sample report
DESCRIPTION
Sample of type of analytical reports I create using survey data. (Client name and product type are not revealed.)TRANSCRIPT
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Report Issued (DATE)
General Aviation Study
CLIENT
THIS IS A SAMPLE REPORT USING DATA
FROM AN ACTUAL STUDY. SOME OF THE
DATA HAS BEEN CHANGED. THE NAME OF
THE CLIENT COMPANY HAS BEEN
CHANGED TO “CLIENT”. THE PRODUCT
CATEGORY HAS BEEN CHANGED TO
(PRODUCT)
Amy Hoffman
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
2
Analysis Contents
Page #
Introduction 3-4
Executive Summary 6-7
Recommendations 8
Detailed Findings
Awareness and Usage 10-15
Importance and Product Satisfaction 17-21
Image of (CLIENT) 23-26
Purchase Process 28-29
Demographics 32-33
Appendix
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
3
Introduction
Background
(CLIENT) Corporation currently markets the (Product) to general aviation pilots. According to CLIENT, the (Product) is the technology leader in the market and is also the most expensive (Product) available at $XXX. CLIENT would like to conduct a study with general aviation pilots to try to better understand their shopping and purchase behaviors with regards to aviation (Products) with the goal of better understanding how these pilots make their purchase decision. Ultimately, CLIENT would like to know how to increase their market share in this category.
Objectives
The primary objectives of this research are to…
• Measure awareness of the CLIENT brand relative to other (Product) brands among general aviation pilots
• Understand what goes into a general aviation pilot’s decision to purchase one brand of (Product) over another. That is, what are the key drivers for making a (Product) purchase?
• Understand how they learned about the (Product) that they own and what resources are used in making a decision to purchase a new Products.
• Measure interest in the CLIENT (Product) and try to determine what, if any, obstacles exist for this product in the general aviation market
• Identify usage demographics of general aviation pilots
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
4
Introduction
Research Methodology
A sample of pilots from an FAA-sponsored on line data base was utilized by AAA Research Company. Respondents were screened for the following:
• Pilot status verification (Private, Instrument, Multiengine or commercial)
• Between the ages of 25 and 64
• Not competitively employed
• Own at least one pilot (Product)
A total of 500 interviews were conducted via telephone from January 9 – 19, 20XX.
Qualified pilots were asked about their awareness and purchase behavior, satisfaction and likelihood to purchase a new (Products) and a CLIENT (Product), and lastly, demographics.
Reporting Notes
All statistical testing has been conducted at the 90% confidence level. Statistical differences between groups are shown in the report and noted by lower case letters.
Base sizes which are less than 30 respondents should be considered directional.
Executive Summary and Recommendations
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
6
Executive Summary
The CLIENT BRAND commands fairly high awareness in the general aviation market; however, the dominance
of the Competitor A brand name combined with CLIENT’s high price appear to deflate usage of CLIENT’s
(product).
• Competitor A (Products) are the predominant name in the pilot (Products) market among general aviation pilots.
With unequalled top-of-mind awareness, the Competitor A (products) dominate current usage as well.
• While CLIENT has the second highest level of unaided awareness, usage is not commensurate with awareness
with just an 8% awareness to usage conversion, among the lowest of all brands.
• Price is the primary reason for not considering CLIENT’s (Product).
CLIENT users are quite satisfied and to some extent more content than the Competitor A users. Further, the
product has a good reputation in the industry even among non-users.
• Ratings for CLIENT are strong on the important attributes of communication clarity, noise reduction, comfort and
weight. Further these ratings exceed those for Competitor A among their respective users.
• CLIENT’s ratings among non-users tend to parallel users’ ratings on the key dimensions. Price is an area where
the two groups disagree, however.
(Products) with passive noise reduction dominates usage 2:1 over active noise reduction. However, those
owning active noise reduction products tend to be more satisfied. Yet this feature may not be perceived as
enough of an advantage to justify the higher price for CLIENT.
