I applaud these guys for attempting what is basically the Lyft/UberX model -- comply to the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law (i.e. Lyft's original "

I applaud these guys for attempting what is basically the Lyft/UberX model -- comply to the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law (i.e. Lyft's original "you're not paying your driver, you're making a donation"), though it's debatable if they're even trying to do that. BUT! And there's a big but... Lyft & Uber were/are disrupting a system that heavily regulated/legislated, some would argue unnecessarily, has false barriers to entry, is inefficient, and is essentially an oligopoly. And their entry is lowering prices, making the market more efficient, and making consumer super-happy. I don't think private aviation is suffering the same ailment. If anything, the airlines are operating below cost because of heavy heavy competition. The FAA licenses private pilots not because they can or they want to charge fees, but because they need to make sure that they're not flying around killing themselves (and despite that regulation, they still are doing that). So Flytenow's approach here feels more like they found a regulated market they feel like disrupting because they can vs. actually making an inefficient market more efficient and better for consumers. In summary: Whereas I'm happy to take a ride with random stranger in their Lyft/UberX car, where I'll get a cheaper and generally better-than-Taxi experience, I'm not in any sort of rush to join a random private pilot who has not been commercially-certified by the FAA in his aircraft that isn't designed for commercial passenger transport. Now - that all being said - that doesn't mean that Flytenow should die! There is indeed an opportunity here, and with the right safety checks and approvals, there could be a market for P2P flights. But this should be done with the FAA, not in spite of it.