Fix the high cost [Was:] High Cost of Sportplanes

Gordon Arnaut wrote:
...

You said you're selling kits for $11,000. That's about $90,000 less than
these sportplanes are selling for. That is a big difference and I don't see
the logical path from your $11,000 kit being realistically priced, therefore
the $100,000 sportplane must realistically priced.


Seems like that implies about $90,000 in labor/ancillary materials
like paint and rivets, tools and other logistical costs, like
floorspace to go from kit to completed plane. Seems excessive
but is a plane built from an $11,000 typically comparable to
a 100,000 plane?

--

FF

First of all, who exactly is willing to pay the going prices for the
sportsplanes?

How many people do you know who have written a check? I think there have
been about enough sales to count on the fingers of one hand.

Second, price-gouging is a fact, not my "whining," as you so inappropriately
put it. (Your own tone is more whine-like than mine has ever been).

I have seen a huge jump in prices of sportplanes here in Canada since the US
rule went into effect. Remember we have had these planes here for years. Two
years ago the retail price of a Tecnam P-92 Echo, which is a two-place
high-wing with a Rotax 912, was CAD $65,000. At the exchange rate at that
time it came to less than US $50,000.

Today that same plane is pushing CAD $100,000 and is selling in the US for
$80,000 in bare-bones trim. Yes the Euro has strengthened since then, but
the inescapable conclusion is that the manufacturers are betting that there
are some desperate medical-lacking pilots who want to fly at all cost and so
they want to squeeze everything they can out of this opportunity.

I am confident that once they realize they have priced themselves out of the
market that they will adjust to a more realistic level. Not only that I
anticipate new entrants who will see an opportunity to make money and will
take it.

But as for yourself, If you are happy with these prices, why don't you put
your money where your mouth is and buy one? It will save you a lot of
building time. But that's besides the point, because I get the feeling that
you are blowing air out your derriere, without actually having looked into
the issue in any meaningful way.

Regards,

Gordon.




"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:hbDYe.70305$7f5.57394@okepread01...

"Gordon Arnaut" wrote in message
...
Chuck,

I'm not purporting to have some kind of "plan" to show you or anyone else
how to get rich. That's not what I am interested in.

I'm simply stating a fact: sportplane prices are way too high. It is my
opinion that they can and will come down substantially.

I think the silly magazines should have more integrity than simply
cheerleading this opportunism.

If you think that $100,000 is a realistic price for these sportplanes,
why don't you come out and so so?

You said you're selling kits for $11,000. That's about $90,000 less than
these sportplanes are selling for. That is a big difference and I don't
see the logical path from your $11,000 kit being realistically priced,
therefore the $100,000 sportplane must realistically priced.

Regards,

Gordon.



There's a BIG difference in a kit from, say Zenith and a completed 601XL.
I don't know what you do for living but labor and its associated costs
ain't cheap. If you are willing to invest your time and your own labor
into building a plane for yourself as I am go a ahead and go for it. Start
building. But to slander the makers of LSAs by calling them price gougers
because they have placed a price on their labor that others are willing to
pay when you can't come up with costs that are even close to what they
have in the aircraft makes you whiny.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Gordon Arnaut wrote:
...

You said you're selling kits for $11,000. That's about $90,000 less than
these sportplanes are selling for. That is a big difference and I don't
see
the logical path from your $11,000 kit being realistically priced,
therefore
the $100,000 sportplane must realistically priced.


Seems like that implies about $90,000 in labor/ancillary materials
like paint and rivets, tools and other logistical costs, like
floorspace to go from kit to completed plane. Seems excessive
but is a plane built from an $11,000 typically comparable to
a 100,000 plane?

--



And don't forget those other ancillary materials like engines and avionics.
But I guess we can ignore them they're universally cheap.

"Gordon Arnaut" wrote in message
...
First of all, who exactly is willing to pay the going prices for the
sportsplanes?

How many people do you know who have written a check? I think there have
been about enough sales to count on the fingers of one hand.

Second, price-gouging is a fact, not my "whining," as you so
inappropriately put it. (Your own tone is more whine-like than mine has
ever been).

I have seen a huge jump in prices of sportplanes here in Canada since the
US rule went into effect. Remember we have had these planes here for
years. Two years ago the retail price of a Tecnam P-92 Echo, which is a
two-place high-wing with a Rotax 912, was CAD $65,000. At the exchange
rate at that time it came to less than US $50,000.

Today that same plane is pushing CAD $100,000 and is selling in the US for
$80,000 in bare-bones trim. Yes the Euro has strengthened since then, but
the inescapable conclusion is that the manufacturers are betting that
there are some desperate medical-lacking pilots who want to fly at all
cost and so they want to squeeze everything they can out of this
opportunity.

I am confident that once they realize they have priced themselves out of
the market that they will adjust to a more realistic level. Not only that
I anticipate new entrants who will see an opportunity to make money and
will take it.

But as for yourself, If you are happy with these prices, why don't you put
your money where your mouth is and buy one? It will save you a lot of
building time. But that's besides the point, because I get the feeling
that you are blowing air out your derriere, without actually having looked
into the issue in any meaningful way.

Regards,

Gordon.

They priced the product where they think it will sell. If they are wrong it
will be them that lose out.

If I wasn't already pretty far into the building process I probably would
buy LSA 601XL.

RST Engineering wrote:
I'm sure if you took your figures down to your local venture capitalist they
would embrace you with open arms and give you all the up front money you
needed to get your project going. After you became wildly successful you
could tell those nasty magazine editors how they knew nothing about the
industry.

Jim



The more I think about, the more this is a no-brainer. I think the people
who doubt the viability of the $50,000 sportplane are simply conditioned
by the marketing propaganda spread by the various commercial interestes
and their mouthpieces, the magazines.




And after he did that, he could start his own magazine where he reviewed
other manufacturer's aircrafts, saying whatever he damn well pleased.
Giving 'unbiased' reviews, and telling any advertiser he didn't like to
****-off. Looks to me like Gordon has a very bright future ahead. Maybe
he'll get so busy that his post will have less drivel.

--
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

This particular thread was for volunteers interested in exploring and
reducing the actual costs incured in building aircraft structures. Since
the issues have already been hashed out in previous threads, if there
are any takers, please let me know off line at .

Evan

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 03:30:12 GMT, Evan Carew
wrote:

This particular thread was for volunteers interested in exploring and
reducing the actual costs incured in building aircraft structures. Since
the issues have already been hashed out in previous threads, if there
are any takers, please let me know off line at .

Evan
maybe so, but I'd think any additional information would be of
interest to all of us.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Good point. I should have made clear that all information gleaned from
this experiment will be posted on my web site, along with regular
updates in this forum.

Roger wrote:
Evan

maybe so, but I'd think any additional information would be of
interest to all of us.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

In article ,
Evan Carew wrote:

This particular thread was for volunteers interested in exploring and
reducing the actual costs incured in building aircraft structures. Since
the issues have already been hashed out in previous threads, if there
are any takers, please let me know off line at .

Evan

Not sure what you mean by "takers." Do you mean people who might
actually want to seriously discuss forming a company to make and market
airplanes, or do you mean people who just want to delve into it a bit
more for the intellectual exercise?

Smitty,

Ideally, I would like to treat this as a community project where the
community contributes the expertise & labor and benefits from the data.

Evan