• Although noise reduction is a critical feature in pilot (Products), pilots are generally pleased with their (Product’s)
ability to achieve this attribute. The difference in passive versus active may not be enough to differentiate the
market.
• Competitor C users, and some extent Competitor A users, are more dissatisfied with the noise reduction qualities
of their Products.
• Those who own active noise reduction models tend to have better ratings on three of the top four important
factors (communication clarity, noise reduction, and comfort.)
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
7
Executive Summary
Ability to try on (Products) is important and likely impacts brand purchase, especially in higher priced models.
• Since weight and comfort are two key factors in the purchase of a pilot (Products), trying on the (Products) becomes a critical way to evaluate a product before purchasing it.
• One-half of the pilots were able to try on their (Products) before buying it, but this increases to 58% among those with active noise reduction (Products) -- the higher-price models.
• Further, those who tried their current (Products) on before buying it, tend to have better ratings on two of the important factors – noise reduction and comfort.
Cell-phone usage in the cockpit is not very common.
• Currently less than one-third of the pilots use their cell phones in-flight and this could be due to the current inability to interface usage with (Products) or perceptions of legality. The option of Products/cell phone interface appeals to over half of the pilots.
Awareness of CLIENT’s active noise reduction feature is fairly well known, but the higher price appears to deflate purchase. Additionally, installment payment plans hold some merit, but awareness of this option needs to be increased in order to result in additional sales.
• Four in five are aware of the active noise reduction feature of CLIENT (Products). Nevertheless, positive purchase interest is just 29%. Reasons indicate price and a need to compare are the factors holding back interest.
• Less than 10% are aware of the installment billing program by CLIENT. Once made aware, over one-quarter believe this option would influence their decision to buy CLIENT.
At the present time Competitor C is not a major competitor. However, compared to CLIENT, Competitor C has a stronger awareness to trial conversion ratio and a better price perception. If Competitor C increases marketing and sales efforts, CLIENT may be hit hard.
• Competitor C is the only brand with comparably strong ratings,even for noise reduction. Further, their rating on price is much better than CLIENT’s. Awareness is where Competitor C falls short. Therefore, CLIENT should be on the defensive if Competitor C enhances marketing efforts and focuses on noise reduction at a lower price (versus CLIENT).
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
8
Recommendations
Awareness of CLIENT (Products) is not an issue. Converting the awareness to purchase is a major issue, however.
• Trying before buying is a key variable in the purchase process since important factors such as comfort and weight can only be evaluated in this manner. The ability to demonstrate or try on CLIENT (products) in a flight shop would go far to achieve this objective. Perhaps a demo program similar to to the consumer flight noise reduction (Products) trial program should be considered. Additionally, if CLIENT had a presence in Sporty’s –the top retailer – pilots would be able to see, touch, feel and perhaps try the product before buying it.
• Flight instructors tend to be a source of awareness second to magazine ads. This is especially true for Competitor A. Perhaps a demo program among flight instructors would serve to increase awareness among the newer pilots and at the same time allow student pilots or those in the market for a new (Products) the ability to try on the product. This might help displace Competitor A as the recommended brand from flight instructors.
While it is known that active noise reduction is a product differentiating feature for CLIENT, at present this feature is not critical enough to justify CLIENT’s higher price.
• Any R&D studies on noise reduction pointing to a real benefit for active noise reduction might be considered for magazine ads.
• Advertisements featuring testimonials from users might also be another method to increase saliency of this feature.
Cell-phone interface is a concept worth exploring, pending investigation of legal issues.
• Currently in-flight cell phone usage is not very common and could be due to the current inability to interface usage with (Products). The option of (Products)/cell phone interface appeals to over half of the pilots.
Combining the existing features with cell phone interface, marketing the payment plan, creating the ability to upgrade and selling this as a package at the existing price might place more value on the CLIENT (products) and increase usage.
