AOPA Twin Comanche

[Rosspilot]

Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
called you up and told you it was yours.

Keep or sell?



www.Rosspilot.com

[Gig Giacona]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>

I'd get my Multi in it then sell it.

[Peter MacPherson]

I would keep it and sell my current plane. For a twin, you can't
beat the speed for the fuel you burn. Then throw in all those
nice new toys......hmmmmm.....very nice airplane.


"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

[Dale]

In article >,
(Rosspilot) wrote:

> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?

If I could swing the insurance I'd keep her for a while at
least...assuming I could pay the taxes.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Jay Honeck]

> Keep or sell?

Keep it, get my multi rating, use up that $5000 gas credit -- and then sell
it.

It's a cool plane, but I don't need (or want) a twin.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[zatatime]

On 01 Dec 2004 21:46:16 GMT, (Rosspilot)
wrote:

>Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
>called you up and told you it was yours.
>
>Keep or sell?
>

Keep it, sell my 235 (sorry Jay), get a partner, and put that money
toward finishing my Cub and paying for gas!!

What a life that would be.

z

[Dave S]

All these people who are keeping it are prepared to pay the "income tax"
hit from winning the plane at the end of the tax year, right?

Whats the value of the Twin Commanche? And.. 30% of that is??? (just
rough round numbers...)

Dave

Rosspilot wrote:

> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

[Nathan Young]

It is an awesome plane. They did a beautiful job restoring it.

I would keep it, fly the heck out of it, and smile all the time... I
wonder what the cost basis is for the plane for tax purposes?

-Nathan





On 01 Dec 2004 21:46:16 GMT, (Rosspilot)
wrote:

>Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
>called you up and told you it was yours.
>
>Keep or sell?
>
>
>
>www.Rosspilot.com
>

[Kyle Boatright]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com

Sell the RV-6 to pay the taxes on the Twin Commanche, then build an RV-3A so
I can bring out even more of my inner fighter pilot...

The inner fighter pilot in me who *almost* bounced a flight of 6-10 high
wing taildraggers once upon a time. Luckily, my senses prevented this
naughty act, which might have resulted in something bad happening. I later
learned that this was a formation flight for the funeral service of a local
aviator, so bouncing it would have been extremely bad mojo.

KB

[G.R. Patterson III]

Rosspilot wrote:
>
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?

Sell it, pay the taxes (about 42% of the value), and fix up the Maule.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dave S wrote:
>
> Whats the value of the Twin Commanche?

According to AOPA, the current value of the "project" is $225,500.

> And.. 30% of that is??? (just
> rough round numbers...)

$67,650.

And in my case, the State of New Jersey wants their 6% income tax and 6% usage
tax, for an additional $27,060.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Nathan Young wrote:
>
> I would keep it, fly the heck out of it, and smile all the time... I
> wonder what the cost basis is for the plane for tax purposes?

$225,500. So far.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[BTIZ]

I'd finance part of it for what I need to pay the taxes and a few years
insurance and fly it for a while.. and see what happens then.. I'm sure AOPA
would "cover expenses" to have it show up at a few airshows or Conventions
sponsored by AOPA for membership marketing purposes.

BT

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

[BTIZ]

no income tax here... but it would hit the "personal property tax" which
would be about $2K per year

BT

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Dave S wrote:
>>
>> Whats the value of the Twin Commanche?
>
> According to AOPA, the current value of the "project" is $225,500.
>
>> And.. 30% of that is??? (just
>> rough round numbers...)
>
> $67,650.
>
> And in my case, the State of New Jersey wants their 6% income tax and 6%
> usage
> tax, for an additional $27,060.
>
> George Patterson
> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to
> have
> been looking for it.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
(Rosspilot) wrote:

> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?

Sell my 140 and try very hard to keep the comanche.

and I'd have a ball explaining to a certain Mike D. how I got
his airplane (inside joke).

--
Bob Noel

[Dave S]

God Bless Texas :)

No personal property tax on personal use airplanes..

No State Income Tax.

