated photo of aircraft that is no longer in service, titled "A NetJets Boeing Business Jet 737-700"

• Finally, if editors agree that some version of the below information should be integrated and retained within the live article, my last question is if these details would be better suited for the History and operations section of the article, rather than here in Fleet?

PROPOSED DRAFT: "Orders" content rewrite

As of June 2012, after a large (150) order of mid-size Citation Latitude business jets, NetJets was Cessna's largest business jet customer, fleet owner, and after-market customer, according to Brad Thress, Cessna's senior VP for business jets at the time.^[1]

As of November 2020 almost half of the company's fleet is manufactured by Textron, and the rest from makers Bombardier Inc. and Embraer. After reducing its delivery target for 2021 by more than half, due to decreased demand caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020,^[2] NetJets expected near the year's end to take delivery of 40 new aircraft in 2021 as the industry began to indicate recovery trends.^[3]

In March 2021, NetJets announced that it had acquired purchase rights for 20 Aerion AS2s. The memorandum of understanding between NetJets and Aerion calls for the two companies to envisage Netjets operating an "Aerion Connect" network.^[4]

Once again, I welcome feedback and for editors to make their own adjustments as you see fit. I ask that edits to the article be made on my behalf, so I may continue to respect guidelines for my conflict of interest as an employee of the brand. Appreciatively, NetJets rep JB (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Thanks for your suggestions here. I have partially cut down the orders, incorporated some of your text, while retaining some of the dollar figures, as I think that they are of interest to reader and gives a sense of the scale of the purchases. I have also merged it into the history section, where I think it better fits. Since we are really doing "history" here on Wikipedia I have left the 737-700 BBJ photo, but moved it to the history section and indicated it is a previously operated type. - Ahunt (talk) 15:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, once again. I'm back with some thoughts for improving the article's current content within Subsidiaries. After user:Ahunt's recent help to make the section current, alongside updates to the Infobox (discussed above), I noticed that the section is largey unsourced apart from those recent changes. It also appears overly formatted, in my opinion, for the amount of content it contains. I wonder if editors have any thoughts about improving sourcing as I propose below, and also moving its contents to the History section so as to do away with the separate "Subsidiaries" heading and subheadings. Alternatively, perhaps it makes more sense to create a new "Operations" section, paired with details recently moved from Fleet to History. I'm interested in thoughts from editors, and ask that a volunteer integrate some version of these changes on my behalf, as deemed fit. As always, I will not adjust the live article myself because of my COI.

Lastly, I'm pinging editor Ahunt once more to say thanks (again!) for assistance with recent changes to Fleet and I welcome your insight if this new request interests you as well.

Thanks in advance for any other thoughts or assistance! NetJets rep JB (talk) 21:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed re-write of Subsidiaries

NetJets has several subsidiary brands including NetJets Europe.^[1] Also among NetJets subsidiaries is Executive Jet Management (EJM), based in Cincinnati, Ohio, which offers aircraft management and charter services.^[2][3] QS Partners is the whole-aircraft brokerage arm of NetJets, launched in 2016 and officing in Columbus, Ohio; Boulder, Colorado; and London; it also exclusively resells NetJets certified preowned aircraft.^[4] QS Security Services was launched by NetJets in October 2019 with "tiered security packages" based on passenger needs and threat level at destination; upon launching packages were only available at Paris Le Bourget and in Mexico, with plans for worldwide coverage by 2023.^[5][6]

Okay,  Done, with a few minor adjustments for "marketing speak". - Ahunt (talk) 14:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, I am returning again with more thoughts on further improvements to the History section. Thanks to user:Ahunt's recent help to reorganize and update the article's content, this section is more cohesive and robust than before. My new observations and suggestions are as follows: *I wonder if it would help readers to break up the text by adding an Operations subheading. I suggest doing so at the start of

the paragraph beginning "In early August 2009, Santulli resigned as CEO…" *I noticed a few more details may be relevant from the AINOnline source referenced within the current article. Specifically, I suggest replacing the first sentence in History with content similar to the following: "NetJets was founded in 1964 originally known as Executive Jet Airways. The name was later changed to Executive Jet Aviation (EJA), and again in 2002 to NetJets after Berkshire Hathaway's 1998 purchase of the company. NetJets was the first private business jet charter and aircraft management company in the world, launching its fractional ownership business in 1986."

