Lasar Aviation Mooney Assurance Program - Really?

[Echo]

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

That is a personal attack.  Do better.  You can not like an opinion without being an (not getting a strike).  

[Parker_Woodruff]

2 hours ago, hazek said:

I'm just being rational and am looking at the situation. This situation didn't just happen. There are objective reasons for it. I'm sure people involved will have plenty of excuses but at the end of the day they are failing. And that's the bottom line.

 

 

It's a massive footprint for a product that doesn't have economies of scale.  Because the product doesn't sell in this small aviation market to the levels it needs to.  This is some of the lowest cost labor in the country and the people have been furloughed and brought back so many times.

There isn't some vast management structure there day in and day out.

[Tom F]

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

Here is a better answer.  LASAR doesn't give a crap about MooneySpace. or its members.  The last time they even visited or looked at a MS page was 3 1/2 years ago.  The last time (actually first and last) that they posted anything or answered any question on MS was eight (8) years ago in 2017 during the month that they joined.  At the time they just used it for a few marketing posts to say they were moving.  I would be willing to bet the only reason that they show up visiting MS after 2017 is because someone with fat fingers accidentally clicked on the MooneySpace site.......

Based on the level of negativity and cynicism if I owned Lasar or any other vendor courting Mooney owners this would be the last place I’d consider using. This is about saving a brand each and every one of us is a stakeholder in.  As an investment, WilliamR is right the history of this company is atrocious.  As is stated in every investment I’ve made “past results are not indicative of future performance”.  We’re certainly starting at the bottom of the barrel.  Once again this is an impassioned plea for ideas.  Tons of knowledgeable owners here whose net worths are literally in the billions. Thanks in advance for your ideas.

[Echo]

Some on here are too close to Kerrville Mooney.  Maybe it is because they are sentimental.  Maybe it is because they know some individuals that work there.  This is about the business of supplying critical parts at this point.  Based on what Laser has thrown out And having to source my own actuator I have zero faith in Mooney and or Lasar to service the vintage fleet in a timely affordable clear open and honest fashion.  It is a strip tease that goes on and on and on, but there is nothing sexy about the show venue, performers or music.  Parts for the most part can be obtained for vintage Mooneys.  THAT is how I will continue, as I have for 25 years to maintain my plane.  This is not off broadway, it is back alley.  Good luck on the return on investment of your parts plan purchase.  Gonna work out great.

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, Tom F said:

Based on the level of negativity and cynicism if I owned Lasar or any other vendor courting Mooney owners this would be the last place I’d consider using.

Hmm, more like realism and ignoring direct market feedback from owners and potential customers sounds kinda dumb…amateur hour, frankly.

1 hour ago, Tom F said:

This is about saving a brand each and every one of us is a stakeholder in.

No, it’s about running a business and turning a profit. I’m not, never have been, and very much doubt I will ever will be a stakeholder. Mooney has always had a pretty checkered business past that is not in alignment with my investment criteria

1 hour ago, Tom F said:

As an investment, WilliamR is right the history of this company is atrocious

I don’t believe that’s what he said. I read that he found Lasar’s approach pretty atrocious; I’d have to agree 100% with that assessment!

[LANCECASPER]

On 10/17/2025 at 7:24 PM, Echo said:

That is a personal attack.  Do better.  You can not like an opinion without being an (not getting a strike).  

Not at all. It was the most restrained thing I possibly could have said for one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seen on Mooneyspace. I will not respond on this subject further.

The attack was by him on Mooney personnel whom he has never met that work at a place he has never been. They could work anywhere else and have a lot better job security and better pay and benefits. Many of them are supporting the airplanes they and their parents help build, now under adverse circumstances. They deserve better than that. I would defend any of you in the same situation.

 

[Echo]

34 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Not at all. It was the most restrained thing I possibly could have said for one the most ignorant posts I've ever seen on Mooneyspace. I will not respond further.

Reported.

[1980Mooney]

2 hours ago, Tom F said:

Based on the level of negativity and cynicism if I owned Lasar or any other vendor courting Mooney owners this would be the last place I’d consider using. This is about saving a brand each and every one of us is a stakeholder in.  As an investment, WilliamR is right the history of this company is atrocious.  As is stated in every investment I’ve made “past results are not indicative of future performance”.  We’re certainly starting at the bottom of the barrel.  Once again this is an impassioned plea for ideas.  Tons of knowledgeable owners here whose net worths are literally in the billions. Thanks in advance for your ideas.

