Whoops!!Things are getting pretty lively!! (Time for a Moderator Interrupt).
A gentle reminder, from the upper left hand corner of the blog homepage:
"Politeness, civility and good manners are expected at a minimum..."
Thank you- we now return to our regularly scheduled programming.
729 comments:
1 – 200 of 729 Newer› Newest»It's interesting to see the strong passion / fervor that Eclipse can invoke!
I would kindly ask that we keep things reasonably respectful though.
While it's okay to thrown the B.S. Flag when appropriate- it's not okay to chase each other around with wiffle ball bats* !
(THAT* treatment is reserved for special "guests of honor", anyone seen those guys lately?)
Thanks,
Phil
*As Abe Lincoln -sort of- said, "If it weren't for the honor of the thing, I'd just as soon it happened to somebody else".
Few people realize what journalist -and blog moderators- go through to "get the story".
(Although, I think Eclipse "enthusiasts" might have a "rough" idea...
Let's make sure it's not too rough though- thanks! :)
Yes , phil ...
you deserve a sheer for "just doing it" !
a blog is mainly a place where opinions are stated ...
opinions are what they are , not more and not less ...
sometimes it is only humor ... sometimes it may be informative ...
sometimes it only give an other "view angle" ...
nonetheless , if anyone believe to have the "Universal truth" , rest assured = it doesn't even exist !
truth depends mainly on the way you look at it ...
SO it CANNOT exist ! (at least in a form accepted by all !)
Baron,
As requested...
'Creditors Holding Unsecured Nonpriority Claims'
Various page numbers from 'Schedule F, Case No. 08-13031.'
1. Ken & Shari Meyer Trust
EA 400 'Aircraft Deposit Agreement' = $100,000
2. Kenneth Meyer (c/o, Ken and Shari Meyer)
'Prepaid JetComplete' = $35,611
3. The Kenneth and Shari Meyer Trust (another 'style')
EA500 'Aircraft Purchase Agreement' = $100,000
This is the 'outstanding' amounts listed at the time of Chapter 11. There are other agreements listed, which clearly refer to the aircraft then in Ken's possession.
Clear enough, even for you.
Now, the question is, can KEN deal with these facts?
I think some of us know the answer to that one, already.
Shane
Monsieur Shane ...
i cannot resist to give you a french-basic-wisdom-saying :
who is the most deaf : the one who doesn't want to hear ...
who is the most blind : the one who doesn't want to see ...
i agree to your statement , many of us here know the answer ...
ONLY one big difference (IMHO) Kenny (or Ken as you want) put his own money ...
some others didn't !
"The EA500 that Shane says I do not own now has just over 100,000 trouble-free statute miles on it,"
Another dimension of Ken's obsession with "managing" truth. Everyone in the aviation world except Ken uses "hours" not "miles" as a measure of aircraft "experience." Ken apparenlty uses miles (and STATUTE miles yet!)to get a more impressive figure, since 100,000 miles equates to only about 200 hours - really nothing significant in the operating life of a jet aircraft.
Someone previously posted that E500 “maintenance is easily obtained through many specialty shops around the country, and the planes continue to fly”
Maintenance or minor servicing? Who are these FBOs? Names please. There is a small group in ABQ doing some work, and I think a shop in Chicago?
Eclipse took extraordinary measures to prevent non-EAC affiliated service centers from maintaining these jets. They were trying to scam FBOs into doing FIKI and Avio service bulletins a year ago (both in 7 calendar days, Bwahahahahahha), because they had failed miserably at successfully completing this work.
In the contract, was a list of tooling required to work on an Eclipse jet, including a $14,000 maintenance computer, $5400 mechanic training, $500 WOW box, $1000 BIO box, $2900 rudder rig board, $2500 UV light, and a bunch of tools with no price listed, because EAC hadn’t even researched what it would cost to build them (and tack on a 500% profit).
The proposals were so ridiculous they only generated laughter. EAC was going to announce a long list of topnotch FBOs as their new service centers at AirVenture 2008, but no one took the bait. They did fib a little, and owners called to schedule maintenance, only to be told the FBO was NOT an Eclipse service center. About a month later, EAC hooked a fish, and proudly announced a seaplane center in Canada was on board. In the Fall of 2008, they announced two FBOs would be doing SB work, but I doubt that actually began before the company unraveled into chapter 11.
I’m curious to know if someone has actually succeeded in the windshield coating. EAC wanted FBOs to do this, even though they themselves couldn’t get it right.
If someone really IS interested in trading their King Air C90 for an Eclipse, there’s one in ABQ available. Just has a leeetle problem with the horiz stab, bring a truck. Of course, it doesn’t have anywhere near the build quality, or support network of a C90, and is still a work-in-progress.
Hey, the wedge was right! You CAN buy an Eclipse for $850,000. There’s one on controller right now! ANNNNND, it even comes with JetComplete! Hahahahahahahahaha. Those ads are so freakin funny. It’s DUMB (seller) looking for DUMBER (buyer). They should also add the plane uses water for fuel, breaks Mach 2, and reaches low earth orbit.
Fred,
bonjour!
Thanks for your info on Russian life or a tiny bit of it.
No time or interest for such petitesses!
Ken etc.:
I wait for Tuesday!
CWMR noted that being a TC holder is more than a hobby!
BTW: Which offer is better:
Col. Mike's or that of RiP?
Julius
P.S.: What about the USD?
1,6 USD for 1 EUR seems to be impossible - because of China!
There are lots of opinions!
Whytech said... 100,000 miles equates to only about 200 hours - really nothing significant in the operating life of a jet aircraft.
Nothing impressive??? That would be 500 statute mile per hour!!! That pretty impressive for a "little toy jet". Whytech, are all your statements equally as reliable?
"Whytech, are all your statements equally as reliable?"
Did you notice I said "about?" Do you know that 500 MPH statute is about 430 kts - not all that far from Ken's published cruise speed claims? Do you recall that Ken not long ago was claiming 67,000 trouble free miles and all of a sudden its up to 100,000? As usual, the Ken camp is trying to deflect the criticism by changing the topic. Bottom line: Ken prevaricates and this I am almost certain has reached a pathological level.
boys and girls, there are clearly 2 camps here...
hthose with something to gain from EA50 related issues and those that are impartial...
I think the last string and this one CLEARLY shows who is a more reliable source for information...
Anyone reading these blogs knows Shane and WT have been very honest and reliable... again, BAron... I have no clue what happend to you... you were always a good couter-puncher... but recently you seem to have forgotten the past, which definately should lead you to better decisions about who to defend and who to insult.
Does anyone want to do the math on how much Ken's business deal with EAC cost, for +/-150 hours of fun per year?
We need this number, in order to do away with the claim this is the least costly jet to own and operate... remember, Ken used $1.1M as the cost of the EA50... when he made these remarks last week... lets clear this up...
Shane Price said...
Please refrain from reminding Ken
Not only did he 'lose' his second EA500 deposit.
Or Shari lose her ConJet $100,000.
But he also is 'in the hole' for $53,000 (odd) of 'Jet(In)Complete'.
======= also ======
Shane Price said...
Ken,
Shari lost, not just the $100k on the ConJet, but her legal fees in attempting to recover same as well.
You are listed as creditor, in the court documents for your second, $150k deposit and $53k (odd) of Jet(In)Complete.
====== and finally ======
Shane Price said...
As requested...
'Creditors Holding Unsecured Nonpriority Claims'
Various page numbers from 'Schedule F, Case No. 08-13031.'
1. Ken & Shari Meyer Trust
EA 400 'Aircraft Deposit Agreement' = $100,000
2. Kenneth Meyer (c/o, Ken and Shari Meyer)
'Prepaid JetComplete' = $35,611
3. The Kenneth and Shari Meyer Trust (another 'style')
EA500 'Aircraft Purchase Agreement' = $100,000
Shane, shame on you. You can't even keep your lies straight. The true sign of a true compulsive.
First you claim $53,000, then your restate and confirm $53K, and finally you come up with "the official" $35,611 for pre-paid jetcomplete. You continue to compound the contradictory falsehoods.
Nowhere in any document is "pre-paid JetComplete" stated. The documents are simply NOT that specific. They might say $XXXX for "EA50 Aircraft Purchase Agreement" or something similar, but NOWHERE is a number given for JetComplete, uninstalled options that were paid for and not delivered such as Stromscope or Radar Altimeters, etc. Your post is a fabrication for the benefit of the blog readers.
I do have a document that contains a speadsheet of all RECEIVABLEs due Eclipse at the time of the declared bankruptcy. In that document the details are a bit more specific as to what is owed Eclipse and has not been paid for. In that document options, service, subscriptions, training, etc. ARE listed in detail. But those are RECEIVABLES and would not serve your argument to mention since those items were never paid for by the customer.
Finally in your last cut-and-paste post of "facts" you show Ken had "EA500 'Aircraft Purchase Agreement' = $100,000". Obviously another falsehood as the EA500 $100K deposit only existed for a short period and were later upgraded to a full 10% of delivery price. OOPS, another error on your part.
Shane, you are a wealth of misinformation. Thanks for stopping by.
Whytech said...Did you notice I said "about?" Do you know that 500 MPH statute is about 430 kts - not all that far from Ken's published cruise speed claims?
OH, I see, 430 knots. The plane may cruise at 369 knots, but that is not the block speed. Block speeds are more realistically "around" 300-320 knots. Only "about" a 50% error from your 430 knots.
I hope your flight planning is "a little" more accurate. I hate to see you run out of fuel.
Airtaximan said... boys and girls, there are clearly 2 camps here... Those with something to gain from EA50 related issues and those that are impartial...
Impartial? On this blog? Now you are getting delusional.
Plane Truth,
Impartial? On this blog? Now you are getting delusional.
it's plane truth!
To be planer truth than plane truth it's about this or so....
We do it with epsilontic - I agree sometimes the epsilon might be too big for the first approach!
Julius
PT...
It would appear as if, according to you, Ken actually LOST more money than Shane stated...
Also.. didn't someone here once state emphatically that Ken did not buy into JetinComplete?