• Content is unsourced, and should be removed or updated: "By the late 1970s, EJA was doing business with approximately 250 contract customers, and logging more than three million miles per year."
• Content is unsourced, add citation (suggested source): "In 1984, Executive Jet Aviation was purchased by mathematician and former Goldman Sachs executive Richard Santulli who owned a business that leased helicopters to service providers of offshore oil operations. When Santulli became chairman and CEO of the corporation, he closely examined 22 years of pilot logbooks, and began to envision a new economic model where several individuals could own one aircraft."
• Add source (suggested:A-Flying Mag 1998 and B-Flying Mag 2002) to unsourced claim: "Around the same time, painted on every NetJets US aircraft is a registration ending with QS, symbolizing the concept of selling quarter shares of an aircraft—a feature that is still representative of the NetJets brand today."
• Citation (AINOnline) should be added to unsourced claim: "In 1998, Berkshire Hathaway acquired AJA and NetJets Inc."
• Content is unsourced, add citation (suggested source): "In 1984, Executive Jet Aviation was purchased by mathematician and former Goldman Sachs executive Richard Santulli who owned a business that leased helicopters to service providers of offshore oil operations. When Santulli became chairman and CEO of the corporation, he closely examined 22 years of pilot logbooks, and began to envision a new economic model where several individuals could own one aircraft."
• Add source (suggested:A-Flying Mag 1998 and B-Flying Mag 2002) to unsourced claim: "Around the same time, painted on every NetJets US aircraft is a registration ending with QS, symbolizing the concept of selling quarter shares of an aircraft—a feature that is still representative of the NetJets brand today."
• Citation (AINOnline) should be added to unsourced claim: "In 1998, Berkshire Hathaway acquired AJA and NetJets Inc." — Preceding unsigned comment added by NetJets rep JB (talk • contribs) 19:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for your new suggestions here, especially finding refs for what were unreferenced statements! You can note that your last two entries above are actually duplicates. I have incorporated all your refs and changes, except adding an "operations" subsection under "History". My main concern there is that future chronological entries may not be "operational" in nature and then would need to either be added in a new section afterwards or before, breaking the chronological order. If you think the history section needs breaking up, I would suggest that it be done by decades instead. - Ahunt (talk) 00:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ahunt, thanks for more assistance! Your point about dividing up the History' section by decades (if at all) instead of with an "Operations" subsection makes sense. Also, I can see from the bot's addition above that my post had some formatting issues leaving a hanger, with a few missing points and my signoff. I'm including a few more suggestions below for improving the current History section:

• Remove unsourced content: "...from founders Jesse Itzler and Kenny Dichter."

• Content seems irrelevant, suggesting removal: "The prepaid Marquis Jet card allowed customers to purchase 25 hours of guaranteed flight time on the NetJets fleet."

• Content based on primary sources (press release, suggesting removal): "On June 11, 2012, NetJets placed the largest aircraft order in private aviation history totaling US$17.6B. The company placed a firm order for 30 Bombardier Global 5000/6000 jets, 25 Bombardier Challenger 650 jets, 75 Bombardier Challenger 350s, 25 Cessna Citation Latitudes and 50 Embraer Phenom 300s."

Additional references

• U.S. Air Force - verifies Lassiter as Air Force Brigadier General :::*The New York Times- verifies Lassiter as former head of Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. :::*Flying Magazine - verifies QS stands for quarter-share :::*The Wall Street Journal - verifies a few details about the NetJets/Berkshire Hathaway relationship and other facets of the company's history that may be relevant :::*Barron's - verifies 1964 founding, prior brand names, and other pertinent details to this section :::*Reuters - details on Lassiter as Air Force Brigadier General and early president of Executive Jet Aviation at the time :::*Bloomberg - Includes information on Berkshire Hathaway's purchase of NetJets

I'm happy to collaborate further and welcome thoughts from others. Ahunt, thanks once more for your recent help with Subsidiaries and the above. I'm interested in your thoughts on these suggestions if you care to take a look. I will continue to avoid updating the live article myself in accordance with the site's rules for my conflict of interest. All the best, NetJets rep JB (talk) 12:40, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input here. I have sub-divided the history section by decades. I think it looks better that way. Rather than remove unsourced text I have sourced it. I also added in the refs you supplied and some text derived from them, too. - Ahunt (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, editors! I have returned to thank you, Ahunt, yet again for your continued assistance with improving the article, most recently within History. Also with my return, I have collected a few more thoughts to suggest further improvements now to the current Business model section for editors to review. Mainly, I noticed the section lacks proper sourcing. I propose the following changes with suggested sourcing for verification, as follows:

• Move subsidiaries details from the last paragraph of History to Business model - With the History section's new organization by decade, the information about subsidiaries in the final paragraph feels out of place now. I'm proposing that it would be better suited for the Business model section, if others agree.