• However, keep in mind that just one in five pilots are in the market for a new (Product) in the coming year, so market potential must be weighted by this variable.
• Instrument-certified pilots represent a slightly more viable target as they have more frequent cell phone usage, pay more for their (Products) and see more value in upgrading but at the same time, they already own more (Products) than others and are more likely to be the CLIENT users.
Awareness and Usage
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
10
Unaided Products Brand AwarenessQ. 2, 3
• More pilots are aware of Competitor A Products than any other brand. They are top of mind for over one-
half of the general aviation pilots. CLIENT is second to Competitor A based on both top-of-mind and total
unaided awareness.
Base: Total Respondents (500)
First Mention Other Mentions
56
9
5
5
3
2
1
2
75
42
20
13
11
7
6
6
0 20 40 60 80 100
Competitor A
Client
Competitor B
Competitor C
Competitor D
P
So
Si
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
11
Total Brand AwarenessQ. 2, 3, 4
Total Unaided Aided
75
42
20
11
13
7
3
4
96
86
84
74
45
48
38
32
0 20 40 60 80 100
Comp. A
Client
Comp. B
Comp. C
Comp. D
P
S
O
Base: Total Respondents (500)
• Virtually all general aviation pilots have heard of the Competitor A brand. CLIENT and Comp. B have
strong awareness levels as well, although not the extent of the leader.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
12
Source of Initial AwarenessQ. 12
31
19
17
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
Magazine
ad
From a
friend
From an
instructor
Store/store
display
Base: Total Respondents (500)
CLIENT users: 47%
Competitor A users: 23%
Comp. B users: 14%
Instructors create more
awareness among those
who fly <50 hours (23%)
• A combination of sources create awareness, but magazine ads are most often mentioned. CLIENT users
in particular cite this source. The flight instructors become a more important source among the less active
pilots and the Competitor A users.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
13
Current and Previous Brand Usage
7
8
8
9
45
3
3
3
Base: Total Respondents (500)
Q. 6, 7
1
2
3
2
2
8
11
37 Comp. A
Comp. B
Comp. C
Comp. D
Client
S
P
Si
Current Products Used Most OftenPrevious Products Used
CLIENT is most popular
among pilots with Instrument
Certification (11%) and active
type (Products) (17%)
• Not only does Competitor A dominate awareness but also has a decided edge in current and past usage
as well.
• Competitor A exceeds all brands in the ability to convert those aware into users.
Awareness
to Usage
Conversion
Ratio*
46%
11%
12%
18%
8%
NA
6%
NA
% use currently
%Total aware* Calculation =
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
14
(Products): Number, Type, and Trial
• Aaaa
Q. 1, 11,15
61
5032
7
50
Active
Passive
Don’t Know
Base: Total Respondents (500)
42
34
24One
Two
Three or
more
Mean = 2.7
(Products)
Who Owns the Most (Products)?
Yes
No
Number of (Products) Owned
Type of Noise Reduction
in (Product)Tried Before Buying
• On average, these pilots own almost three pair of (Products). More sets are owned by pilots with instrument certification,
those in the mid range of flight hours and those with active noise reduction. Passive noise reduction dominates usage,
however.
• Although among the general population trial before buying is split evenly, active noise reduction (Product) owners are more
likely to have tried the product before buying than passive owners.
* Caution very small base
size. Interpret with caution.
Active 58%
Passive 47%
Average No.
of Headsets
Pilot Certification
Private (276) a 2.5
Instrument (70) b 3.2 ad
Multi Engine (18*) c 3.5 a
Commerical (136) d 2.7
Hours Flown Annually
<50 (217) e 2.1
51-150 (187) f 3.0 ej
151-225 (43) g 3.5 efj
226-300 (16*) h 4.6 efj
Over 300 (37) j 2.2
Type of Headset Owned
Active (161) k 3.3 m
Passive (305) m 2.4
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
15
Ability to Connect with Cell Phone/Value/Frequency of Using Cell Phone
48
21
15
16
Frequency of Cell Phone Use
Frequently
Occasionally
Rarely
Never
357
40
Q. 19, 20A, 20B
Don’t Know
See
value
See No
Value
Value of Ability to Connect Cell
Phone to Pilot Products
Base: Total Respondents (500)
Just 4% have
have (Products)
with ability to
interface with
cell phones.
