Factory Closed Down?

[daytonabch04]

7 minutes ago, DualRatedFlyer said:

use outline.com and paste the link below -- reading right now. 

 

https://dailytimes.com/news/article_b5fd6b10-056c-11ea-a29f-830a66f49904.html

Didn't work for me..

[DualRatedFlyer]

Just now, daytonabch04 said:

Didn't work for me..

you in chrome?

[daytonabch04]

1 minute ago, DualRatedFlyer said:

you in chrome?

Tried IE and Edge..no Chrome on a gov computer.

[philiplane]

1 hour ago, aviatoreb said:

Your opinion - not mine.  

Not all customers are the same.  My Mooney is a traveling machine and I do travel with it.  But it is also my hot rod and I enjoy it very much as my hot rod.  It is more of a hot rod than a Cirrus, more fun to fly, and a better pilots machine.  I am a pilot and that is what I wanted.  By your general logic, minivans are the only vehicle that makes sense because they get the job done so who would want something else- so clearly there is no purpose to a Ford Mustang.  Yes Ford still produces and sells some Mustangs, because that is what some people want.

But you aren't buying a new airplane, and new airplanes are what keeps factories in business. You have to divorce your feelings from the reality of the situation, and admit that Mooney cannot survive on the  current path. And then there will be no new parts for the old planes.

We can all feel the way we feel, but the reality is the market decides who wins and who loses. Mooney is not winning, and that is reality. I also wish it weren't so, but wishes don't keep businesses alive.

[steingar]

There is one of the reasons why experimental is one of that fastest growing sector in GA.  $35k will get you a airplane that will do 165 knots.  

Yeah, if the airplane has one seat.  I looked into this.  For the money I paid for my Mooney there wasn't an experimental that could be had that went faster that would take two people and a weekend's worth of luggage.  At the time there wasn't a single one, and I'll bet there still isn't.  Anything less than $35K was a puddle jumper, if it was fast it was small, really small.  My Mooney is the biggest bang for your buck in all of general aviation, hands down.

I do feel bad for Mooney, but I really do feel the writing is on the wall.  it's greatest strength is it's greatest weakness.  I'd been wondering when the Chinese were going to pull the plug.

[chrisk]

Just curious where the labor and cost is for building a Mooney?  The wing, the frame, the gear?

[ragedracer1977]

5 minutes ago, daytonabch04 said:

Didn't work for me..

Features a quote from our own Mr. Hyatt

[HB-JAN]

In the appendix the report as PDF

 

Jan 

Mooney.pdf

[chrisk]

9 minutes ago, steingar said:

Yeah, if the airplane has one seat.  I looked into this.  For the money I paid for my Mooney there wasn't an experimental that could be had that went faster that would take two people and a weekend's worth of luggage.  At the time there wasn't a single one, and I'll bet there still isn't.  Anything less than $35K was a puddle jumper, if it was fast it was small, really small.  My Mooney is the biggest bang for your buck in all of general aviation, hands down.

I do feel bad for Mooney, but I really do feel the writing is on the wall.  it's greatest strength is it's greatest weakness.  I'd been wondering when the Chinese were going to pull the plug.

There are plenty of experimentals that have wonderful performance.  An Evolution Turbine 750 comes to mind, but it is more than a Mooney.  Perhaps a Vans RV10 is a better example, but it is still nowhere near $35K.

[wcb]

I read into the article they are actively looking for a buyer.  What is the price?  If they are looking for more than the $100 million they bought it for I would bet they are SOL (at least from me...LOL).

Edited November 12, 2019 by wcb

[GDGR]

On 11/11/2019 at 8:54 AM, Marauder said:

Kind of reminds me of an incident that happened on move in day for my freshman year at college. I met my new roommate and his parents. It was a hot August day even for western NY standards. I asked my roommate with his parents standing there if he knew where the pop machine was. Both he and his parents had this unbelievable shocked look on their faces and didn't say a word. Later that evening my roommate from Long Guyland asked me if they really had pot machines in western NY. That was when I got indoctrinated to the word "soda".