In any case, the issue is how much did Ken (and others, as typical buyers) lose in their dealings with EAC... and how does this relate to their true cost of ending up with this contraption, and the related overall cost of ownership... Ken uses $1.1M as his basis for justifying the plane.... what did it really cost him, all things considered?
PS. I will give you a hint on this - had these die-hards not plunked down (and lost) a few deposits, Ken probably would have never even received the plane... at least MANY of the owners would have fallen victim like all the others that got shafted completely.
Shane if you wanted to write, "court documents suggest..." blah blah blah, you'd have been accurate, even if the facts were ultimately incorrect.
But, despite your own blog's experience with a court case, you assumed what the plaintiff filed was both accurate and correct. You didn't learn anything, did you?
The *facts* now:
We did not lose a nickel on JetComplete as you claimed--that's 'cause we did not *pay* a nickel on JetComplete.
We did not pay to move up in position as you claimed--we swapped position, cost-free, with another buyer.
And you missed the court's order setting aside $3.2 million for restitution of our $100K deposit on the EA 400. That money is still in play; it isn't lost yet, and may very well not be.
Two of your contentions were flatout incorrect. The other one remains unresolved.
But...
Are these really the issues the readers of this blog are here to discuss? The *only* point you could possibly make if your incorrect assertions were, in fact, correct would be: "Ken lost some money dealing with Eclipse."
Ho hum. Lots of people did.
You're using incorrect facts to make a point that is both obvious and irrelevant. Which actually makes sense because you are both obvious and irrelevant.
That's why you had to quit hosting your own blog and shut it down. Readers got tired of your obvious anti-Eclipse, anti-owner rant.
Don't kill *this* blog with so many lies, inaccuracies and rrelevant rants, okay?
Ken
"Thanks for stopping by."
Well, I'm glad I did too!
I read my 3 AM comments from the previous post, and realized I had made a glaring omission in them. While I commented I was on the verge of the DEL button, I failed to mention that the CTRL-C button was also in use, and a complete re-post, with only two words substituted, would have ensued.
(That's a little trick I've used here before- my sole contribution to innovation here).
Shane and Stan's thoughts and actions have been the blog's heart and soul. I found the blog to be a delightful read during their tenures- an outstanding read, really. I hope others will feel as I do and attempt to honor that spirit of lively, vigorous, but not unpleasant, debate.
I figure they've saved the aviation community between several 10-200 million dollars through their tireless effort at hubris-debunkation. Jolly good show- it is my hope that we celebrate success, and critique suspicious hubris-ish activity, least we have another situation go "supercritical" and threaten a meltdown of many's personal bank accounts, as well as creating a financial hole of "China syndrome" proportions.
(I am concerned that EAC may suffer the "China syndrome" a second time, depending on how things go Aug 24...)
While on the topic of supercritical, I'd hope we won't be supercritical of each other. (I don't want the blog to "bomb"! :)
So please- no name calling.
I appreciate Ken's comments, and figure (actually, it's already been figured :) that he's got a good haircut already. Several times in fact- I think I would have changed barbers before the third appointment though. It appears he got "clipped" for $300-400K or so, but also got a good intro price on his airplane, so he's come out okay on the deal, total "expenses" coming up to a bit less than a typical sales price when new- not the incredible buy of subsidized advertising that EAC had originally intended, but still- half the price of a Mustang- so congratulations on choosing the EAC for it's operating costs, and for being lucky enough to get one before the doors closed.
I appreciate Ken's commentary on the airplane, and have never detected him defending the dubious actions of EAC.
I also noted a few snippy comments regarding the blog's friend Rich Lucibella and the troubles at EPIC. For newcomers, I will share that Rich himself covered legal expenses for the blog last year; and will remind readers that the blog would have largely dispersed if it had not been for Rich's dedication to principal.
I regret that EPIC did not have the same dedication to principals. However, on the bright side, his airplane was almost finished, so let's hope court proceedings enable a cheerful outcome. (I also happily point out that Ken has kindly expressed similar good wishes).
I'm on vacation for a few days- keys to the shop are in Shane's able hands. (Who's on vacation too- so everyone please behave themselves ! .)
From today's Wall Street Journal:
"China Executes Airport Chief for Bribes"
"China puts to death more people every year than all other countries combined, with 5,000 executions expected to take place this year, according to the San Francisco-based Dui Hua Foundation, a human rights monitoring group."
Makes one wonder what would happen to certain of our aviation ventures if they had been based in China!
Phil said... I'm on vacation for a few days- keys to the shop are in Shane's able hands.
Beware!!! The fox has the keys to the hen house.
The extent of the anti-eclipse, anti-eclipse owner stuff that is flying around here is ridiculous. It is fun to see Shane start getting nasty with people. Were you drunk the last couple of days mate? That Guinness is heavy stuff, and I am sure even an Irishman can drink a little much...
As far as ken losing money....
We all lost money due to Eclipse Aviation, almost everyone in contact with them did. I welcome the purchase by Eclipse Aerospace, because the groundwork for a great airplane is already set. They have to do just a little more work. I just don't think I will be blasting by anyone at 430 kts anytime soon, but you never know with a good tailwind.
I sure hope none of you ever make a "bad decision" regarding your money, and have a bunch of people say how stupid you are. Guess what, as I have said before hindsight is 20/20 boys. So continue to sit at your keyboards and lament all of the wrongdoings of EAC.
I know you guys worship Gunner for saving your hides. But let me know when he gets 1 hour on his aircraft, that is a kit-plane, not certified, no engine, NOW BANKRUPT COMPANY, let me know. Maybe I will have 600 hours (1 million fafillion bajillion statute miles in WhyTech numbers) on my Eclipse 500 by then. But that is saying that he will get his aircraft relatively soon. People probably lost their butts with Epic too. But I am sure there are a few owners out there that love their Epic LT. I bet that is fun to fly too. Just watch out for the weather...
The more postings I see from Plane Truth, the more I think this person is really Wedge or Mike McConnell.
Speaking of Wedge, the mountain man himself was at Oshkosh last week. I look forward to seeing his scruffy face again at the NBAA show, with Capt. Zoom stuck to him like glue and fawning over his every word.
EclipsePilotOMSIV said, "We all lost money..." I might add, and TIME. How many thousands of hours of my life I spent with a supplier on the design of that plane.
Now Mason can get it for $40M. Go for it! All that money spent and lost on bad systems is gone, and not on your dime. Only the working systems remain.
"I sure hope none of you ever make a "bad decision" regarding your money, and have a bunch of people say how stupid you are. "
Dont need anyone to tell me. I tell myself! It called reality, not the denial practiced by some here.
"(1 million fafillion bajillion statute miles in WhyTech numbers)"
Go that wrong - its "Ken miles" (and STATUTE miles to be sure)." When it comes to airplanes, I deal with hours.
Phil lamented... "I also noted a few snippy comments regarding the blog's friend Rich Lucibella and the troubles at EPIC. For newcomers, I will share that Rich himself covered legal expenses for the blog last year; and will remind readers that the blog would have largely dispersed if it had not been for Rich's dedication to principal."
Hmmm, I would venture a guess that considering the logic used by ATM that those legal expenses should be added to the $2M that Gunner has already spent on his experimental non-flying turboprop from a now non-existent manufacturer.
Am I the only one that noticed that in all of the Diamond web advertising for Oshkosh, there was not one mention of the D-Jet? Let's add three, count 'em, three, D-Jet deposits to Gunner rising purchase total.
Why Tech says, "When it comes to airplanes, I deal with hours."
Don't blame you a bit. In your propeller plane, you are accustomed to thinking in terms of *hours*. (Long hours, I'll bet, often spent in weather, with vibration and a noisy cabin)
Because of the disparate speeds of a prop plane vs a jet, I converted the flight time to miles to help you better grasp how much farther the jet is going in the same flight time :)
Ken
TB,
"ATM that those legal expenses should be added to the $2M that Gunner has already spent on his experimental non-flying turboprop from a now non-existent manufacturer."
I would agree 100% on this, but the expenses referenced were paid against EAC, not Epic... if Rich ends up shafted with fighting for his plane, and needs to spend legal for THIS, it shuld abosolutely go towards the cost of his plane from Epic.
I think this demonstrates good judgement - provide the REAL cost of doing business with these companies, and compare to an OEM, honestly all things considered, and you will find the promise of value might not be there...
Cessna et als cannot really over promise and under deliver -- they stand behind their products, and they accont for the realities of developing and supporting these plane BETTER than a neophyte like Vern and his team.
Most smart buyers will not bite at the dream numbers, because you can easily see they are BS... concocted to sustain orders anad investment and deposits, and the "worry about it later" attitude regarding delivering a complete aircraft and warrantee and support, is just pathetic.
I am happy a cottage industry of inexpensive and relaible support accross the US has popped up (according to some) for the EA50...
I just makes me wonder WHY anyone would be willing to pay anything for the assets... based on support - so you can compete with someone who paid nothing?
I guess, as Baron says, we'll just have to wait and see... but I can only surmise one thing: support is lacking and support pricing will go up... otherwise the claim about affordable relaible support it bogus...
anyone?
"and have never detected him defending the dubious actions of EAC."
short memory... he does not even acknowledge any risk of doing business with them, or that they shafted anyone, or that they mischaracterized their order book... this guy is Vern's "die-hard" poster child.
"The extent of the anti-eclipse, anti-eclipse owner stuff that is flying around here is ridiculous."
No, just the crazy claims by the owners and supporters, designed to make someone believe... " I welcome the purchase by Eclipse Aerospace, because the groundwork for a great airplane is already set." as you claim...
this is simply not true - the plane is a very expensive thing to make and deliver, compared to the competition... the market is small, and the price will be high, and this is due to the FACT that they missed their market with the design.
It needs to be a low cost plane, half the cost of the Mustang all things considered, for any reasonable persone to care... and guess what? It aint.
So... you make the BIGGEST mistake defending this plane and the design... and I believe it stems from a lack of understanding PLUS the perverted belief that some of the claims being made here by owners and stakeholders are accurate.
They are as inaccurate as EAC has always been regarding the real cost, marketability, and price of the plane, as well as the related orders.
Double the price, half the stated/expected demand, and you will have you answer -- its a fetish plane, for a small market of strange folks who seem to embrace a tech guys perspective on aviation - nothing grounded in reality regarding true cost.