Frequent cell phone users are
more likely to be instrument
(21%) and commercial
certified pilots (21%).
• Cell phone usage in flight is fairly uncommon as just three in ten report frequent or occasional usage.
Likewise, the ability of the Products to interface with the cell phone is rare (just 4%). However, over half
see the ability to interface the two devices as valuable.
• During the interview several pilots mentioned that usage of a cell phone in the cockpit is illegal.
Importance and Product Satisfaction
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
17
Importance of Product Features
4.0
4.4
4.4
3.4
5.8
5.2
6.8
7.1
7.9
5.7
7.6
9.2
9.0
4.4
4.5
4.7
4.8
5.2
5.7
6.3
6.4
7.4
7.0
7.4
8.1
8.8
9.39.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Battery life
Auto shut off feature
The way it looks
Recommendation from flight instructor
Ability to try/receive a demonstration
Recommendation from a friend
Warranty
Customer service
Weight
Price
Reputation of the brand
Noise reduction
Comfort
Clarity of communication
Importance of these features was rated on a scale from 10 to 1, where 10 = “Extremely important” and 1= “Not at all important.”
Average
CLIENT usersTotal
Q9
More important to CLIENT
users than pilots in general
• Clarity of communication and comfort are clearly the two most important attributes in pilot (Products).
CLIENT users tend to be like the pilots in general in what they deem important, although they place more
emphasis on noise reduction, customer service and ability to try/demonstrate before buying.
• They place less emphasis on price and recommendation from a flight instructor.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
18
Mean Ratings for Brand UsedQ. 8, 10
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
• Generally pilots are satisfied with the brand they use most often. Highest satisfaction levels are for
performance-related attributes (clarity, noise reduction) and aesthetics (comfort, weight).
• CLIENT users tend to be more satisfied overall and on the performance-related and aesthetic attributes
compared to most other brand users, including Competitor A. CLIENT performs poorly on price, however.
• Competitor C users are similar to CLIENT users in their high satisfaction levels, but Competitor C also has
an advantage in price.
Total Client
Comp
A
Comp
B
Comp
C
Comp
DBase: Total Respondents (472) (34) (224) (39) (40) (43)
a b c d e
Overall Rating 8.2 9.2 bcde 8.4 7.5 8.6 ce 7.7
Clarity of Communication 8.6 9.2 bce 8.8 ce 8.1 9.1 ce 8.3
Comfort 8.0 8.6 bce 8.0 c 7.4 8.8 bce 7.8
Noise Reduction 7.9 9.1 bce 7.7 7.6 9.0 bce 7.1
Weight 7.4 8.1 bce 7.3 7.0 8.2 bce 7.3
Price 7.1 5.3 6.6 a 7.7 ab 8.1 ab 7.5 ab
Customer Service 7.1 7.4 7.1 7.2 7.9 be 6.2
Warranty 6.9 7.3 e 7.1 e 6.9 7.5 e 5.8
The way it looks 6.6 7.1 e 6.4 7.4 be 6.7 6.1
Battery life 5.6 5.6 5.2 5.6 7.8 b 5.3
More
Less
Imp
ort
an
ce
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
19
Strategic Performance Matrix - CLIENT
High Importance/Low Performance
Low Importance/Low Performance
Low Importance/High Performance
Warranty
Battery life
Price
Customer service
The way if looks
ComfortNoise reduction
Weight
Clarity of communication
Performance
Imp
ort
an
ce
High Importance/High Performance
Q. 9, 10
• Aaaa• CLIENT performs well on the more important attributes. Room for improvement exists in customer service.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
