Aspiring Mooney owner needs a little help...

[N9201A]

Hmmm. I was wondering how to participate in some flour-bombing tactical stuff with my J. That "through-to-the-cabin" hole might let me convert my nose gear doors to bomb bay doors. Is there an STC on that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fantom]

Good learning experience for you. I'm always embarrassed for the brotherhood of Mooney owners when I hear stories like this, and I've heard too many of them.

Caveat Emptor.

[gsxrpilot]

Apologies for pouring a little more fuel on this thread. But as a Mooney owner, I'm very interested in the value of our airplanes. So I'm sure I must be missing something here and I'm just asking for clarification.

We all know the engine is 2193 SMOH. So the engine is run out and the airplane should be priced as one that needs an engine.

The asking price on controller is $77,500. The owner agreed to $10K to cover the repairs uncovered by the pre-buy inspection. (Not including the engine overhaul)

As I read it, the result would be a very well equipped, 1977 M20J that has passed a Maxwell pre-buy inspection for $67,500 + the cost of an engine. 

Considering the list of equipment, I think that's actually quite a fair price?  What am I missing here. Would this not be a $100K M20J with a fresh engine?

I'm not suggesting @Firebird2xc made a bad decision, I'm just curious what everyone thinks about the valuation. 

[ragedracer1977]

It sounds to me like there's a lot more going on than just the run-out engine.  Structural damage to the firewall, for instance.

[Firebird2xc]

5 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Apologies for pouring a little more fuel on this thread. But as a Mooney owner, I'm very interested in the value of our airplanes. So I'm sure I must be missing something here and I'm just asking for clarification.

We all know the engine is 2193 SMOH. So the engine is run out and the airplane should be priced as one that needs an engine.

The asking price on controller is $77,500. The owner agreed to $10K to cover the repairs uncovered by the pre-buy inspection. (Not including the engine overhaul)

As I read it, the result would be a very well equipped, 1977 M20J that has passed a Maxwell pre-buy inspection for $67,500 + the cost of an engine. 

Considering the list of equipment, I think that's actually quite a fair price?  What am I missing here. Would this not be a $100K M20J with a fresh engine?

I'm not suggesting @Firebird2xc made a bad decision, I'm just curious what everyone thinks about the valuation. 

The gig list from the PPI was nearly 40 items and nearly $10,000  long.  That did not, for some reason, include the massive oil leak from the base of the #2 cylinder.  Don didn't include a price for repair on that in the list of deficiencies, but it was still on the list.  This confused me. 

The brokers portrayed the airplane to me as "high time but serviceable", and that TBO was a recommendation and not a hard and fast requirement.  The hope was, were that true, to get a hundred hours out of it, maybe, before it went to overhaul.  Don wouldn't stick a number to it and said it would be fixed in overhaul.  I got him to ballpark me a price as it sat.  I wanted some compensation in the buy for it- if this is an engine not truly at TBO as the broker said, why would I be expected to fix it?

If the seller didn't stipulate the engine as 'runout' and agreed to fix whatever airworthiness issues found in PPI to make the sale go, why was this leak somehow exempted and automatically expected to be fixed by me at my cost?  That wasn't in writing and certainly wasn't in the sales pitch.

Don remarked on the severity of the leak and that RTV had been applied to slow it.  I found a puddle of oil near the firewall just by looking into the service panel on the Cowl.  I had serious misgivings about it and when the engine would hold up just flying it home and to an overhaul shop.  A runout just by manufacturer time and date is a misnomer- many people can and safely do fly past those numbers.  And yes, at that price point, an overhaul in the relatively near future was part of the plan- but not an immediate one found during prebuy.  I sent a photo to Jimmy of the oil pooled in the cowling and he still acted like they didn't know what I was talking about... 

The purchase price was $75,000- pending inspection.  This didn't wind up me paying $65000 and the seller paying $10000, though.  I would have still been out $75,000, the seller wanted to pay for repairs out of that, and then I would have still been on the hook for an overhaul.

The real deal breaker overall was still the breathtaking lack of repair on the airplane.  It had an annual about this time the year before at Dugosh, who if memory serves was also giving it 100 hr inspections...

Why then was there a hole in the airplane?  Loose antennas, cracks, chafing cables, missing firewall grommets, a leaking gascolater, etc?  A creased aileron, a bent elevator counterweight bracket?

