Factory Closed Down?

[ESPN168]

On 11/10/2019 at 6:38 PM, gsxrpilot said:

I don't think the problem is selling airplanes. And that is a surprise to me. But evidently, according to a few guys out there selling new Mooneys, they are selling everything available. The problem seems to be that they can't make them fast enough. When everything is done by hand and they can only produce 6 airplanes in a year, the numbers don't add up. 

Looks like it's gonna be made in China now. GA is gonna take off in Asia with more and more countries approving airspace for GA crafts. And they don't care about the having to sell with back to Americans yet because of the trade war with Trump. I heard that Mooney's past failures are due to bad marketing and I totally agree. You can have one of the best product out there but if it's not marketed properly you'll lose market share.... I still think mooney should have signed a deal with RR for their engines.

[Alan Fox]

3 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

I’ve never seen the reapers advertise control surfaces or rods...they seem to focus on avionics. I guess sheet can be fabricated, but that level of skill and machinery probably not available to small AP shops.


Tom

Need control surfaces , Rods , I have a wing too

[pkofman]

Wow  . I own a mooney m20m ( my 3rd  mooney  in 15 years after owning a  j, and k )  and saw this news only yesterday . There is allot of meat in this thread. This thread contain a safety story, a certification story, ( reads live a conspiracy theory  )  some deep thoughts on Mooney itself and its new owners.  Well this is not Mooneys first time in the goo!, but it might be the first time in trouble with a foreign owner. I just don't know . What strikes me is that Mooney while a wonderful  highly respect product/  machine, and i love them, seems to have operated with a sense of arrogance  around marketing, sort of a ... ..." "if we build it they will come" !!. scenario  Life and business requires constant  innovation. So although there may have been technical pressure to modify the plane there is also a need to really modify the marketing methods and pricing to suit a  changing world.  I don't anything about marketing planes but in my business our plans change endlessly and maybe even n  at time overnight. You cannot be stuck on any particular point. The Mooney of today must be extraordinarily innovative in all ways given the extreme of a digital world , cost , and  what must be an extremely competitive landscape,  There must be a pretty good reason Cirrus outsells Mooney 30-40 to 1. ( maybe its just the parachute ... i don't know!) Perception is reality sort of thing. Im just shocked that it took a failure for anyone to say that. Can you imagine the conversations within  the marketing team. But then again maybe that is exactly what Mooney wanted. Limited production of a very specialized  product which would sell to a few people rather than have any accessibility . I always think of aviation as being very similar to my business. I am and engineer and real estate developer . We build tall buildings. Our projects run for years . if we don't plan ahead the designs and ideas we started with wont match the market when we go live.with the public..The approval process alone can impose such heavy constraints  that we  can be  behind the curve when we make our first application. Im sure aviation certification is much worse and hugely expensive. I  don't know what is right or wrong but I really hope that Mooney can find it way . To me the very first step is to ensure that MOONEY upholds its outstanding commitment to safety and the product does not lose its core value to ensure confidence with its customers. The product needs to be  safe and sound  to be viable  I own one of these machine and have no idea what happens to parts, value or perception when this sort of thing happens

Edited November 13, 2019 by pkofman

[DXB]

Mooney's cease in manufacturing in 2008 was precipitated by the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.  This time is different - it is the result of blowing huge amounts of cash while failing to create a product that is competitive in a market that has irreversibly shifted over the past decade. I'm not sure their current assets provide much of a platform for another reboot attempt either - I seriously hope I'm wrong, but I fear liquidation is not that far off. 

Edited November 14, 2019 by DXB

[DualRatedFlyer]

16 hours ago, Marauder said:

Don’t take this the wrong way. But as a long time owner (28 years and counting), I don’t get the fear about the Mooney situation.

 

In those 28 years, I’ve been through numerous Mooney ownerships/bankruptcies and during that time frame have yet to experience the inability to get a part. Yeah, sometimes it may require an owner produced part and other times, the services of one of the Reapers.

 

But in the end, a solution was available.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

Strangely enough, my dad cant get factory parts for his 2005 Toyota Camry.  But I be danged if those things dont still command a premium price on craigslist. 