It is easy to confuse realism with cynicism.  Some of us have owned our Mooney since last century and have seen multiple bankruptcies, company owners come and go and the factory shut down multiple times, the longest being five (5) years with  without the prospect of ever restarting.  Yet we kept our Mooney's flying.  

There seems to be a lot of "panic, the end is near... so you need to send money now" for a proposal that is slick schlock.  Be honest - the pitch is "sign up and send money now - we will work out the details later".  The Letter reads like a pyramid (ponzi) scheme presentation from the '70's.  (Does anyone remember the "Dare to Be Great" ponzi scheme?!!).  I am too old to mince words with niceties.

If LASAR wanted to be serious they would provide more detail on how they propose to use the money to support the fleet, and what portion will actually be supported.  They would do some homework and share some facts - more than "We have a plan", "Reduce the risk", "access to KPI's", "piloting Ask Mooney".

Surely, they can do more analysis and work than me. 

I searched the US, Canada and Australian Registries.  There are 6,823 Mooney's registered in those 3 countries.  Obviously there are a few more in Europe and with less in South America and Africa but this probably represents about 95% of the world fleet.  The data is current as of just before the shutdown.

• 159 are not M20 - they are the Mooney version of Ercoupe, A10's, M18's and M22's
• 96 are wood wing M20 and M20A
• 2,431 are Short Body
  • 116 M20B
  • 1.351 M20C
  • 88 M20D
  • 876 M20E
• 3,212 are Mid Body
  • 770 M20F
  • 126 M20G
  • 1,492 M20J
  • 824 M20K
• Only 925 are Long Body
  • 17 M20L
  • 263 M20M
  • 427 M20R
  • 60 M20S
  • 128 M20TN
  • 12 M20U
  • 18 M20V

This is about "unobtanium" parts unique to everyone's' particular Mooney that they are panicked about being AOG. So what do you think the money will go towards?  It can't be for everyone/every model.

The F's share much with the early J's.  Combined that is 33% of the worldwide fleet right there.  C's alone comprise another 20% of the worldwide fleet.  Short and Mid body Mooney's comprise 83% of the worldwide fleet.

If you look at the parts manuals, you will see that the M and early R's have a lot of commonalities excluding firewall forward.  Later R's have more commonalities with the S and TN.  U's and V's are unicorns.  In total that is about 13% of the fleet but split somewhat.

So shouldn't LASAR focus first on Mid bodies and then Short bodies?  Why spend time and money on Long bodies that are only 13% of the fleet? ..... Oh right - Long body owners will pay more. 

• Perhaps the reality is that LASAR will focus on only Long bodies as one of the early posts feared.
• Mid and Short body owners need to know LASAR's intentions BEFORE sending Assurance Plan funds.

This is just common sense.  LASAR can do better.

Edited Saturday at 03:40 AM by 1980Mooney

[tim417]

This is how I read the situation:

LASAR is pushing the message that Mooney may go under, and to be fair, that’s a real possibility. They’re leveraging that sentiment to sell what looks like a prepaid membership program, asking owners to inject capital into a LASAR/Mooney relationship that remains opaque to the public. Owners are being asked to fund this project on the assumption that parts availability will improve and that discounts and priority access will be honored long-term.

Unfortunately, several red flags stand out. There’s no information about which parts or models will be prioritized, what discount tiers will look like, or even what “priority ordering” actually means. It’s a funding-first, value-second approach. They’re asking for money before quantifying what they’ll deliver. No matter how much Mooney owners want to help, that doesn’t foster trust or goodwill.

What would build trust instead is real transparency:

– What are the deliverables for membership?

– What are the timelines?

– Which parts and models will be prioritized first?

– What will pricing and discount structures look like?

Show us a parts roadmap. What’s available now, what’s in the pipeline, what’s planned, and projected pricing. Hiding that information behind higher contribution tiers only fuels suspicion. Other transparency items:

– What’s the projected annual cost to keep Mooney operational?

– How exactly will membership funds be allocated?

– What happens to unspent funds if this program folds?

