1. User Survey 2015 November, 2015 Prepared for Prepared by: Ian McShane J.6782 Confidential

2. 2 ● The International Registry of Mobile Assets was launched in March 2006. ● Once established, it was decided to conduct a User Establishment Survey during May 2007, the objectives of which were:  To understand how different features and usability levels were rated, and relative importance of each.  To understand Users’ priorities for updating the Registry features.  To understand what the perception was as to the cost of usage versus its worth to their organisation.  To initiate a repeatable annual benchmark survey. ● Having addressed the key issues emerging from the 2007 exercise, it was decided to repeat the survey in 2008 and again in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 with a view to assessing the state of play year on year. Background And Objectives

3. 3 Confidential ● Online survey of Registry users, by way of structured questionnaire. ● Potential respondents initially contacted by Aviareto, with survey rationale explained. ● Questionnaire mailed to total contact sample of 2,311 users. ● Total achieved sample of 317 users, (352 users in 2014, 345 users in 2013, 349 users in 2012, 402 users in 2011, 356 users in 2010, 371 in 2009, 308 in 2008; 339 in 2007), representing a response rate of 13.71% - at the upper end of response rates for a survey of this nature. ● The interviews were completed in English, Spanish and French. ● Fieldwork took place between 20 th October to 13 th November. Incentive offered for the first time in 2009 (3 x draws for $250 Amazon voucher), and each year since then. Methodology

4. 4 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 GENDER AGE % Male Female 55yrs+ 18-34 yrs 45-55 yrs 35-44 yrs 20142013201220112010200920082007 29%30%26%24%27%28%29%17% 18%17%20%23%21%19%17% 12%15%13%12%8%11%9%7% 20%17%21%18%19% 23%32% 12% 11%12%13%8% 9%8% 10% 13%14%18% 1%2%1% 2% n/a The 2015 Registry User sample base has a heavier professional services firm presence in 2015 versus previous years, and a significantly lower ‘other aircraft owner’ profile. ? Q.Analysis of Sample

5. 5 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 200720082009201020112012201320142015 Gender%%%%% Male 63444750 485047 Female 37555350 525053 Age%%%%% 18-34 13171920 19202324 35-44 22242928 30 2728 45-55 3932 31 29 26 55+ 26 2122 212422 With users almost evenly split by gender, and spread across all age groups from 18-34 yrs to 55 yrs+. ? Q.Analysis of Sample

6. 6 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 % 2014 30% 21% 18% 13% 18% 0% 2015 There are marginally more legal assistants and fewer senior managers/partners in the 2015 sample vis-a-vis 2014. ? Q.Analysis of Sample

7. 7 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 Social Media Usage Total 2015 GenderAge 2015201420132012MaleFemale18-4445-5455+ Base: 317352345349 1481691658171 %%%%% Facebook 585457 52 4767 4748 Linkedin 545348 43 5653585445 Twitter 16 18 16 1419211210 Other 564 4 27723 None 202427 32 2515102834 Any Facebook/Linkedin 79737066 7383887066 Any Facebook/Linkedin/ Twitter 80767368 7585907266 Use of either Facebook or Linkedin has increased significantly year-on-year, and now stands at just under 8 in 10 of all Registry Users. ? Q.Analysis of Sample

8. 8 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 Social Media Usage Total OrganisationRole in the organisation AirlinePrivateOwner Lease company Fin inst. Prof firm Senior manager /partner Law Finance professi onal General Base: 317 4725434050112871135166 %%%%%% Facebook 5862525365506053615362 Linkedin 5447245168506357596136 Twitter 1611169201222161518 Other 544232865-6 None 2021361615281520162226 Lease companies and professional firm Registry Users are particularly heavy users of social media, with airline users over-indexing on use of Facebook. ? Q.Analysis of Sample

9. 9 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 Frequency of Usage Tot al GenderAge OrganisationRole in the organisation MaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs 55 yrs + AirlinePrivateOwner Lease compan y Fin inst. Prof firm Senior manag er/part ner Law Finance professi onal General Base: 317 14816916581714725434050112871135166 %%%%%%%% Never121121245---114- Once a year 283423 323521804415301738123933 Once a month 40463542403755162660443646453130 Once a week 141116 11 19- 101812718 12 Once a day 427526--25293723 More than once a day 135191412102-5 627517621 ? Q.Finally, how often do you use the International Registry system? 17% of all Registry users use the system at least once a day, with four in ten accessing it on average once a month. Use of the Registry is highest amongst female users, those working in professional firms, and individuals working in the legal and more general roles in their organisation.