• Add sourcing to verify the fractional ownership aspects of the company's business model - suggested sources Reuters Nov 2020 and Business Jet Traveler July 2015

• Add relevant details about NetJets' recent commitments to environmental sustainability efforts - suggested source FlightGlobal Oct 2020

• Add relevant details about the impact of COVID-19 on the private air travel industry - suggested source NYT May 2020

• Add relevant details about the company's efforts to expand employee COVID-19 testing - suggest AIN Online May 2020

As always, I welcome feedback from others and I'm happy to collaborate further. As well, I'll request that a volunteer such as User:Ahunt or another will make changes on my behalf so I may remain respectful of policies for COI editors like me. Thank you! NetJets rep JB (talk) 18:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I moved the subsidiaries section into its own new section where it can be updated independently of history and added the rest under history. - Ahunt (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ahunt, and thanks for more assistive edits! Your updates have added some valuable details to help bring the company's History more current and to include recent events. The Subsidiaries content stands out more clearly as well, thank you! If you don't mind, I have a little bit of feedback. I wonder if you will agree, and be willing to consider some amendment for clarification on the following:

• 2020s (second sentence) - "Previously many potential customers had concerns about the optics and the environmental issues of private jet transport, but NetJets CEO, Patrick Gallagher noted in May 2020, 'concerns about opulence and concerns about environmental issues are gone'." - I wonder if this sentence might be confusing from the reader's perspective. For me it is hard to tell for sure in this context if the comment is about the public's attitude about environmental concerns, or the attitude of the NetJets brand. It reads as contradictory to my eye when closely followed by details about the company's specific efforts to reduce its carbon footprint the same year. If editors agree, I propose rephrasing this second sentence within 2020's for clarity.

Although they are primary sources and unlikely to be useful references within the article, I'm including links to other details about NetJets' environmental efforts for further research in case they may be helpful. 1) NetJets global sustainability program, 2) press release

As always, I welcome feedback and will defer to the consensus of the community while avoiding any direct edits to the article myself, due to my paid COI. Thanks again for your collaboration and ongoing assistance! NetJets rep JB (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I went back to the source ref and re-worded the text in a way that I hope will help clarify. - Ahunt (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, thank you for making that adjustment. It reads with more clarity now. Much appreciated! NetJets rep JB (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, I have a new request after more recent improvements to the article - thanks again to Ahunt's help and collaboration. In looking at the current See also section's content, I noticed that there is a short list of NetJets' competitors listed that seems arbitrarily selected. I wonder if there is a way to improve this list with more relevant pages, or if editors think it should be removed altogether? If others agree that it should be expanded with other relevant entries, I'm happy to collaborate further to help identify those. I welcome feedback from the community and ask that a reviewing volunteer make changes on my behalf. I will continue to avoid doing so directly, myself, due to my conflict of interest as a paid employee of the brand. Thanks, as always, for any consideration or thoughts shared. NetJets rep JB (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It probably should be a list of the major competitors, if you have suggestions for those. - Ahunt (talk) 16:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, thanks for this guidance. For updating the existing list I put together a list of competitors' articles, as requested, and a few others I think could be relevant. I welcome you to integrate the best version of this list into the live article, at your discretion.