DOA... but you seem to believ the owners... the one's with the most to lose.
regarding impartiality...
the owners and stakeholders have somethng to gain or lose regarding the company formerly known as EAC...
the other blogggers do not.
Anyone reading this blog can see who is who, and what smells fishy and what does not.
I once read a few posts by some guy, and by merly reading what he wrote, I suspected he was involved with one of the companies offering to use use the EA50 for air taxi... he knew so little about the subject, I suspected he was a banker...
he was... he left fast... it was easy to see he ws promoting... and on this blog, if anyone knows anythng about owneing and operating aircraft, one can smell the rotting fish from miles away...
They mostly obfuscate and when push comes to shoe, they have to admit they were wrong, or nit pick their way out of a lie.
My last word on all this - -make sure you understand the perspective of the blogger... and make sure you approach all posts with healty skepicism... if something appears to be back peddling, remember who said what.. and who is trying as hard as they can to cover their misstatements with nits.
ALso, remember the eclipse promise, and the one supported here by stakeholders and refuted by most non-stakeholders... the value eclipse offered was a sham -- it was not based on Tech, it ws bassed on volume... and based on an order book cooked by 2 friends... with no teeth. The plane is a huge risk compared to any major OEm offering, and the reqrds might be some savings on fuel. Ocmpared to Service costs, fuel is a joke when looking at operating costs all things considered, as is depreciation, as is waranttee for the first year or two. We can talk of upgrades and fixes to make the owners whole AT THEIR EXPENSE, and we can discuss other aspects of dealing with EAC and all the money owners lost...
But, plese do not fantasize anyone with the idea this plane has a reasonable market price based on any sort of volume... it was supposed to be the cheapo jet, and it never was and never will be.
DOA
ATM i hope you have a job dude, but if you don't it would explain the length of all your BS...
I can't remember, are you even a pilot?
And your last post helps this discussion how, EclipsePilotOMSIV?
I don't give a rat's a$$ which bloggers here are pilots. In fact, if they're a pilot, I consider that to be a minus, since many pilots are also horrible businessmen, not to mention arrogant and never admit to being wrong.
Airtaximan said... I am happy a cottage industry of inexpensive and relaible support accross the US has popped up (according to some) for the EA50... I just makes me wonder WHY anyone would be willing to pay anything for the assets... based on support - so you can compete with someone who paid nothing?
Because that's what is need to obtain parts and TC support. Without parts and TC support, that cottage industry won't survive for long, and neither will the planes.
Shadow, pilot? No doubt.
As a preemptive measure, note that I said "many" pilots, not "all". There are some pilots who are also good businessmen, but that's more the exception than the rule.
Plane Truth, I know my limitations -- that's why I work for The Man. :)
OMSIV,
you have seen me speak on panels of industry experts (if you have been around this industry) regarding operating aircraft for hire.... and I have time to write what I want here, because I run things, and my time is my own.
My posts would be shorter, except some folks seem to need more and more explaining... some of the obfuscating is confusing... some people forget the history... some recast... so deny... it takes time to clarify...
what I write is not BS, and you know it... you usually dig a big hole when you write something here... as does Ken... because it is just smoke... and this you know too well... but you do not like it, and I know, you have your reasons. This is part of my point.
- you don't think Ken knew he was just like many other EAC depositors, and had mulitple deposits? How do I know this... just becasue its been said here before... now, its confirmed, again.
PT... I thought the planes enjoyed a healthy support network around the US, keeping them compliant and airworthy at an affordable price? this FACT is amazing to me, but, it remains something said by the owners, and I for one believe this... the fleet is flying, and is being supported...jolly good... unless:
-a- this is untrue
-b- this new venture is going to be a fast and easy way to lose a lot more money backing this dog to the tune of $40M plus, plus....
I'll tell you what I think - I think, the promise of cheapo support is just like the promise of cheapo EA50 jets... it attracts a certain kind, shall we say - the customers by and large will troll along the bottom, to find ANY way to pay less for support, and therefore, there will be healthy competition from the guys already providing such support... they will find a way to compete without blowing $40M plus plus..., and the guy blowing $40M will be behind the 8-ball... the EA50 clients could care less about quality or service... they want cheap... if they wanted ANYTHING else, they would have made another choice. The other choice, as is often the case, may have yielded a lower overall cost, all things considered. I would say, one that is more easily justified on a true economic basis...
It helps the discussion in a great deal of ways. Instead of attacking theories that these guys cook up, maybe they should get out there and learn the joys of what they are attacking. That is all I am saying. It is easy to fly on flight simulator X at home, a whole different ball game in the FLs.
Going about and spewing this filth about the aircraft they know nothing about is quite useless as well. The company, fine.
Yeah ATM,
It is kind of a waste to fill up the Citation X to fly someplace with 2 people aboard. We get a smaller version that flies where it needs to fast, and has the added bonus of not burning a hole through the wallet, at the rate of larger aircraft I should clarify.
You want more evidence of this fact. Just ask John Travolta. Getting to clearwater in the 727 is not always necessary. So he flies the Eclipse. Problem solved.
Then there are the guys that want to step up from the twin pistons, like Ken. Not a bad deal here either.
If the E500 is put next to a mustang at an increased price if they resume production, which is a big if, I still think quite a few people will choose the Eclipse. It is faster and cheaper to operate for one, and there are other good reasons to choose between the two when this is all said and done. Apples to Apples if you compare the two new planes side by side there is something to be gained from each. Just depends on the mission plan. Like any person buying a jet. It needs to fit your mission plan.
AirTaxiMan writes, "what I write is not BS"
Actually, AT, what you write is very often not just ordinary BS. It is extraordinary BS, and you do it so very well, too, as if you are a seasoned BS expert.
:)
Ken
airtaximan said... you have seen me speak on panels of industry experts (if you have been around this industry) regarding operating aircraft for hire.... and I have time to write what I want here, because I run things, and my time is my own.
So you're *that* guy! I always thought it was just a high school kid that went around and said, "Test, 1, 2, test, yup, this mike works."
Thanks for clearing that up.
FAA prelim report shows an Eclipse 500 landing overrun last Friday at 3,801-foot field.
Ken,
Your ConJet deposit 'agreement' has a snowballs chance in hell. That was money set aside during the Chapter 11/363 sale process.
It might have escaped your notice, but Eclipse Aviation Corporation is now, officially, an ex company.
Plain Truth.
Page 42, if you have the document I referenced. Now, either the team that put together these numbers are correct, and you/Ken or wrong, or somebody is risking jail time for misleading the Court.
Which is it?
Oh, and I'm human. My memory failed me on the JetComplete numbers.
But why would EAC list Ken as being owed $35K? What do they gain by INCREASING the amount owed to creditors?
At least I wasn't out by the amount Vern and Roel were. Even by Vern's own admission, he burned a billion dollars. Makes my 'mistake' very small beer.
Speaking of Roel, I wonder if he's still part of Mike and Mason's future plans.
He was, after all, announced with great fanfare as joining their efforts as the 'European' agent.
Only to vanish a few weeks afterwards. Let's hope there is no 'second coming', but with this pantomime, you never can tell....
You'll notice that Ken slides into 'watching' mode when he thinks things are going poorly. His activity level here is a 'barometer' for the Press/Holland bid. As long as the road ahead is smooth, our Ken will bore the pants of us with 'pounds per hour' and pictures of Avio screens disagreeing with each other.
But when the scales fall from his rose tinted spectacles (again...) I expect he'll rumble off into the undergrowth, from whence he emerged.
Speaking metaphorically, of course!
Shane
Shane writes, " I expect [Ken will] rumble off into the undergrowth, from whence he emerged."
That's an area you are no doubt intimately familiar with--it's where you became so *green* with envy for those who have something you simply cannot afford.
Your fixation with the dollars *others* have lost may be unsavory, but it is also very telling: some people have lost more than you've got and it bothers the hell out of you.
A blind man could see it with a cane.
The really sad part is that you started the blog with altruistic enough motives--show the world the unsavory business practices of EAC--but ended it with personal attacks on owners who you resent because they have more than you. Sad really.
Ken
"you assumed what the plaintiff filed was both accurate and correct."
Wow, a hell of an admission I must say! A plaintiff is filing an inaccurate information. On purpose or just by negligence may I ask?
It might have escaped your notice, but Eclipse Aviation Corporation is now, officially, an ex company.
Nah, it's only tired and shagged out following a prolonged squawk.
Page 42, if you have the document I referenced.
42. The answer to life, the universe and everything.
Your fixation with the dollars *others* have lost may be unsavory, but it is also very telling: some people have lost more than you've got and it bothers the hell out of you.
Sounds like Dr. Strangelove. There's the Arms Race, The Space Race, The Peace Race and now according to Ken there's the Losing Money Race.
The really sad part is that you started the blog with altruistic enough motives--show the world the unsavory business practices of EAC--but ended it with personal attacks on owners who you resent because they have more than you.
Actually I remember you repeatedly talking about your personal finances in regards to Eclipse. Seeing how you brought it up, it seems rather convenient to complain about it now.
Let’s pretend:
Whoever get’s the remains of Eclipse needs all the help they can get . . . and all of the bloggers have the highest of motivation to help them produce a good little jet . . . not exceptional, but at least a safe and reliable aircraft . . . that they would trust to carry four members of their own family on a short trip . . . say, 600 to 800 nautical miles at a reasonable velocity (300 plus knots or so, “block to block”).
Now, let’s put aside “fuel economy” as all that is hardly relevant for an occasional use aircraft. Let’s assume the basic “MTOW” claimed, and by all means, let’s make this above all, a safe and easy to fly little bird . . . fun and safe . . . and let’s introduce something else, which seems to have been avoided like the “plague” or the “Janta virus” . . . not in my memory has anyone answered my questions about empirical testing . . . not once . . . “In hands-off, with all systems kaput, assuming it was previously trimmed out, is the aircraft inherently stable?” . . . will it return to an up-right stable flight/glide, etc.?!
Let’s pretend that name-calling and constant put-down may be put on “hold” until some intelligent advice would be provided for those who hope to resurrect the little bird factory, by the Rio Grande.