10. 10 Confidential Sample Profile 2015 COUNTRY US STATES Base: USA respondents - 156 % % 2014 % 52 10 6 4 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 - - 1 1 1 1 1 - 2014 % 16 6 4 1 8 3 3 4 9 5 2 3 1 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 - 1 1 1 2 1 1 - 1 2 1 4 1 (All other mentions less than 1% for total) Half of all Registry users are based in the USA with a further 12% residing in Canada. A fifth of all USA users are based in Oklahoma.

11. 11 Confidential Key Service Aspects: Relative Contribution Towards Worth Of Registry To Business (Pearson’s Correlations) 2015 20142013201220112010200920082007 0.780.750.810.760.780.830.8n/a 0.70.640.730.640.730.67 0.71 0.620.630.650.60.690.740.70.67 0.510.590.560.550.620.570.520.56 0.550.570.560.440.610.490.60.58 0.5 0.490.370.450.50.420.37 0.470.570.660.390.510.560.480.47 0.580.560.64 0.470.450.440.530.48 0.50.60.640.550.510.380.520.55 0.60.540.620.450.590.56 0.57 0.550.480.640.420.530.450.590.49 0.420.49 0.420.440.360.350.36 0.520.570.47 0.500.640.580.520.59 The fit of Registry functionality with business functionality remains the single most important definer of the perceived worth of the Register, followed by its Ease of Use and Fee Charged. The relative importance of all other factors remains reasonably consistent year-on-year. ? Q.1Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory.

12. 12 Confidential Overall Weighted Registry Experience Rating (+.67) (+.83) (+.26) (+.34) (+.09) (+.27) Despite levelling out in recent years, the overall weighted Registry experience rating has improved yet again in 2015 – and now stands at 8.53 out of a possible 10. (+.10) ? Q.1Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory. (+.20)

13. 13 Confidential Overall Satisfaction with the Registry - Summary With the Registry’s overall satisfaction rating now exceeding 8 out of 10 in practically all user sub-groupings. ? Q.1Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory.

14. 14 Confidential Overall worth of registry to business: Ten point Rating Scale The perceived worth of the Registry to users business remains extremely high – with limited scope for further significant improvements in excess of 8 out of 10. ? Q.1Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory.

15. 15 Confidential Key Service Aspects: Overall Performance Rating (10 Point Scale) Mean Performance Rating 2015201420132012201120102009 The degree to which the functionality of the Registry fits with the way your business functions. 7.887.757.467.187.126.76.42 Overall ease of use of the Registry. 7.887.437.266.897.016.646.52 Level of fee charged. 7.487.317.156.796.645.516.18 Quality of information sent to you from the Registry Officials 8.848.728.478.298.328.117.93 Efficiency of resolution of queries by Registry Officials 8.888.638.448.238.067.827.61 Efficiency of credit card transactions. 9.048.918.778.328.488.228.28 Speed of refunds 8.428.398.177.748.147.016.69 Reliability of technical aspects of the Registry. 8.428.287.79 7.897.37.22 Availability of Registry Officials 8.868.578.388.028.087.647.41 Speed of Registry during use. 8.238.167.97.597.737.177.1 Speed of approval for new Administrators/Users 8.648.428.368.178.278.097.92 Registry Officials’ language skills 9.259.048.958.918.968.768.73 Technical knowledge of Registry Officials regarding the Registry 8.918.698.578.388.48.27.86 Efficiency of resolution of queries by help desk staff n/a 8.418.047.347.016.23 Technical knowledge of help desk staff regarding the Registry n/a 8.428.17.627.126.27 Availability of help desk staffn/a 8.418.167.627.467.08 Helpdesk language skills n/a 8.898.878.548.367.98 Remarkably, performance scores on two of the five most important service aspects has increased year-on-year – i.e. overall ease of use of the Registry, and the efficiency of resolution of queries by Registry Officials.