And beyond finances, I’d like to see LASAR actively engage the Mooney community:  participate here, contribute to the Mooney Flyer, sponsor the Mooney Safety Foundation PPP program, or support training initiatives. I might be wrong but their only recent participation has been their pitch at the recent Mooney Summit. Sustained involvement in these established community channels would go a long way toward establishing trust and goodwill.

I’m not rooting for LASAR to fail, I’m rooting them and Mooney owners to work and thrive together.

[Schllc]

The factory has records of what has been ordered over the last 30 years. There does not need to be a generation or model specific priority.  
First, it should actually be based on what has been ordered, because that is the actual demand.  For example…

Im sure main, and nose gear doors, steps, belly pans and lower cowlings are pretty popular given the number of gear up landings. 
Nose gear trusses from towing damage or engine baffles, and so on. 
I don’t think defining what would get attention would be difficult, controversial, nor alienating to anyone. If you select the top 50 parts being ordered to start, you’re going to make most of the fleet pretty happy. 
Step two would perhaps identify the next tier, something like top 50 AOG parts like the intake boot I’ve read about, or the gear actuator, or the back spring. 
They could also do a survey of the top 10 parts concerns of Mooney owners. 
This would be tricky because of participation, but you have to start somewhere.  
Asking MSC”s for their wish list is another source. 
If you can find out what people actually need and focus there first it would be much easier to separate people from their money.

Im refraining from criticizing them at this juncture because they appear to be the only option and I’d like to be optimistic. The only real sin so far seems to be poor planning, and communication.  They can still salvage the faith if they figure it out soon…

[Tom F]

8 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

It is easy to confuse realism with cynicism.  Some of us have owned our Mooney since last century and have seen multiple bankruptcies, company owners come and go and the factory shut down multiple times, the longest being five (5) years with  without the prospect of ever restarting.  Yet we kept our Mooney's flying.  

There seems to be a lot of "panic, the end is near... so you need to send money now" for a proposal that is slick schlock.  Be honest - the pitch is "sign up and send money now - we will work out the details later".  The Letter reads like a pyramid (ponzi) scheme presentation from the '70's.  (Does anyone remember the "Dare to Be Great" ponzi scheme?!!).  I am too old to mince words with niceties.

If LASAR wanted to be serious they would provide more detail on how they propose to use the money to support the fleet, and what portion will actually be supported.  They would do some homework and share some facts - more than "We have a plan", "Reduce the risk", "access to KPI's", "piloting Ask Mooney".

Surely, they can do more analysis and work than me. 

I searched the US, Canada and Australian Registries.  There are 6,823 Mooney's registered in those 3 countries.  Obviously there are a few more in Europe and with less in South America and Africa but this probably represents about 95% of the world fleet.  The data is current as of just before the shutdown.

• 159 are not M20 - they are the Mooney version of Ercoupe, A10's, M18's and M22's
• 96 are wood wing M20 and M20A
• 2,431 are Short Body
  • 116 M20B
  • 1.351 M20C
  • 88 M20D
  • 876 M20E
• 3,212 are Mid Body
  • 770 M20F
  • 126 M20G
  • 1,492 M20J
  • 824 M20K
• Only 925 are Long Body
  • 17 M20L
  • 263 M20M
  • 427 M20R
  • 60 M20S
  • 128 M20TN
  • 12 M20U
  • 18 M20V

This is about "unobtanium" parts unique to everyone's' particular Mooney that they are panicked about being AOG. So what do you think the money will go towards?  It can't be for everyone/every model.

The F's share much with the early J's.  Combined that is 33% of the worldwide fleet right there.  C's alone comprise another 20% of the worldwide fleet.  Short and Mid body Mooney's comprise 83% of the worldwide fleet.

If you look at the parts manuals, you will see that the M and early R's have a lot of commonalities excluding firewall forward.  Later R's have more commonalities with the S and TN.  U's and V's are unicorns.  In total that is about 13% of the fleet but split somewhat.

So shouldn't LASAR focus first on Mid bodies and then Short bodies?  Why spend time and money on Long bodies that are only 13% of the fleet? ..... Oh right - Long body owners will pay more. 

• Perhaps the reality is that LASAR will focus on only Long bodies as one of the early posts feared.
• Mid and Short body owners need to know LASAR's intentions BEFORE sending Assurance Plan funds.

This is just common sense.  LASAR can do better.