20
Dissatisfaction with Current ProductsQ. 17
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Total Client
Comp
A
Comp
B
Comp
C
Comp
DBase: Total Respondents (472) (34) (224) (39) (40) (43)
a b c d e
Comfort/Fit (net) 17 12 19 d 23 d 5 12
Comfort 6 6 5 8 3 5
Extended flights wear (subnet) 5 3 6 8 -- --Comfort from pressure
for long term wear/flights 5 3 6 8 -- --
Fit around ears 4 3 5 5 3 2
Not enough padding on headband 2 6 3 -- -- --
Need jell ear pads/seals 1 -- -- 5 -- 5
Noise Reduction (net) 16 6 17 23 a 8 14
Like to have active noise reduction 11 -- 13 ad 15 a 3 7
Noise reduction 4 6 3 5 3 7
Weight (net) 11 12 15 c 3 8 7
Weight/heaviness 11 12 15 c 3 8 7
Construction (net) 9 15 b 4 18 b 20 b 21 b
Microphone/mouthpiece 4 3 3 8 5 9
Sturdiness 1 3 -- -- 3 5
• Given the strong satisfaction ratings for CLIENT and Competitor C, current users find little with which to
be dissatisfied. However, construction, especially compared to Competitor A, appears to be an issue for all
brands. Size for CLIENT is also an issue.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
21
Dissatisfaction with Current Products (continued)Q. 17
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Total Client
Comp
A
Comp
B
Comp
C
Comp
DBase: Total Respondents (472) (34) (224) (39) (40) (43)
a b c d e
Sound (net) 3 -- 2 8 -- 9 b
Clarity 2 -- 1 8 -- 9 b
Sturdiness
Size (net) 3 12 be 1 3 5 2
Size too large 2 12 be 1 3 3 --
Price/Cost (net) 1 6 b -- 3 -- --
Too expensive 1 6 b -- 3 -- --
Miscellaneous
Happy with current headset 3 -- 3 3 5 2
Nothing/don't know 50 50 51 38 48 53
Image of CLIENT
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
23
Comparison of User and Non-User
CLIENT Ratings
9.2
9.1
8.6
8.1
7.1
7.3
7.4
5.6
5.3
Overall
Comfort
Noise Reduction
Weight
Customer Service
Price
Warranty
Battery Life
The Way it Looks
8.6
8.7
8.2
7.8
7.6
7.6
7.5
6.5
4.1
Use CLIENT Most OftenAware of CLIENT But Do Not Use
Q. 8,10, 21, 22
Base: Total Respondents (500)
• Non CLIENT users have a fairly strong impression of the product. Their ratings generally equal user
ratings, although price is one area where the non-users have a particularly unfavorable impression.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
24
2
18
7989
2
9
69
2
29
Awareness of Noise Reduction, Installment Billand Effect on Purchase Decision Q. 23,24, 25
Don’t Know
Yes
No
Don’t Know
Yes
No
Awareness of Installment
Billing Programs by CLIENT
Would It Influence Decision
to Purchase
Base: Aware of CLIENT/do not currently use most often (394)
Active
Noise
Reduction
Passive
Noise
Reduction
Don’t Know
Awareness of Active vs.
Passive Noise Reduction
• Most pilots aware of CLIENT (79%) correctly identify it as a (product) with active noise reduction.
• However, most (89%) are unaware of the installment billing program by CLIENT. Even so, the ability to
spread payment out over time would not likely impact the decision to purchase CLIENT.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
25
Purchase Likelihood Overall/Purchase Likelihood for CLIENT Q. 26, 27
3313
20
7
9
18
2333
9
27Definitely Will Not
Probably Will Not
Probably Will
Might/Might Not
Definitely Will
Base: Total Respondents (500)
Likelihood to PurchaseA New Pilot (Product) in
the Next Year
Likelihood to Consider
PurchasingCLIENT Pilot Products
20
29Highest propensity to
purchase new
(Product) is with pilots
who fly more than 300
hours annually (24%).
