New Mooneys, any interest at all?

[APTUS Pilot]

New development:

CEO Saxena is out, and the M10 is reportedly still moving forward "full speed ahead".

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/april/24/mooney-ceo-out

I am not exactly overflowing with optimism about the future stability of the company. But maybe the 170 knot diesel M10J will happen after all.

[gsengle]

That was fast


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stephen]

55 minutes ago, gsengle said:

The difference is maintenance and fuel bills... big difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point; I used to care for a PA31T fleet, so am familiar with their maint/ops. Maybe we were lucky but ours were pretty reliable...recall the cabin heaters were a bit of a pain. But assuming a person has a very big small or medium business and has a business justified aviation justified aircraft budget in the $1M zip code - all things being equal, I think the Cheyenne at 500-700K has a far greater chance of facilitating offsetting top line revenue than the Ultra (for obvious reasons). That is why business level aircraft for medium+ sized businesses (who could afford these high 6 figure aircraft budgets)  look like Cheyennes, King Air's, and the 7 figure planes: TBM, Pilatus, Citations etc...

So, the ultra seems like it has to have to sell to independently wealthy persons who want a toy (at that point who cares about maintenance/ops costs),  or more likely  business owner/pilots who can afford planes in that financial zip code, but can't/won't do a pressurized turbine or have an low need for reliable dispatch (??). Pretty small niche.  Like I said, wealthy toy buyers aside, I do not get the economics. 

[gsengle]

There is a market for high performance singles, there just is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[M20FanJesse]

1 hour ago, APTUS Pilot said:

New development:

CEO Saxena is out, and the M10 is reportedly still moving forward "full speed ahead".

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/april/24/mooney-ceo-out

I am not exactly overflowing with optimism about the future stability of the company. But maybe the 170 knot diesel M10J will happen after all.

Woah wait what? How many CEO's have they been through in the past few years? I agree, this doesn't fill me with optimism, but I hope for the best.

[KSMooniac]

That was very fast! Heard rumors he was not well liked, and had employees scared/timid due to his management style. Hopefully the third time will be the charm for the current ownership...

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

[AZM20C]

I would love a new two door Mooney. I would love a new Bonanza. I would love a P-51 Mustang, or a Corsair. I have an M20C. I'm happy because I can afford to fly. To fly an M20C is icing on the cake for me. Heck, it's too much money for my budget. As long as I get to fly. If my budget shrinks I will fly a 152 and be happy. I hope Mooney has great success selling those $700,000 plus airplanes. I hope there is a market out there so they have a long prosperous life. I would not want to own an airplane that cost more than my house. Just don't sound right. 

[AndyFromCB]

3 hours ago, gsengle said:

The difference is maintenance and fuel bills... big difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fuel bills, not so much if you really compare apples to apples. JetA can be had for $3 a gallon with a contract fuel card vs 6 dollar AvGas. Compare a TBM burning 60gph to an Acclaim burning 20gph, one doing 320knots vs 230knots, cost per nm is pretty close (56cents/nm for TBM, 52cents/nm for Acclaim). Maintenance will be a close to a wash in grand scheme of things between the two aircraft if you use a large repair station (which you will if you use the aircraft for business because you need it to be in the air and in my experience only large certified repair stations deliver anything on time, so think $15K a year for Acclaim, $30K a year for TBM, big difference will be parts availability, on newer TBMs anything can be had overnight, not my experience in piston world and prices can actually be more reasonable on turbine equipment, guess how much Cessna wants for a new 206 front strut). Insurance will be the same, might actually be lower for TBM at $3million vs Acclaim at $800K, both probably around $15K annually but with TBM, you'll get $5million smooth for that money and your engine will be insured against FOD. Engine reserves will be just over half on an Acclaim if you assume it makes TBO with one set of jugs, turbos and exhaust in the middle of life. I figure TSIO550 at around $120K over 2000 hours, so about $60 an hour, I figure a big block PT6 at about $125 an hour, most likely all at once, as opposed the piston, where $50K will be spent over the lifetime chasing things, then another $70K at TBO between overhaul and R&R. Avionics are identical between two aircraft, so cost is the same. I'm not saying the costs are identical, but the delta is not as steep as you think for business use.

This is why they make no sense for business, so all that's left is enthusiasts with $800K burning in their pocket.  Not that many people like that left anymore. Which is too bad, because they are magnificent machines.

[Urs_Wildermuth]

5 hours ago, APTUS Pilot said:

the M10 is reportedly still moving forward "full speed ahead".

If true, best news I've heard today.

Re the used Cheyenne vs new Mooney comparison, well, that is worse than apples and oranges. Any idea how much a Cheyenne costs to keep? That 300k difference or what it was will be eaten up in no time at all. Anyhow, people who shop for planes like a Cheyenne are hardly the typical Mooney customers, are they.

Other than that, the calc is easy enough. If there are new planes produced, if the make is alive, it will do all of us some good. If it goes down, we have a huge problem with the maintenance of the fleet. Apart, any newly sold Mooney will probably free up a previously owned one at prices where those who will never buy new will buy.

