m20cDoug Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Good news, I don't care where they go as long as they are able to turn them out. I would like to think that as long as they are producing airplanes they are also able to support us who have older airplanes a whole lot easier than with a skeleton crew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mcstealth Posted May 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2014 So true. When Mooney made their first round of layoffs. it was over 100ppl. The last round was over 300 or so. I posted this on the red board that over 400 ppl got laid off, and some of them couldn't believe that little 'ol Mooney could employ over 400. I guess they thought Mooney was an RC company? Believe me, a town of this size losing 400 jobs, leaving only 11 or so at the factory, was not good. A skeleton crew kept the doors open and the insurance going, and the FAA in check, etc,etc.... Thank you skeleton crew. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth Posted May 27, 2014 Report Share Posted May 27, 2014 Exactly... If your plane meets the majority of your missions, then it is the right plane for you. Trust me, I have tried to convince myself (let alone the CFO, aka my wife) a number of times how a plane that flies 20 knots faster than mine is worth it. If I begin flying over big rocks, or tougher weather, I will reconsider. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk The Missile is a lot more than 20 knots faster - but . . . there's still the cost. The F is a great airplane. I just didn't want to spend the money to upgrade mine, where I could sell it, and use the upgrade money to get the Missile (plus a little more). Didn't have a CFO at the time (got married only last month). Thrilled Mooney rolled off the first Acclaim. I'm curious what will sell more - the Ovation or Acclaim once back in production. -Seth 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mcstealth Posted May 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 The Missile is a lot more than 20 knots faster - but . . . there's still the cost. The F is a great airplane. I just didn't want to spend the money to upgrade mine, where I could sell it, and use the upgrade money to get the Missile (plus a little more). Didn't have a CFO at the time (got married only last month). Thrilled Mooney rolled off the first Acclaim. I'm curious what will sell more - the Ovation or Acclaim once back in production. -Seth I am guessing the Ovatios will out sell the Acclaims. No reason why. Just a gut feeling. Df Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 I have the opposite feeling / acclaims and absolute speed will draw the greater customers to the speed brand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 I have the opposite feeling / acclaims and absolute speed will draw the greater customers to the speed brand. I have to kind of agree with this. Absolute speed, why else would anyone buy a Mooney? Going fast is really Mooney's only great selling feature over it's competition and if $650,000 is in the realm of reality, what's another $50,000? Only 7.6% more. In for a penny, in for a pound I would think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaz Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Why wouldn't ADS-B be standard equipment these days for a new aircraft, or at least an option? You drop 700K on a plane and have to upgrade it within 5 or 6 years to be compliant? Not even listed as an option. Seems odd. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Why wouldn't ADS-B be standard equipment these days for a new aircraft, or at least an option? You drop 700K on a plane and have to upgrade it within 5 or 6 years to be compliant? Not even listed as an option. Seems odd. Mike I hope it's just implied, otherwise I would walk away from any new $650,000 airplane where that is not standard equipment just on principle. If these new Mooneys don't have ADS-B compliance, that is serious bull crap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manu damaschin Posted June 2, 2014 Report Share Posted June 2, 2014 Finally...!! Thumbs up! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Just doing a little looking at cost comparisons. 1967 Corvette approx. $5,700 1967 Mooney F approx. $26,000 Ratio 4.6:1 2014 Corvette approx. $65,000 2014 Mooney approx. $650,000 Ratio 10: 1 Seems to me that the current price of a Mooney should be closer to$350k 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Garmin 796 $1700 Garmin 750 $17000 Cars aren't regulated by govt and don't required the level of certification a plane does. You remove govt and lower the risks of tort, your 2014 Mooney would cost $200K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMcClure Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Just doing a little looking at cost comparisons. 