• One in five pilots are considering buying a new (Product) in the next year.
• Just under one-third would consider buying a CLIENT Products the next time they need a (Product).
• One-third are unsure. A “try before you buy” program may move this group to the positive side.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
26
Reasons for Purchase InterestQ. 28
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Total Aware Not Aware Top 2 Box Bottom 3 BoxBase: Total Respondents (500) (428) (72) (148) (330)
% % % % %
a b c d
Positive Reasons 31 32 b 19 77 d 12
Preference (net) 12 14 b 4 30 d 5
Like/good product/headset 12 14 b 4 29 d 5
Product Quality (net) 9 10 4 24 d 3
Top of the line/the best 4 5 1 11 d 2
Quality 4 4 3 9 d 2
Reputation (net) 7 7 13 18 d 3
Reputation/reputable name 7 6 13 18 d 3
Noise Reduction (net) 6 7 b -- 15 d 2
Like active noise reduction 6 7 b -- 15 d 2
Familiarity (net) 4 4 1 9 d 1
Familiar with/own other of Client's equipment/products 3 3 1 7 d 1
Negative Reasons 75 76 71 40 96 c
Price/Cost (net) 37 42 b 7 20 47 c
Expensive/More expensive 26 30 b 6 15 33 c
Price/cost 5 4 1 3 7
Wouldn't spend $1000 for a headset 3 6 1 5
Need (net) 29 27 42 b 9 40 c
Satisfied with current headset 16 14 25 6 21 c
No need 11 10 14 2 15 c
Don't fly often 6 6 8 1 9 c
Familiarity 15 14 22 9 19 c
Need to compare to other brands 10 10 10 6 13 c
Unfamiliar with/Haven't tried/used 6 4 14 b 3 8 c
Preference 3 4 1 4
Prefer/Like Comp. B 2 2 2
Client Awareness
Likelihood to Buy Client's
Product in Future
• Overall, reasons for
interest/disinterest in
CLIENT tend to be
more negative than
positive (because the
purchase intent falls
toward that end.)
• Those more inclined
to buy CLIENT state
reasons related to
product likes (30%),
quality (24%) and
reputation (18%).
• Those less inclined
to buy CLIENT state
negative reasons
largely related to
price (47%), current
Products satisfaction
(21%), or lack of
need (15%).
• Even among those
aware of CLIENT,
reasons tend to be
more negative than
positive.
Purchase Process
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
28
4
4
5
5
6
19Sporty’s
Pilot Shop
Mail Order
FBO (Fixed Based Operator)
Osh Kosh/PA Convention
Manufacturer/Factory
Price Paid/Purchase Source
Purchase Source
25
17
12
11
11
14Less than $150
$150 to under$200
$200 to under $250
$250 to under $300
$300 to under$350
$350+
Price Paid
Base: Did not receive Products as a gift (469)
Q. 13, 16
• Aaaa
Mean =
$311
Who Paid the Most?
• Prices paid for pilot head sets range from less than $150 to more than $350. Private pilots as well as
owners of passive noise reduction products paid the least, on average.
• As a purchase location, Sporty’s is the largest single retailer mentioned.
Average
Price Paid
Pilot Certification
Private (258) a $285
Instrument (68) b $342 a
Multi Engine (17*) c $419 a
Commerical (126) d $336 a
Type of Headset Owned
Active (161) e $447 f
Passive (305) f $236
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
29
Value in Upgrades vs. New PurchaseQ. 18
4
66
30
Yes
No
Base: Total Respondents (500)
Don’t Know
• Two-thirds of the general aviation pilots like the idea of the upgrading their current Products for greater
functionality rather than having to buy a new one.