Will the new owners heed such advice? Will pigs ever grow wings and fly? . . . Who knows, but it might be a good exercise, and get this thing away from character assassination, and back to some profitable discussion.
Remember . . . this is “just pretend”, but I betcha a whole lot of lurkers would be interested to read something truly intelligent for a change. And who knows, it just might be worth our time to read. Now wouldn’t that be a change!
gadfly
Dave wrote, "Actually I remember you repeatedly talking about your personal finances in regards to Eclipse."
I believe your memory is failing you, Dave. I repeatedly made the point that the Eclipse 500 is cost-effective to acquire and cost-effective to operate. Fast, fun, and affordable. I stand by that.
I don't think I ever invited anyone here into my Quicken directory.
And, I'll note with a smidgeon of pride that each and every posting *I* make is signed "Ken Meyer" not "Dave," "Dork" or "Ima JetPilot Wannabe."
I stand behind my postings with my name even though it puts a target on my back. I believe letting people know who you are and owing up to what you write is important. I don't hide behind a moniker, afraid to come out of the closet like you, AT, Fred and most of the others who relish taking potshots from their comfortable, anonymous sanctity.
Ken
Ken is correct about one thing, I am sincerely afraid to let anyone know who I am... PLUS, I believe its my moral and constitutional right to be anonymous.
If en has a problem with this, too, I personally do not care..
But, it does provide him with the ability to discredit me... unfortunately, what I write is true... especially when I rebutt his BS.
So, trample on the US constitution - its just one more indication of what you are all about.
What is BCA's cost comparison for an EAC versus a new Mustang? or, should be continue to use $1.1M for this comparison, Ken?
"His activity level here is a 'barometer' for the Press/Holland bid."
man, how true is this... when he get's excited about someone else plunging into this mess with their wallets, he goes into blogging/defensive mode...
We try to save people money, he tries to attract more into the furnace, HOPING he can get an upgrade or cheaper service... it may last for a little while...
and, this is all he seems to really care about....
you guys need to do some dammage control... someone today informed me that the ea50 fleet had had a 60% reduction in utilization year over year...
and... it may be printed pretty soon in a BIG pub......
I don't think I ever invited anyone here into my Quicken directory.
I never said you did. Nice strawman.
In the early days of the blogs, I was very open about who I am, and access to me and my business was readily available . . . right there on my profile. But then, it became apparent that Eclipse was in deep trouble, and certain folks were reading the blog and showing signs of blaming anyone and everyone for the things they were experiencing. It was obvious that we “locals” were possibly putting ourselves, our businesses, and our families in jeopardy . . . and so, I removed that data, reluctantly, from my profile.
Soon, Ken showed up . . . and then “goat”, etc. And early on, I made a comment to Ken that if he stayed with what he knows, he’ll do just fine. (‘Funny thing . . . about that time NASA put on their website, “Astronomy Picture of the Day”, a beautiful picture of the Milky Way over Phoenix . . . or was it Tuscon . . . and I make the connection as to the date). And then, there was that stupid move to expose those that disagreed with the “great white father” (of Eclipse) . . . Gunner so kindly stepped in to provide the legal beagle and the “funds” (rather large, by the way), to keep us protected . . . .
Since then, things seemed to go south . . . a few times others openly revealed the “gadfly”, for what motive I never determined, but I’m not all that difficult to locate. I just never appreciated strangers with questionable motives showing up at my front door, without prior invitation or knowledge of their intent. I’m not able to “jump in my jet” and leave town on a moment’s notice . . . I haven’t flown as a pilot in . . . let’s see! . . . 2009 minus 1963 . . . good grief, 46 years! Some of you weren’t even a gleam in your father’s eye back then. But I still have a great “love” (if a person could love a thing) for aviation . . . and when folks make it something to wipe their feet on . . . that is almost “sacrilege”.
Ken, and others, who may have a bone to pick with the “gadfly”, or simply to discuss things “aeronautical”, I’m available. And to find me, ask “Phil” or “Shane” or “Stan” . . . ‘Lord willing, I’m not going anywhere soon, and we’ll have a good visit over lunch or whatever floats your boat. The purpose is to benefit both you and aviation in general. And I think that the others with whom I have had the privilege to meet through this blogsite with give testimony that the meeting and communication was worth the effort.
Aviation, and developing new technology should be fun, and not an excuse to destroy the character and reputations of others. Let’s move to a higher altitude . . . and keep it there.
gadfly
(Notice: “gadfly” is in “lower case” . . . there is nothing important about a minor insect. Let’s keep it that way.)
Almost on queue, we have notice of the problem with a single source of airspeed indicator, or is it a “triple source” . . . the “Airbus A330" . . . a great reminder of the need for more than a single “TYPE” system.
gadfly
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/world/europe/05plane.html
It seems that there is a lot to be discussed here as to what is going on at Beech, Cessna, Piper, Cirrus, not to mention Boeing's issues. We could discuss the Airbus accident and what happens when a highly integrated avionics and autopilot system processes the wrong signal. We could discuss what constitutes a class company and if there are any left in aviation. Instead we are going over, for the umpteenth time, the same old arguments about an owner/pilots airplane finances. It is not a functioning, complete, reliable airplane that any sane person would put their family in, so who cares? Can we drop it, please?
Airsafetyman writes, "It is not a functioning, complete, reliable airplane that any sane person would put their family in, so who cares? Can we drop it, please?"
If your conclusion is correct, then the current 200+ Eclipse owners are not "sane." You think they willingly get into an aircraft proven to be unsafe? Of course that's wrong. What a silly thing to write.
In fact, the NTSB injury and death statistics suggest that the Eclipse 500 introduction has been as safe a Part 23 introduction as has *ever* occurred. And a lot safer than many planes such as the Cirrus.
Perhaps you meant that the plane is safe, but not reliable. That doesn't fit the experience of owners either. I postponed exactly ONE flight in the 100,000 miles I've flown this plan. And that was for 24 hours. That's a far better track record than I had with my previous plane.
There are indeed plenty of other interesting things to discuss, and I hope your contributions in those areas will be without the polarization of your latest incorrect and unsubstantiated comment.
Ken
"And a lot safer than many planes such as the Cirrus."
Sorry these are bogus claims. There is simple insufficient data at this point to arrive at any such conclusion. Comparison with the Cirrus is nonsensical - these airplanes are flown by completely different pilots at different altitudes, piston versus turbine engine, etc. Perhaps comparison with PC-12, Mustang or TBM would make more sense. There are almost 3 times more PC-12 then EA500 and I suspect total hours flown (OK, distance flown) is more than 20 times of the EA500 fleet. In short after such relatively short time since its introduction nothing can be said about relative safety of EA500, absolutely nothing, perhaps the only thing can be said it is not horribly 'unsafe'. We all know how safe Concorde looked "on paper" until a single accident basically made her safety record 10 times worse than a 747.
Shane Price said... Baron, As requested...
---------------
Thank you.
Phil Bell said... However, on the bright side, his [Gunner's] airplane was almost finished.
===========================
LOL - that cracked me up.
Everybody is hounding Ken and the other EA500 owners because their Jet is a "toy jet" and was never finished, is not close to be finished, will never be finished.
But Gunner's plane, with no engine, no systems, on blocks - is ALMOST FINISH.
Anyway, I wish to see all the Epic planes finished and supported. I wish to see all the EA500 planes upgraded and supported.
I'd love to invite a MVY fly-in for the Blog with Ken, Gunner and all flying beautiful GA turbines in.
We may even let Fred dock his boat at Vineyard Haven if he can get past immigration without being arrested.
Maybe there is a good business in GA. Set up a company to collect TCs from defunct companies and provide support for the orphan types. Maybe EA can pick up Epic - oh no. Never mind they only have 20 planes in the air - not a market there.
Is it my impression, or this entire thread, that was started to "stop personal attacks" is filled with nothing but personal bickering?
I propose that ONLY people that have claimed os this blog that 9/11 was staged by the US govmt or managed to use Hitler, Jews, Muslim in a single sentence, should be subject to personal attacks and public ridicule.
Everyone else deserves at least a modicum of common courtesy.
Even the person of interest above has been invited to dock his boat at MVY if he can get past the coast guard.
Can we just talk about the prospects of all the new light turbine airplanes in the market and in the pipeline.
With 260 in the wild - the most prolific of the breed, and the company assets in play, the EA500/AE are the hot topics.
Vern and Ed and Mann and Roel and the $3B, and EAC, and the promises of 2,000 $875K jets per year - should be left where they belong - buried as a foot note.
Lets look forward. This industry and this segment of the industry are under attack from the president of the US and the speaker of the house (lower case spelling intended) on down.
Lets help this industry, these planes and their owners people.
They are NOT the enemy.
Those demonizing private jet aviation, those manipulating fuel prices by cartel, those plotting to sneak into our shores in a 58-foot boat - those are the enemies.
Have a great weekend - tomorrow I face the 55 year old wonderful AA flight attendants for 12 hours and land in Suine Flu outbreak zone.
That should be fun ;)
Michael wrote, "Sorry these are bogus claims. There is simple insufficient data at this point to arrive at any such conclusion."
The SR20 entered production in 1999 and had its first fatalalites within two years. The Eclipse entered production in 2006 and has yet to have a single fatality. By definition the Eclipse introduction has been safer than the Cirrus SR20 introduction.
Ken
"By definition the Eclipse introduction.."
Sure Ken. If we went by your "definitions" we could arrive at conclusion that Earth is flat. Karl Marx using his definitions proved that communism is better than capitalism. Your statement about SR20 and EA500 is equally true and illuminating as Clinton's denial "of having sex with that woman".
Every pressurized turbine aircraft logbook I've ever seen uses "cycles" and "hours". Yet to see a Boeing with a odometer.
I propose that ONLY people that have claimed os this blog that 9/11 was staged by the US govmt or managed to use Hitler, Jews, Muslim in a single sentence, should be subject to personal attacks and public ridicule. ...
be a man for once !
say it is me ... ;-)
let me guess , your mind is so shallow that for you using those three names into a single sentence (while they are part of my personal inheritance ) is a capital sin ?
i know why you are so blinded , you cannot open history-book !
as for 9/11 : i never said it was "Staged" by Bush administration ...
(if you understood it this way , apologies )
but it has been used to justify things (so they let it happen) :
invasion of Afghanistan , where 7 years after full military operation , the situation remain about the same ...
may be the Gov. that funded the Taleebans in their beginning to fight the soviet invasion ,should be blamed !
and to invent a a "virtual" link between Al-Quaeda and Iraq (known now to be totally faked) and a preventive strike against WMD which were as fake as the link ...
all made in an attempt to keep the Gallon of Unleaded at less than a buck in US petrol-station !
attempt which has been paid cash in blood and tears by the young soldiers sent there , for the best benefit of Halliburton & Co. !
but NOW , i know why you wrote that french perfume is more expensive in Paris than in N-Y :
you are such an easy turkey to roast so the seller saw you coming from miles away ...
(i don't know about you , but when I see something too expensive = i just DO NOT buy it to complain after ....! )
or
you just bought it in "Duty free" shops in CDG ...
from such a seasoned traveler , you should know by now that IT IS NEVER good to buy in Airport-Duty-Free ... often it is more expensive without tax than any small shop anywhere in town with tax !
Monsieur Shane :
the comment i have read about you posting and (may be ?)getting confused between 35.000 and 53.000 reminded me of the time i was studying laws ...
"Your Honor , yes , i confess to have stolen it ....
but only half of it !"
Judge : " very nice of you ! i sentence you to only half of the double penalty ...! " ;-)
(other iteration of being ONLY half-pregnant !)
numbers are not the most important ...
it is what is underlying into those numbers ...
the action of stealing is a thief , made by false statement and embezzling is a sting !
action remain the same while amount may differ ...
If Kenny has lost 100$ or a Million $ is the same , who has stolen it is a thief !
those plotting to sneak into our shores in a 58-foot boat ...
this is SOOOOO hilarious !
don't you know that many places are vastly more interesting than YOUR shores ?
i personally prefer countries where peoples are REALLY free , not encumbered with "Patriot Act" (which is a disgrace to liberty) or blinded as much as you seems to be ...
and even if i would like to come , i wouldn't have to sneak-in ...
you see , for work i had a U.N. passport ( exactly like President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's envoy to N-Y ) i still have it for an other 2 years (and can keep it quite easily ...)
so even your F22 would keep me out , if by any chance i would like to be IN ...!
Gutten tag , herr Julius ...
P.S.: What about the USD?
1,6 USD for 1 EUR seems to be impossible - because of China! ...
actually the problem is not IF impossible , more WHEN it will be ...
sorry for the ones who can be shocked but few facts are "taken behind the curtain" by a minority of "thin air movers" (def: someone would would die of hunger in the most fertile farmland ...)
the problem is multi-faced and mostly out of US control possibilities ...
the biggest depositor of US paper is China , we agree ...
but contrary to what some seems to think , Chinese want to get rid of this paper ...
they know only too well that the current Job situation in the USA is a big threat to the value of those papers ...
so they will get rid of it one way or another , the crucial questions are WHEN and HOW ...
just the fact that they reduced buying new papers is already painful enough for debt-financing alone ...
on top of it , there is some side-band effects :
as i mentioned before , some Gulf-countries want to reduce exposure as well ...
which means that US$ is progressively loosing some of its most vibrant defenders ...
at same time , i know from "inside" that Oil-exporting countries are sensible to what currency scale the petrol-prices ...
that the $ is the standard is a fact , but that they get paid with a cotation made into a currency exposed so much to depreciation is a big concern for them ...
so i think we can agree the combined effect of those countries is set at moderately support $ in its current value for the time they need to reduce their exposure to $/risks !
which in return is more a bad news for the US Economy :
Debts are libeled in US$ , product aren't cheaper to export , imported products are still cheaper then US products ...
but this is quite opposed by US GOV. and The Fed's who are putting vast sums on the market , both to correct the lack of liquidities , try to correct the effect of the last decade (when cheap-credits were overflowing about everything ...) and at same time Destroy the $ in its value compared to other currencies ...
what next in future ?
A: Oil-prices will sky-rocket if paid in $ (Euro may protect us in some measure) ...
1.60$ for 1€ will be remembered as "sweet times" (later in the process)
Peoples like Mr Gadfly seems to be (someone who can actually do something out of raw stuff ...) will be the "new kings of the block" as for "thin air movers" (W.S. pseudo- gurus , cynic of all nature and all thinking "Money is the answer " ) will be reconverted as back-offices bankers (a place they should have never left to start with ...)
USA will rebuild a productive economy not relying anymore on "how much crap can be said in wall-Street" to raise capital !
yes, Ken, and Epic is even safer, according to you... not even an incident...
"Vern and Ed and Mann and Roel and the $3B, and EAC, and the promises of 2,000 $875K jets per year - should be left where they belong - buried as a foot note."
...and remembered every time someone brings up issues related to inexpensive ownership and operating costs of this plane, or the possibility of delivering a lot of them to many buyers seeking the most affordable jet... this is the future, and if we forget the past, we will probably relive it...
Like Dial-A-Jet
;)
Michal and AT--I think you're both mixing up "accident rate" with the safety of the design's introduction.
We don't know the overall fatal accident rate of the Epic LT because it is buried somewhere in a very small denominator (i.e. too few flying examples, too few flying hours). We don't know the overall fatal accident rate of the Eclipse 500 for the same reason.
But it's a fact that Cirrus had two fatal accidents before they delivered 250 airplanes, and Eclipse had zero, rendering Eclipse a safer Part 23 aircraft introduction.
[And AT--Epic has not been accident and incident free as you suggested. That was incorrect. The Epic LT suffered a gear collapse incident last year and an engine failure accident this year.]
Ken
Ken,
Lets define the introduction of a new aircraft by the percentage still available for flight.
Now, that would make a very interesting comparison.
How many 'total loss' EA 500's.
We all know of at least one.
What about those now AOG, which stand an excellent chance of remaining that way, forever?
Or perhaps we could look at 'cost per copy'. Each EA500, as publicly admitted by the original leader, Vernicius the First, stands 'someone', wait for it...
AT LEAST $3,846,153
and 85 cents...
Now, which other launch of a GA aircraft missed its original target by $3 million?
I can't think of one, but I'm sure you will...
Shane
SP:
that's a good point about missing the target price by $3MM.
For argument's sake, and in defense of EAC (yikes) I do think the company was on to something about how the suppliers are chock full of inefficiencies and cost. The engine alone are an example. Were is the "lean" jet engine?
I'm not arguing that EAC took the right approach to working with suppliers but I do know how "backward" alot of the industry is.
So my point? That $3MM over run is due in part to enormous cost inefficiencies in the supply chain.
EAC only made matters worse with their confrontational attitude and it's a pity it wasn't slowed down and certain costs really worked on. But EAC was a price taker, not a price maker.
Shane writes, "Each EA500, as publicly admitted by the original leader, Vernicius the First, stands 'someone', wait for it...
AT LEAST $3,846,153
and 85 cents..."
Gosh, Shane, I guess I got a pretty good deal, eh? :)
Ken
P.S. What do you suppose the per-copy cost of the first dozen 707s was? The first dozen 747s? You know (or should) that quoting per copy cost early in a production run is a fool's errand.
"You know (or should) that quoting per copy cost early in a production run is a fool's errand."
true, except this is not the case, this is THE PER COPY COST OF THE TOTAL PRODUCTION RUN... Ken...
CUTE, comparing the EA50 with the 747... now we're really seeing the depth of your thought process, here... keep going....
"P.S. What do you suppose the per-copy cost of the first dozen 707s was? The first dozen 747s? You know (or should) that quoting per copy cost early in a production run is a fool's errand."
a "fool's errand"... WOW!!!
ATM :
yep ! ;-)
i would think kenny hasn't got yet ... TOTAL production for Ea500 : 260 !
as well as safety blabla : 260 compared to all flying in GA , is that a "Wide enough" numbers to draw conclusion ?
knowing the fact a certain % of them are seating in hangar ...
Ken please don't get mixed-up between Affective-Value (which is normal and somehow honors you ...) and Plain-Value ...
working statistics (especially in a "funny way") is the best way to say everything with nothing !
i still believe your plane is a no-go-for-me ...
ok , you may have bought for cheap ... but what do you hold now ?
basic says that something has got value when :
1° it is for sale .
2° it can be sold to someone agreeing to pay a said amount ...
i fear that in first case , no one would buy it ...
in 2nd : i am not sure anyone with a sane mind would (today , as tomorrow it may change IF there is a new firm , which is all the bad i wish you !) accept to pay anything ...
so the value is Zip !
therefor whatever you paid is gone to a no-value item = you have lost a lot !
I am still curious, what BCA quoted as the purchase price for an EA50 compared to a new Mustang, in 2009?
Ken,
After 260 you claim they're still 'early in the production run'?
This from an 11 year old bankrupt company, that burned at LEAST a billion dollars of investors money while never delivering ONE completed aircraft which met its own declared spec?
Come on mate, stop taking those happy pills and reconnect with the real world out here....
Press/Holland (or any other 'asset' purchaser) have ZERO chance of restarting production in the current climate. The best they can hope for is a program to finish the hulls on the line, get the DayJet birds upgraded and try and live off the service revenues the current owners (yourself included) will pay.
I've had personal contact with a number of the 'depositors', who to a man have told me they won't put up another cent until they see the finished jet in the delivery facility.
If (and its a big 'if') any purchaser has the cash reserves to a) finish the design, b) reapply for and get a PC, c) rebuild market confidence and (most difficult of all) persuade enough NEW purchasers to stump up the $2.5 million required, they have a chance.
Which, in my humble opinion, is such a long shot it's not a 'shot' at all.
Shane
Yikes - I stuck my head in here - and see that you guys are still at it with knifes and swords.
FRED - that was a joke dude. You missed the part that I'd invite you to dock your boat at Martha's Vineyard for the fly-in lunch.
On a sad note - A helo and a light plane just collided over NYC (VFR corridor) and fell into the river. At least 7 on-board both craft. Fate uncertain.
Missed it by that much!