The horror show of it wasn't the cost of the repairs needed- it was how many.  So many little things that would have cost very little to fix in the grand scheme just ignored.  Having been annualed by and maintained by a shop with Dugosh's reputation and coming out looking like this means either the shop has gone incompetent or the owner was just blatantly, terribly neglectful.

I knew full well that the airplane would eventually need some expensive maintenance done and maybe a few upgrades, too- the price point made sense for that.  When I called Dugosh, they copped to a squishy right brake- never could quite get it right.  I had that written into prebuy... 

... but the sheer level of neglect that had obviously fallen on this airplane plus the weird ambiguity of the engine issues were too much to bear.  $75,000 was based on an airworthy airplane with a high time engine that might have a few issues in prebuy.  The buffed turd that it came out to be isn't worth nearly that much.  If that's what came out in prebuy, what else would show up in the first year of ownership?

I've had a number of people try to walk crap by me before with used airplanes and I'm getting sick of it.

The seller should be ashamed that this airplane became what it was on his watch.

 

 

[Firebird2xc]

3 hours ago, ragedracer1977 said:

It sounds to me like there's a lot more going on than just the run-out engine.  Structural damage to the firewall, for instance.

One can only speculate.  That's the problem with airplanes like this- if a first look finds all this, what's next?

[Firebird2xc]

On 8/18/2017 at 6:56 PM, Raptor05121 said:

Don't consider that PPI as a loss, but as an additional $XXX to having the picture perfect airplane you will eventually buy

I agree whole-heartedly.  I consider the PPI an initiation fee and a relatively cheap lesson.  In one of my other interests there's an expression: "Buy once, cry once."  In other words, better to pay up and snivel a little over a bigger cost now or you'll have to do it twice in the end.

Lesson learned.

[gsxrpilot]

Ok, got it. And obviously my math was wrong. So the deal would have been $75K + the cost of an engine. Now you're at $120K and that buys a pretty nice J.

When I bought my M20C, the list of airworthy issues that Maxwell found totaled over $6K. But other than that it was a beautiful airplane. Don convinced me that if the seller would eat the $6K, he could get it back into good repair and I'd have a really nice C. I took the deal, Don kept the airplane for a month, and I flew the nicest C in the country for the next 400 or so hours.

Setting the engine aside for a minute. I obviously haven't seen this J, but if Don said he could fix everything it needed except the engine, for $10K and the seller came $10K off the price. I'd have done the deal assuming that it was other wise a really nice airplane. In other words, nice panel, nice enough interior, nice paint, etc. I wouldn't have worried about anything that Don said he'd fix. Because he knows how to make it right and can work magic with a Mooney.

Now the engine... No one should ever BUY an engine where going to, much less past, TBO is part of the calculation.  Any engine within 200 hours of TBO should be priced as run out. It might last another 20 minutes, it might last another 400 hours. But you buy the airplane as if it needs an engine today regardless of what the seller or anyone says about the longevity of the engine.

So IF this J with a fresh engine and a clean bill of health from Don Maxwell is worth $120K, then it's still a good deal. If not, that it isn't. And thanks for clearing it up for me.

I'm 100% with you, and thankful you didn't buy it without a pre-buy. They are worth the money and the trouble.  Best of luck with the next one. I hope you find a really good one.

[Firebird2xc]

9 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Ok, got it. And obviously my math was wrong. So the deal would have been $75K + the cost of an engine. Now you're at $120K and that buys a pretty nice J.

When I bought my M20C, the list of airworthy issues that Maxwell found totaled over $6K. But other than that it was a beautiful airplane. Don convinced me that if the seller would eat the $6K, he could get it back into good repair and I'd have a really nice C. I took the deal, Don kept the airplane for a month, and I flew the nicest C in the country for the next 400 or so hours.

Setting the engine aside for a minute. I obviously haven't seen this J, but if Don said he could fix everything it needed except the engine, for $10K and the seller came $10K off the price. I'd have done the deal assuming that it was other wise a really nice airplane. In other words, nice panel, nice enough interior, nice paint, etc. I wouldn't have worried about anything that Don said he'd fix. Because he knows how to make it right and can work magic with a Mooney.

Now the engine... No one should ever BUY an engine where going to, much less past, TBO is part of the calculation.  Any engine within 200 hours of TBO should be priced as run out. It might last another 20 minutes, it might last another 400 hours. But you buy the airplane as if it needs an engine today regardless of what the seller or anyone says about the longevity of the engine.