[Bob_Belville]

Page 11 on one of several threads... I am going to wait until someone from Mooney speaks. While each event is has unique contexts, ISTM we've been here several times since I checked got out in a M20E in 1969.  

• I note those closest to this story are mum for the moment and much posted here does sound like Andrew Hyett's pub prognosticators.
• Wouldn't it be nice to be introduced to the new head of Mooney with a free hand to do what's needed... a Lee Iacocca, a Roy Lopresti, a Bob Iger...

[DXB]

21 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

perhaps.....  and this is not a dig just an observation, the answer can be found in these pages.  A quick look at this post shows the numbers who spend and the numbers that don't, I mean who are supporters and who are basic members.   There appear to be more Basic members on here than Supporters, so if we apply the same logic to Mooney, although we LOVE the brand, are we spending the money to help them or are we as someone said earlier down the Pub solving the problems of the world over a pint of beer.  Have we done any advertising of our own for them, via FB, social media etc.  I know I plug them when I can to the point my friends moan at me.  I even started conversations with Volvo on their behalf unofficially to try to get Volvo to partner with them on marketing., two safety bands together.  It was my own time, free and gratefully given.  On something as niche as an aeroplane which lets face it is more of a hobby than a business, we all as hobbyists need to pull together and help them in any way we can.

The passion of current owners undoubtedly helps sustain the far cheaper used Mooney market. The enthusiasm of an owner was a key factor in my buying one.  My becoming a vocal fanboy has likely contributed to at least a couple other used Mooney purchases.  But owner enthusiasm will never sell many 800k new planes with serious objective shortcomings relative to the competition.  If I were spending that kind of money on a new piston single for serious travel use with passengers, I would very likely pinch my nose and buy a Cirrus instead. Mooney was doomed during the latest reboot by their failure to develop a product beyond the M20 design, which has finally been rendered obsolete in the new aircraft market after an impressive run of 60+ years.  I doubt there's any path to recovery left at this point.

[MooneyMitch]

 “”Have we done any advertising of our own for them, via FB, social media etc.  I know I plug them when I can to the point my friends moan at me””

 

Yes we have!  This was the entire initial concept of the Mooney Ambassadors, and it WAS very successful in support of the previous shutdown of 2008!

I”m not so sure MA would be as effective with this situation, but trying never hurt.

[aviatoreb]

1 minute ago, DXB said:

The passion of current owners undoubtedly helps sustain the far cheaper used Mooney market. The enthusiasm of an owner was a key factor in my buying one.  My becoming a vocal fanboy has likely contributed to at least a couple other used Mooney purchases.  But owner enthusiasm will never sell many 800k new planes with serious objective shortcomings relative to the competition.  If I were spending that kind of money on a new piston single for serious travel use with passengers, I would very likely pinch my nose and buy a Cirrus instead. Mooney was doomed during the latest reboot by their failure to develop a product beyond the M20 design, which has finally been rendered obsolete in the new aircraft market after an impressive run of 60+ years.  I doubt there's any path to recovery left at this point.

Not me - I like used airplanes.  If I wanted a Cirrus I would buy a used Cirrus.  If I had $300k for a used airplane I might buy a used newer best at price point Mooney but if I wanted a Cirrus I would buy the best at price point Cirrus.  But I would buy a Mooney.  But if I had $800k budget I would buy best at price point available used TBM or maybe PA46.  Seems like 800k is used turbine money.  But that is me.

Many people like new - or business want new.  Anyway then new pistons in this class are 800k.  If that is it I would have wanted a new Ultra.  Or I would be dreaming of 4M for a new TBM.

...but if I had 4M I would be buying a used Phenom.

[pkofman]

55 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Page 11 on one of several threads... I am going to wait until someone from Mooney speaks. While each event is has unique contexts, ISTM we've been here several times since I checked got out in a M20E in 1969.  

• I note those closest to this story are mum for the moment and much posted here does sound like Andrew Hyett's pub prognosticators.
• Wouldn't it be nice to be introduced to the new head of Mooney with a free hand to do what's needed... a Lee Iacocca, a Roy Lopresti, a Bob Iger...