Proposed list for updating the contents of See also:

• Air charter

• AirSprint

• Air taxi

• Berry Aviation

• Business jet

• CSI Aviation

• Delta Private Jets

• Elite Airways

• Flexjet

• Fractional ownership of aircraft

• Jet card

• List of charter airlines

• Million Air

• National Airlines

• Omni Air International

• PlaneSense

• Reliant Air

• Skymax

• Swift Air

• World Atlantic Airlines

• XOJET

• Xtra Airways

Thanks, as always. NetJets rep JB (talk) 16:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done We don't put links in "see also" that are already in the main article text, so I made sure all the general terms were linked in the text (except two that didn't fit there) and then added the competitors in a separate, two-column list. See what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 17:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Ahunt, and thanks for your quick review and reply. Your changes make sense and look great from my perspective. Thanks again for your assistance! NetJets rep JB (talk) 19:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, once again, I've returned to address a new set of observations. Specifically, I noticed that the Accidents and incidents section is atypical for similar content within other industry adjacent articles on Wikipedia. Generally, the table included in the section appears incomplete and lacking of appropriate citations for much of the existing content. I wonder if it makes sense to simplify the table so it is a bulleted list instead, and reduce its contents to list the noteworthy incidents that have Wikipedia-appropriate references and are most relevant to readers - perhaps those that were nationally reported. Ahunt, as you have been hugely collaborative on recent improvements to the article, I wonder if you have any thoughts or suggestions for the best approach to improving this section? I welcome feedback from reviewing editors and will defer to the community's consensus. As always, I will ask that a volunteer make edits to the live article on my behalf, so I may remain respectful of rules for my conflict of interest as a NetJets employee. Thanks in advance for any consideration or thoughts shared. NetJets rep JB (talk) 15:29, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It varies from article to article, for instance Air Canada uses a table like this one, whereas Qatar Airways uses a bulleted list. Let me go over the list and see which ones should be here and which ones removed and then see if a table or list looks better. We list accidents that are as per our inclusion standards, WP:AIRCRASH:

Accidents or incidents should only be included in airline articles if:

• The accident was fatal to humans; or
• The accident involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport; or
• The accident or incident resulted in changes to procedures, regulations or processes affecting airports, airlines or the aircraft industry.

- Ahunt (talk) 14:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I removed quite a number as not meeting the WP:AIRCRASH criteria. - Ahunt (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, Thanks again for more assistance here! The section and table are much improved and I'm grateful for the helpful reference to WP:AIRCRASH. One note: I noticed that a list of errors appeared at the bottom of the References list with the last edit. Would you mind taking another look to see if there is an easy fix on the back end? Perhaps it will be easy to do all at once, if my latest post below interests you as well. Regardless, thanks again for all of your help to improve the entry thus far! NetJets rep JB (talk) 17:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing the errors, I had missed that, but it is now  Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 18:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, editors. Thanks once again for Ahunt's help, the Accidents and incidents table and section appears much more concise and accurate. I have returned with a few more observations, this time about the Concerns and conflicts section. Specifically:

• observation: subheadings add unnecessary complexity to the larger article outline

• • suggestion: remove the "Taxes" and "Discrimination complaint" subheading titles ("==example=="), replacing them with bold formatted headings only (" example ")

• observation, Taxes: current content does not indicate the significance of the case mentioned, from the readers' perspective

• • suggestion: Add a reference to this article by The Washington Post which mentions the case in passing, to help demonstrate its notability if it should still be included in the article. Also, add a reference to this article by The New York Times, which covers the case in detail, and may be used to update the section's contents and clarify the significance of the case.

• observation, Discrimination complaint: Though sourcing referenced does offer verification of the details included, they seem low-tier in quality to my eye, from a Wikipedia perspective of ideal references.

• • suggestion: If editors agree, I found the following sources that I believe editors may use to update the contents and references, 1) This article from Fox News covers the same information as the current subsection's details and references, but from a national media outlet; and 2) [https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/netjets-pilots-

short-stature-enough-for-sex-bias-suit-for-now/ Bloomberg Law] published an update on the case, but editors should note that it is behind a paywall and may be difficult to access for some.

• Finally, I wonder if this section could be consolidated with Accidents and incidents, perhaps to create a new section called "Accidents, incidents, and conflicts", or similar.

• • My thoughts are that this might help to simplify the article's structure overall. As well, it might neutralize the presentation of the content by reducing weight given within the larger structural outline, if reviewing editors agree.

As always, thanks for any consideration and collaboration. Again, I'm interested in any thoughts User:Ahunt might have on the best handling of these points, given prior significant contributions to the page, though I welcome feedback from any editors. As always, I ask that a volunteer implement changes on my behalf due to my COI, and I will defer to community consensus on best practices. Cheers, NetJets rep JB (talk) 17:19, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions here. Some responses:

"observation: subheadings add unnecessary complexity to the larger article outline" - not allowed under MOS:HEADINGS Not misuse description list markup (";") to create pseudo-headings. This is for accessibility requirements, like making the table of contents work right.