16. Mean Performance Rating% Scoring 1-2% Scoring 9-10% of No Opinion YOY CHANGE 2015 vs 2014 20152014201320122011201020092008201520142013201220112010200920082015201420132012201120102009200820152014201320122011201020092008 Fit of Registry and business functionality 7.88 7.75 7.467.187.126.76.425.48 23 477111324 4641 3836332928 55 332466 0.13 Overall ease of use of the Registry 7.88 7.43 7.266.897.016.646.525.8 35 49612 20 4537 3327 19 11 011214 0.45 Level of fee charged 7.48 7.31 7.156.796.645.516.185.68 25 58861119 33 322524252018 75 6967710 0.17 Quality of information sent to you by the Registry Officials 8.84 8.72 8.478.298.328.117.937.36 11 221137 6761 54 53504837 35 865669 0.12 Efficiency of resolution of queries by Registry Officials 8.88 8.63 8.448.238.067.827.616.84 02 223310 6659 464744401531 46 201611174819 0.25 Efficiency of credit card transactions 9.04 8.91 8.778.328.488.228.287.52 11 031215 6964 594953504941 109 1113101215 0.13 Speed of refunds 8.42 8.39 8.177.748.147.016.695.03 01 121337 2019 18192112134 6564 656061666768 0.03 Reliability of technical aspects of the Registry 8.42 8.28 7.79 7.897.37.226.11 11 2526514 5445 43 39333022 812 897 1516 0.14 Availability of Registry Officials 8.86 8.57 8.388.028.087.647.416.61 01 2223510 6858 433841353225 57 242217232223 0.29 Speed of registry during use 8.23 8.16 7.97.597.737.177.16.15 12 2527715 5248 494143343225 22 1222344 0.07 Speed of approval for new Administrators/User s 8.64 8.42 8.368.178.278.097.926.81 12 2322410 5650 49 4546 31 1214 1511 121412 0.22 Registry Officials language skills 9.25 9.04 8.958.918.968.768.738.36 00 010112 7566 52 62555146 1011 2726142021 0.21 Technical knowledge of Registry Officials regarding the Registry 8.91 8.69 8.578.388.48.27.867.32 01 021237 6658 464546413731 611 242114242523 0.22 Key Service Aspects: Overall Performance Rating (10 Point Scale) Indeed, satisfaction with all 10 of the most important service aspects has improved, to varying degrees, since last year. LEAST IMPORTANT MOST IMPORTANT

17. 17 Confidential Efficiency of credit card Efficiency of resolution of queries Availability of Registry Officials Quality of Info sent by RO Speed of refunds Reliability of technical aspects Speed of registry during use Fit of Registry and business Overall ease of use of Registry Level of fee charged Key Service Aspects: Overall Performance Rating (Ten Point Scale) – Top 10 Particularly in relation to overall ease of use of the Registry.

18. 18 Confidential R.O. language skills Technical knowledge of R.O. Speed of approval for new administrators Key Service Aspects: Overall Performance Rating (Ten Point Scale) – 3 Least Important With improvements in satisfaction on the ‘second tier’ aspects also.

19. 19 Confidential Satisfaction With The Registry x Key User Groupings Ten Point Rating Scale Total GenderAgeOrganisation MaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs55 yrs +AirlinePrivateOwner Lease company Fin inst.Prof firm Overall worth of the Registry to my organisation/business. 8.17.68.528.247.997.878.316.487.058.218.38.58 The degree to which the functionality of the Registry fits with the way your business functions. 7.887.68.127.827.88.127.936.917.498.038.048.07 Overall ease of use of the Registry. 7.887.618.127.817.838.117.76.567.957.88.048.19 Level of fee charged. 7.487.187.757.337.457.856.917.717.547.087.347.86 Quality of information sent to you by the Registry Officials 8.848.78.968.758.8898.678.569.058.898.98.85 Efficiency of resolution of queries by Registry Officials 8.888.739.028.798.959.038.848.898.828.78.97 Efficiency of credit card transactions. 9.048.919.158.988.999.229.2499.149.18.669.05 Speed of refunds 8.427.938.758.48.098.728.5398.457.947.98.54 Reliability of technical aspects of the Registry. 8.428.338.58.358.478.548.127.528.958.48.58.52 Availability of the Registry Officials 8.868.768.968.828.739.118.828.568.889.088.768.92 Speed of Registry during use. 8.238.028.428.028.388.578.158.178.328.138.298.27 Speed of approval for new Administrators/Users 8.648.548.728.468.738.988.578.558.468.538.78.77 Registry Officials’ language skills 9.259.189.319.169.319.389.259.299.189.249.149.32 Technical knowledge of Registry Officials regarding the Registry 8.918.938.888.838.939.048.99.009.199.008.628.86 As has been the case in previous years, female and younger (18-44 years) users tend to allocate a more positive score with regard to the overall worth of the Registry to their organisation/business.