• Instrument-certified are more likely than commercial pilots to see value (79% vs. 62%).
Demographics
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
31
Demographic Profile
Type of Product Used
Total Active PassiveBase: Total Respondents (500) (161) (305)
% % %
Age a b
18-34 12 11 13
35-54 49 51 49
55 + 39 39 38
Average Age 49.9 50.1 49.5
Gender
Male 96 96 97
Female 4 4 3
Income
Under $75,000 32 24 35 a
$75,000 to under $150,000 34 32 36
$150,000+ 14 23 b 9
Average Income ($000) 100.5 114.6 b 94
Online Visits/Purchases
$0 to under $500 36 47 53
$500 to under $1,000 15 14 17
$1000 to under $2,000 12 16 12
$2,000 to under $10,000 7 9 7
$10,000 or more 3 5 2
Regularly view QVC, Shop NBC, or
other home shopping network 7 5 9
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
32
Demographic Profile (continued)
Type of Product Used
Total Active PassiveBase: Total Respondents (500) (161) (305)
% % %
Highest Level Certificate Held a b
Private 55 47 60 a
Commercial 27 28 27
Instrument 14 20 b 10
Multiengine 4 5 3
Type of Aircraft Primarily Flown
Single-Engine Piston 85 78 89 a
Multi-Engine Piston 5 11 b 2
Single-Engine Turbo Prop 3 5 b 1
Own vs. Rent Aircraft
Own 56 65 b 49
Rent 28 21 32 a
Owned by Company 15 12 18
Longevity of Pilot's Certificate
Less than 10 years 35 35 36
10 years to less than 15 years 14 14 14
15 years to less than 25 yers 21 24 20
25 years or more 29 27 30
Average (years) 14.8 14.8 14.7
Hours Flown Per Year
0-50 43 30 49 a
51-150 37 43 b 33
151-225 9 14 b 7
226-300 3 5 2
More than 300 7 7 8
Average number hours flown per year 95.2 112 b 90Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
33
Demographic Profile (continued)
Aware of
Use Client but do not
Total Most Often use ClientBase: Total Respondents (500) (34) (394)
% % %
Age a b
18-34 12 15 12
35-54 49 41 50
55 + 39 44 37
Average Age 49.9 50.0 49.5
Gender
Male 96 97 96
Female 4 3 4
Income
Under $75,000 32 9 34 a
$75,000 to under $150,000 34 29 34
$150,000+ 14 35 b 13
Average Income ($000) 100.5 138.5 99.8
Online Visits/Purchases
$0 to under $500 36 21 36
$500 to under $1,000 15 6 17
$1000 to under $2,000 12 21 13
$2,000 to under $10,000 7 12 7
$10,000 or more 3 9 3
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Sample Report
Amy Hoffman
34
Demographic Profile (continued)
Aware of
Use Client but do not
Total Most Often use ClientBase: Total Respondents (500) (34) (394)
% % %
Highest Level Certificate Held a b
Private 55 35 56 a
Commercial 27 32 28
Instrument 14 24 13
Multiengine 4 9 3
Type of Aircraft Primarily Flown
Single-Engine Piston 85 59 86 a
Multi-Engine Piston 5 15 4
Single-Engine Turbo Prop 3 18 b 2
Own vs. Rent
Own 56 76 b 54
Rent 28 3 30 a
Longevity of Pilot's Certificate
Less than one year-less than 10 years 35 29 36
10 years to less than 15 years 14 15 14
15 years to less than 25 yers 21 24 22
25 years or more 29 32 29
Hours Flown Per Year
0-50 43 12 44 a
51-150 37 47 38
151-225 9 21 b 7
226-300 3 12 b 3
More than 300 7 9 8
Average Number hours flown per year 95.2 146.4 b 94.3
Letters to the right of a number indicate a significant difference at the 90% confidence level.
Appendix