Express Aircraft of Olympia WA quits

Why would you be less inclined to buy a new one than an old one?

Seems like you are in the same boat.

Besides, Cessna pulled the plug on building piston planes even when they had
money, what's the difference?


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
Here's a news scoop for you all...

Another one:

Amazingly, it's being reported that Commander Aircraft has found "new
investors" and is back up and running.

Ya just gotta wonder where these guys keep finding investors?

What's even more amazing to me is that they will find customers if they
get
back into production. Would you buy a new Commander (or Mooney, for that
matter) knowing the shakey history of the company?
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

"Dude" wrote:

Why would you be less inclined to buy a new one than an old one?

The warranty might not be honored if the mfr. goes TU. A lot of the value
of a new airplane is in the warranty. Suppose you bought a new Commander,
the co. went bankrupt and it was discovered there was a metallurgical flaw
in the main wing spars on new models? That's a not-too-far-fetched scenario
that would leave you with a $half-million, non-airworthy hangar queen and no
recourse.

Seems like you are in the same boat.

Not really.

Besides, Cessna pulled the plug on building piston planes even when they
had
money, what's the difference?

Cessna was still a viable company; it did not cancel warranties on new
aircraft when it stopped production of piston a/c.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

Dan,

I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First, Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech. Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar situations
even without going TU.

So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane worthless. I
suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p sandwich
variety?

One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys will pull
out of piston planes for good. If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets by doing
it), what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair? People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote:

Why would you be less inclined to buy a new one than an old one?

The warranty might not be honored if the mfr. goes TU. A lot of the value
of a new airplane is in the warranty. Suppose you bought a new Commander,
the co. went bankrupt and it was discovered there was a metallurgical flaw
in the main wing spars on new models? That's a not-too-far-fetched
scenario
that would leave you with a $half-million, non-airworthy hangar queen and
no
recourse.

Seems like you are in the same boat.

Not really.

Besides, Cessna pulled the plug on building piston planes even when they
had
money, what's the difference?

Cessna was still a viable company; it did not cancel warranties on new
aircraft when it stopped production of piston a/c.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

And at least with Mooney you know that management knows how to handle
bankruptcy. Heck, they've done it a dozen times.

"Dude" wrote in message
...
Dan,

I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech. Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar situations
even without going TU.

"Dude" wrote:
I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech.

Maybe so, but says who?

Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar situations
even without going TU.

Cite?

So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane worthless.

I didn't say it did. Airplanes get parked for a lot less than total loss.
What do you reckon replacing the main spar would cost? Even if the owner
bites the bullet and fixes the spar, he's still screwed for an awful lot of
money. Plus, his airplane now has a major repair in the logs, which will
affect its value.

I suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p
sandwich
variety?

Why do you suppose that? You're setting some kind of record for putting
words in my mouth.

One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys will
pull
out of piston planes for good.

Here, I agree with you.

If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets by
doing
it),

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi

what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair?

I seriously doubt I'll *ever* buy a new airplane. If I were in the market,
I would consider the above. Under no circumstances would I consider an old
design from a company that had just emerged from bankruptcy.

People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.

Uh, Cirrus is selling 40 piston planes a month; that's more than Cessna. So
tell me again: how is the "nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude killing GA?
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi[ston airplane business.
That doesn't mean they'd void the warranties the minute they stopped
production.]

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote:
I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech.

Maybe so, but says who?


Me, I compared. Also a recent mag article agreed.

Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar
situations
even without going TU.

Cite?


The only specific I can name by buyer is Art P who got a Cirrus lemon beyond
compare. However, we have all heard stories about C, P, and B leaving a
customer in a lurch. Here's an idea, call Cessna and ask a question about
recommendations on how to fix your plane. See if you like their "service".
I recently saw a new 182 with bad paint that the guy had to fight for 6
months to get fixed. Have you ever talked to people in the next hangar?


So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane worthless.

I didn't say it did. Airplanes get parked for a lot less than total
loss.
What do you reckon replacing the main spar would cost? Even if the owner
bites the bullet and fixes the spar, he's still screwed for an awful lot
of
money. Plus, his airplane now has a major repair in the logs, which will
affect its value.


There are lots of bad things that can screw you out of lots of money that
are more likely to happen. Sit and worry if you will. BTW, did any Mooney
owners ever get burned on their warranties? I remember they were worried,
but do not recall if the new company cleared it up each time.


I suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p
sandwich
variety?

Why do you suppose that? You're setting some kind of record for putting
words in my mouth.


Note the question mark. I didn't put words in anyones mouth. I have had it
up to hear with these attitudes, and they mostly end up being about the
same. Sorry if you don't quite fit the mold.



One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys will
pull
out of piston planes for good.

Here, I agree with you.