;-)
The LT, I mean. Y'all see, I was next in line for engine...almost out the door. I thought about going the route of many Eclipse Depositors and shilling for Epic; I just didn't think about it for long.
Yep, missed it by that much.
Then I shot myself in the foot by going public with the company's problems and promising them, if they showed up at Osh, I'd have the booth right next to 'em to warn off potential Customers.
Missed it by that much.
Difference between me and others is I pay my own way, thanks.
Missed it by that much.
And, instead of shilling for Epic, only to later whine to a Bankruptcy judge, we took the issue direct to the Courts and the public. The CEO is now in hiding and adults are in control of the company.
We are working with those in control, the landlord, the Courts and the community in a productive manner. Virtually all the other Builders have joined our Court action. Refreshingly, nobody is looking for an innocent third party to cover their losses.
Missed it by that much.
Perhaps we can save this amazing design(the LT); perhaps not. Perhaps we'll complete our planes; perhaps some will pass. For those of us who do go forward, we'll have to be content with walking out to our aircraft on our hind legs, rather than our knees. YMMV
In the end, I think, the difference between Epic builders and some of Vern's Faithful is we couldn't be found running around the Boards, personally attacking critics and spamming Epic ads in hopes of squeaking out that one last plane.
I never took much issue with anyone's decision to buy an Eclipse; rather, it was the willingness to publicly grovel before Vern; and the manner in which some "assisted" that company in continuing the scam that I found so distasteful.
And speaking of distasteful, I don't come back here much, given the unfortunate devolution of the debate to eye gouging and hair pulling (despite Phil's best efforts).
I now recall why.
Rich
Rich--we're dreadfully sorry things worked out badly for you with the Epic. Do you still believe Rick is an honorable man, a "model gentleman" as I seem to recall you once saying in a comparison to Vern?
AT--we covered that already. B&CA listed the pricing of the Mustang at $2.859M and the Eclipse at $1.1M.
Shane--From the financial standpoint, it's early in a production run at 260 examples to spread the sunk costs over. That's still true regardless of the fact that EAC ceased production prematurely.
If Eclipse Aerospace closes on the assets, they divorce those sunk costs from *their* future production (of course they'll have some of their own). Buying the completed design with type certificate, tooling, EASA, FIKI etc without having to pay huge development costs to get all of it is obviously one of the main attractions to them.
Ken
Rich,
Nice post.
Sorry about your troubles.
Good luck,
ATM
Deep Blue said:
That $3MM over run is due in part to enormous cost inefficiencies in the supply chain.
Arrrgh! I will beat this dead horse until it is a pulp. I agree with Mr. Blue 100% ....but does any one see the flip side of this? What we call inefficiencies for this industry are "normal." And the reason I say that is because the market isn't asking for 10 million GA planes per year. If it was, then the supply chain would have to get a lot better at making all the widgets that go into a plane. I think even the problems HondaJet is having with its suppliers is a perfect example of who really has power in this industry.
The supply chain, for better or worse, is about as functional or dysfunctional as it is forced to be. Since there is no real market force dictating high volume production ....nor is there any low volume OEM with the leverage to dictate terms to the supply chain, nothing can or will change in the short-term. Er - think of the health care business!! With a sudden demand to cover another 47 million people, they have to get a lot better at providing medical services, especially if they hope to make a profit. It is a paragigm shift for the entire health care supply chain: from med schools, Big Pharma, and to your average neighborhood doctor and nurse. They could 'afford' a given level of waste when only covering 100 millon people since there was still a net profit. Same thing applies, I think, to planes so long as you are only making 5k per year.
In the context of EAC, as I look back on it now, I'm not too surprised they had to be confrontational with suppliers. Or else the George Carlin factor would have taken over. He once said that "you don't get what you pay for .....you get what they feel like giving you." I can clearly see how that applies to vendors like Hampson, Avidyne, and even Fuji.
The spplier is already 'fat and happy' with things the way they are today. **Their** dice has memory too, since so few new OEMs in the GA market last long. Hmmmm, this would be great for some eager beaver to model for a game theory dissertation!! Goat, where are you??! I'm not all that savvy with econometrics and differential equations...
e.d.t.
anyone know when the first customer delivery of the Epic was? 2005 or 2006?
Gunner - why is the CEO in hiding? Is he suspected of doing anything illegal. I thought this was just a "company run out of funds" story.
Is there more to it?
Anyway. I find it ironic that your ran from Eclipse and landed at Epic and it didn't turn out much better. But I do SINCERELY hope you and the other Epic builders get your aircraft completed and in the air. Being an experimental will help as you can never be held hostage to factory only parts and SBs.
Good luck.
Ken,
Buying the completed design with type certificate, tooling, EASA, FIKI etc without having to pay huge development costs to get all of it is obviously one of the main attractions to them.
is this obvious?
RiP failed with a similar deal ($20M for the stalking horse), when employees where still at site?
Was it only the wrong time?
The EASA cert still costs about $1M! And it's not the full cert!There is no EASA-market for the fpj! It has to be developed!
We will see who the owner (the real ones) and the doer (the real ones) in the newco.
You were so good informed when "doing" with EAC!!!
Now your are better informed about the newco so you dare to talk about "attractions" like TC and tooling...
Julius
ATman,
'First Delivery' TM Vern Raburn, was officially on at the very end of 2006.
Like, 23.59 and 59 seconds on the the 31st....
I don't know this for sure, but I suspect this was done to suck in (or secure) more money from the mugs, sorry, investors in EAC.
Or that's how I remember it anyway.
Shane
Baron,
Should check out the last few posts at the end of the last thread.
Me and Kenny were at each other with dueling pistols....
Speaking of one who's always (well, nearly always) posted under his own name, I still can't work out why Ken insists that his 'good' deal is not another's calamity.
Or even his own.
Lets do the maths, now that Ken boasts about his '100,000' statue miles in his FPJ.
That's Fisher Price Jet, for those of you not paying attention since 2006.
I make that just under 300 flying hours.
At the DIRECT costs so far incurred by Ken (his losses on deposits, initial purchase price and current open market 'value' of a bird with that many hours up) but excluding fuel, insurance and other trivial matters, I work that out at a tad under $3,000 per hour
Chuck in the cost of fuel, fees, insurance and the like, and you're into big bucks there....
Ya gotta love this low cost jet, don't ya?
Of course DayJet proved there is no such thing as a low cost jet, but Ken and the rest of the Faithful will never, ever allow rude economic facts to disturb their cosy world view.
There are lots of lessons in this saga. I just hope that some people remember those wise words of one the greatest Americans:-
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time"
Abe Lincon still has lessons for all of us, 145 years after his death.
But especially for Ken and his ilk.
Shane
Shane wrote, "Me and Kenny were at each other with dueling pistols...."
That would be "Kenny and I..." Didn't you say you're in the publishing business? And you don't understand basic grammar? My goodness!
Regardless, I can't imagine why you wrote that. I suppose you're just one of those people who is troubled 'cause somebody else has more money or "stuff" than you. Personally, I think that's a moronic approach; there is always someone who has more. What's the point in getting upset about that?
You're so green with envy that you keep trying to make yourself feel better by saying over and over that I lost money on the Eclipse.
OK, I'll say it for you: I lost money on the Eclipse.
Did that help you feel better?
:)
You haven't changed the thing that *really* bothers you: I feel mighty good about the aircraft I purchased. If I didn't have one already, I'd be out buying one today.
It's a great plane. Fast, fun and affordable. With direct operating costs in my budget. Deal with it, Shane. I'm happy. And you're not. Sux for you, I guess.
I'll bet the other readers are wondering about you: Is it your intention to keep writing over and over again that Ken lost money on the Eclipse venture and should feel badly? Do you think maybe you can get over your envy and let us all discuss other more interesting issues?
Personally, I think that's going to be very hard for you. Do you need a recommendation for someone to help you through this?
Ken
Ken,
I'd be more worried about the raft of legal actions building up a head of steam and just waiting for Mike and Mason to put half their money on the line.
Lots of pissed off people out there. You know it, I know it and, sadly, all the lawyers know it too.
You also know that I only use the pet name 'Kenny' when I'm trying to annoy you.
I'm so happy to see that I've succeeded, again, that I've cancelled the psychiatrist session I'd planned for Monday.
You know, the one who was helping me with my PES. It's a newly discovered condition, which is sure to be looming in your (not too distant) future.
'Post Eclipse Syndrome' is what my doctor is calling it....
Shane
Legal Actions Snippet
Several of those involved at EAC are in the 'legal' crosshairs of its many victims, with allegations of fraud, misrepresentation and misuse of funds.
Expect a blizzard of writs as soon as the Trustee steps aside. I'm hearing they will be aimed at individuals, and I'm sure we can all guess who's wearing the 'targets'...
Shane
RonRoe said... ATM, You're an aviation professional, and don't have access to an issue of B&CA? You ought to sign up for the free subscription.
Get a clue. He runs a flight school in Florida, and is not a pilot. On a blog like this he can say he is anything he wants you to believe.
Ron,
There was a silly comparison made on this blog by someone, and it involved the Mustang compare to the EA50... and there was the inference that it was a current issue of BCA citing NEW costs for BOTH planes.... as in new in 2009 or so...
SO, for people like you, I will repeat my question... what was the 2009 new cost numbers used to compare the Mustang with the EA50?
My issues of BCA show no such numbers... ;)
I would suggest, you pay attention - there's a ton of BS on this blog, and statements like yours do not add to any sort of fidelity.
Of course, one can always just read and not use any critical thinking... "die-hard" anyone?
One can just assume any comment is worthless or wrong, becsue it comes from a critic... but you would be wrong... this sort of thinking almost LOAST Ken $10,000 when he refuted something I said, and I asked him to place his money where his mouth was - he continued to refute and insult me... but ya know what - I was correct and he was dead wrong, and he knew it all along, because he refused to bet...
He was so sure... BUT, he refused to put his money where his mouth was... which is pretty darn sad.
Especially considering how nasty he can be... so, instead of dismissing... perhaps you should look for pearls.
TB, I know it must kill you to read comon sense truths about the plane/company you obviously have some stake in... but I assure you, I have no affiliations with any flight school directly -
Try dealing with the posts, and provide insight... this could make for some interesting perspective... you will not be able to discredit me - I have a good track record on this blog, and in the industry for that matter...