So I am curious..... seems there are folks  in the forum that have  insights that go way beyond public knowledge.

Are there any insiders or actual company employees here that can provide internal news that could shed light on what is actually going on within the company

I also think I read that the layoff is only for a week.... ( I think i read that on avweb or in the Kerrville paper) but I could be wrong......  question.....what happens next....!

Does anyone here have this internal knowledge ?

 

Peter

[Bob_Belville]

1 minute ago, pkofman said:

So I am curious..... seems there are folks  in the forum that have  insights that go way beyond public knowledge.

Are there any insiders or actual company employees here that can provide internal news that could shed light on what is actually going on within the company

I also think I read that the layoff is only for a week.... ( I think i read that on avweb or in the Kerrville paper) but I could be wrong......  question.....what happens next....!

Does anyone here have this internal knowledge ?

 

Peter

Read my post again. The folks who are posting are not in the know and those in the know are not posting. Therefore I will wait until Mooney is ready to talk. I doubt that will be very long for numerous obvious reasons. 

[MooneyMitch]

I would expect, and believe discretion is warranted in this situation and for respect of those at the factory directly affected by this.

[pkofman]

4 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Read my post again. The folks who are posting are not in the know and those in the know are not posting. Therefore I will wait until Mooney is ready to talk. I doubt that will be very long for numerous obvious reasons. 

Yes , i agree with you and understood your post the first time . It will be interesting to see how the detail are made public.. But also interestingly  the Mooney website appears to be business as usual.

 

[RobertGary1]

2 hours ago, DXB said:

Mooney's cease in manufacturing in 2008 was precipated by the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.  This time is different - it is the result of blowing huge amounts of cash while failing to create a product that is competitive in a market that has irreversibly shifted over the past decade. I'm not sure their current assets provide much of a platform for another reboot attempt either - I seriously hope I'm wrong, but I fear liquidation is not that far off. 

The type certificate will fetch a lot of money. The ability to produce parts for Mooney's has always been profitable. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't use the type certificate to make new planes though.

-Robert

[RogueOne]

43 minutes ago, DXB said:

The passion of current owners undoubtedly helps sustain the far cheaper used Mooney market. The enthusiasm of an owner was a key factor in my buying one.  My becoming a vocal fanboy has likely contributed to at least a couple other used Mooney purchases.  But owner enthusiasm will never sell many 800k new planes with serious objective shortcomings relative to the competition.  If I were spending that kind of money on a new piston single for serious travel use with passengers, I would very likely pinch my nose and buy a Cirrus instead. Mooney was doomed during the latest reboot by their failure to develop a product beyond the M20 design, which has finally been rendered obsolete in the new aircraft market after an impressive run of 60+ years.  I doubt there's any path to recovery left at this point.

I agree with a lot of this post, but I have a difficult time understanding the price point and willingness of individuals to enter into the price point of a new piston single.  To obtain that kind of money you need to be pretty good with decision making.  The decision to spend that kind of money vs. buying used, regardless of brand seems like an easy decision.  I guess if you can you do and obviously those that do prefer brand C with a BPS over ALL other options.  To summarize:  Buying a new piston single is bat$%^& crazy to me.  I personally wish continued success to all.  The last sentence of DXB is where I am sitting as an observer that knows nothing about the Mooney balance sheet or business plan.

[aviatoreb]

3 minutes ago, RogueOne said:

I agree with a lot of this post, but I have a difficult time understanding the price point and willingness of individuals to enter into the price point of a new piston single.  To obtain that kind of money you need to be pretty good with decision making.  The decision to spend that kind of money vs. buying used, regardless of brand seems like an easy decision.  I guess if you can you do and obviously those that do prefer brand C with a BPS over ALL other options.  To summarize:  Buying a new piston single is bat$%^& crazy to me.  I personally wish continued success to all.  The last sentence of DXB is where I am sitting as an observer that knows nothing about the Mooney balance sheet or business plan.

That argument of use vs new has always been mysterious to me for ALL of the airplane brands, makes and models.  But clearly people do buy new airplanes at least from some brands so there are new buyers out there.  If I were spending 800k on a new piston single, absolutely I could see buying a Mooney.