So IF this J with a fresh engine and a clean bill of health from Don Maxwell is worth $120K, then it's still a good deal. If not, that it isn't. And thanks for clearing it up for me.

I'm 100% with you, and thankful you didn't buy it without a pre-buy. They are worth the money and the trouble.  Best of luck with the next one. I hope you find a really good one.

Thank you for your advice, sir.

Here's to hoping.

[fantom]

"The buffed turd" An apt description, IMO.

A PPI, even one by The Don, doesn't turn up every surprise waiting to bit you.

The subject plane has way too many delayed maintenance items, to take a chance on.

Good that you walked away. I would have run, and I hope Jimmy does also.

[Firebird2xc]

On 8/23/2017 at 5:45 PM, fantom said:

"The buffed turd" An apt description, IMO.

A PPI, even one by The Don, doesn't turn up every surprise waiting to bit you.

The subject plane has way too many delayed maintenance items, to take a chance on.

Good that you walked away. I would have run, and I hope Jimmy does also.

Thank you, I appreciate the support.  Like I said, I hope nobody thinks I take issue with Don or Jimmy.  This owner bought this plane a few years ago, rode it hard, put it up wet, neglected it, then expects everybody else to get his money out of it for him.  I hope he gets stuck with it.

[steingar]

In general, when I see something that is utterly glaring (like an unprepared oil leak, or a hole going through to the cabin) I assume there's lots of other stuff.  ITs a buyers market out there, and there are plenty of Mooneys for sale.  Sounds like the OP didi the exact right thing.  Better luck next time.

[Firebird2xc]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

In general, when I see something that is utterly glaring (like an unprepared oil leak, or a hole going through to the cabin) I assume there's lots of other stuff.  ITs a buyers market out there, and there are plenty of Mooneys for sale.  Sounds like the OP didi the exact right thing.  Better luck next time.

Oh, that is absolutely right.  I used to turn wrenches for a living- there are things you find or just come to expect based on what you're looking at...

[Highflight]

I am here at KSUA and looking fr a companion nicholasgravino@att.net

[Godfather]

1 hour ago, Highflight said:

I am here at KSUA and looking fr a companion nicholasgravino@att.net

Looking for a companion or partner? At first glance I was not sure if your account was hacked. 

I wish the OP good luck with his aircraft hunt.  However, be kind with words used to describe other aircraft. @gsxrpilot is keeping a list of people that have had some growing pains with recent purchase Mooney aircraft. I'm thinking it would be good to have a list for when the MS buyers become sellers. We are very quick to throw stones areound here. 

[Firebird2xc]

2 hours ago, Highflight said:

I am here at KSUA and looking fr a companion nicholasgravino@att.net

I'm not really salty with Mooneys yet.  I'm not an instructor, either.  If you're looking for someone to ferry an airplane, maybe post a thread of your own in the Florida pilots area?  You might get a more focused response.

[Firebird2xc]

1 hour ago, Godfather said:

Looking for a companion or partner? At first glance I was not sure if your account was hacked. 

I wish the OP good luck with his aircraft hunt.  However, be kind with words used to describe other aircraft. @gsxrpilot is keeping a list of people that have had some growing pains with recent purchase Mooney aircraft. I'm thinking it would be good to have a list for when the MS buyers become sellers. We are very quick to throw stones areound here. 

Fair enough.  Perhaps my military aviation maintenance history colors my perception.  Perhaps my standards are too rigid?   I just don't understand how an owner can be so laissez faire about maintenance.  This wasn't a few things that cost a lot to fix, it was many, many things that didn't cost that much, plus maybe one or two fairly expensive things.  Why would someone just be allowed to have no standards and then pass the buck to the next owner?

As for keeping track of buyers having pains and then turning them back on them when they're selling, isn't that a little hypocritical?  If a buyer/new owner goes to lengths (and expense) to correct the neglect of previous owners, do they deserve grief for reflecting that value when they sell?

Perhaps if more owners were encouraged to keep up interest in maintenance *before* a sale there wouldn't have to be such concern of airframe value erosion?

As a soon to be buyer and maybe-someday seller, I'm going to fight for every penny I think I can honestly get, both times.  Especially as a buyer, though.  A broker recently educated me as to what a 'Dutch auction' is on a sale listing.  Start stupid high and whittle the price down periodically until the phones start ringing.  That's how you know what the market supports, apparently.  How much of that tactic relies on not divulging information and keeping the buyer ignorant as possible?  It's caveat emptor all the way.  