If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets by
doing
it),

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi


No, but you are worried about losing lots of money. Tried selling an orphan
lately? Furthermore, I believe they will do whatever they think costs least
in the long run. One day, some accountant in either company says they
should stop making parts, they will do it. CORRECT OR NOT!


what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair?

I seriously doubt I'll *ever* buy a new airplane. If I were in the
market,
I would consider the above. Under no circumstances would I consider an
old
design from a company that had just emerged from bankruptcy.


Its nice to know there is hope for you. I can understand not buying new,
and I can understand being wary of a recent bankruptcy. What I don't
understand is your motivation to comment at all. Serious, if you are not
ever going to buy new, then where do you get off telling people that buy a
new Mooney they are stupid. What do you know about it all?

People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.

Uh, Cirrus is selling 40 piston planes a month; that's more than Cessna.
So
tell me again: how is the "nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude killing GA?
--

40 is not enough to get the level of investment we need for real innovation.
Please compare to the hundreds a month levels of production from the days of
yore. New investors are looking at Cirrus, and have to be thinking that
they are nuts to risk so much money. Only aviation enthusiasts are going to
play, which may be a positive, but we really need to attract more pilots and
more money. Companies like Cessna exist in many fields, and they keep
investment down due to their sheer market presence. The difference between
Cessna and Microsoft is that MS has done something new in the last 10 or 20
years for its customers.

: There are lots of bad things that can screw you out of lots of money that
: are more likely to happen. Sit and worry if you will. BTW, did any Mooney
: owners ever get burned on their warranties? I remember they were worried,
: but do not recall if the new company cleared it up each time.

I'm almost afraid to join this discussion. A fiend of mine bought a 2002 or
2003 model Mooney Ovation2 from a private seller, with 125 hours TT.
This was one of last aircraft made in the previous Mooney incarnation.
He bought just after the newest Mooney restarted production and was giving
fire sale prices on new M20R airplanes.

He got the thing for 1/2 the original price, with the caveat that there
was absolutely no warranty whatsoever. The seller took a hit of something
like $150K.

He has made a couple of minor repairs of the type that would be covered by
a warranty if one were to exist, but these have cost him much less than the
$150K "discount" he got.

Now the paint is now flaking off each and every flush rivet on both
wings. This would likely be covered by a warranty if there was one, but as
there's no warranty he's going to ignore it for a while.

So, the incoming administration at Mooney had no difficulties tearing up
the warranties on all of the airplanes that had been produced before they
took over. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, just that it happened.

--
Aaron Coolidge

"Dude" wrote:
I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech.

Maybe so, but says who?


Me, I compared. Also a recent mag article agreed.

Well, *that* certainly settles it.

Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar
situations
even without going TU.

Cite?


The only specific I can name by buyer is Art P who got a Cirrus lemon
beyond
compare. However, we have all heard stories about C, P, and B leaving a
customer in a lurch.

Once again, solid data!

Here's an idea, call Cessna and ask a question about
recommendations on how to fix your plane. See if you like their
"service".
I recently saw a new 182 with bad paint that the guy had to fight for 6
months to get fixed. Have you ever talked to people in the next hangar?

As a matter of fact, I know a flight school owner with 2 new Cessnas. He's
had no problems getting warranty service - not that any of this is to the
point.

So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane worthless.

I didn't say it did. Airplanes get parked for a lot less than total
loss.
What do you reckon replacing the main spar would cost? Even if the
owner
bites the bullet and fixes the spar, he's still screwed for an awful lot
of
money. Plus, his airplane now has a major repair in the logs, which
will
affect its value.


There are lots of bad things that can screw you out of lots of money that
are more likely to happen. Sit and worry if you will. BTW, did any Mooney
owners ever get burned on their warranties? I remember they were worried,
but do not recall if the new company cleared it up each time.

I thought you knew all about this. As a matter of fact, new owners *were*
screwed; see Aaron Coolidge's post for an example.

I suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p
sandwich
variety?

Why do you suppose that? You're setting some kind of record for putting
words in my mouth.


Note the question mark. I didn't put words in anyones mouth. I have had
it
up to hear with these attitudes, and they mostly end up being about the
same. Sorry if you don't quite fit the mold.

Put a cool cloth on your head and lie down a while, you'll feel better.

One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys will
pull
out of piston planes for good.

Here, I agree with you.

If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets by
doing
it),

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi


No, but you are worried about losing lots of money. Tried selling an
orphan
lately? Furthermore, I believe they will do whatever they think costs
least
in the long run. One day, some accountant in either company says they
should stop making parts, they will do it. CORRECT OR NOT!


what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair?

I seriously doubt I'll *ever* buy a new airplane. If I were in the
market,
I would consider the above. Under no circumstances would I consider an
old
design from a company that had just emerged from bankruptcy.


Its nice to know there is hope for you. I can understand not buying new,
and I can understand being wary of a recent bankruptcy. What I don't
understand is your motivation to comment at all. Serious, if you are not
ever going to buy new, then where do you get off telling people that buy a
new Mooney they are stupid. What do you know about it all?

