Will.iam Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said: You may have missed my reply above - Buried in page 26 they Spec out "Project Phoenix" to "Cruise 30K feet". I didn't think that the FAA would certify a GA plane to fly passengers above 25,000 ft without pressurization. I assumed it had to be pressurized to cruise at 30K ft. because you are unconscious in less than a minute. Maybe I am wrong. I wouldn’t assume pressurized, FAA already signed off 28,000 with the 252 Mooney. 30k is only 2k more. Is it safe maybe only if everything is working perfectly. Is it smart to take that big of risk? I don’t think so but there are people who cave dive and skydive that I think has a higher risk than flying imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 Gents, The presentation is a great set of talking points… Expect that if you aren’t in the room while the actual presentation is being given… or part of a zoom meeting… It is going to be incredibly hard to know what the details really are… As far as Useful Time of Consciousness goes… you get a few minutes…. Based on your health and how saturated your blood oxygen is before the O2 runs out… Who is going to be there to set the timer the timer for you? Keep your O2 flowing and have a solid plan B ready to go… just like every other Mooney in the FLs… Just because you can… doesn’t mean you should fly at 30k’…. +1 for pressurized Mooneys! Let’s discuss getting insurance… to fly a Mooney Turbine…. That’s going to be expensive… PP Thoughts only… not current enough to fly above 18k’… Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 That spring isn’t manufactured by Mooney though, is it? (Serious question - I thought that Mooney just bought the springs from a fabricator.)But you can’t get it directly from the manufacturer, or maybe no one has tried? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 9 hours ago, GEE-BEE AEROPRODUCTS said: Please understand the liability cost even before you build the aircraft. We must reduce product liability or nothing will happen. GB More engineers and fewer lawyers would be a starting point. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Ellis Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 7 hours ago, carusoam said: That guy was Victor Kayam… He liked his razor so much he bought the company… Remington Razors… Then he bought Schaefer Stadium (named for the beer) in Foxboro…. Making it Shaver Stadium… You might recognize Shaver Stadium… as it has become Gillette Stadium…. Owned by some guy named Bob Kraft… During that time there was a lesser known football team hanging out in that ancient facility…. They hired some lesser known players…. Like Tony Eason, Drew Bledsoe, and that last guy that wasn’t expect to stay very long… Tom Brady… You might not remember him since he left the Boston area… but, you might remember who his wife is though… Giselle Bundchen…. Yeah… that Giselle… I think that guy may have went on to win another game or two… last known to win a SuperBowl the following year… in a place called Tampa… You all remember Tampa don’t you…? The home of Raymond James Stadium and Mooney Summit! I think most have heard of 6 degrees from Kevin Bacon? Well, this first part from @carusoam reads like 6 degrees from Mooney. I love how you start with a shaving company and bring it around to Mooney. Awesome!!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingslevel Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 The liabilities wouldn't be an issue. A buyer with a good lawyer would do an "asset purchase" which would not include any liabilities. We are basically just talking about the parts business here. If they are still asking $15m, then the sellers haven't come to that reality yet. But the fact that it is listed on bizquest is a clue that the regular sale process hasn't gone well. Bizquest is kind of a last resort. Best case for the Mooney community is someone buys the parts biz and continues to support the fleet. I think the parts biz is only worth half of sales - $500k. Maybe another $100k for the STC's and type certificates. Big question is, how many of the parts have to be made by proprietary molds and tooling? The parts biz is too small to continue manufacturing, I think - they would have to outsource everything. But the tooling and inventory might require a lot of space. This would be a tough deal to do, even if you could buy it all for $600k. Sorry to be the voice of doom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_elliott Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 This is the perfect op for an entity that wants to take their new design to production using the Production certificate Mooney has versus going thru the FAA hoops now in place to obtain one. It may not a backwards tail or yoke however. #LetsGoElon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccray Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 15 minutes ago, wingslevel said: The liabilities wouldn't be an issue. A buyer with a good lawyer would do an "asset purchase" which would not include any liabilities. We are basically just talking about the parts business here. If they are still asking $15m, then the sellers haven't come to that reality yet. But the fact that it is listed on bizquest is a clue that the regular sale process hasn't gone well. Bizquest is kind of a last resort. Best case for the Mooney community is someone buys the parts biz and continues to support the fleet. I think the parts biz is only worth half of sales - $500k. Maybe another $100k for the STC's and type certificates. Big question is, how many of the parts have to be made by proprietary molds and tooling? The parts biz is too small to continue manufacturing, I think - they would have to outsource everything. But the tooling and inventory might require a lot of space. This would be a tough deal to do, even if you could buy it all for $600k. Sorry to be the voice of doom. asset purchase would do that- but- how does an asset purchase affect the production certificate? I'm sure it's movable, but I also suspect it isn't as trivial as a simple asset purchase. I'm not an attorney, but I've played this game in the healthcare space. We execute asset purchases but it isn't a trivial process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Ward Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 13 hours ago, 1980Mooney said: The "Mooney Future" Powerpoint Dec 2020 seems clear to me: Page 11 - US Financial acquires "A MAJORITY STAKE" - As I suspected all along the CHINESE STILL OWN PART OF MOONEY Page 10 - "The Kerrville Factory sits on over 25 acres" - But what it doesn't say is that the FACTORY BUILDINGS AND LAND ARE OWNED BY THE CITY OF KERRVILLE They are in a 20 year lease which is more of a liability than an asset. The leasehold improvements are only of value if Mooney stays there- it is not like something that they own and can move. Mooney International gets new airport lease | News | dailytimes.com Page 12 - Mooney part sales in 2020 were projected to be $1.0 million....ONLY $1 MILLION PER YEAR. Even at 50% or 70% margin on the parts that doesn't even cover overhead for that plant in a year. Now you know why Mooney has to mark everything up about 3 times more than you would pay elsewhere. Page 17 - They point out that the problem is that they have stuck with aluminum and steel too long - "Slow to adopt new materials"....Or as they said to Benjamin in the Graduate - "One word: Plastics" (Actually Jonny Pollack says it in Slide 19) Too much vertical integration, making too much themselves, too much employee turnover in an manhour intensive build process Page 20 - They think by widening cabin, increasing load, adding CAPS/BRS and Autoland and more speed they will "crush" the competition But in reality that is just playing "Catch-Up" Page 21 - They propose to ditch what we consider to be a Mooney and go All Composite.... and later slides with a turboprop or turbine Page 24 - It seems to signal that they consider the market for current legacy aluminum Mooney's to be: $1 million 4 seat planes for millionaires. They see a gap in the market for $1.5-2 million 4 seat planes (jets and turboprops) for multi-millionaires They see the market for 6+ seat jets and turboprops for the uber-rich to be already addressed by others. Page 26 - A Carbon empennage being manufactured next year (2022) for Ovation and Acclaim - sounds like they are ditching the hallmark articulating tail and probably going with a solid tail. So the strategy is to go way upscale but way cheaper than others have been able to deliver. They are going to go "me too" into plastics....composites....just later than the others. "Me too" in wider cabin, CAPS/BRS. And "Me Too" with Piper Meridian in small pressurized turboprops. Like Eclipse was supposed to be to small jets, Mooney will be to small turboprops. A better Piper Meridian M500 minus 2 seats - $500k cheaper, 50 knots faster, and 500 lbs more payload full fuel. Mooney will do what Cirrus, Diamond, Pipistrel and Piper can't do - and quicker and cheaper. A "poor mulit-millionaire's" smaller EPIC E1000. And a product in 2023. Pressurization knowhow from the 1964-70 M22 Mustang?...structural composite knowhow from the 2014-2017 failed M10T?....right. Lots of interesting tidbits but still not too much that a dealmaker would look for: how big is the market and how much can they conceivably take? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertGary1 Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 I’m sure you could streamline the operation to make a small profit off parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A64Pilot Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 1 hour ago, wingslevel said: The liabilities wouldn't be an issue. A buyer with a good lawyer would do an "asset purchase" which would not include any liabilities. I believe that’s exactly what was done when we bought the defunct Ayres Corporation in 02 or 03. But as I’m no Lawyer I can only speculate as to how exactly it was done I know we had no liability for the Rockwell or Ayres manufactured aircraft. As far as liability insurence, you just don’t carry it, you structure the company so that it has little if any value. Story is every so often a Jet full of NY Lawyers descend on little Maule in Moultrie Ga, tours the plant and I’d guess takes a look at assets, then gets back in the Jet and leaves, there isn’t enough there to whet their appetite. You can’t get blood from a turnip. So someone spends big bucks to sue Mooney, what are they going to get? A TC that no one will buy? Only real value Mooney has I’d bet is the Production Certificate. Ayres plant using that PC built and still does many contract parts, some for Boeing, all the 727 cargo doors for Fed-Ex were built the as well as the hush kits. they also built I believe all of the MD 600 fuselages for Mcdonald Douglas for a number of years, we pressed skins for someone who had an STC to replace the Magnesium Beech skins etc. etc. Lots of people want to sell airplane parts for their STC’s etc. but don’t have the capability to manufacture aircraft parts as they don’t have a PC. That would one revenue source, it’s small, but a few bucks here and there helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A64Pilot Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 9 hours ago, ArtVandelay said: But you can’t get it directly from the manufacturer, or maybe no one has tried? Assumption is due to liability as they know where it’s going that they wouldn’t sell it to you. We bought many off the shelf parts, our prop, fuel control and throttle cables were boat steering cables and the company would not sell to the public due to liability for instance, Our trim handle was some kind of lawnmower part if I’m not mistaken, neat lever, it had locks that held it in place until the handle was moved slightly, that unlocked it, but no realistic force could move it when it was locked. Brake Master cylinders came from NAPA and we installed the correct seals for hydraulic seals, fresh air vent cables came from NAPA etc. But I’m nearly certain that when we entered the purchased parts into our Quality control system, that made them legal aircraft parts and “our” parts and that protected NAPA etc. Like Alcoa made the aluminum but the Aircraft manufacturer produced the parts and the Aircraft manufacturer is liable, not Alcoa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chriscalandro Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 The Mooney business plan looks about as realistic as mine, so I’m optimistic. 2023 - convert time machines from Deloreans to teslas 2027 - wheel-less fully self powered time machines 2030 - time machines that create a clone so the operator can be 2 places at once. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 16 hours ago, ZuluZulu said: At this point LASAR and Maxwell (+ other MSCs?) should form a holding company, negotiate a fair price for the type certificate, tooling, inventory, and any other assets worth a darn, and convert whatever is left of Mooney to a parts support/mods business. Liquidate everything else. I wish Mooney could stick around and pump out new planes but it just doesn't look like it's gonna happen. There are approximately 50 MSC’s world wide, myself included. Just what would each of us get for our $300,000 investment in the company? The airframe mod business is pretty much dried up, with many kits no longer available. So far Cirrus is wiping out all of the competition and doesn’t appear to be stopping any time soon. In my case Cirrus airframes represent the single largest portion of my client base. This summer we’ve imported 6 from the US, and helped several other client buy Canadian aircraft. The last Mooney we imported was an 08 Ovation 4 years ago. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricJ Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 2 hours ago, smccray said: asset purchase would do that- but- how does an asset purchase affect the production certificate? I'm sure it's movable, but I also suspect it isn't as trivial as a simple asset purchase. I'm not an attorney, but I've played this game in the healthcare space. We execute asset purchases but it isn't a trivial process. I think that's the rub. If the entity purchased can produce "Mooney" airplanes, it may not be severable from the liability of airplanes produced under that same authority. The parts business may be severable, I dunno, since separating the PMA/factory sorts of authorizations may be just as difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toto Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 42 minutes ago, chriscalandro said: The Mooney business plan looks about as realistic as mine, so I’m optimistic. 2023 - convert time machines from Deloreans to teslas 2027 - wheel-less fully self powered time machines 2030 - time machines that create a clone so the operator can be 2 places at once. Yeah - the slide deck must envision a major infusion of capital. If someone were to write a $1B check, it's certainly possible to execute on this business plan, but "keep the lights on" money isn't going to cut it. The problems that Mooney has are sales and marketing problems. There are very clearly buyers out there who will drop ~$1M on a SEP aircraft. The Mooney Ultras are very nice planes, and I'm confident that it's possible to sell those planes. But with the recent track record, it's hard to see how throwing money at the problem is going to fix anything without a substantially different approach to sales. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TGreen Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 49 minutes ago, toto said: Yeah - the slide deck must envision a major infusion of capital. If someone were to write a $1B check, it's certainly possible to execute on this business plan, but "keep the lights on" money isn't going to cut it. The problems that Mooney has are sales and marketing problems. There are very clearly buyers out there who will drop ~$1M on a SEP aircraft. The Mooney Ultras are very nice planes, and I'm confident that it's possible to sell those planes. But with the recent track record, it's hard to see how throwing money at the problem is going to fix anything without a substantially different approach to sales. If there is no market for the Bonanza, it's hard to believe there is a market for the M20. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZuluZulu Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 1 hour ago, M20Doc said: There are approximately 50 MSC’s world wide, myself included. Just what would each of us get for our $300,000 investment in the company? The airframe mod business is pretty much dried up, with many kits no longer available. So far Cirrus is wiping out all of the competition and doesn’t appear to be stopping any time soon. In my case Cirrus airframes represent the single largest portion of my client base. This summer we’ve imported 6 from the US, and helped several other client buy Canadian aircraft. The last Mooney we imported was an 08 Ovation 4 years ago. Clarence I said negotiate a fair price, not that you should all pay $15 million. Pennies on the dollar, for the reasons you state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZuluZulu Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 15 hours ago, carusoam said: Gents, The presentation is a great set of talking points… Expect that if you aren’t in the room while the actual presentation is being given… or part of a zoom meeting… It is going to be incredibly hard to know what the details really are… Obviously they were not very persuasive in person, either... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertGary1 Posted October 19, 2021 Report Share Posted October 19, 2021 6 hours ago, EricJ said: I think that's the rub. If the entity purchased can produce "Mooney" airplanes, it may not be severable from the liability of airplanes produced under that same authority. The parts business may be severable, I dunno, since separating the PMA/factory sorts of authorizations may be just as difficult. That’s the company has changed its name so many times over the decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A64Pilot Posted October 20, 2021 Report Share Posted October 20, 2021 7 hours ago, EricJ said: I think that's the rub. If the entity purchased can produce "Mooney" airplanes, it may not be severable from the liability of airplanes produced under that same authority. The parts business may be severable, I dunno, since separating the PMA/factory sorts of authorizations may be just as difficult. They could produce everything on the type certificate as well as parts, without any liability for products produced before they purchased the company, I know because we did. Issue is as many have said, is there a market for Mooney’s anymore considering what they would cost? Even if I had it I doubt I’d pay $800,000 for a J model for instance Look at how many GA aircraft are manufactured by anyone, compared today to the 1970’s. It’s not hard to make the case that any small aircraft manufacturing is as I’ve heard it put a buggy whip manufacturer, there just isn’t a market. From what I can tell there are 20,000 fewer Ga aircraft in the US than there was 12 years ago. What I was wanting to do was find Cessna’s production from say 1976 and compare it to Cirrus of the last few years, last year may have been a bust due to Covid, But I couldn’t find any Cessna data so I gave up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2021 Report Share Posted October 20, 2021 The builders of Van’s Aircraft models have certainly shown there is a market, it’s just not for FiKI fire breathing airplanes. Fun affordable planes seem to be doing fine. Almost 11,000 so far. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A64Pilot Posted October 20, 2021 Report Share Posted October 20, 2021 Way we got Thrush was Ayres Corp went bankrupt, Quality Aerospace I believe was the major debtor and they got it and ran it as a parts business for awhile, we bought it from them for not much really and restarted aircraft production. Our Lawyers structured the buy specifically so that we cut the liability tail from previous manufacturers 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A64Pilot Posted October 20, 2021 Report Share Posted October 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, M20Doc said: The builders of Van’s Aircraft models have certainly shown there is a market, it’s just not for FiKI fire breathing airplanes. Fun affordable planes seem to be doing fine. Almost 11,000 so far. Clarence I don’t believe until recently that Vans was an aircraft manufacturer and in fact most of their business is still likely kits? Which isn’t to say that’s not a model to pursue, but there is very little similarity to a Certified production aircraft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toto Posted October 20, 2021 Report Share Posted October 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, GEE-BEE AEROPRODUCTS said: I would like to chat about the prototype pressurized turbine mooney out of Chino California , but I have a non disclosure That topic sounds like fun Maybe Blue on Top has some insight that’s not NDA’d? @blueontop 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.