But - it is such a strange market used airplanes.  It is entirely unlike used cars.  Used cars tend to get beat up, on rough roads, corrode in salty environments and generally people more so tend to buy new cars at a price point where quality used ranges from 50%-90% of new.  And cars mostly seem to last less than 10 years.  I have a 17 year old Subaru WRX STI with 100k on it and it quite good shape but a bit of corrosion starting to sneak in where all my previous efforts to hold it off were working for a decade but seem to escaped me.  Our last 3 car purchases were cream-puff used cars - Subaru Crosstrek - one for my wife, and each of two of our boys.  18-20k instead of 24k for cars with 2-5 k miles on them at time of purchase used.

That said - airplanes are so different. Let's take Cessna.  I can buy a used 172 for 10% the price of a new Cessna 172 and it flies and feels substantially the same.  For 20%-25% I can have it fixed up to a point that it seems to "civilians" (not pilots) as if it is new.  Cessna is competing to sell new airplanes vs its own 50 year old airplanes.  That is such a strange market.  There is no salt on the runways and a well kept airplane can last seemingly forever.  The DC3's have proved that 75 year old airplanes with 250,000 hours on them are still work horses, where as it is rare for a small GA airplane to have 5 or 10k hours on it - so if kept in good shape, new interior, new paint, new engine, new avionics it is awfully hard for new airplanes to compete.  Used airplanes are not like used cars and are seemingly almost as good as new for 10-20% price of new.

But some brands do seem to compete ok.

I am just riffing - no real point here.

[RogueOne]

On 11/12/2019 at 12:33 PM, Bravoman said:

A lot has been written on this topic. Most is beyond dispute. Even going back to the beginning where Churchill knew about the plan to attack Pearl Harbor but did not do anything to warn us because he knew he needed us brought into the war because at the time there was a very strong isolationist movement in the United States as a reaction to World War I. No one seriously disputes that if it were not for lend lease and the material provided to the British before our involvement, and the United States subsequent involvement after the attack on Pearl Harbor, that an Axis victory would have been inevitable. Unlike what was said above, The German Air Force was far from finished after the Battle of Britain; quite the contrary, it did not even suffer a dent. Absent US involvement, the Germans would’ve ultimately succeeded in an invasion of the British Isles, or, at the very least, cutting off the British Isles from sources of supply and thus neutralizing the British. As demonstrated by Dunkirk in particular, the British would have never been able to invade the mainland of Europe in a fashion that would have caused the defeat of Germany. And the British would certainly have never been able to wage a two front war such that the Japanese would have been defeated in the Pacific theater.

To dispute what is written above is simply Nationalistic pride.

[kevinw]

When I think about why Cirrus is selling so many more aircraft than Mooney a few things come to mind. Cirrus is appealing to a different buyer. Wealthy middle aged people with minimum flying experience; i.e. the people buying new airplanes. These people are typically tech savvy and Cirrus fills that lane. All glass cockpit (for the most part), side stick control, designed for the most part to be flown on autopilot, modern airframe design and the icing on the cake is, you guessed it, ballistic parachute. Say all you want about BPS but it does two things for the buyer; it satisfies the wife and friends who are scared to fly in small planes but also gives peace of mind to high income buyers who may believe their demise will have bigger consequences than that of the average person. I think a good salesman could paint quite a picture to a prospective buyer with an important position within his occupation. The Cirrus may not be any safer than other aircraft but perception is king and all that really matters. One more thing, the SF50 gives Cirrus buyers a step up option that would be fairly easy to transition to. Even if a SR-22 buyer can't ever afford the SF50, they will always dream and this may weigh into the buying decision.

I think Mooney drivers are quite different; we're purists who love the speed, handling and efficiency of a Mooney. Unfortunately, we are the minority in the buyer pool and the reason Mooney is in this situation. It may be too little too late but, in my opinion, to survive and sell new aircraft in this day and age, Mooney will have to really modernize and come up with a new or modified airframe with a higher useful load that's easier to get in and out of, with side stick control and I hate to say it, BPS. In essence, they need to build a direct competitor to the SR-22 because that's what most people want today. Just my $.02

[exM20K]

Well, the upside of all of this is that I can stop saving for that G1000 NXi upgrade for the time being!