Really saw this gong another direction once you mentioned the roommate... Glad you sorted it out (FACEPALM)

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, wcb said:

I certainly will not debate your expertise and defer to you as the wisest of all men in your field that I have run across(not that I run in the PhD in Applied Mathematics crowd).  My simple point on the UK vs US debate was simply if we (the US) did not break from the UK the world for certain would be very different today.  If we would not have stayed the United States the world would be very different today.  Mr. Andrews points out decisions and actions matter.  Decisions and actions can impact lives and history for generations.  I also like the "real" history but just like any Hollywood movie Mr. Andrews puts an exaggerated flare to his story telling to appeal to wide audience. I have seen his more detailed work and will have to defer to him on his research to fact and embellishment. You would really enjoy picking his story apart on why the solid rocket boosters on the space shuttle were designed off of the width of two horses ass.

I don't mean to claim a status of wise.  I can say in the education world it is tabu to say false things.  It is also poor form to say misleading things.  Some of what Mr Andrew said falls into each category and since he is positioned as if an educator it irked me but I spoke up because I was tagged.  But for sure he is more of an entertainer than an educator, so he can say whatever he wants, true or not, as long as it is entertaining.  It is no more chaos theory or the butterfly effect that says every action has huge outcomes since not every action has huge outcomes, anymore than I have seen statements like "quantum mechanics says" everything is uncertain so it was quantum mechanics that guided Henry Tandey to not shoot the young private Hitler in WWI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Tandey

but in fun jest I always liked this classic poem that is in the spirit of what you were raising, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail  - that small inputs might have large effects - but sometimes an inconsequential horse looses a nail, and the shoe doesn't fall off since there are other nails, and anyway it is a farm horse working the field, so end of story.  In technical work there is an important and critical distinction between the phrase, "for every," "for almost every," and "for some," each of the 3 different, and there are critical real world technologies for each that depend on getting the distinction right at the right time.

For Want of a Nail

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

[aviatoreb]

Interesting moment of this thread start as it yesterday was the certification finally of the Epic 1000 that is a beautiful plane somewhere between a TBM and a Pilatus and now officially the step up plane I dream of if I win a lottery, now displacing the TBM 930 that had formerly held that position of too expensive to ever afford, but cheap enough to dream about plane.  (I don't dream of a Gulfstream).

I wish Mooney had successfully finished the M10.  I wish they had made a next gen M20. I wish they had a M30 turbine version in the works. I wish they would have gone the route of Diamond with a military drone version of the M20 perhaps with a diesel engine for massive range and 24 hour loiter time.  I don't know what is right, but I wish they had a broader portfolio whatever would be the right way to do it, so they could better roll with the punches.

[steingar]

1 hour ago, chrisk said:

There are plenty of experimentals that have wonderful performance.  An Evolution Turbine 750 comes to mind, but it is more than a Mooney.  Perhaps a Vans RV10 is a better example, but it is still nowhere near $35K.

I never said there weren't experimental aircraft that were great performers. There are lots, and they're great aircraft.  What they aren't is cheap.  Don't believe me?  Got look at the price of short bodied Mooneys.  Then look at experimental aircraft that can fly at those speeds (and I mean cruise, not firewalled in a dive).  Very, very few will be available at that price point, and none will be able to carry much more than the pilot and maybe a passenger.  I will repeat, a vintage Money is the biggest bang for your buck in GA.  Simple systems, stout and durable build quality.  Nothing compares.

If you want an experimental aircraft for a fast inexpensive airplane I think you're barking up the wrong tree.  Lots of vintage certificated aircraft can fulfill that role and do it better.  If you like wrenching on your own aircraft an experimental fits the bill.  If you really want to build your own aircraft an experimental fits it better.  But if  you're looking for fast and cheap, nothing but nothing does it better than a Mooney.

[ArtVandelay]

I read into the article they are actively looking for a buyer.  What is the price?  If they are looking for more than the $100 million they bought it for I would bet they are SOL (at least from me...LOL).

No way, potential and pending litigation probably makes the company almost worthless. It would be cheaper just to start a new company.


Tom

[Austintatious]

3 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

No way, potential and pending litigation probably makes the company almost worthless. It would be cheaper just to start a new company.