Dave

BTIZ wrote:
> no income tax here... but it would hit the "personal property tax" which
> would be about $2K per year
>
> BT
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>>Dave S wrote:
>>
>>>Whats the value of the Twin Commanche?
>>
>>According to AOPA, the current value of the "project" is $225,500.
>>
>>
>>>And.. 30% of that is??? (just
>>>rough round numbers...)
>>
>>$67,650.
>>
>>And in my case, the State of New Jersey wants their 6% income tax and 6%
>>usage
>>tax, for an additional $27,060.
>>
>>George Patterson
>> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to
>>have
>> been looking for it.
>
>
>

[Bob Fry]

Dale > writes:

> If I could swing the insurance I'd keep her for a while at
> least...assuming I could pay the taxes.

If I had a pig, I could make a ham-and-cheese sandwich, if I had a cow
to make milk for cheese.

I'd sell the damn thing. The taxes would kill me.

[Bob Fry]

"BTIZ" > writes:

> no income tax here... but it would hit the "personal property tax" which
> would be about $2K per year

You don't live in the US and thus not subject to Federal income tax?

[Bob Fry]

"Kyle Boatright" > writes:

> then build an RV-3A so
> I can bring out even more of my inner fighter pilot...

Ahhh...one of those personality types that we were talking about in
another thread...that raises statistical accident rates....:-)

[Kyle Boatright]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Kyle Boatright" > writes:
>
>> then build an RV-3A so
>> I can bring out even more of my inner fighter pilot...
>
> Ahhh...one of those personality types that we were talking about in
> another thread...that raises statistical accident rates....:-)

"Those" people are dangerous, no doubt.

I, on the other hand, have an excellent safety record and plan to continue
to only *contemplating* stupid things, instead of actually doing them.. ;-)

[Jose]

> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?

Sell. I'm not twin rated, and don't fly enough to be safe in a twin.
I might use the money for a nice single, and pull in a few partners.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Thomas Borchert]

Rosspilot,

> Keep or sell?
>

Sell and get a shiny new single.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Dave,

> Whats the value of the Twin Commanche? And.. 30% of that is??? (just
> rough round numbers...)
>

200k, 60k

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Bob,

> You don't live in the US and thus not subject to Federal income tax?
>

If he doesn't, he's not eligible to win, anyway. Read the fine print...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Nathan Young]

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:49:50 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Nathan Young wrote:
>>
>> I would keep it, fly the heck out of it, and smile all the time... I
>> wonder what the cost basis is for the plane for tax purposes?
>
>$225,500. So far.

Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
cost basis be the market value?

[James M. Knox]

Thomas Borchert > wrote in
:

>> Keep or sell?
>>
> Sell and get a shiny new single.

I'd keep it, no question.

This is one of those individual things, different folks with different
needs and desires. For example, if I had won the Waco, make a couple of
fun flights with an instructor and then sell it. But the Arrow -- much
nicer than MY Arrow, but I would hate to give up my turbo. Hard decision.

By the way, what do you mean "*if* Phil calls." I'm *counting* on it!!!
<G>

jmk

[Jim Burns]

Wouldn't your cost basis be the amount of money that you paid to aquire it?
(the taxes) Then the remainder of the value be considered capital gains
should you sell it?
Jim

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:49:50 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Nathan Young wrote:
> >>
> >> I would keep it, fly the heck out of it, and smile all the time... I
> >> wonder what the cost basis is for the plane for tax purposes?
> >
> >$225,500. So far.
>
> Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
> cost basis be the market value?
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 11/19/2004

[G.R. Patterson III]

Nathan Young wrote:
>
> Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
> cost basis be the market value?

In the case of purchased items, it's what AOPA paid for them. In the case of
donated items, it's what AOPA would have paid for all the labor and materials
had they not been donated.

Which brings up another point. If you keep the plane, you pay taxes on whatever
AOPA says the value is. If you sell the plane, you pay taxes on what you got for
it. Which is probably a lot less than $225,500.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[C Kingsbury]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.

Use it to get my multi and commercial tickets then sell it for a down
payment on a condo.

-cwk.

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Thomas Borchert > writes:

> > You don't live in the US and thus not subject to Federal income tax?
> If he doesn't, he's not eligible to win, anyway. Read the fine print...