You have now officially broken the single-thread record for putting words in
my mouth. Congratulations, I guess.

People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.

Uh, Cirrus is selling 40 piston planes a month; that's more than Cessna.
So
tell me again: how is the "nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude killing GA?
--

40 is not enough to get the level of investment we need for real
innovation.
Please compare to the hundreds a month levels of production from the days
of
yore.

So you think those days would come back if Cessna folded its piston
business? What DO you think would bring those numbers back? What exactly
are you proposing?

New investors are looking at Cirrus, and have to be thinking that
they are nuts to risk so much money.

Seems to be turning out ok for them now.

Only aviation enthusiasts are going to
play, which may be a positive, but we really need to attract more pilots
and
more money. Companies like Cessna exist in many fields, and they keep
investment down due to their sheer market presence. The difference
between
Cessna and Microsoft is that MS has done something new in the last 10 or
20
years for its customers.

What about your beloved Mooney? When's the last time they had anything
really new? How are they different in this respect from C and B?

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

The only reply your letter deserves is for me to note that I am no longer
interested in your opinion. Furthermore, I am sad for your mother, and the
rest of your family.


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote:
I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech.

Maybe so, but says who?


Me, I compared. Also a recent mag article agreed.

Well, *that* certainly settles it.

Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar
situations
even without going TU.

Cite?


The only specific I can name by buyer is Art P who got a Cirrus lemon
beyond
compare. However, we have all heard stories about C, P, and B leaving a
customer in a lurch.

Once again, solid data!

Here's an idea, call Cessna and ask a question about
recommendations on how to fix your plane. See if you like their
"service".
I recently saw a new 182 with bad paint that the guy had to fight for 6
months to get fixed. Have you ever talked to people in the next hangar?

As a matter of fact, I know a flight school owner with 2 new Cessnas.
He's
had no problems getting warranty service - not that any of this is to the
point.

So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane
worthless.

I didn't say it did. Airplanes get parked for a lot less than total
loss.
What do you reckon replacing the main spar would cost? Even if the
owner
bites the bullet and fixes the spar, he's still screwed for an awful
lot
of
money. Plus, his airplane now has a major repair in the logs, which
will
affect its value.


There are lots of bad things that can screw you out of lots of money
that
are more likely to happen. Sit and worry if you will. BTW, did any
Mooney
owners ever get burned on their warranties? I remember they were
worried,
but do not recall if the new company cleared it up each time.

I thought you knew all about this. As a matter of fact, new owners *were*
screwed; see Aaron Coolidge's post for an example.

I suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p
sandwich
variety?

Why do you suppose that? You're setting some kind of record for
putting
words in my mouth.


Note the question mark. I didn't put words in anyones mouth. I have
had
it
up to hear with these attitudes, and they mostly end up being about the
same. Sorry if you don't quite fit the mold.

Put a cool cloth on your head and lie down a while, you'll feel better.

One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys
will
pull
out of piston planes for good.

Here, I agree with you.

If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets
by
doing
it),

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi


No, but you are worried about losing lots of money. Tried selling an
orphan
lately? Furthermore, I believe they will do whatever they think costs
least
in the long run. One day, some accountant in either company says they
should stop making parts, they will do it. CORRECT OR NOT!


what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair?

I seriously doubt I'll *ever* buy a new airplane. If I were in the
market,
I would consider the above. Under no circumstances would I consider
an
old
design from a company that had just emerged from bankruptcy.


Its nice to know there is hope for you. I can understand not buying
new,
and I can understand being wary of a recent bankruptcy. What I don't
understand is your motivation to comment at all. Serious, if you are
not
ever going to buy new, then where do you get off telling people that buy
a
new Mooney they are stupid. What do you know about it all?

You have now officially broken the single-thread record for putting words
in
my mouth. Congratulations, I guess.

People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see
them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.

Uh, Cirrus is selling 40 piston planes a month; that's more than
Cessna.
So
tell me again: how is the "nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude killing GA?
--

40 is not enough to get the level of investment we need for real
innovation.
Please compare to the hundreds a month levels of production from the
days
of
yore.

So you think those days would come back if Cessna folded its piston
business? What DO you think would bring those numbers back? What exactly
are you proposing?

New investors are looking at Cirrus, and have to be thinking that
they are nuts to risk so much money.

Seems to be turning out ok for them now.

Only aviation enthusiasts are going to
play, which may be a positive, but we really need to attract more pilots
and
more money. Companies like Cessna exist in many fields, and they keep
investment down due to their sheer market presence. The difference
between
Cessna and Microsoft is that MS has done something new in the last 10 or
20
years for its customers.

What about your beloved Mooney? When's the last time they had anything
really new? How are they different in this respect from C and B?

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM