Flytenow, a flight-sharing service, was founded in 2013 by two pilots, Matt Voska and Alan Guichard in Boston, Massachusetts. Flytenow's business model was based on a common and long-standing practice among pilots – sharing expenses with their passengers to make flights on small aircraft more cost-effective. Under long-standing FAA rules, pilots and passengers may each pay an equal share of gasoline costs, fees, and other expenses so long as they are traveling to the same location for independent purposes. The company aimed to build a database of licensed pilots offering their personal flights on non-commercial aircraft to the general public. Notably, as pilots did not earn money on Flytenow, they simply were able to share their flight expenses, pro-rata, for pre-planned flights. Travelers could search for select flights between destinations that were being offered by pilots on the service. Flytenow provided travelers with information on each flight and its pilot including their license type, experience, and past flight ratings. This would allow the traveler to fly on small private planes for a reduced cost and would allow participating pilots the ability to defray some flight expenses. Flytenow charged a connection fee to travelers for each flight. On February 12, 2014, Flytenow submitted an official FAA Chief Counsel request for legal interpretation of its services.
FAA ruling
Flytenow was shut down by the Federal Aviation Administration in August 2014 along with other flight sharing companies, namely AirPooler and PilotShareTheRide.com. The FAA ruled that pilots offering their planned flights online and receiving pro rata compensation were classed as a "common carrier" similar to Delta Airlines or American Airlines. Although common carriage is not defined by regulation, FAA Advisory Circular No. 120-12A describes common carriage as " a holding out of a willingness to transport persons or property from place to place for compensation or hire." The FAA ruled that by posting specific flights to the Flytenow website, a pilot participating in the Flytenow service would be engaged in common carriage because online posts constituted holding out services to the general public and receipt of shared expenses constituted compensation. This ruling meant pilots using Flytenow would be subject to regulations akin to commercial airlines requiring heightened safety requirements, U.S. Department of Transportation Economic Authority approval, and other more stringent requirements. Flytenow, with the help of The Goldwater Institute, a conservative policy think tank, challenged the FAA ruling to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit. Flytenow argued among other things that sharing expenses did not constitute compensation within the meaning of "common carriage" because long standing case law defines compensation as an "enterprise for profit". Flytenow asserted that receiving pro rata shared expenses did not amount to an enterprise for profit and therefore pilots could not be classed as a common carrier. On December 18, 2015, the FAA ruling was upheld by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit. Flytenow appealed the Circuit Court's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. On January 9, 2017, the Supreme Court declined to hear Flytenow's case.