Which fine print? According to <http://www.aopa.org/sweeps/rules.html>,
non-Quebecois Canadians are eligible to win too.

- FChE

[Nathan Young]

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:48:54 GMT, Nathan Young
> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:49:50 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Nathan Young wrote:
>>>
>>> I would keep it, fly the heck out of it, and smile all the time... I
>>> wonder what the cost basis is for the plane for tax purposes?
>>
>>$225,500. So far.
>
>Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
>cost basis be the market value?

Cost basis is the incorrect term. This should probably be tax basis.

[NW_PILOT]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

I would keep it....I would refinance my home for the money to pay the taxes
"can we say write off".

[C J Campbell]

Keep it, lease it to an FBO at a price a little too high for it to actually
get used much, and use the deductions against the taxes.

[NW_PILOT]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> Keep it, lease it to an FBO at a price a little too high for it to
actually
> get used much, and use the deductions against the taxes.
>
>

That may work also,

[Dan Luke]

Keep it, sell the Cutlass to pay the tax bill. That's a helluva nice
travelin' airplane.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[BTIZ]

sorry.. I should have specified.. no STATE income tax.. as that was in the
post I was commenting with...

BT

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "BTIZ" > writes:
>
>> no income tax here... but it would hit the "personal property tax" which
>> would be about $2K per year
>
> You don't live in the US and thus not subject to Federal income tax?

[mindenpilot]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

Sell/Trade up to a cherokee six.
My kids will only fit in the Super III for probably another 5 years or so.
Couldn't afford to insure/maintain a twin.
But it would be sooooo cool if I could ;-)

[Thomas Borchert]

Frank,

"CAN I PARTICIPATE?
AOPA’s 2004 Win-A-Twin Sweepstakes is open to all individuals who
legally reside in the 50 United States, the District of Columbia and
Canada (except the Province of Quebec) age 21 years or older as of the
date of entry."

It might surprise you, but that excludes a helluva lot of people ;-)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Kai Glaesner]

Ross,

> Keep or sell?

For me this gave rise to the question why AOPA puts a plane on the
sweepstakes that makes this decision so tough. Seems to me there will be
more "Sell"ers than "Keep"ers for this kind of plane in the world out there.
So what's next? A nice old Lear 23, beautifully restored?

I would like to see planes that more people can afford to keep....

Regards

Kai

[john smith]

Isn't that an oximoron?

Kai Glaesner wrote:
> I would like to see planes that more people can afford to keep....

[Frank]

Rosspilot wrote:

> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
>


Keep it until the reality of paying for it sunk in. That should give me
about a year to get my MEL.....

--
Frank....H

[David Reinhart]

They award it after the first of the year. That gives you a year to play with it,
then sell it to pay the taxes. Very few of the winners of the AOPA aircraft end
up keeping them. If they can afford to pay the taxes they can afford to buy an
airplane and probably already have.

If I won it, I might hold onto it long enough to get a multi rating and learn all
the whiz-bang stuff in the panel, then sell it and buy into an SR-22.

Dave Reinhart


Dave S wrote:

> All these people who are keeping it are prepared to pay the "income tax"
> hit from winning the plane at the end of the tax year, right?
>
> Whats the value of the Twin Commanche? And.. 30% of that is??? (just
> rough round numbers...)
>
> Dave
>
> Rosspilot wrote:
>
> > Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if Phil
> > called you up and told you it was yours.
> >
> > Keep or sell?
> >
> >
> >
> > www.Rosspilot.com
> >
> >

[David Reinhart]

Why taxes on what you sold it for? It's not an investment, so capital gains don't
apply. You already paid taxex on the "income" of the prize value.

And if you did pay taxes on the sale, wouldn't you be able to write off the
difference as a loss?

Dave Reinhart



"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:

> Nathan Young wrote:
> >
> > Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
> > cost basis be the market value?
>
> In the case of purchased items, it's what AOPA paid for them. In the case of
> donated items, it's what AOPA would have paid for all the labor and materials
> had they not been donated.
>
> Which brings up another point. If you keep the plane, you pay taxes on whatever
> AOPA says the value is. If you sell the plane, you pay taxes on what you got for
> it. Which is probably a lot less than $225,500.
>
> George Patterson
> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
> been looking for it.