With all due respect, if you’ve owned your airplane for a month or for 50 years doesn’t give you any more or less ability to get parts if Mooney goes tits up.  I’ve read your post a couple of times and you appear to assume this is some sort of a long body program. I’m curious about this. I have failed to interpret this the way you have and looking over the Lasar website (which I agree lacks details) I don’t see anything that indicates shorts and mid’s wouldn’t be the focus. Either you have information to back your statements above, or you’re full of shit. These birds are well manufactured and parts wear out over time. It makes sense a 40 year old plane would have parts wear out before a 20 year old model.
 

I’m fully aware of the fleet size and although I am a long body guy, Lasar would be nuts to craft any program around long bodies.  I have zero knowledge of what parts the factory makes or has demand for and I am 100% sure nobody on this forum has that information.  The short and mid’s are the key to saving Mooney in its present form.  Damn near everyone in this forum has thrown a shovel full of dirt in the grave.  In following and posting in this thread there have been a few helpful ideas spring up which is great.  Has any one from this group picked up the phone and called Lasar?  
 

If you read my posts you should see that I have respectfully asked the collective group repeatedly for ideas to an eminent problem.  Most responses seem to be based on 2 theories, 1. parts will magically appear from the parts fairy of airframes past or 2. the factory, the ability for the factory to produce parts, documentation and engineering is just not worth it.

I hope I’m wrong but if Mooney goes out of business I am fairly certain the value of the fleet decreases. This thesis is my sole interest in saving the company.
 

One common thread exists we are all Mooney owners.  Have a great Saturday and safe travels wherever the Mooney fleet takes you next.

[Shadrach]

The ideal buyer for the remaining assets is Univair. They’ve cracked the model for maintaining profitability by manufacturing parts for orphaned type certificates.  They understand the business side; they understand the regulatory side. Mooney doesn’t need more dreamers to keep the fleet flying. They need an experienced manufacturer that already understands how to be profitable selling parts for certificated aircraft.

[Tom F]

14 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Interesting comment.  So you think US Financial, LLC (Wyoming), the "so called" 80% Owner is just a cover for foreign owners? For years, foreign entities and cybercriminals have used Wyoming LLC's to hide their identity.

 

I know who the owners are. You should really become more knowledgeable before commenting. The information is not that difficult to obtain.  
 

Whoever you are, 1980, you hide behind the anonymity of a handle, and you have made posts you can’t substantiate. Seeing Mooney fail seems to be a blood sport for you.  
 

Have a great day!!

[Tom F]

15 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

The ideal buyer for the remaining assets is Univair. They’ve cracked the model for maintaining profitability by manufacturing parts for orphaned type certificates.  They understand the business side, they understand the regulatory side. Mooney doesn’t need more dreamers to keep the fleet flying. They need an experience manufacturer that is already profitable selling parts for other certificates aircraft.

15 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

The ideal buyer for the remaining assets is Univair. They’ve cracked the model for maintaining profitability by manufacturing parts for orphaned type certificates.  They understand the business side, they understand the regulatory side. Mooney doesn’t need more dreamers to keep the fleet flying. They need an experience manufacturer that is already profitable selling parts for other certificates aircraft.

Agreed, but for whatever reason they’ve not stepped up. In the current Mooney ecosystem either Lasar or Maxwell would seem to be the naturals to take the lead. 

[Paul Thomas]

14 minutes ago, Tom F said:

I hope I’m wrong but if Mooney goes out of business I am fairly certain the value of the fleet decreases. This thesis is my sole interest in saving the company.

The cost of saving the company likely outweighs the decrease in value of the fleet.

Let's say we can waive a magic wand and everyone in the fleet invest the appropriate amount of money in LASAR to "save the fleet", I'd still think it's a bad investment. We'd be better off waiting like sharks for the bankruptcy and taking the company then. I haven't seen anything from LASAR to lead me to believe they can competently accomplish what I'll call a merger. The current LASAR is not the old LASAR that many depended on and loved.

A better plan would have been for Mooney to start factory annuals, paint jobs, etc. Get the business going and providing for itself; the facilities are there and sit unused. How hard would it have been to partner with a painter and make it a win/win? There were plenty of low cost solution to enhance and help the business instead of continuing to dig a financial hole.

[Tom F]

4 minutes ago, Paul Thomas said:

The cost of saving the company likely outweighs the decrease in value of the fleet.

