used aircraft valuation

If your premise was true, every airplane would be parted out.

Mike
MU-2


"private" wrote in message
news:HlQ9e.1093908$8l.347752@pd7tw1no...
If runout engine is valued at $21,600
and assuming that AOPA is correct?
actual sale vs asking price?
wholesale value?

minus engine core $8,000?
minus prop $2,000?
minus panel & radios $5,000?

= hobby aircraft airframe premium $6,600?

If new engine is valued at $33,600
and assuming that AOPA is correct?
actual sale vs asking price?
wholesale value?

minus engine time remaining $18,000?
minus engine core $8,000?
minus prop $2,000?
minus panel & radios $5,000?

= hobby aircraft airframe premium $3,600?

Please note that this formula is the opinion of many others in the
business
who HAVE purchased many aircraft.

I do NOT have enough experience to have or voice a personal opinion, but
in
other transactions I have been amazed by what I call the "power of the
cash
offer."

I have seen aircraft (with for sale signs) sit on the ramp for years while
their owners wait for a "book value" sale.

Never fall in love before you negotiate a purchase, or retain love for
what
you want or NEED to sell.

It is easier to buy smart than to sell high because buyers can walk for
free. Nobody I know NEEDS to buy an aircraft.

Blue skies to all

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
private wrote:

I have often heard (from people in the business) that a good opening
offer
for what

(well) used aircraft (particularly light twins) are worth (wholesale?)

Total of the core value + time remaining on the engine(s) and prop(s) +
value of avionics and radios or other easily removable equipment.

airframe minimal or none

I think that small hobby aircraft seem to add a (sometimes large)
premium
for very shiney or special.

Please comment

Blue skies to all


According to AOPA aircraft valuation service:

1966 Piper Cherokee 140: , 5070 TTAF, 1000 hrs SMOH, basic radios:
$27,600

new engine makes it worth 33,600.

runout engine (2000 hours) makes the value $21,600

GNS430 adds $5K to the value.

So if this is accurate, the basic airframe value is about $21,600. Not
an insginficant part of the price.

So I think you're all wet.

HTH

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
http://www.planedata.com/aircraft%20...%20methods.htm




It seems to me that in the end, they claim to have better data than the
other sources. I would be curious what makes their data more reliable
than
the "value guides" they mention.

They explain that in this and other linked articles.


All I see is them saying that they use data from actual sales. Not how they
get it.

I did like the example they give for an
appraisal document, but it seemed to me they did a lot of the same things
that thier "methods" page pours doubt upon.

They explain the caveats.


They explain it after they have already slammed it. The pitch boils down to
this "We do ALL the things that others do rather than just a FEW of them so
we are more thorough. We are professional, because we are part of an
organization."

In the end, they look at all the methods and data, and then swag it. Unless
they can prove thier data is somehow less tainted than others, it doesn't
matter. I know the flaws with the Blue Book, so I can work with it. I have
also done all the things they do in their appraisals when necessary.
Personally, I think this site makes the association look bad.

Where do they get this pristine data?

Best part to me was that if you go by published prices - you will be
high.
So true.

OTOH, it doesn't matter what "average" is. That argument is fallacious.

And they explain what really is divergence from "average". Look at any
listing and see how many items for sales list their interiors/exteriors as
8/10 or 9/10.

Yes, but the ads are judged by the sellers. Besides, the condition isn't
the end all anyway. What matter is the condition if you can't stand the
color scheme? Their explanation doesn't matter. If you know how the guide
you are using works, then "average" just doesn't matter. It comes out in
the wash.

Most guides are based on selling ad space to SELLERS, thus they have to
let
them run pretty much whatever they want. Also, final selling prices are
never recorded so at lest they make an effort to explain ALL facets,
rather
than just "asking price".


I am missing something you are seeing. I can't seem to find where they get
"actual" selling prices. You are right about the ad prices bringing up the
averages, but that has known affects you can account for. Also, sellers ARE
motivated to price properly if they actually want to sell the plane.


When I bought my current bird, I made first contact with the seller almost
seven months before we concluded the sale. During that time, the asking
price dropped nearly 40% whilst the seller was involved in a traumatic
divorce and business upheaval. I could have missed out on that particular
airplane, but it had what I wanted (just short of TBO, good avionics) but
at
a price rather higher than I wanted to and was willing/able to pay. He,
like
most others, rated the airplane as though it was sacred. I didn't (and
still
don't) ever buy that.

I certainly don't think anyone could give a totally objective guide short
of
knowing precisely what the final price was, but it does run over the very
common fallacies that the market spews (such as new avionics, new
upholstery...).


The common fallacies are common for a reason. People find value in what you
and I might call a fallacy. The Blue Book actually values new paint and
interior at less than cost. I can tell you that only a very savvy buyer
would do that. Plenty of buyers will pay high for this because they don't
want anything to do with having it painted or putting in an interior. To do
both takes weeks of downtime, and plenty of management by the owner.

I, and others, have pointed out that this board is not made up of "average
owners".


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Dude" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
http://www.planedata.com/aircraft%20...%20methods.htm




It seems to me that in the end, they claim to have better data than the
other sources. I would be curious what makes their data more reliable
than
the "value guides" they mention.

They explain that in this and other linked articles.


All I see is them saying that they use data from actual sales. Not how
they
get it.

Are you looking at the single article, or the other links as well? I see
much more than that, analysis of the pros and cons of various inputs.


I did like the example they give for an
appraisal document, but it seemed to me they did a lot of the same
things
that thier "methods" page pours doubt upon.

They explain the caveats.


They explain it after they have already slammed it. The pitch boils down
to
this "We do ALL the things that others do rather than just a FEW of them
so
we are more thorough. We are professional, because we are part of an
organization."

In the end, they look at all the methods and data, and then swag it.
Unless
they can prove thier data is somehow less tainted than others, it doesn't
matter. I know the flaws with the Blue Book, so I can work with it. I
have
also done all the things they do in their appraisals when necessary.
Personally, I think this site makes the association look bad.



Where do they get this pristine data?

Best part to me was that if you go by published prices - you will be
high.
So true.

OTOH, it doesn't matter what "average" is. That argument is
fallacious.

And they explain what really is divergence from "average". Look at any
listing and see how many items for sales list their interiors/exteriors
as
8/10 or 9/10.

Yes, but the ads are judged by the sellers. Besides, the condition isn't
the end all anyway. What matter is the condition if you can't stand the
color scheme? Their explanation doesn't matter. If you know how the
guide
you are using works, then "average" just doesn't matter. It comes out in
the wash.

Most guides are based on selling ad space to SELLERS, thus they have to
let
them run pretty much whatever they want. Also, final selling prices are
never recorded so at lest they make an effort to explain ALL facets,
rather
than just "asking price".


I am missing something you are seeing. I can't seem to find where they
get
"actual" selling prices. You are right about the ad prices bringing up the
averages, but that has known affects you can account for. Also, sellers
ARE
motivated to price properly if they actually want to sell the plane.


When I bought my current bird, I made first contact with the seller
almost
seven months before we concluded the sale. During that time, the asking
price dropped nearly 40% whilst the seller was involved in a traumatic
divorce and business upheaval. I could have missed out on that
particular
airplane, but it had what I wanted (just short of TBO, good avionics)
but
at
a price rather higher than I wanted to and was willing/able to pay. He,
like
most others, rated the airplane as though it was sacred. I didn't (and
still
don't) ever buy that.

I certainly don't think anyone could give a totally objective guide
short
of
knowing precisely what the final price was, but it does run over the
very
common fallacies that the market spews (such as new avionics, new
upholstery...).


The common fallacies are common for a reason. People find value in what
you
and I might call a fallacy.

Geez...ya think?!?


The Blue Book actually values new paint and
interior at less than cost. I can tell you that only a very savvy buyer
would do that. Plenty of buyers will pay high for this because they don't
want anything to do with having it painted or putting in an interior. To
do
both takes weeks of downtime, and plenty of management by the owner.

I, and others, have pointed out that this board is not made up of "average
owners".

I love the self-proclaimed "experts with an attitude" that can't get past
the fallacy debunkers.

I love the self-proclaimed "experts with an attitude" that can't get past
the fallacy debunkers.



Huh?

I think you're dreaming. Good luck on having your offers accepted

Well, not really - he emphesized he was talking about a starting
*offer* on an old light twin, presumably an Apache or such:

Lycoming O-320 x 2 = $12,000
Props x 2 = $6000
Radios & instruments = $3,000

Total = +/- $21,000

Little low-ball, yes, but not by much, that plane will sell for maybe
$30-35 on a good day, *if* it has decent paint... A salvager would have
to pay well under $20 to make any money, dealer hoping to eventually
resell it not more than $25. It's brutal.

I agree his statement is less true for singles or sought-after twins
like Twinkies where the margins between flyable airplane and salvage
are much wider.