20. 20 High contribution towards worth to business Low contribution towards worth to business Low Performance High Performance Critical Improvement Areas Leverage and Enhance IGNORE MONITOR Aviareto: Strategic Performance Matrix 2015 Base: All users It is difficult to see how the satisfaction scores with such aspects as ‘The fit of the Registry with Business Functionality’ and ‘Overall ease of use’ can significantly increase in future surveys. The level of fee charged will always be singled out by respondents in surveys of this nature as a negative, and users may need to be reminded of the level of service, and the value of the Registry to their business, in prompting a reappraisal of perceived value for money vis-a-vis fees charged.

21. 21 Aviareto: Strategic Performance Matrix 2015 vs 2014 Base: All users Here, we can see that performance of the Registry continues to improve each year, despite the significant advances that have been made since 2007. High contribution towards worth to business Low contribution towards worth to business Low Performance High Performance IGNORE MONITOR Critical Improvement Areas Leverage and Enhance 2014 2015

22. 22 Aviareto: Strategic Performance Matrix 2015 vs 2007 Base: All users In superimposing the 2015 data on the original 2007 strategic performance map, we can see the extent of the user improvements made over the last eight years. Overall ease of use Level of fee charged Technical reliability Resolution of queries by R.O. Speed during use Tech knowledge of R.O. Availability of Officials in Dub Tech knowledge of Montreal staff Resolution of queries by Montreal staff Credit card transactions Speed of refundsAvailability of Montreal staff Speed of approval for new Administrators/Users Quality of info sent by R.O. RO Language skills Montreal staff Language skills High contribution towards worth to business Low contribution towards worth to business Low Performance High Performance Critical Improvement Areas Leverage and Enhance IGNORE MONITOR 2007 2015

23. 23 Confidential Changes Or Improvements Should Be Made To The Functionality, Service or Support Of The Registry To Make It Easier To Use 2015 Base: All users % 20142013201220112010200920082007 252417 11--- 9835---- 8------- 7138568-- 31------ 143----- 3------- n/a 4323681612 3------- 383----- 2------- 25------ 1------- 5------- 55------ 3027281218--- Users continue to request a more user-friendly/intuitive website, improvements to the search function, and access to the Registry for more than one computer. ? Q.3Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory.

24. 24 Confidential Changes Or Improvements Should Be Made To The Functionality, Service or Support Of The Registry To Make It Easier To Use 2015 Base: All users TotalGenderAgeOrganisation MaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs 55 yrs + AirlinePrivateOwnerLease compan y Fin inst.Prof firm Base: 31714816916581714725434050112 %%%%%% More User-friendly website, better interface 212320251518323614181620 Improve search function - multiple searches, search by owner, remove expired certs, download to PDF 1281514127--5231219 Don’t limit access to only 1 computer 91179 648168108 Improve Help desk - response time/ knowledge, 24/7, contact person, Montreal office inefficient 325441642-44 Payment flexibility, include Visa, Mastercard, TT, cumulative/better invoicing 34134-4--542 Reduce fees332314--2563 Ability to update TUE administrators, separate CEs from controlling TUEs, provide new e-mail address when TUE account has been delegated 2142234--10-1 On-line user guide, tutorials, webinar, training course in Far East 21222-2--322 Happy, no complaints252624192737302037202421 None, no comment343246-49343 ( All other answers 1% each mention in total) Improvements to search functionality are of greater importance to users in lease companies and professional firms, as well as for younger, female, users.