 I stand by my statements on this particular airplane, though.  Were I selling an airplane I'd be embarrassed to put forward one like this without at least acknowledging that it needed a degree of work.

[ArtVandelay]

When I was looking there was a lot owners did not know. Most hadn't been flown that much, and never at night (they all had multiple inop lights).

The only time I took exception was when it was advertised as "no squawks, perfect condition" and found out there was a prop leak, a bad one, and then told "they all do that". One owner had a fuel leak, did not realize it. Owners look at their planes with rose color glasses...that's why you need to inspect them before doing a prebuy. If it's a long way away, then maybe someone on this board that's local can do you a favor.

 

[Godfather]

20 minutes ago, Firebird2xc said:

Fair enough.  Perhaps my military aviation maintenance history colors my perception.  Perhaps my standards are too rigid?   I just don't understand how an owner can be so laissez faire about maintenance.  This wasn't a few things that cost a lot to fix, it was many, many things that didn't cost that much, plus maybe one or two fairly expensive things.  Why would someone just be allowed to have no standards and then pass the buck to the next owner?

As for keeping track of buyers having pains and then turning them back on them when they're selling, isn't that a little hypocritical?  If a buyer/new owner goes to lengths (and expense) to correct the neglect of previous owners, do they deserve grief for reflecting that value when they sell?

Perhaps if more owners were encouraged to keep up interest in maintenance *before* a sale there wouldn't have to be such concern of airframe value erosion?

As a soon to be buyer and maybe-someday seller, I'm going to fight for every penny I think I can honestly get, both times.  Especially as a buyer, though.  A broker recently educated me as to what a 'Dutch auction' is on a sale listing.  Start stupid high and whittle the price down periodically until the phones start ringing.  That's how you know what the market supports, apparently.  How much of that tactic relies on not divulging information and keeping the buyer ignorant as possible?  It's caveat emptor all the way.  

 I stand by my statements on this particular airplane, though.  Were I selling an airplane I'd be embarrassed to put forward one like this without at least acknowledging that it needed a degree of work.

You took the plane to a great shop. They did a good job finding all the neglected maintenance items (often happens when people fly less and decide to sell).  They found 10k worth of items that need to be addresses. The seller said he would cover the cost to fix those items.  I'm not sure I see a polished turd of an airplane or seller. 

You have a great history maintaining machinery for the government. It's good to have high standards and keep them throughout your ownership. We need people like you to keep the fleet going. To some individuals 10k is a lot of money which is why some of the maintenance gets pushed out. You keep going back to the oil leak and I'm not sure what the fixation is on that. It needs to be addressed for sure with better methods than rtv caulk. But the engine is run out and the current owner was probably planning on overhauling it in the near term. It sounded like you were pushing the prebuy shop to place a value on the leak to lean on the seller more they refused and you are venting here. 

My only point is with a free market everyone is trying to maximize buying/selling and in this case you want a broker plane to be a great deal with perfect maintenance. Sometimes that's a hard plane to find.  As I said before good luck with your search. 

[Firebird2xc]

12 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

There is a decent chance with this particular plane that the seller didn't know about some of the little things and maybe even some of the big things that your prebuy identified.  Take it to another shop for a prebuy and they would come up with another list that would compare to the first like a Venn diagram.

You are buying a 40 year old piece of machinery for 10 percent of what it would cost new today that Uncle hasn't been paying an entire staff of professional support personnel to fawn all over for the past four decades.  New is nice and it costs big bucks. 

Once you are an owner for 10 years or so you will gain some perspective.  I know this sounds harsh but you asked and I think I am qualified to answer. Stick with it. The education will hopefully be worth way more than you will pay for it. 

Jim

Cost new today isn't fair comparison for purchase price on an old airframe- depreciation is a thing.  

Maybe the seller didn't know about some of those things- but this many stretches credibility.  Some of these things were pretty obviously known.  There's an easy fix for that either way- have a fresh set of eyes look at it before you sell.  Once again, there is no ignorance to be used for an excuse here.  If a seller knows they're going to be on the hook for the results of a prebuy, why stall?

Either way, the variety of issues pretty well showed a long term pattern of neglect.

In other threads other owners talk at length about scrutinizing sellers for how they act, present the records, run the engine analyzer, etc, but scrutinizing the seller's maintenance regimen is somehow out of bounds?   Really?