I would HOPE you could find ome facts and opinions to enlighten everyone here as to what the future holds for EA50 owners, and other stakeholders.
I see nothing positive, except perhaps some more BS and money burned... but that's just me... you should be able to make a case for:
- inexpensive support
- LEP
- affordable warantee
- affordable upgrades
- production and pricing for the ea50 at a price that makes sense
- all compared to what the industry now sees, which is reported to be relaible affordable convenient support accross the US...
Make a case.... go for it, lets see how smart you really are.... you should be a lot smarter than a flight school owner in Florida!!!
airtaximan said... you should be a lot smarter than a flight school owner in Florida!!!
I never said you were the owner. I don't give you that much credit. I said you run one, as in the lackey behind the desk.
"Test, 1 2, Test"
“Time Is Now for Eclipse Sale”
http://www.abqjournal.com/biz/0801439biz08-08-09.htm
gadfly
e.d.t.:
Nice post; good comparison to health care.
The supply chain in aerospace (not just GA) can be frankly, a nightmare. And it is rather unfriendly to new ventures, although certainly that is not the case with all firms. PWC comes to mind in how fast they got the 610/615 series turbofans up and running. But they ain't cheap. Cheap thrust is still elusive. And maintenance is still in the dark ages.
Why is an airline engine with a TBO of say 10,000 hours but the exact same or family related engine, if used in GA, has a TBO of 5 or even 3500 hours? Utter BS.
Regulation is antiquated as well and drives huge cost distortions in this industry.
I think one of EAC's instincts was, "just because it flies, why does it have to cost so much?"
That's still an unanswered question. And speaking of gouging and antiquated manufacturing/costing, look at the bill for the government's new Gulfstreams (of course defense side is even worse).
Shane said,
Expect a blizzard of writs as soon as the Trustee steps aside.
WTF??? Can you elaborate any further? I thought a Ch7 BK killed all the 'sins' of the prior organization. Yes? No???
e.d.t.
Damn, I have never seen so many people so pissed off at something they never owned or had a part of in my life. Now if you had a deposit up and lost money I appologize as you have a beef. But I seem to see most of the name calling and spear throwing coming from people who never owned or intended to own the jet. Ken bought a paid for his plane and like it or not he is a fan of the plane he owns. One of my closest friends owns one and he loves it. I have flown it many times and it has never done anything to me to make me hate it or him. Some of you people need to get a life and move on to something that really needs to be driven into the ground like our President's health care plan.
"I thought a Ch7 BK killed all the 'sins' of the prior organization. Yes? No???"
The prior organization is dead, correct, no way to win from EAC. But you can still go after private individuals (officers of the company) if you can prove some malice/malfeasance and potentially recover from them privately. At least this is my imperfect understanding of the law.
flyforfun,
yes you can take a real naive point of view!
The plane is easy to fly if you trim it all the time. At daytime with no clouds and soft winds it might be a nice for a hour or so in VFR conditions if you trust in AVIO or AVIO NG and the assembly.
Is your problem that EAC is bk, that the last buyer of a fpj was badly betrayed - he payed his bill but couldn't take his fpj because of the (well prepared) ch 11 filing, that the fpj is still incomplete, that the maintenance is going to become difficult...?
Julius
DB,
how true.. except PW was developing the 600 series since mid 1990's... but this sort of just makes your point better.
Its surprising how little you see in aviation in 3 years, and also suprising how much you see in 10 yeare...
Risk is high, dev costs are high, prod runs are low... tough nut to crack
Ron,
I guess, according to you, its simply unfair to ask for a source, when someone makes a claim on this blog...
Sorry if you missed the point.
No , julius ...
The EASA cert still costs about $1M! And it's not the full cert!There is no EASA-market for the fpj! It has to be developed! ...
what would be the point to "develop" a market knowing that it would be a pain in the *** to comply with all regulations , service obligations and the like ...
UNLESS they can sell Fpj for a substantial profit on EACH sale : what would be the point of developing such a market knowing that the number of item sold to make it even would be quite difficult to reach ?
trying to develop such a market would be "Vernicus Blunder" (deposed trademark ;-) ) where real profits to be expected would be the cubic-root of the inverse of the bloated one ... (about nuts)
the maintenance is going to become difficult...? ...
i don't really agree ...
maintenance will be quite simple ... but terribly expensive !
do they have an other choice if they want to survive and eventually re-launch a production ?
someone(s)or something will have to give in !
i guess we know who ... ! ;-)
on top of it :
with Mustang for sale at less than 1.7M€ ...
who in his sane mind would like to risk +/- million on something which is not Cert. , not serviced (will probably never be on this side ) , not finished , not ... , not ...
so , IMHO , the mass is said for this part of world !
Ps: i may be wrong but i thought that Fpj with Fiki and Avio 1.5 was made into only a single plane , the one supposed to be used for EASA.. ?!
i forgot to give a hint :
if you want to hide yourself from the coming downturn
(when most will have understood that the recent events in Stocks are a vast fraud ...or that a declining rate of jobs-losses is STILL a job-loss )
if you can spare a bit of cash , avoid like the plague any "fancy papers" ...
Go to Luxembourg (Liechtenstein is having too many problems with the BND ... Swiss : i wouldn't trust them very much but that's only personal ...)
choose a bank which has a Government-guarantee but avoid Foreign national bank (important to avoid the RiP like )
buy gold with them and let they know you are going to deposit it "physically" in their premises ...
if you can buy a certain amount , ask them to integrate this bullion into their assets while remaining your property ... (a bit of negotiation will do it)
this way , you will have all the good aspects :
no prime on buying
no fees on keeping
no worries as raid or attack
the up of Gold for you
the "pain" for the bank
no tax
no hassles
satisfaction to be greeted "in the proper manner" next time around
if in assets , ready for delivery anywhere at moment notice (in cash-transfer)
if by any bad luck the bank goes TU , the Lux. Gov. will pay you on spot , simple demand ...
( i know a case where a crook-banker signed contracts with mention "Gov.Gar." even if it was fake : Lux.aut. paid immediately to keep their good reputation , and "talked" the matter with the crook directly ! )
only advantages and a much safer bet than "paper-money" in this time of uncertainty !!
"who in his sane mind would like to risk +/- million...
Fred, we need to remember, that there is a market for this plane... it is small, and some would take the risk. Even if it is not the exact risk you describe, there is "added" risk in the ea50, compared to say the Mustang... IMO.
Some may not want to acknowledge the risks... and some may not want to acknowledge the market... both positions are drastic -
There is a small market of interesting folks who would chose the ea50 - I have never met anyone of the actual owners who expresses the risk side in any clear manner, in fact, many of them seem to completely deny most of the easily decernable risks.
FInally, at the realistic numbers for the possible market of these folks, the price becomes impossibly high for most anyone to make a practical decision.
Where's Mr. BriklinNG?
HAve a great day - I have a couple of flight school students to dispatch today...
;)
AT wrote, "I guess, according to you, its simply unfair to ask for a source, when someone makes a claim on this blog..."
Well the source was listed the first time I posted the price. And the second time. And the third time.
Did you miss all that or were you trying to make some other point that most of us missed?
Ken
ATM :
i like your humor ..
Freddie said... who in his sane mind would like to risk +/- million on something which is not Cert. , not serviced (will probably never be on this side ) , not finished , not ... , not ...
Gunner perhaps. Oh my mistake, he did.
OK, I'll bite.. I must have missed it a few times...
What was the source you used for the new Mustang price in 2009 compared to the new EA50 price in 2009?
Sorry, to keep asking...
OOOps! gotta run, another flight student to dispatch...
returned & burnt :
sorry to point that out > Gunner is not whining about his misfortune nor he is pretending to have made the deal of the century ...
as for what i wrote :
In E.U. , unfortunately for some , the rules are "bit" different ...
not complying to the rules is the golden way to miss Cert. (normally as i still believe the Useless Cert. Ea500 got was more out of pressure than for it real respect of said rules ...)
to use its partial-cert. , a potential NewCo. would have to wipe the bill left by previous one or restart the process ... (unfair(?) , but in Rome do as the romans !)
so on top of EASA problems , the NewCo would have to develop the market , build a service center , finish the plane AND do something quite essential for a firm = SELL FOR PROFIT !
which would take us around 2 millions $ or 1,410 Million Euros ... (i am being very kind here , i guess the number should be north of that ...!)
in the wake of the crisis , there is mustang on offer at around 1,700 Million Euros ...
(Ok , i agree it might not last very long ...)
considering that it take about 60 or 70 of IQ to have some kind of comprehensible speech ( don't worry = i know that on a good day i can reach a good wet 30 ! ;-) )
HOW much of IQ level does it need to understand that in one case a potential buyer would pay 1,7 M€ for a jet with Full Cert. , proved track and a very efficient network of service ...
to be compared to 1,410 M€ for a jet which is not really finished , hasn't got a valid Cert. (for use in E.U.) and a service system which doesn't even exist in its country of origin ...
210.000€ difference ...
some call it insurance , some would call it sanity-check ...
so a natural conclusion would be :
The market in European Union is probably meant by (very) few business-school that would be delighted to have one on exposition to show to students what is to be avoided ... and some excentric who (for the occasion) would show that they have more cash than brain !
it doesn't subtract any love already owners may have ...
but they shouldn't be confused between affective-value and real value ...!
ATM :
BTW , could you teach me how to fly ?
(if you try to do it in Fpj , you won't be on my will !)
someone here said that you Teach or at least you are the guy answering the phone in a Flight-School ...
;-)
(just kidding)
ron , i think i got ATM meaning :
since there is no more new-made and since "some" victims have quite high expectations (illusions?) on the value their plane can have ...
any price is "out of the hat" ...
if i want to sell my old socks and give them myself a value of a million = the very fact that it doesn't sell at this price should hint me ...
but i can stick to the value i said ...
no, Ron... somoen else here made the comparison, trying to show the value of an EA50 compared to a new Mustang... and they said the vlaues came from BCA... so, I am interested to know what value wa used for a new EA50...