25. 25 Confidential Changes Or Improvements Should Be Made To The Functionality, Service or Support Of The Registry To Make It Easier To Use 2015 All mentions at 1% level (Total) Base: All users TotalGenderAgeOrganisation MaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs55 yrs +AirlinePrivateOwnerLease company Fin inst.Prof firm Base: 31714816916581714725434050112 %%%%%% Support for Apple computers, not Mac compatible 12-111-4-3-1 speed up web response time - authorisations, approvals, searches 111111-42--1 ability to save pending information to re-entry, transfer to new computer 1-11-------2 translate into/assistance in Ukrainian, Russian, Japanese,Spanish 1112--6----- Easier access - passwords instead of electronic cert, remove need to re- enter passwords 111-21-4--21 extend business hours1-111--4--2- reduce documentation & information required 1111--2---2- increase bandwidth to eliminate U.S. business day delays 1111-1--2--1 faster registration of new entities, faster turnaround of registration requests 1111-------2 display all PUE requests on 1 screen1-11-1-----2 impove password retrieval /3 attempts to change password 11111-2---4- simplify language/terms, FAQ legal11121---2-22 updates on outstanding issues, e- mails re events 1111-3--2-4- Simplify log in procedure121111--2321 E-mails should contain more relevant information 1-11-1----21 Other12-11-2-2-2- Allow for multiple discharges simultaneously 1111-1-----3 Ability to tailor administrator details (phone number, address etc) 112111-4-3-2 Indicate whether Approved, Suspended or Disabled 1-2111-----4

26. 26 Confidential Overall Satisfaction Ratings with the Registry TOTAL 2015 GENDERAGEORGANISATION MaleFemale18-4445-5455+ Airline Private Aircraft Owner Other Aircraft Owner Leasing Company Fin. Inst Prof Services Firm 317 148169 1658171 4725434050112 %%%%%% Completely Satisfied 10 1 Completely dissatisfied 9 8 7 6 Top 2 Score (9-10)50 4751 465257 405654455052 Mid (7-8) 39 3841 453433492033463841 Low (1-6) 11 158 10139 10201411127 Mean score 8.228.058.368.158.198.418.097.888.168.208.268.35 ? Q.2Taking everything into account, how would you rate your overall satisfaction with the Registry on a scale of one to ten where 10 means that you think it is completely satisfactory, and 1 means it is completely unsatisfactory. Overall satisfaction with the Registry, in keeping with general survey results, now sits at over 8 out of 10.

27. 27 Confidential Likelihood to Recommend Registry TOTAL 2015 GENDERAGEORGANISATION MaleFemale18-4445-5455+ Airline Private Aircraft Owner Other Aircraft Owner Leasing Company Fin. Inst Prof Services Firm 317 148169 1658171 4725434050112 %%%%%% Extremely likely NPS Score +42 +33+51 +45+42+43+41+20+37+42+34+57 Mean score 8.408.148.628.508.468.088.507.148.288.368.198.78 9-10 7-8 1-6 Extremely unlikely Don’t know ? Q.3And how likely would you be to recommend the Registry to relevant colleagues in the industry on a ten point scale where 10 is extremely likely to recommend, and 1 is extremely unlikely to recommend? The Registry Net Promoter Score (NPS) stands at +42 – a very high NPS score by any service sector standards.

28. 28 Confidential Reasons for Recommend Score Base: All respondents scoring 9 to 10 n - 169 % Those particularly happy with the Registry point to its ease of use, general service provided, and essential nature to their business as the main drivers of satisfaction. ? Q.4 For what specific reasons did you give that score in terms of likelihood to recommend the Registry?

29. 29 Confidential Reasons for Recommend Score Base: All respondents scoring 7 to 8 n - 90 % Those scoring the Registry at a more modest 7-8 are generally happy with the service, although some do find it difficult to navigate. ? Q.4 For what specific reasons did you give that score in terms of likelihood to recommend the Registry?

30. 30 Confidential Reasons for Score Base: All respondents scoring 1 to 6 n - 40 % The small minority of users who fall into the Detractor segment find it generally cumbersome/difficult to navigate, and struggle to value it vis-a-vis the fee charged. ? Q.4 For what specific reasons did you give that score in terms of likelihood to recommend the Registry?

31. 31 Confidential Awareness of Closing Room Base: All respondents - 317 TOTAL 2015 GENDERAGEORGANISATION MaleFemale18-4445-5455+ Airline Private Aircraft Owner Other Aircraft Owner Leasing Company Fin. Inst Prof Services Firm 317 148169 1658171 4725434050112 %%%%%% Yes No ? Q.5aNow thinking specifically about the Closing Room, are you familiar with this feature on the International Registry? Just three in ten of all users are familiar with the Closing Room feature – although this rises to a considerable 45% of those working in professional services firms.

