At some point in the past 12 months, someone in your organisation approved a mobility expenditure that was suboptimal. Not fraudulent. Not negligent. Simply not optimised.
An aircraft type that was heavier than the mission required. A yacht positioning that could have been coordinated with the previous charter’s departure and was not. A ground transport booking made through an aviation operator at a markup that a direct relationship would have eliminated. A jet card deposit expiring with 40 hours unused because nobody flagged the balance against the upcoming schedule.
These are not dramatic failures. They are the routine inefficiencies of a mobility programme that is being managed reactively — responding to requests rather than anticipating patterns, processing bookings rather than optimising them.
The family office COO who commissions a proper mobility audit — a structured review of 24 months of aviation, maritime, and ground transport expenditure against the principal’s actual movement patterns — consistently finds the same things.
Broker margin inconsistency across an uncoordinated multi-broker programme. Aircraft type mismatches on shorter sectors. Positioning charges that a consolidated programme would have eliminated. Ancillary costs — catering, ground transport, FBO fees — that are being absorbed without scrutiny at markups that a direct relationship would not carry.
The audit we conducted with one family office last year identified £1.1 million in annual programme inefficiency. The programme was not badly managed. It was managed by a highly competent EA who was doing six other things simultaneously and who had never been given the specific tools to optimise an aviation programme rather than simply operate one.
The inefficiency was not the EA’s failure. It was the absence of a mobility partner with the specific expertise and the operational visibility to identify it.
What the audit should cover
Every booking over 24 months. Aircraft type against sector length and passenger load. Operator identity and audit status. Broker margin transparency and consistency. Positioning charge frequency and avoidability. Catering and ancillary cost benchmarking against market rates. Ground transport procurement method and cost.
The output is not a report. It is a restructuring plan — specific, actionable, and conservative in its projections because the projections need to survive the scrutiny of a CFO who did not commission the exercise.
The savings it identifies fund the relationship that found them.
Several times over.
Curated by: Hype Luxury