 

[Godfather]

You are looking at 65k for a J (I'm sure the buyer would reduce the price if you wanted it as is). I have not looked up the info on this plane but that IMO is the lower end of J transactions.  The neglect as you call it, even though good shops have worked on it recently, is already priced in. 

[Godfather]

Just looked up the plane on controller.  Looks to be a good deal to me. Interior looks clean, panel looks clean and complete, exterior looks good, engine is a run out reman so hopefully will be a reasonable overhaul. What the heck am I missing?  Is the hole a major structure item or a small hole in the thin aluminum?  $10 of patched aluminum or a $10k repair?  Major corrosion?

[Firebird2xc]

35 minutes ago, Godfather said:

 To some individuals 10k is a lot of money which is why some of the maintenance gets pushed out. You keep going back to the oil leak and I'm not sure what the fixation is on that. It needs to be addressed for sure with better methods than rtv caulk. But the engine is run out and the current owner was probably planning on overhauling it in the near term. It sounded like you were pushing the prebuy shop to place a value on the leak to lean on the seller more they refused and you are venting here. 

 

If you can't afford to own it, maybe you shouldn't have bought it?

TBO isn't a hard requirement in a non-revenue operation.  Tell me, what FAR governs a 'runout'?

And truth be told, I was a little cranky about the oil leak, etc.  The broker and even previous annual shop portrayed the airplane as mechanically sound minus the brake issue.  The RTV patch on the cylinder says otherwise.  I was lead to believe the airplane was good to go, at the very least to get it home.  The purchase contract said *any* airworthiness issues, and for some reason the inspector decided to put the oil leak on the results sheet but not as a required repair- for the seller.  That's not the contract as written, but since I was effectively left holding the bag, I'm out approximately $2500 for transport and inspection fees, plus my own travel expenses.  Had the inspection tagged the seller with the oil leak cost, and they had balked at carrying out the contract, they'd have been liable for the cost of the inspection.  But since the inspector decided to randomly decide the disposition of the repair required went in favor of the seller, I was on the spot for inspection costs, plus dealing with an airplane that cost $75,000 PLUS the cost of an overhaul.  Maybe.

The inspector may be technically very correct that the engine was done and time for overhaul.  But as the brokers conveyed it otherwise, that left me in the middle.  The contract language that protected me in case of a money pit that the seller wasn't willing to be responsible for became irrelevant when the inspector.  There was no stipulation that the engine required immediate overhaul- there WAS a stipulation that the seller would deliver an airworthy airplane.  So which is it?  

So out of then gate the airplane is really at a cost of $115,000 to $125,000.  Had this airplane been otherwise clean and pristine and well kept up, that would have been a deal.  Given how beaten down it was and likely to have other surprises in the future, not so much.  

The long and short of it is that in business, the contact is what counts, and if someone does an end run around a contract clause, somebody else is probably gonna get screwed.

I got screwed.  And I wrote the checks and took the expense and wasted my time and went home disappointed.  I'd still take another airplane to the inspector if that was the most logical option.

I don't understand the logic involved, as apparently it went unwritten and unspoken, but in the long run the inspector really did me a solid.  Had by position not been so untenable, who knows, I might have negotiated out the cost of the repair and rolled it into a local overhaul shop- and still had to deal with the airframe in the end after all.

I don't blame the brokers, either- I have no way of knowing how closely they scrutinize an airplane they take on for consignment.  For all I know they were as shocked as me.

I can give the inspector the benefit of the doubt, surely.  His name stands too tall in the community.  The brokers, too.  A dozen airplane under their roofs and they know everything about a given one?  Not likely.

The buck's gotta stop somewhere for the abuse on this airframe and it's not gonna be me- I think I've shelled out enough already.

 

[Firebird2xc]

11 minutes ago, Godfather said:

Just looked up the plane on controller.  Looks to be a good deal to me. Interior looks clean, panel looks clean and complete, exterior looks good, engine is a run out reman so hopefully will be a reasonable overhaul. What the heck am I missing?  Is the hole a major structure item or a small hole in the thin aluminum?  $10 of patched aluminum or a $10k repair?  Major corrosion?

I have an itemized list, with dollar amounts.  Are you really going to make me post it?  I don't think your defense of the seller will be helped by that.

[Godfather]

No, posting it is not necessary. Enough has been said online already. I hope someone is able to buy this aircraft in the future and put 25-30k into the aircraft and enjoy it for the next 20 years.