1967 Corvette approx. $5,700 1967 Mooney F approx. $26,000 Ratio 4.6:1 2014 Corvette approx. $65,000 2014 Mooney approx. $650,000 Ratio 10: 1 Seems to me that the current price of a Mooney should be closer to$350k Interesting comparison. More perplexing is the ratio of the value of a good late model Mooney ($250-350k for a good O and $350-450k for an Acclaim) compared to a new one. Same airframe, same avionics (comparing a G1000). I know some people just like new but what do you get for an extra 200-400k? The price of new airplanes compared to late model used ones seems out of line, for any brand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Certification and regulation is the biggest problem when it comes to aircraft costs. I mentioned this on a different topic but a few years ago I attended an AOPA gathering at Santa Rosa hosted by former Pres Fuller and sponsered by Cirrus. After the event I spoke with The President of Cirrus and asked him What % of the cost of a new Cirrus was directly tied to certication and product Liability and he said it was about 65% if you take that out of the mix that $350K would be about right, As for the ADS-B maybe since they already know that most of the sales will be over see's and if its not a requirement they are not installing it. I cant think of any type of new car that after just a couple of years loses at least 1/2 its value. I would never buy a new car. besides now they have all the big brother crap in your car and can check your driving history at the touch of a button. NO THANKS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Interesting comparison. More perplexing is the ratio of the value of a good late model Mooney ($250-350k for a good O and $350-450k for an Acclaim) compared to a new one. Same airframe, same avionics (comparing a G1000). I know some people just like new but what do you get for an extra 200-400k? The price of new airplanes compared to late model used ones seems out of line, for any brand. You get someone's used headache for the saved several hundred k. I don't have the money to choose between new and used - but a late model Acclaim that has been mostly sitting for 5 years may be quite a headache - whereas there is a certain sureness of buying factory new. Not to mention the pinache of buying new. I would buy factory new if I could. ....but if I had $800k in reality I would buy a used TBM700. ...but if I had $3.5M I would buy a factory new TBM900. (and that is where I would stop - that is the end of the line - I would not be pining for a used jet for 3.5M since that is no longer pilot owned flying). BY the way - about 2 weeks ago my wife and I went to KGON for her Conn College reunion - and it turns out there is a TBM dealer on the field. We pulled right up to half a dozen gorgeous TBM's all in a row on a sparkling late spring day - several 700's several 850's, and one TBM900! It was stunning! I will say that again in caps - it was STUNNING! I had just read about it in the magazine the evening before and there it was for real life. There was a guy who flew in to test drive the 900 and fly it home that same day. Wow - they let me climb in and sit in it. And that turbine engine was so cleeeaaan. Everything was so clean and smelled good. Hey - if I had the money, yes I would buy new. If price was an object - I would buy used. Price is an object and I bought quite used. And I pinch myself every time open my hangar to see my very own 1981 Mooney sitting in there just waiting for little-ol' me to fly it! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Certification and regulation is the biggest problem when it comes to aircraft costs. I mentioned this on a different topic but a few years ago I attended an AOPA gathering at Santa Rosa hosted by former Pres Fuller and sponsered by Cirrus. After the event I spoke with The President of Cirrus and asked him What % of the cost of a new Cirrus was directly tied to certication and product Liability and he said it was about 65% if you take that out of the mix that $350K would be about right, As for the ADS-B maybe since they already know that most of the sales will be over see's and if its not a requirement they are not installing it. I cant think of any type of new car that after just a couple of years loses at least 1/2 its value. I would never buy a new car. besides now they have all the big brother crap in your car and can check your driving history at the touch of a button. NO THANKS! A 5 year old Acclaim has lost 1/3 of its then new price. Isn't that comparable to how expensive cars lost value over time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 new vs used. now days I hear more people having problems with there "new cars and trucks" and look at the percentage of new or zero time engine failures comparred to 250 to 1000 hr time engines. new does not always mean better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMcClure Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Full disclosure, I do have a late model O for sale. I always buy well maintained and lightly used automobiles, planes and boats. I feel a well cared for and flown late model is BETTER than new when talking about airplanes. With a hand built complex machine, I expect all sorts of bugs for the first few hundred hours. Then you know what you are going to have. And planes are not like cars, the maintenance record is right there for you to review. Now, it gets harder to compare when we are talking difference generations of avionics, air frames and engines. But comparing a good used 2007 Aclaim for $450k vs a new one at $700k, what exactly are you getting? What would you rather have, a 1-2 year warranty or evidence of the plane working well for the last 5 years. I would take the latter even if the difference was not $300k. My point is the new airplanes are way overvalued. Or the used ones are way undervalued. No wonder new GA airplane makers are struggling to live. Now a 67 Vett for $5000 compared to a 2014 Vett at $65k is also an interesting comparison.In today's dollars, that $5000 is worth about $25,000 now. The $26,000 for an F in 1967 would be $130k in today's dollars (3.5% interest). So the Vett is 260% more than its predecessor. But the $700k Acclaim is 538% more than its predecessor. I had a F and have an O. I really like my O. But is the technology and value more than 5 times what it was in 67? The advancement in the