Well, I hope the news re the M10 is true.

[kpaul]

4 hours ago, KSMooniac said:

Heard rumors he was not well liked

When my wife and I met him at this past Mooney Summit, he immediately rubbed us the wrong way.  He quickly lost interest as soon as he found out I flew a M20F, and then tried to explain how if we got in a 10 way partnership we could fly the new Mooney.  He seemed to be more comfortable with the Doctor and Lawyer crowd that were closer to his economic standing.

[Godfather]

5 hours ago, AndyFromCB said:

Fuel bills, not so much if you really compare apples to apples. JetA can be had for $3 a gallon with a contract fuel card vs 6 dollar AvGas. Compare a TBM burning 60gph to an Acclaim burning 20gph, one doing 320knots vs 230knots, cost per nm is pretty close (56cents/nm for TBM, 52cents/nm for Acclaim). Maintenance will be a close to a wash in grand scheme of things between the two aircraft if you use a large repair station (which you will if you use the aircraft for business because you need it to be in the air and in my experience only large certified repair stations deliver anything on time, so think $15K a year for Acclaim, $30K a year for TBM, big difference will be parts availability, on newer TBMs anything can be had overnight, not my experience in piston world and prices can actually be more reasonable on turbine equipment, guess how much Cessna wants for a new 206 front strut). Insurance will be the same, might actually be lower for TBM at $3million vs Acclaim at $800K, both probably around $15K annually but with TBM, you'll get $5million smooth for that money and your engine will be insured against FOD. Engine reserves will be just over half on an Acclaim if you assume it makes TBO with one set of jugs, turbos and exhaust in the middle of life. I figure TSIO550 at around $120K over 2000 hours, so about $60 an hour, I figure a big block PT6 at about $125 an hour, most likely all at once, as opposed the piston, where $50K will be spent over the lifetime chasing things, then another $70K at TBO between overhaul and R&R. Avionics are identical between two aircraft, so cost is the same. I'm not saying the costs are identical, but the delta is not as steep as you think for business use.

This is why they make no sense for business, so all that's left is enthusiasts with $800K burning in their pocket.  Not that many people like that left anymore. Which is too bad, because they are magnificent machines.

Numbers can be stretched to make any device look affordable.  Insurance for the Mooney would be in the mid 5's, hanger would be considerably cheaper(normal T hanger vs larger), annuals would be half the expense, 100ll can be had for under $4/gal depending on where you fly which might modify the cost/mile slightly. As some who has put on 2000hrs on the same io550 with direct engine cost of $50k (overhaul and all cylinders/starter adapter/etc included) I find it hard to believe I could spend that much on a tsio. 

A TBM is a great plane but imo just another expensive transportation device for someone who has worked hard over their lifetime and enjoys aviation. 

[rpcc]

I wonder what the issue was.  The ceo was able to restart production and apparently sell a number of copies (10 maybe).  That seems to say the company and x ceo could execute on a plan.  Again, from a marketing perspective they need an optional chute in these planes - it can't be that hard - people can chose AC and or TKS as options, why don't they have a choice of a parachute.   I've seen a couple planes with AC AND TKS - which must weight 120lbs - for reference the 182 parachute system weighs 85lbs. It's not that it can't be done - they just chose not to do it.  

[AndyFromCB]

48 minutes ago, Godfather said:

Numbers can be stretched to make any device look affordable.  Insurance for the Mooney would be in the mid 5's, hanger would be considerably cheaper(normal T hanger vs larger), annuals would be half the expense, 100ll can be had for under $4/gal depending on where you fly which might modify the cost/mile slightly. As some who has put on 2000hrs on the same io550 with direct engine cost of $50k (overhaul and all cylinders/starter adapter/etc included) I find it hard to believe I could spend that much on a tsio. 

A TBM is a great plane but imo just another expensive transportation device for someone who has worked hard over their lifetime and enjoys aviation. 

I don't disagree completely, like I said, if we're comparing apples to apples, business use, not flying as hobby. There is no way you're going to be all in at $50K for a TSIO550 and there is no way you will get to insure your $900K Acclaim for $5K a year, going rate for piston hull values is 1.5%, going rate for SETP values is 0.5%. If you're using your Acclaim for business, then you're not flying from a $4 AvGas airport to a $4 AvGas airport to hunt for cheap gas, you're going from Signature FBO to another because you're buying time.

TSIO550 overhaul is about $65K from factory. Add another $5K for R&R. Add another $12K for a set of jugs at 1000hours. Add another $10K for a set of turbos, waste gates and exhaust work at 1000 hours. Add another $20K for oil changes over lifetime at $250 a pop every 25 hours. That's $112K there over 2000hours. Sure, you can change your oil but people who spend $900K on an aircraft tend not to be that involved. They are the throw the keys to the mechanic and call me when it's done types. My costs are not out of line at all. I'm just saying neither is really affordable for personal use and for business use, TBM is really not that far away if you've got the cash flow to cover the cost of financing. I sure don't right now.