32. 32 Confidential Usefulness of Closing Room Feature Base: All familiar with Closing Room Feature - 91 TOTAL 2015 GENDERAGEORGANISATION MaleFemale18-4445-5455+ Airline Private Aircraft Owner Other Aircraft Owner Leasing Company Fin. Inst Prof Services Firm 91 3853 542116122*713750 %%%%%% Mean score 3.82 3.633.96 3.623.63 3.672.003.143.623.434.14 *Caution low base Very useful Fairly useful Neither Not very useful Not at all useful ? Q.5bAnd how useful do you find the Closing Room feature. Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 is very useful and 1 is not useful at all? Of those aware of the Closing Room, however, the feature is perceived to be quite useful.

33. 33 Confidential Preferred Method of Communication % When providing supportWhen providing general news & updates % ? Q.6aWhen those responsible for the Registry are providing support, what is the best way for them to communicate with you? Q.6bAnd when those responsible for the Registry are providing general news and updates, what is the best way for them to communicate with you? Email is by far the most preferred method of communication, either in providing support or general news and updates. Phone contact is, however, also critical in the provision of on-going support.

34. 34 Confidential Preferred Method of Communication when providing support GenderAgeOrganisation TotalMaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs55 yrs +AirlinePrivateOwnerLease company Fin inst.Prof firm 31714816916581714725434050112 % %%%%%% Email92 9093918997879293859893 Phone73 70757669 747267756477 On the International Registry website 15 1118 101419812101219 Chatroom facility11 9131693218710612 Newsletter9 5121021115425213 Online video7 769444-7-213 Skype5 65743118510-4 Fax3 333-6245323 By text message3 154161145-22 Twitter1 -11-------2 Other1 1111-2---21 ? Q.6aWhen those responsible for the Registry are providing support, what is the best way for them to communicate with you?

35. 35 Confidential Preferred Method of Communication when providing general news & updates GenderAgeOrganisation TotalMaleFemale18-4445-54 yrs55 yrs +AirlinePrivateOwnerLease company Fin inst.Prof firm 31714816916581714725434050112 % %%%%%% Email97 96 999810098939497 On the International Registry website 221627231923 821232025 Newsletter211627211530321214131827 Phone10 911215131295413 Online video8789576-23216 Skype221121642--- Fax2211-4-42321 By text message2122-32423-1 Chatroom facility1-22----2--2 Twitter1-22-1---3-3 Other1-11-------2 ? Q.6bAnd when those responsible for the Registry are providing general news and updates, what is the best way for them to communicate with you?

36. 36 Confidential 2009201020112012201320142015 USAOtherUSAOtherUSAOtherUSAOtherUSAOtherUSAOtherUSAOther The degree to which the functionality of the register fits with the way your business functions 6.27.076.626.917.077.217.296.997.467.457.597.897.977.80 Overall ease of use of the Registry 6.56.626.566.866.847.2876.697.227.327.287.567.917.86 Level of fee charged 6.16.536.466.646.76.547.116.237.376.897.487.157.887.14 Speed of registry during use 7.17.167.17.347.797.637.87.227.917.898.188.138.478.04 Reliability of technical aspects of the Registry 7.27.19 7.587.937.838.057.337.97.678.248.338.608.27 Speed of approval for new administrators/users 7.88.1588.318.378.128.317.958.448.278.338.508.768.54 Efficiency of resolution queries by Registry officials 7.57.897.827.88.17.998.3788.44 8.548.718.948.84 Technical knowledge of registry staff regarding the Registry 7.97.878.258.058.558.168.548.118.558.618.778.619.048.79 Quality of information sent to you by the Registry Officials 7.98.098.18.158.388.228.468.018.568.368.788.668.998.72 Efficiency of credit card transactions 8.28.498.38.028.598.38.567.938.828.719.008.839.208.90 Availability of Registry Officials 7.27.867.448.118.177.958.097.918.358.438.548.598.968.78 Speed of refunds 6.76.727.0178.138.157.997.38.228.098.378.408.877.98 Registry official’s language skills 8.68.998.88.659.018.8898.769.118.779.108.979.399.12 Efficiency of resolution queries by help desk staff 66.986.787.657.247.528.17.968.378.45n/a Technical knowledge of helpdesk staff regarding the Registry 67.186.867.817.657.558.177.988.438.41n/a Availability of helpdesk staff 7.17.177.218.127.67.668.28.18.328.5n/a Helpdesk staff language skills7.98.178.278.68.538.568.938.779.018.76n/a Overall worth of the registry to my organisation/business 6.27.296.527.316.947.587.447.567.657.867.718.178.008.18 USA Versus Other Regions: Comparative Analysis ? Q.1Firstly, please rate the Registry on each of the following features on a scale of one to ten, where ten means you think it is completely satisfactory and one means it is completely unsatisfactory.