[Newps]

David Reinhart wrote:

> They award it after the first of the year. That gives you a year to play with it,
> then sell it to pay the taxes. Very few of the winners of the AOPA aircraft end
> up keeping them.

They did an article on this. No one has ever kept the plane they won
from AOPA. If I win any plane they gave away it would immediately go in
the hangar and up for sale.

[Newps]

You pay taxes on the planes value at the time you win it. Those taxes
are due the April 15th after you win it, assuming you normally file your
taxes only on 4/15. If you sell the plane that only affects your tax
bill if you sell it for more than AOPA says it was worth when you got
it. But that's true for any asset.



David Reinhart wrote:

> Why taxes on what you sold it for? It's not an investment, so capital gains don't
> apply. You already paid taxex on the "income" of the prize value.
>
> And if you did pay taxes on the sale, wouldn't you be able to write off the
> difference as a loss?
>
> Dave Reinhart
>
>
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" wrote:
>
>
>>Nathan Young wrote:
>>
>>>Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
>>>cost basis be the market value?
>>
>>In the case of purchased items, it's what AOPA paid for them. In the case of
>>donated items, it's what AOPA would have paid for all the labor and materials
>>had they not been donated.
>>
>>Which brings up another point. If you keep the plane, you pay taxes on whatever
>>AOPA says the value is. If you sell the plane, you pay taxes on what you got for
>>it. Which is probably a lot less than $225,500.
>>
>>George Patterson
>> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
>> been looking for it.
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

You pay on the April 15th in the following year (ignoring estimated taxes).
If you sell it, then the sale price is the value and it doesn't matter what
AOPA says it was worth. If you use it and then sell it, you would have to
add the depreciation from your use to the sale price. If you keep it, you
will have to pay taxes on what it is worth but if you think that AOPA's
estimate is too high then you can get an appraisal. The IRS could challenge
your appraisal but AOPA doesn't just declare the value and that's it.

Mike
MU-2

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> You pay taxes on the planes value at the time you win it. Those taxes are
> due the April 15th after you win it, assuming you normally file your taxes
> only on 4/15. If you sell the plane that only affects your tax bill if
> you sell it for more than AOPA says it was worth when you got it. But
> that's true for any asset.
>
>
>
> David Reinhart wrote:
>
>> Why taxes on what you sold it for? It's not an investment, so capital
>> gains don't
>> apply. You already paid taxex on the "income" of the prize value.
>>
>> And if you did pay taxes on the sale, wouldn't you be able to write off
>> the
>> difference as a loss?
>>
>> Dave Reinhart
>>
>>
>>
>> "G.R. Patterson III" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Nathan Young wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is that the money AOPA put into it, or market value? Wouldn't the
>>>>cost basis be the market value?
>>>
>>>In the case of purchased items, it's what AOPA paid for them. In the case
>>>of
>>>donated items, it's what AOPA would have paid for all the labor and
>>>materials
>>>had they not been donated.
>>>
>>>Which brings up another point. If you keep the plane, you pay taxes on
>>>whatever
>>>AOPA says the value is. If you sell the plane, you pay taxes on what you
>>>got for
>>>it. Which is probably a lot less than $225,500.
>>>
>>>George Patterson
>>> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to
>>> have
>>> been looking for it.
>>

[G.R. Patterson III]

David Reinhart wrote:
>
> Why taxes on what you sold it for?

Lagally "the value of a thing is what that thing will bring". If the most you
can get for that plane is $200,000, that's the legal value of it for tax
purposes.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[G.R. Patterson III]

David Reinhart wrote:
>
> They award it after the first of the year. That gives you a year to play with it,
> then sell it to pay the taxes.

If you live in a State that has a usage tax, that tax will be applicable within
a few weeks. New Jersey will have a letter in the mail to you within a few days
of the registration clearing at Oklahoma City. Furthermore, unless you pay the
income taxes in quarterly installments during the year, the Feds will hit you
with a late penalty next April. I *think* that's about 10%, but I'm not sure.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Kai Glaesner wrote:
>
> I would like to see planes that more people can afford to keep....

They actually did that one year. They fixed up a TriPacer and threw in $10,000
cash for the taxes.

The main thing is that AOPA isn't doing this mainly to give one of the members a
plane. They do it mainly so that they can produce articles all year long about
fixing it up. If they stuck to fixing up low cost aircraft and including some
cash, the organization wouldn't get as much bang for the buck.

Now, let's say that AOPA fixed up a nice TriPacer again and I won it. I'd sell
that one just because I already have a better aircraft IMO.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[John Galban]

"Kai Glaesner" > wrote in message >...
>
> For me this gave rise to the question why AOPA puts a plane on the
> sweepstakes that makes this decision so tough. Seems to me there will be
> more "Sell"ers than "Keep"ers for this kind of plane in the world out there.
> So what's next? A nice old Lear 23, beautifully restored?
>
> I would like to see planes that more people can afford to keep....
>

So, you'd rather that AOPA gave away a clapped out C-150 every year?
Just kidding. It's not only the tax bill that keeps the winners
selling. Often the plane that they won does not really fit the
winner's mission profile. So, on top of a big tax bill (even if they
give away a more modest airplane), you're stuck with a plane that
doesn't necessarily fit the kind of flying that you do. Why keep it?

The current plane is an excellent example. If I were in the market
for a twin, the Twin Comanche would be near the top of my list.
Unfortunately, it really doesn't fit my mission profile (a lot of
backcountry flying). If I won it I'd certainly sell.

I seem to recall that within the past few years, AOPA pilot had a
"where are they now" article on the giveaway planes. All but a few
were immediately sold by the winners.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Gig Giacona]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> David Reinhart wrote:
>>
>> Why taxes on what you sold it for?
>
> Lagally "the value of a thing is what that thing will bring". If the most
> you
> can get for that plane is $200,000, that's the legal value of it for tax
> purposes.
>
> George Patterson
> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to
> have
> been looking for it.

One nice thing about winning this airplane or any of the planes given away
by AOPA is that there will probably be people contacting you from day one
asking if you want to sell it. It wouldn't suprise me if AOPA doesn't have a
list already of people who want to buy it from the winner.

Think aout it. If you were in the market for a nicely updated light twin
wouldn't you call AOPA and ask them to give the winner your name?

[Robert M. Gary]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...
> Dave S wrote:
> >
> > Whats the value of the Twin Commanche?
>
> According to AOPA, the current value of the "project" is $225,500.
>
> > And.. 30% of that is??? (just
> > rough round numbers...)
>
> $67,650.

That's a start. I live in California so let's add a few more...
1) State income tax of about 5% so add another $10000
2) Of course I would have to pay use tax on it as well for another
$16,000
3) Then every year I would pay property tax on it for $2,000 /yr
(including the first).

So, my first year taxes would be $95,650. I could almost live in
Canada at these prices! :) (hense the 50% rule of thumb)
I might be able to get a really good deal on a hanger for only
$500/month, so I would put in another $6000. Also, for me the
insurance on a Twin Comanche would be $6000 for the first year. So, I
could fly it one year for...
$107,650 plus gas. If I fly 100 hours I would spend another $6300
($3.50/gal at 18 gals/hr).

So, if nothing breaks and I have ZERO maintenance I would spend
$113,950 to fly it the first year. That's about $1139.5/hr. of out of
pocket until I sell it. I would probably be better off selling it
right away. :)

-Robert



-Robert, People's Republic of California

[Bob Fry]

Thomas Borchert > writes:

> AOPA's 2004 Win-A-Twin Sweepstakes is open to all individuals who
> legally reside in the 50 United States, the District of Columbia and
> Canada (except the Province of Quebec) age 21 years or older as of the
> date of entry."

Why the Quebec exclusion?

[Bob Fry]

"G.R. Patterson III" > writes:

> Furthermore, unless you pay the
> income taxes in quarterly installments during the year, the Feds will hit you
> with a late penalty next April.