Vett is far more than the advancement from the F. Imagine you could buy a brand new 67F made in 2014 equipped exactly like it was in 1967 for $130k or a brand new Acclaim for $700k. They couldn't keep the F stocked. It is also interesting that an excellent1967 F model is probably worth about $65k now, about exactly 1/2 what it was worth in 1967 in todays dollars or 3 times the cost in 1967 dollars. Math Error edited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 bonal and Mclure, You guys are quite right. Any cost benefit analysis suggests that buying a new car is a bad idea, and buying a new airplane is an even worse idea. Said another way - the hull value takes its largest hit the moment you drive (fly) off the lot and is its fastest during the first few years. And quite right bonal about the annoyance of a buggy brand new flying machine. Remember - in the real world I fly a 1981... So I am just speaking of knee jerk reaction. If price is an object - buy used. Buy the nicest used you can - all the way up to a late model O or A (or TBM or whatever). If price is no object - if I have tens of millions burning a hold in my Swiss bank accounts - and I want a personal flying machine cuz flying is just cool and its boring always flying in a personal Gulfstream - then I get it - I get the awesomeness of flying off the lot in a brand new A. I could see doing it myself in the imaginary world where I have tens of millions offshore. By the way - lets not work too hard here on Mooneyspace to discourage the sale of new planes! Someone needs to buy new planes if you want to buy their used planes in a few years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaV8or Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Just doing a little looking at cost comparisons. 1967 Corvette approx. $5,700 1967 Mooney F approx. $26,000 Ratio 4.6:1 2014 Corvette approx. $65,000 2014 Mooney approx. $650,000 Ratio 10: 1 Seems to me that the current price of a Mooney should be closer to$350k You know, these historical comparisons are pretty worthless. They presuppose that we are the exact same Americans living in the exact same America as say, 1967. We are no longer those Americans and the America we live in now is vastly different. Time marches on, change is constant and simple inflation calculators serve very little practical purpose. They exist to aid people in entertaining themselves on the internet. There's no returning to 1967 and I seriously doubt there any who would want to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMcClure Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Ouch - I resemble that remark. But isn't that why are here - to entertain ourselves? At the end of the day, I will spent the amount of disposable income I have in the way I want. Buying a $700k plane when I could buy a very similar one for $450k won't be one of them. That is the more meaningful comparison than the 1967 comparison. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 I really hope they sell lots of new aircraft and if I had that kind of money I might buy a brand new Mooney and pay some one to fly it around for a hundred hours or so to get all the bugs worked out. It will be interesting to see how the market pans out. my guess is that it will find lots of homes in the training and business worlds and not so much your average doctor or dentist. and a question for the doctors out there. is Obama care going to cut into your flying budget? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Thinking about it - and looking the 1967 corvette versus the 2014 corvette (or any car line for that matter) the new machine is much much more complex. The old machine was simple, carbs, v8, no air conditioning, minor electrical system, simple disc breaks, no airbags, (cup holder?) wind shield wipers?, and that's it. Modern machine has more electronics in it than the saturn v rocket sending a man to the moon - well so does your iPhone. Well so does your toaster oven. Anyway, airbags, air-conditioning, abs breaks, inflammable materials, electric seats, heated seats, heated mirrors, FADEC or whatever they call it in cars, electronic fancy futuristic instrument displays that would put Night-Rider to shame, maybe a back up view digital camera, etc, etc, etc. All that junk and wiring gotta cost something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bnicolette Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Not bad considering that a fully loaded Cirrus SR22 GTS costs same. Don't know about you guys but I'd much rather take a new Acclaim over the Cirrus. Doesn't the fully loaded Cirrus come with TKS? That's another $50K on the Acclaim. http://www.wcvb.com/news/small-plane-crashes-near-burlington-mall/26440712?tru=XxUoE#ixzz34MAblKjE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 None of the stuff in my 64 mooney and it fly's just fine. Actually I do have the STC for the toaster oven so I can prepare our in flight meals. I kind of like the idea that when we are up in the sky looking down it could be like a time machine looking back 50 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted June 11, 2014 Report Share Posted June 11, 2014 Thinking about it - and looking the 1967 corvette versus the 2014 corvette (or any car line for that matter) the new machine is much much more complex. The old machine was simple, carbs, v8, no air conditioning, minor electrical system, simple disc breaks, no airbags, (cup holder?) wind shield wipers?, and that's it. Actually the vette has had fuel injection since 1957, AC since 63, and a AM-FM radio!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.