-dan

[MooneyMitch]

11 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

“I would expect forthwith communication by the company to and transparency with Mooney owners who collectively have probably $500-$700 million tied up in the fleet.”

I would expect that could possibly happen, or not.

[RogueOne]

18 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

I would expect forthwith communication by the company to and transparency with Mooney owners who collectively have probably $500-$700 million tied up in the fleet. This absolutely damages the value of our planes - The only debate is how much. Some posts here say “I’m not worried“. Others see this at the end of the marque. Reality it will be somewhere in between.
 

Some owners will be lucky and not need any critical parts for a long time. Some owners are happy to scrounge for and salvage critical parts treating their older planes as an expensive hobby which really doesn’t need to be airworthy anytime soon. Some planes may have a dust up, hangar rash or porpoised landing  that renders them unflyable for extended period of times in attempt to source parts. Premiums will be paid for critical short supply parts that can be had. 
 

Posts here likening the Mooney parts situation to that for an older Toyota or a GM multiple division common platform Pontiac are sadly irrelevant.   Also posts stating “I’ve been through shutdowns before and.....don’t worry, parts will somehow come, etc” exhibit selective memory. Values dropped and planes didn’t sell. The notion that owner procured parts is a solution is way oversimplified. 
 

It depends upon the actions of the owners.  The Kerrville news reported that a Mooney spokesperson said that remaining employees will not manufacture any new parts. That’s troubling. Will they be willing to sell the type certificates, drawings, jigs, etc to an owners group like Commander did?  Will they just hold on to it and transfer it to China?  Will theY sell to a third part supplier? How Much might they sell for?  Who knows but any potential buyer will only proceed if they think that they can pass all the costs on with an adequate markup to current Mooney owners. 

You just rose from the mire to cast clouds of doom and gloom upon all that dwell within.  Such a pity.  I say “Talk to the hand my depressed/depressing donkey with a tacked on tale.”  “We’re all doomed” is one way to go, but I will choose to keep supporting my passion for as long as my body allows.

Agendas and propaganda are everywhere.  They definitely come out of the crypt here on Mooneyspace.  The pox to ‘em all.

Edited November 13, 2019 by RogueOne

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

Does anyone remember the Japanese acquisition binge in the 1980s?  How many of those investments went south?  (Rockefeller Center?)  I suspect the same will happen with the Chinese.  They have invested almost $200B in US companies the past few years, Mooney being one.  They will have to sell these fallen assets, (just like the Japanese did), and someone will be there to pick up cheap assets and resume the companies' operations. 

The only alternative would be to move the production equipment to somewhere production could be done less expensively.  (Would you buy Mooney parts made in China/Viet Nam/etc.?)  Maybe the line could live on from there...

Edited November 13, 2019 by Ah-1 Cobra Pilot

[RogueOne]

6 minutes ago, Ah-1 Cobra Pilot said:

Does anyone remember the Japanese acquisition binge in the 1980s?  How many of those investments went south?  (Rockefeller Center?)  I suspect the same will happen with the Chinese.  They have invested almost $200B in US companies the past few years, Mooney being one.  They will have to sell these fallen assets, (just like the Japanese did), and someone will be there to pick up cheap assets and resume the companies' operations. 

The only alternative would be to move the production equipment to somewhere production could be done less expensively.  (Would you buy Mooney parts made in China/Viet Nam/etc.?)  Maybe the line could live on from there...

PM sent

 

[KB4]

https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/mooney-ceasing-production/#.XcxeXW5Fx9A

Not producing anymore Mooney's for now anyway.  

[HRM]

38 minutes ago, Ah-1 Cobra Pilot said:

The only alternative would be to move the production equipment to somewhere production could be done less expensively.

Frankly, I thought that was the big plan when this all started a few years ago. The reality is that the Mooney is pretty much handmade and the most expensive resource in any business is the human resource. Mooney is not making wood wings anymore (imagine the labor in that!) and it really is just tedium to rivet an aircraft together where the parts are formed on jigs or pop out of presses.