Not necessarily (if the Feds haven't changed the rules in the last few
years). I thought you avoided the penalty if you withheld at least as
much as your tax liability the previous year.

[Blueskies]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
k.net...
> You pay on the April 15th in the following year (ignoring estimated taxes). If you sell it, then the sale price is the
> value and it doesn't matter what AOPA says it was worth. If you use it and then sell it, you would have to add the
> depreciation from your use to the sale price. If you keep it, you will have to pay taxes on what it is worth but if
> you think that AOPA's estimate is too high then you can get an appraisal. The IRS could challenge your appraisal but
> AOPA doesn't just declare the value and that's it.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>


So it would be possible for some to win the plane then sell it to someone for a ridiculous price, and declare that as
the taxable value of the plane...

[Rutger]

"Kai Glaesner" > wrote in message >...
> So what's next? A nice old Lear 23, beautifully restored?
>
> I would like to see planes that more people can afford to keep....

I'd personally like to see them do a Cessna 195

[Mike Rapoport]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>> You pay on the April 15th in the following year (ignoring estimated
>> taxes). If you sell it, then the sale price is the value and it doesn't
>> matter what AOPA says it was worth. If you use it and then sell it, you
>> would have to add the depreciation from your use to the sale price. If
>> you keep it, you will have to pay taxes on what it is worth but if you
>> think that AOPA's estimate is too high then you can get an appraisal.
>> The IRS could challenge your appraisal but AOPA doesn't just declare the
>> value and that's it.
>>
>> Mike
>> MU-2
>>
>
>
> So it would be possible for some to win the plane then sell it to someone
> for a ridiculous price, and declare that as the taxable value of the
> plane...
>

Well you can't sell it to your wife for a dollar but if you sell it to an
unrelated third party for a reasonable sum then that is the value.

Mike
MU-2

[G.R. Patterson III]

Rutger wrote:
>
> I'd personally like to see them do a Cessna 195

It might be hard for them to find one that is in poor enough condition to make a
good series of articles. I also really hate to see them take a classic aircraft
like that and modernize it (but then, I prefer antique cars over hotrod versions
of the same thing).

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[john smith]

How about a Champ or a Cub and include a wind generator ($600) between
the gear legs, a Garmin GPS296 with RAM mount ($1800) and a handheld
comm and antenna ($500)? This would have affordable taxes and qualify in
the new Sport Aircraft catagory so even those without a medical could
still fly it.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
> Rutger wrote:
>
>>I'd personally like to see them do a Cessna 195
>
>
> It might be hard for them to find one that is in poor enough condition to make a
> good series of articles. I also really hate to see them take a classic aircraft
> like that and modernize it (but then, I prefer antique cars over hotrod versions
> of the same thing).
>
> George Patterson
> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
> been looking for it.

[Bob Fry]

john smith > writes:

> How about a Champ or a Cub and include a wind generator ($600) between
> the gear legs, a Garmin GPS296 with RAM mount ($1800) and a handheld
> comm and antenna ($500)? This would have affordable taxes and qualify
> in the new Sport Aircraft catagory so even those without a medical
> could still fly it.

They could do two or three of these in the same year and still save
money over restoring a twin. And think of the added publicity for
giving away more than one airplane.

[zatatime]

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:26:55 GMT, john smith > wrote:

>How about a Champ or a Cub and include a wind generator ($600) between
>the gear legs, a Garmin GPS296 with RAM mount ($1800) and a handheld
>comm and antenna ($500)? This would have affordable taxes and qualify in
>the new Sport Aircraft catagory so even those without a medical could
>still fly it.
>
>G.R. Patterson III wrote:

Blasphemous! :) Just as the thuoght of revamping a 195 with modern
stuff is.

z

[aluckyguess]

I woud keep it and sell the 180 to pay the taxes. That is a nice plane.
"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
> Keep it, sell the Cutlass to pay the tax bill. That's a helluva nice
> travelin' airplane.
> --
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM
>

[Jay Beckman]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering what you guys would do with that sweepstakes airplane if
> Phil
> called you up and told you it was yours.
>
> Keep or sell?
www.Rosspilot.com

Sell it and use the $$$ toward a Garmin 1000 Skyhawk.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
Still nowhere to go but up!