Tom

Boy, isnt that a sad fact.

[chrixxer]

34 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

I wish they had a broader portfolio whatever would be the right way to do it, so they could better roll with the punches.

I wish they had a more diverse product offering, too. I wish they still made the J/K, for those of us who still value efficiency and don't like the (TS)IO-550 engine. I wish they had a light twin on par with a Baron (or even a Duchess; a FIKI "Twin J" would have been my next plane; fuel injected 200HP IO-360s competing with the Seminole...). Even Cirrus has pushed to have four basic models in their lineup (SR20, SR22, SR22T(N), and now SF50).

[Alan Fox]

41 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Interesting moment of this thread start as it yesterday was the certification finally of the Epic 1000 that is a beautiful plane somewhere between a TBM and a Pilatus and now officially the step up plane I dream of if I win a lottery, now displacing the TBM 930 that had formerly held that position of too expensive to ever afford, but cheap enough to dream about plane.  (I don't dream of a Gulfstream).

I wish Mooney had successfully finished the M10.  I wish they had made a next gen M20. I wish they had a M30 turbine version in the works. I wish they would have gone the route of Diamond with a military drone version of the M20 perhaps with a diesel engine for massive range and 24 hour loiter time.  I don't know what is right, but I wish they had a broader portfolio whatever would be the right way to do it, so they could better roll with the punches.

You have got to be kidding me.....   They cant even get the payload up to a reasonable level , on an aircraft they have been making for 50 years...…   The only people their Planes appeal to , are those that have been flying them before for many years , And the reality is that 90% of those people move into Barons , Bonanzas , and Cirrus , because a Plane has to be Mission capable , to sell..... 

[wcb]

8 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

No way, potential and pending litigation probably makes the company almost worthless. It would be cheaper just to start a new company.


Tom

It will be interesting where it falls.  I do not think the Chinese will just let it go for nothing.  So somewhere between 0 and 100 million (I am sure they want more than 100 million)????? As the article says there is value in the the current assets (hard as well as designs etc) as well as the brand name.

[LANCECASPER]

https://outline.com/cM46PR

@Hyett6420 Andrew is quoted in the Kerrville Times article

[aviatoreb]

3 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

You have got to be kidding me.....   They cant even get the payload up to a reasonable level , on an aircraft they have been making for 50 years...…   The only people their Planes appeal to , are those that have been flying them before for many years , And the reality is that 90% of those people move into Barons , Bonanzas , and Cirrus , because a Plane has to be Mission capable , to sell..... 

I don't follow - which of those paragraphs was the one you think I was kidding?  I wasn't kidding - I was spouting off - similar to kidding but more unleashed.  :-)

[DXB]

4 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

https://outline.com/cM46PR

@Hyett6420 Andrew is quoted in the Kerrville Times article

Depressing.  Here's to hoping a second Chinese (or other) investor with deep pockets revives it, learns from the current owners' mistakes, and revives the company with a successful clean sheet design trainer with mass market appeal.  

[daytonabch04]

Will this cause anyone to think of selling their Mooney in the near future??

[Yetti]

On 11/11/2019 at 7:17 AM, aviatoreb said:

Forget the C182, C210 and Piper Navajo,

I want a P51.  Can I still get factory support for a P51 Mustang when my machine guns need an overhaul?

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/24700307/1944-north-american-p-51-mustang

 

@Hyett6420 said "and that's why you are in the colonies.  Sorry you asked for that one.     Ive told you before, dont have a bitch fight with a Queen, you will lose.  "

To be fair to the queen, I think she overhauled trucks in WWII so I would think she would be fine with an Overhaul of simplistic M2 duces.   Figuring it this way she outlived John Browning.

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by Yetti

[TGreen]

6 minutes ago, DXB said:

Depressing.  Here's to hoping a second Chinese (or other) investor with deep pockets revives it, learns from the current owners' mistakes, and revives the company with a successful clean sheet design trainer with mass market appeal.  

If the market has rejected aluminum, complex, high-performance singles, I don't see what the assets of this company would have to offer to someone who wants to design a trainer from a clean sheet. Is it just that we want to see the name and logo live on?