Let's say we can waive a magic wand and everyone in the fleet invest the appropriate amount of money in LASAR to "save the fleet", I'd still think it's a bad investment. We'd be better off waiting like sharks for the bankruptcy and taking the company then. I haven't seen anything from LASAR to lead me to believe they can competently accomplish what I'll call a merger. The current LASAR is not the old LASAR that many depended on and loved.

A better plan would have been for Mooney to start factory annuals, paint jobs, etc. Get the business going and providing for itself; the facilities are there and sit unused. How hard would it have been to partner with a painter and make it a win/win? There were plenty of low cost solution to enhance and help the business instead of continuing to dig a financial hole.

I could be and probably am off a little but if 6500 planes average $150k that’s $975,000,000. A nominal 5% decrease in value is $48,750,000. My cocktail napkin calculation thinks a new owner could do what Lasar is attempting for maybe $6-8mm.

I certainly agree with you completely on the services that could be offered as an add on to the revenue stream.

[tim417]

5 hours ago, Schllc said:

The factory has records of what has been ordered over the last 30 years. There does not need to be a generation or model specific priority.  
First, it should actually be based on what has been ordered, because that is the actual demand.  For example…

Im sure main, and nose gear doors, steps, belly pans and lower cowlings are pretty popular given the number of gear up landings. 
Nose gear trusses from towing damage or engine baffles, and so on. 
I don’t think defining what would get attention would be difficult, controversial, nor alienating to anyone. If you select the top 50 parts being ordered to start, you’re going to make most of the fleet pretty happy. 
Step two would perhaps identify the next tier, something like top 50 AOG parts like the intake boot I’ve read about, or the gear actuator, or the back spring. 
They could also do a survey of the top 10 parts concerns of Mooney owners. 
This would be tricky because of participation, but you have to start somewhere.  
Asking MSC”s for their wish list is another source. 
If you can find out what people actually need and focus there first it would be much easier to separate people from their money.

Im refraining from criticizing them at this juncture because they appear to be the only option and I’d like to be optimistic. The only real sin so far seems to be poor planning, and communication.  They can still salvage the faith if they figure it out soon…

I agree with this. Bur before I give any money to any membership or subscription model, I want to see exactly where the priorities will be. Right now, everything is completely opaque. 

[WilliamR]

A turn around of Mooney would simply start with a focus on the typical first steps for a turnaround; overhead and WC.

To be clear, my comments earlier were not primarily focused on Mooney's past. If that's the only thing someone gets from my post, they really missed the mark.  

The timing of the solicitation for Privates and the whole idea of a subscription model is a huge red flag.  It's a very typical play for a company desperate for cash and is usually the last gasp before it closes.

Summary: this is a train wreck, I would not give LASAR any money upfront until they have a very clear and saliant list of what the issues are and how they plan to overcome them. Don't hold your breathe for that. Neither Mooney nor LASAR seem to have that ability or experience.

OK, this has been fun. I need to focus on the M&A deals that actually make me money.

Oh, and if someone gets the Private Placement Memorandum, please do NOT share it or a summary of it. Again, that's MNPI.

William Rutkowski

[Marc_B]

There are LOTS of parts on a Mooney that weren't made by Mooney...

Rochester Dials - wing sight fuel gauges, Globe Motors - cowl flap motor, Voltage regulators, speed brakes, flap/trim indicators, potentiometers, luggage door handles, rod ends, and on and on...

Most of these companies would deal direct to a manufacturer and all of them have a minimum parts order.  With the proper capital a company could meet min orders for a variety of different parts and with the sale of said parts they could spring off the profit.  Most of these parts have been previously sold by Lasar or Mooney for 2-3+ times what it cost to buy from OEM.

However, Mooney doesn't have the capital laying around to invest in a bunch of parts.  Lasar would like to have a bunch of parts, but that's a lot of money laying on the shelf and some may not have a quick turnover.  A member funded subscription service where the owners foot the initial capital investment sounds similar to what's being offered.  Of course that's all speculation.

 

I've seen it posted multiple times on this forum that "if the existing Mooney owners all offered up "$X" that would be a sizeable amount to turn Mooney around."  Sounds like this was born off that sentiment.