"suggestion: Add a reference to this article by The Washington Post which mentions the case in passing, to help demonstrate its notability if it should still be included in the article. Also, add a reference to this article by The New York Times, which covers the case in detail, and may be used to update the section's contents and clarify the significance of the case." The NYT article isn't loading, but I used the WP one to expand the entry a bit. I think it is of interest and relevant but only to a limited extent.

"Discrimination complaint" - the Fox News link you provided is 404 but I found it on Archive.org and the other one, as you noted is paywalled. I added the Fox News ref, but no new text, since it had little new to add, like the outcome of the court case. I did search for a verdict there but it looks like the case has not been concluded. We use the page layout at Wikipedia:WikiProject Airlines/page content, which details accidents and incidents as aircraft accidents and incidents. Instead I have re-titled the section "Legal issues", but it could also be moved into the history section. - Ahunt (talk) 01:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, thank you for these thoughts and edits. "Legal issues" seems like a more appropriate title for the existing section, thanks for that change. I'm also appreciative that you pointed out the importance of TOCs for accessibility from your sharing of MOS:HEADINGS. I like your idea to incorporate the Legal issues content within the History section because its contents are limited, as you say, and perhaps not quite enough for a dedicated section. Let me know if you're interested in implementing that change, or if you'd prefer I propose a possible structure for merging those sections. Thanks, as always! NetJets rep JB (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I have moved both those issues into the history section. See what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahunt, thanks for making those changes and for all the help you've provided. I've posted a new request below with some suggestions for the introduction. If you have time to review, I'd be happy to continue collaborating with you. Thanks again, NetJets rep JB (talk) 20:28, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, thanks to collaboration with Ahunt, the NetJets article appears much improved in terms of relevant and quality information and its organization. Now that the body of the article has been updated and brought current, I wonder if it makes sense to update the introduction to reflect these improvements and provide a better summary of the article's contents. I have included my proposed draft for updating the lead below, hoping to make it easy for editors to review and implement as they see fit:

Article introduction (new draft)

NetJets Inc., a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, is an American company that sells part ownership shares (called fractional ownership or shared ownership) of private business jets.^[1] Since its founding as "Executive Jet Airways" in 1964, NetJets was the first private business jet charter and aircraft management company in the world, launching its fractional ownership business in 1986.^[2][3] Fractional owners pay monthly maintenance fees for a minimum of 50 annual flight hours and a five-year commitment, as well as operating fees by the hour for use of aircraft. Alternatively, customers may buy flight hours in 25-hour increments by way of jet card programs.^[4]

As always I ask that a reviewing volunteer make these changes on my behalf so I may continue to respect rules and guidelines about my paid conflict of interest as an employee. I welcome editors' feedback and will defer to the consensus of the reviewing community. Thank you, again, in advance for any assistance! NetJets rep JB (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I incorporated your suggestions and refs, but with a few adjustments to ensure we caught the previous names of the company. I also moved the business model information to the business model section as it really doesn't belong in the lede section. - Ahunt (talk) 22:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm back again with a quick request and question. Ahunt, thanks for making the updates to the introduction, and for all the support you've provided. If you're still available, I'd welcome your feedback and assistance with the requests below.

• In 2020s, I noticed it says Patrick Gallagher is the CEO. His title is actually President of Sales, Marketing and Service (as noted in the Infobox). Would an editor mind correcting that entry?

• Based on this Flying Magazine magazine article, would it be reasonable to add a brief mention of NetJets' investment in WasteFuel to 2020s along the lines of "In 2021, NetJets invested in WasteFuel with plans to purchase 100 million gallons of sustainable aviation fuel over the next ten years."?

As always, I appreciate feedback and help implementing appropriate requests so I can continue to follow all rules for conflict of interest editors. I understand if editors choose to alter my proposed content. Thanks, NetJets rep JB (talk) 17:46, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I have also added a note about Aerion folding too, to sort of close that item out. - Ahunt (talk) 01:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Jude from NetJets here. I've been revisiting some sections of this article and have a couple of questions/thoughts regarding the Fleet section and the Competitors list.

Ahunt, Thank you again for all of your wonderful help. Since you've worked on both those sections, I wonder if you'd be able to weigh in here?

• For Fleet, how can I be most helpful in keeping this table up to date? We worked on it back in February, but it still has some outdated info. We no longer have G200s, G550s, Hawker 800XP, Citation Bravos, Citation Encores, or Citation Xs, for example. Some of which haven't been in the fleet since 2008. Our website lists the aircraft currently in our fleet, but I know that's not a preferable source. I would love guidance on if a primary source might be usable here.

• In Competitors, I'm looking back on the list I sent over back in April and seeing that most of them are also included in the List of charter airlines linked in See also. Would it make sense to trim that redundancy and only list other

airlines that offer fractional ownership in Competitors? (XOJET, FlexJex, etc.)?

Thanks so much for your consideration. I'm grateful for the help I've received here. NetJets rep JB (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note here. There is no issue with using primary references, like your company website for factual information, like how many aircraft you have. I can use that to update the list.

We have quite a bit of flexibility on the "see alsos". We can cut the whole list or just cut the non-fractions. Let me know which ones should be removed. - Ahunt (talk) 21:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The fleet list is  Done. I have used a simple list, as each of the linked articles describes the aircraft and your company website doesn't list the number of aircraft, etc. - Ahunt (talk) 22:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahunt: Thank you! The simple fleet list makes sense, and not having individual numbers of aircraft is less to manage in the article. As for Competitors, I think if we can keep the List of charter airlines, that thoroughly covers the field and we can cut the competitors subsection. Thanks again, NetJets rep JB (talk) 14:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great,  Done. - Ahunt (talk) 23:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahunt: Thanks! I have another question. Internally, I'm being asked why the NetJets article includes content on accidents and incidents, while other articles on private jet operators do not. I understand that Wikipedia's very nature makes it impossible to ensure consistency across articles, and your help bringing that section inline with WP:AIRCRASH was a big improvement. I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this already, but are there any circumstances in which that section would be removed from the article altogether? Just covering my bases here and making sure I explore all possible avenues before I go back to my team with a final answer. Thanks again, NetJets rep JB (talk) 20:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the most succinct answer to that is that the articles on other companies are incomplete and need to have notable accidents and incidents added. We are pretty sensitive here to WP:COI WP:WHITEWASHING (meaning people associated with the articles subject removing negative information for WP:PROMOTIONAL reasons.) - Ahunt (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahunt: I appreciate the clarification there, that's what I thought. If you're interested, I've posted a new request below. Thanks! NetJets rep JB (talk) 18:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'd like to make a small request for an update to the Marquis Jet card.

• NetJets has renamed the Marquis Jet card as the NetJets Card, can we add that change to History per this article?

Thanks for all the help reviewing my COI requests! NetJets rep JB (talk) 18:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 19:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ahunt! I had a thought about the newly streamlined Fleet section. Now that it's been trimmed down, can we add an image showing an example of the type of jets in the fleet? I think the Cessna Citation Latitude would make sense, because it's our flagship and there are photos of it on Wikimedia Commons. This article from the Wichita Business Journal notes when we got our 100th Citation Latitude, in case that might be useful for a caption.

Happy to hear feedback and thoughts on this addition. Thanks for everything! NetJets rep JB (talk) 14:23, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I put in two, see what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Jenna from NetJets here. I have a question about the Boeing 737 image in the History section. I saw that Jude previously asked about removing the image, and it was left in place with an updated caption. Since the article body doesn't mention 737s, I was wondering if it would make sense to replace it with an image such as this one, since the Citation Latitude is mentioned in 2010s? A simple caption like "A NetJets Cessna Citation Latitude" would be fine.

Ahunt, if you're around, I'd be interested in your thoughts. Thank you, NetJetsJM (talk) 14:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note here. I have added the Netjets Citation Latitude photo. We have room for more photos in the article and overall, since this is a history article and not promoting the current fleet, it would be good to have more historic photos, rather than remove them, so I have left the 737, but added the photo date of 2009 and also added a ref and some text on the 737 fleet. - Ahunt (talk) 15:03, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahunt: Thank you! Adding the context for the 737 fleet was a good call. NetJetsJM (talk) 18:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]