37. Summary

38. 38 Confidential Summary ● The 2015 Registry User sample base has a heavier professional services firm presence in 2015 versus previous years, and a significantly lower ‘other aircraft owner’ profile. ● With users almost evenly split by gender, and spread across all age groups from 18-34 yrs to 55 yrs+. ● There are marginally more legal assistants and fewer senior managers/partners in the 2015 sample vis-a-vis 2014. ● Use of either Facebook or Linkedin has increased significantly year-on-year, and now stands at just under 8 in 10 of all Registry Users. ● Lease companies and professional firm Registry Users are particularly heavy users of social media, with airline users over-indexing on use of Facebook. ● 17% of all Registry users use the system at least once a day, with four in ten accessing it on average once a month. Use of the Registry is highest amongst female users, those working in professional firms, and individuals working in the legal and more general roles in their organisation. ● Half of all Registry users who responded are based in the USA with a further 12% residing in Canada. A fifth of all USA users are based in Oklahoma.

39. 39 Confidential Summary ● The fit of Registry functionality with business functionality remains the single most important definer of the perceived worth of the Register, followed by its Ease of Use and Fee Charged. The relative importance of all other factors remains reasonably consistent year-on-year. ● Despite levelling out in recent years, the overall weighted Registry experience rating has improved yet again in 2015 – and now stands at 8.53 out of a possible 10. ● With the Registry’s overall satisfaction rating now exceeding 8 out of 10 in practically all user sub-groupings. ● The perceived worth of the Registry to users business remains extremely high – with limited scope for further significant improvements in excess of 8 out of 10. ● Remarkably, performance scores on two of the five most important service aspects has increased year-on-year – i.e. overall ease of use of the Registry, and the efficiency of resolution of queries by Registry Officials. ● Indeed, satisfaction with all 10 of the most important service aspects has improved, to varying degrees, since last year. ● Particularly in relation to overall ease of use of the Registry.

40. 40 Confidential Summary ● With improvements in satisfaction on the ‘second tier’ aspects also. ● As has been the case in previous years, female and younger (18-44 years) users tend to allocate a more positive score with regard to the overall worth of the Registry to their organisation/business. ● It is difficult to see how the satisfaction scores with such aspects as ‘The fit of the Registry with Business Functionality’ and ‘Overall ease of use’ can significantly increase in future surveys. The level of fee charged will always be singled out by respondents in surveys of this nature as a negative, and users may need to be reminded of the level of service, and the value of the Registry to their business, in prompting a reappraisal of perceived value for money vis-a-vis fees charged. ● Here, we can see that performance of the Registry continues to improve each year, despite the significant advances that have been made since 2007. ● In superimposing the 2015 data on the original 2007 strategic performance map, we can see the extent of the user improvements made over the last eight years. ● Users continue to request a more user-friendly/intuitive website, improvements to the search function, and access to the Registry for more than one computer. ● Improvements to search functionality are of greater importance to users in lease companies and professional firms, as well as for younger, female, users.

41. 41 Confidential Summary ● Overall satisfaction with the Registry, in keeping with general survey results, now sits at over 8 out of 10. ● The Registry Net Promoter Score (NPS) stands at +42 – a very high NPS score by any service sector standards. ● Those particularly happy with the Registry point to its ease of use, general service provided, and essential nature to their business as the main drivers of satisfaction. ● Those scoring the Registry at a more modest 7-8 are generally happy with the service, although some do find it difficult to navigate. ● The small minority of users who fall into the Detractor segment find it generally cumbersome/difficult to navigate, and struggle to value it vis-a-vis the fee charged. ● Just three in ten of all users are familiar with the Closing Room feature – although this rises to a considerable 45% of those working in professional services firms. ● Of those aware of the Closing Room, however, the feature is perceived to be quite useful. ● Email is by far the most preferred method of communication, either in providing support or general news and updates. Phone contact is, however, also critical in the provision of on-going support.