Edited April 25, 2017 by AndyFromCB

[gsengle]

I wonder what the issue was.  The ceo was able to restart production and apparently sell a number of copies (10 maybe).  That seems to say the company and x ceo could execute on a plan.  Again, from a marketing perspective they need an optional chute in these planes - it can't be that hard - people can chose AC and or TKS as options, why don't they have a choice of a parachute.   I've seen a couple planes with AC AND TKS - which must weight 120lbs - for reference the 182 parachute system weighs 85lbs. It's not that it can't be done - they just chose not to do it.  

The long bodies still have weights in the tails along with the dual batteries? Any chance the rocket/chute could be located back there and ditch some other weight?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob_Belville]

I'd vote to make MooneySpace a chute free zone.

(I am a member of a facebook group: "beekeeping techniques", That group had to adopt a policy about a new gimmick that makes harvesting honey easy. The header post now includes: :PLEASE READ THIS FIRST. NO MORE FLOW HIVE POST. WE HAVE 2 POST ABOUT FLOW HIVES SO IF YOU WANT TO TALK FLOW HIVE SEARCH FOR EITHER OF THOSE 2 POST. ALL FLOW HIVE POST WILL BE DELETED FROM THIS POINT FORWARD.")

IMNSHO, posts about chutes are our flow hives.

[gsengle]

Respectfully they appear to sell airplanes... *sigh*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob_Belville]

2 minutes ago, gsengle said:

Respectfully they appear to sell airplanes... *sigh*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See above

[gsengle]

I vote for whatever will sell planes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pinerunner]

I can't afford one so I haven't been watching it. I can afford my old M20E (barely, sorta) and I'm having a lot of fun with it. If you gave me a million... I'd trick it out and probably get a Lo Presti nose job. I'd add a C 180 on floats to my stable and a nice getaway place to take it to. Fishing trips with the 180 and cross country trips with the SUPER-21. Oh yeah and counseling for my wife so she'll dare to fly with me to the really cool places I'd be flying to.  I'd probably have to bribe her somehow cause she has her own agenda. Spend half a million on a plane? That's nut's. Harrison Ford has the money and what do you see him flying for fun? A Husky. A Beaver. I don't think the newer more expensive planes offer as much fun per dollar.

Of course that's just my opinion.

[bradp]

This may be about the most capable lead burner I've seen for less than a new Mooney Acclaim.   If your fixed costs are where they are

https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=130994

Good news re a new CEO and a new direction.

I would have thought that the composite fuselage would have allowed for rip away channels and a BRS.   Additional weight  cleanups would help a lot....

If Mooney goes under again we should create an owner / operators group and buy out the company.   Maybe we'd figure out how to sell Mooney's.

Want to sell high performance singles?  Pressurize it.  Get those 305 drawings out of the locker.   Have a factory pathway with engine configs that include LL, diesel, and upgrade to a small turbine.   The PA-46 / TBM needs some competition.  There is your 1MM market. For the rest, strip down and offer a small bore highly efficient engine for $250k.  Offer a mid model big bore or turbo for $400k.  You can't run a large development program selling 15 airplanes a year and then squander the pile you've already put all in.  Every project that Mooney has worked on and given up and had completed by another company has been successful (TBM, MU-2).  Maybe the M10 can be salvaged from that fate. 

[rpcc]

It seems buyers have voted with their wallets - attached is the market data from 2015.   Short of scrapping the airframe all together doesn't it make sense to just offer the feature as an option - perhaps one could be designed so you could remove it for flights where weight was an issues and reinstall when needed.

[kpaul]

Maybe Mooney was listening...

[gsxrpilot]

I know Mooney needs to sell airplanes and a chute might help with that. But there's no way I'd give up retractable gear for a chute. And I'm afraid that would be the cost.

[gsengle]

I know Mooney needs to sell airplanes and a chute might help with that. But there's no way I'd give up retractable gear for a chute. And I'm afraid that would be the cost.

There is absolutely no reason that would be the tradeoff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob_Belville]

58 minutes ago, rpcc said:

It seems buyers have voted with their wallets - attached is the market data from 2015.   Short of scrapping the airframe all together doesn't it make sense to just offer the feature as an option - perhaps one could be designed so you could remove it for flights where weight was an issues and reinstall when needed.

Enough already! Does the C172 have a chute? The PC-12? We know what you Monday morning quarterbacks think, give it a rest or take it to the CirrusSpace space. Geez.

The Ultras just got certified about 10 minutes ago. After rising from the dead to a viable company with a visible presence at shows, ads in aviation publications, a reinvigorated MSC network, a retooled factory, and almost 200 employees I am pretty certain the Mooney International folks need for this little corner of the relatively small GA world to be cheerleaders. A role I'm happy to play.

I and my old M20E are much better off than we were in 2012 when I bought a plane built by a company with about 8 employees sacrificing to keep the type certificate active.     

Now, let's all stand and sing "Count your many blessings..."