[Gary]

I believe that the Quebec provincial government will not allow any Quebec
resident to participate in a lottery or contest that is not endorsed or
originates in said province!


"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> Thomas Borchert > writes:
>
> > AOPA's 2004 Win-A-Twin Sweepstakes is open to all individuals who
> > legally reside in the 50 United States, the District of Columbia and
> > Canada (except the Province of Quebec) age 21 years or older as of the
> > date of entry."
>
> Why the Quebec exclusion?

[John T]

I'd have to sell it. I'm still working on finishing my private ticket.
To make the jump from a newly minted pilot to a twin rating is a very
large leap. And I don't even want to think of what the insurance would
be like, if I could even get it!

Den dere's dem taxes....

Say...would that 5K of gas be on a card or something? maybe keep that! :)

I'd buy me a bearhawk kit, or used certified single, like a 182 or
something.

As for future planes...yes, something simple would be nice. I'm sure
they can find a high time basket case 172 or something that would
produce good series of articles!
Or why not just go and buy a new sport pilot plane?!?

John

[G.R. Patterson III]

John T wrote:
>
> Or why not just go and buy a new sport pilot plane?!?

Then they wouldn't get a series of articles out of it. Reading about buying a
new plane isn't exciting enough to justify even one article.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> Garmin 1000 Skyhawk.
>

Now there's a gruesome combination of old and new <gd&r>

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Beckman]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Jay,
>
>> Garmin 1000 Skyhawk.
>>
>
> Now there's a gruesome combination of old and new <gd&r>
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

Thomas,

They say that nothing succeeds like success.

I figure if you marry a reliable airframe (Skyhawk) with the best avionics
(ok, the jury may still be out on this...) you are putting a plus with a
plus.

I don't need (nor want) to get anywhere at near the speed of sound at some
unbeliveably high flight level.

All I would be looking for is a reliable aircraft and a system by which I
can garner the most information regarding my heading, altitude and airspeed
in as easy a manner as possible.

Know the pilot, know the mission. Hence, the Garmin 1000 equipped Skyhawk.

Jay B

[Journeyman]

In article <s3Rsd.132645$SW3.79999@fed1read01>, Jay Beckman wrote:
>
> I don't need (nor want) to get anywhere at near the speed of sound at some
> unbeliveably high flight level.
>
> All I would be looking for is a reliable aircraft and a system by which I
> can garner the most information regarding my heading, altitude and airspeed
> in as easy a manner as possible.
>
> Know the pilot, know the mission. Hence, the Garmin 1000 equipped Skyhawk.

Sure you say that now, but you may eventually find yourself wanting to go
20% or 30% faster, or carrying more than 2 people with full fuel.

Your mission will change over time.


Morris

[Jay Beckman]

"Journeyman" > wrote in message
. ..
> In article <s3Rsd.132645$SW3.79999@fed1read01>, Jay Beckman wrote:
>>
>> I don't need (nor want) to get anywhere at near the speed of sound at
>> some
>> unbeliveably high flight level.
>>
>> All I would be looking for is a reliable aircraft and a system by which I
>> can garner the most information regarding my heading, altitude and
>> airspeed
>> in as easy a manner as possible.
>>
>> Know the pilot, know the mission. Hence, the Garmin 1000 equipped
>> Skyhawk.
>
> Sure you say that now, but you may eventually find yourself wanting to go
> 20% or 30% faster, or carrying more than 2 people with full fuel.
>
> Your mission will change over time.
>
>
> Morris

Morris,

Fair enough, but the OP said if I won the AOPA Twin today...

Today, my mission criteria still stand. Over time is a relative
term...we'll see where it leads!

;O)

Jay B

[Journeyman]

In article <pf4td.137352$SW3.120237@fed1read01>, Jay Beckman wrote:
>>
>> Your mission will change over time.
>
> Fair enough, but the OP said if I won the AOPA Twin today...