 

[DCarlton]

In terms of Mooney unique parts, In the 20 years I've owned my airplane, I've needed a flap hinge, an intake boot (twice) and an interior door handle bracket.  Got the bracket from salvage.  Everything else was purchased directly from other sources or overhauled.  At most, $2K in parts in 20 years.  Putting money forward for parts would be insurance for something that might happen.  Salvage parts seems like the future; that's why I like my F; they made a bunch; enough to support a salvage pipeline.  But no one wants to discuss the salvage business and how to pump that up or organize it.

[Echo]

An example of how Lasar is going to work going forward is available to review in Vintage section.  It discusses the ask (Up front payment by 50 owners at a cost of $1400+ for a gear actuator THAT MUST BE SENT IN To LASAR) (grounding your plane) with an estimated 18 week or 4+ months WHEN they get 50 paid orders.

No thank you.

[Tom F]

16 minutes ago, Marc_B said:

There are LOTS of parts on a Mooney that weren't made by Mooney...

Rochester Dials - wing sight fuel gauges, Globe Motors - cowl flap motor, Voltage regulators, speed brakes, flap/trim indicators, potentiometers, luggage door handles, rod ends, and on and on...

Most of these companies would deal direct to a manufacturer and all of them have a minimum parts order.  With the proper capital a company could meet min orders for a variety of different parts and with the sale of said parts they could spring off the profit.  Most of these parts have been previously sold by Lasar or Mooney for 2-3+ times what it cost to buy from OEM.

However, Mooney doesn't have the capital laying around to invest in a bunch of parts.  Lasar would like to have a bunch of parts, but that's a lot of money laying on the shelf and some may not have a quick turnover.  A member funded subscription service where the owners foot the initial capital investment sounds similar to what's being offered.  Of course that's all speculation.

 

I've seen it posted multiple times on this forum that "if the existing Mooney owners all offered up "$X" that would be a sizeable amount to turn Mooney around."  Sounds like this was born off that sentiment.

 

Yes you are correct.  OEM have largely Mooney specified parts and will only sell them to Mooney. The costs of engineering inventory and running a business would dictate a 3x cost on said OEM parts.

I equate any assurance program or other form of support like buying an EAA lifetime membership at 60 years old.  It’s purely for a belief in the cause and because I care enough to support them.  The financial ROI isn’t a concern.  
The amount of money I spend on my airplane isn’t exactly a good ROI, it’s a lifestyle choice. Sure it’s convenient and saves some time over airline travel, but really I could survive without the plane.

 

[tim417]

14 minutes ago, Tom F said:

Yes you are correct.  OEM have largely Mooney specified parts and will only sell them to Mooney. The costs of engineering inventory and running a business would dictate a 3x cost on said OEM parts.

I equate any assurance program or other form of support like buying an EAA lifetime membership at 60 years old.  It’s purely for a belief in the cause and because I care enough to support them.  The financial ROI isn’t a concern.  
The amount of money I spend on my airplane isn’t exactly a good ROI, it’s a lifestyle choice. Sure it’s convenient and saves some time over airline travel, but really I could survive without the plane.

 

RE: The LASAR program

As far as I'm concerned, this isn't purely an ROI decision. This is more of an issue where LASAR is asking for a fairly large financial commitment and blind faith it will help the factory stay afloat, with nearly zero details as to how the money will be used. Teasing swag and quarterly reports for the highest tier contributors is not compelling nor does it build trust. There needs to be far more transparancy.

 

[Tom F]

2 hours ago, tim417 said:

RE: The LASAR program

As far as I'm concerned, this isn't purely an ROI decision. This is more of an issue where LASAR is asking for a fairly large financial commitment and blind faith it will help the factory stay afloat, with nearly zero details as to how the money will be used. Teasing swag and quarterly reports for the highest tier contributors is not compelling nor does it build trust. There needs to be far more transparancy.

 

Tim, 100% agree. 

[Pinecone]

On 10/17/2025 at 11:11 AM, 1980Mooney said:

You are right - context is missing.

Where in all its transparency has LASAR announced that it is trying to acquire Mooney International in its entirety?  Maybe I have been asleep.  Please point me to the discussion/statement.

And please elaborate on how LASAR is covering the payroll of Mooney International which is a separate legal entity - cash infusion by prepayment of future parts orders?  A loan?

It was covered at the presentation at Mooney MAX.