Thread drift. We were talking about a G1000 in a Skyhawk. The
172's a reliable and proven airframe, but the G1000 just seems
like overkill. Not that I'd refuse to fly it, of course.


> Today, my mission criteria still stand. Over time is a relative
> term...we'll see where it leads!

Of course. It's the journey, not the destination.


Morris

[C Kingsbury]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
> They did an article on this. No one has ever kept the plane they won
> from AOPA. If I win any plane they gave away it would immediately go in
> the hangar and up for sale.
>

All of which raises a damn good question about why they spend $200,000/year
of OUR dues on this exercise. That's enough to put another lobbyist on staff
to help hold the TSA at bay. If they have to do a big giveaway they ought to
give away flight school scholarships to poor kids. I say take the money and
every year pick 30 kids who show some promise and send them to Embry-Riddle
for a month. Every one of them would be a great story on the local news,
that's a lot of good will you'd buy.

[Mike Rapoport]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> They did an article on this. No one has ever kept the plane they won
>> from AOPA. If I win any plane they gave away it would immediately go in
>> the hangar and up for sale.
>>
>
> All of which raises a damn good question about why they spend
> $200,000/year
> of OUR dues on this exercise. That's enough to put another lobbyist on
> staff
> to help hold the TSA at bay. If they have to do a big giveaway they ought
> to
> give away flight school scholarships to poor kids. I say take the money
> and
> every year pick 30 kids who show some promise and send them to
> Embry-Riddle
> for a month. Every one of them would be a great story on the local news,
> that's a lot of good will you'd buy.
>
I think that all the stuff is donated by the vendors.

Mike
MU-2

[zatatime]

On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 03:08:14 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
> wrote:

> I say take the money and
>every year pick 30 kids who show some promise and send them to Embry-Riddle
>for a month. Every one of them would be a great story on the local news,
>that's a lot of good will you'd buy.


I like the idea except for the Riddle part. Send them to local flight
schools around the country and follow their progress for a year.

z

[john smith]

Au Contre mon ami! The Skyhawk is the perfect trainer platform for the
G-1000. It's simple to operate, lots of people know how to fly them, you
can fly an approach at max cruise power to simulate a high performance
aircraft.

Journeyman wrote:
> Thread drift. We were talking about a G1000 in a Skyhawk. The
> 172's a reliable and proven airframe, but the G1000 just seems
> like overkill. Not that I'd refuse to fly it, of course.

[G.R. Patterson III]

C Kingsbury wrote:
>
> All of which raises a damn good question about why they spend $200,000/year
> of OUR dues on this exercise.

They don't. Nearly all of the stuff is donated in exchange for the publicity.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Chris Schmelzer]

In article et>,
"C Kingsbury" > wrote:

>
> All of which raises a damn good question about why they spend $200,000/year
> of OUR dues on this exercise. That's enough to put another lobbyist on staff
> to help hold the TSA at bay. If they have to do a big giveaway they ought to
> give away flight school scholarships to poor kids. I say take the money and
> every year pick 30 kids who show some promise and send them to Embry-Riddle
> for a month. Every one of them would be a great story on the local news,
> that's a lot of good will you'd buy.



Well, they clearly think it is enough of a promotional item that it
makes them more money and gains more money than it costs....

Maybe it does, I don't have access to that kind of data..

--
Chris Schmelzer, MD
Capt, 110th Fighter Michigan ANG
University of Michigan Hospitals
Ann Arbor, MI

[Bob Fry]

"Mike Rapoport" > writes:

> I think that all the stuff is donated by the vendors.

What stuff, and what vendors?

[Mike Rapoport]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Rapoport" > writes:
>
>> I think that all the stuff is donated by the vendors.
>
> What stuff, and what vendors?

All the stuff expounded upon by Pilot articles every month and the vendors
that are listed as having "contibuted" to the airplane.

Mike
MU-2

[Gig Giacona]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Rapoport" > writes:
>
>> I think that all the stuff is donated by the vendors.
>
> What stuff, and what vendors?

The current issue of AOPAPilot has a whole page of those who donated or sold
items at a discount.