I can imagine a cost, number, but I cannot believe BCA used $1.1M...
I think any reasonable discussion of EA50 vs. Mustang will include a realistic price for them both... and, unless there's new math where a company can sustain losing a ton of money on each until sold... the ea50 comparison needs to be north of $2.5... or some such number.
At this number we know 2 things:
Ken, (unless he includes all the money he lost chasing EAC planes, plus what he will continue to pay to get his plane properly equipped) got an amazing deal at $1.1M... for a plane that one day might end up costing north of $2.5 million...
Anything to add to the discussion?
See how this works... you keep making mistakes, and I keep clarifying...
Now, I wish the guy who made the comparios would do the same...
It can be a polite and exciting interchange!
AT, it's been asked and answered. And answered. And answered.
B&CA used the latest Vref pricing for the 2008 Eclipse in their comparison. You know what Vref is, right? They collect sales figures and calculate the going price for *used* airplanes.
What's so damn complicated about all this that requires 3 guys making 5 different attempts to explain it to you?
Ken
Here is a thought for some new discussion threads....
Let's discuss how we make some money in this stock/debt market using our knowledge of aviation. For example, while I didn't pull the trigger, years ago the idea was correctly floated of shorting ISSC above $20/share.
I have made some money buying TXT real cheap, as I didn't think the world was going to end, and if it didn't end, well there would be value in TXT.
Anyone want to go here? Making money can be wonderful and can help pay for fuel, insurance, etc...
"AT says, "So either Ken is just posting BS, or he figures HIS plane cost him $1.x plus upgrades and completions, and this is an OK price for him"
No need to speculate what I'm talking about. If you don't know, please just ask. It's always better than putting words in your colleague's mouth, no?
I was referring to the current going price of the Eclipse 500, which is right now less than half the current going price of a Mustang."
OK, Ken, this was your post... so I ask again... was this apples to apples... new to new?
IS it a bad thing the Mustang has a higher going price than an EA50, all things considered?
Let's try to be clear... I know how painful this might be...
You seemed to be using a $1.1M price for the ea50... and some other price for the Mustang, which is still in production, as of your writing whaich was in 2009...
So, again... how can you justify the comparison...
There is a lot of work to be done on the ea50... its used, and the mustangs are in production and you plane is not...
these are important... and making stupid remarks about me just obfuscates the FACTS...
Make a real comp, and if you can't say - I can't there's no real comp to be made here, becasue my plane needs a lot of work to come up to snuff, and its discontinued...
AT wrote, "You seemed to be using a $1.1M price for the ea50... and some other price for the Mustang, which is still in production, as of your writing whaich was in 2009..."
One of us is being awfully obtuse. If it's me, my sincere apologies.
I used the pricing listed in the B&CA 2009 Operations Planning Guide. You seem to have a lot of trouble with the numbers *they* used, but you're shooting the messenger.
Do those numbers show the Eclipse costs less than half the price of the Mustang? Sure. You bet. What's so complicated about $1.1 million being less than $2.859M? I'm okay with the numbers *they* published; they look about right to me. Don't they look right to you?
"There is a lot of work to be done on the ea50"
Can't agree with you there. I do think the FIKI upgrade is nice, but it's not a major upgrade, nor does it entail a huge expense. I think you'll see most EA500's upgraded to FIKI status quite soon.
Quite a few EA500's already have the Garmin's installed; those are nice too. What else do you figure is needed? $1.7 million worth of upgrades? Hardly. Yet that's the price differential under discussion.
"Fast, fun and affordable." That's what the Eclipse is. Other people have different needs and different definitions of "affordable," but the Eclipse numbers work real well for many of us.
Ken
While I still would like to launch some comments about investing in the aviation field, either long or short, I do have a few questions about the Eclipse 500.
1.) Does the "standard" Eclipse without FIKI have engine anti-ice capability?
2.) Does the "standard" Eclipse without FIKI have windshield anti-ice or de-ice capability? If so, what kind and how effective is it?
3.) What is the replacement cost of an Eclipse windshield? Either left hand or right hand side.
4.) Is P&WC providing an engine program for the 610F right now after the demise of Eclipse? If so, what is the cost per engine per hour and what does the program cover and what does the program not cover?
5.) Finally, what are Eclipse operators doing for de-salinization engine washes? Is P&WC providing tools?
Thanks in advance.
Ken,
"Fast, fun and affordable." That's what the Eclipse is. Other people have different needs and different definitions of "affordable," but the Eclipse numbers work real well for many of us.
this reflects a real positive mental attitude!
but the Eclipse numbers work real well for many of us.
This might be correct!
AVIO NG 1.5 with FIKI - is this a "must be" in the south of US?
There is no need to fly into clouds when temperatures are at freezing level, to perform hard IFR...
The maintenance ...hmmmm...some AOGs ... not brilliant, ca va?
Assembly - some question marks!
What are the problems with the AOGs (20 of about 260 - more than 10%? (source AIN))?
In summa $1.1M is good (high) estimated value for the fpj.
Who (apart of you) would buy a fpj under these conditions for $1.1M?
Ok, let's wait for Col.M's and Madson's end of the year message!
Julius
P.S.: What about the tires - the "better ones" are available?
Ken,
20 of about 260, this is about 7% or little less than 8% - 10% is a bit too much up!
You know the reasons for the AOGs - or are these owners out of reach?
Julius
ATM :
(and Julius)
yes , you are right ...
not knowing the reference you quote (BCA) to me it seems to be real weird to attribute a X value to something failing the 2 starting basis ...
(1° on offer[what the point to give a value to something which is not for sale ?] 2° eventual buyer ready AND able to pay this price)
it is still the example of the old socks ...
or we can agree on something else :
let say that i found a 100 carats diamond (flawless and of Jewelry quality) ...
i can announce my discovery ...
(which would make me a very lucky and stupid guy ...)
i can even attribute a Commercial value to it ...
here , we have already a problem : i can pretend it is jewelry-quality ... and i value it to XXX millions ...
(off-course , it is mine ! ;-) )
IF i don't want to sell it , i don't have to show it to anyone ...so it can be only a rock a coal that my blindness pushed me to take for a diamond ...
which is about the N° 1 condition :
"what is not for sale has no price" not a question of value , only uselessness ...
in 2° , i want to sell it , but despise whatever expert has or want to say : i decided on my own that the REAL price for it is XXX Millions
(this is where very often AFFECTIVE value is striking ... the house where you have raised your kids is very valuable to your eyes , but why a new buyer would pay extra because of that fact , unless you are a pop-star ?)
IF i do not find anyone to pay (this is where READY [read willing] and ABLE [read : with other meaning than notes , credit not granted yet ,cash in the heart of Siberia , etc ...] is DEADLY IMPORTANT ) then if i want or are desperate to sell = i have to lower the announced-price ...
so any sale in the world are the meeting of 2 persons who agree to exchange something for a certain amount of something else !
Back to Fpj and to its valuation :
how come anyone can put a price on something which DOESN'T fill the first 2 most basics conditions ?
this is where i find this quite amusing ...
at the moment and in the situation of TODAY :
EA500 has no price !
(neither good or bad )
it may have some value , but i fear this point remain very "affective" or "theoretical" ...
Julius , yes there is new tires available ...
once again : With adequate money , lots of things may be possible ...
even Maintenance could be ... with adequate money ! ;-)
Real Plane :
Making money can be wonderful ...
well ...
we have probably a very different outlook on life ...
but as (most?) european , making money is never wonderful ...
it is useful , rewarding , a lot of term in that same kind ...
i found a baby smile , a beautiful women getting out of water in the sundown wonderful ...
as for money = it is one of the best tool , but the worst master !
BTW :
i know it already , do not waste time to write it ...
i don't need to find a diamond to be stupid ! ;-))
the only + i have , i can afford to be stupid ... and for what others could think : sorry , i left schoolyard quite a few years ago ...!
;-)
E.D.T.
Just to be clear, the 'weather forecast' I gave about legal actions is for activity to be aimed at individuals, formerly employed at EAC.
The complicating factor is that some of these people have lined up behind each of the prospective purchasers.
I suspect that some may have alined themselves with ALL of the possible bidders, but I'm probably more paranoid that most....
Back to my main point. Lets say Eclipse Aerospace (a.k.a. Press/Holland) end up with the nod from the Trustee. Lets assume they've base their plan on getting a number of key former 'Eclipsers' to executed the revival.
One (or two, or possibly even more) of these individuals get wrapped up in ongoing litigation, which is almost bound to be a) expensive and b) time consuming.
What happens?
I don't know, but it can't be good...
Shane
What happens?
I don't know, but it can't be good... ...
me think that what has been erased by BK (as corporate liabilities ) will re-appear in NewCo as personal liabilities ...
the more it changes , the more it remain the same !! ;-)
Shane, Eclipse Aerospace would NOT be interested in any of the old management. That just carries too much baggage from "old" Eclipse for customers to be comfortable. Holland/Press want this to be their company, run their way. What they want are some of the previous engineering and manufacturing leads that would never have had customer contact, and therefore would not be targets of litigation.
You sources and/or suspicions are again flawed.
TB :
Press ?
isn't it "part" of old co ?
Shane, Eclipse Aerospace would NOT be interested in any of the old management. That just carries too much baggage from "old" Eclipse for customers to be comfortable.
That's why they made such a big deal about bringing on Roel. If they though Roel was too much baggage, they wouldn't have brought him on to begin with. For all we know Roel is still a silent partner.
Dave said, "For all we know Roel is still a silent partner."
For all you know, you are a partner!
Roel is not a partner.
Ken
fred said... TB: Press? isn't it "part" of old co?
Freddie, try and keep up. Never was.
TB :
it was only a question ...
i didn't remember what was exactly his role ...
apart from his love to be called COL. M.Press (bit odd) and his "funny" (so to say) newsletters ...
i couldn't remember what was his position in EAC !
Roel is a partner ?
Alleluia !
soon we will hear about the Zillions ready to be spent , but actually sitting idle in Waga-Waga ( capital city of Bashorkazkakouzbektadjikstan , as most of you know already !)
;-)
fred said... Roel is a partner?
Freddie, try and keep up, again. Roel is not a partner.
"...Freddie, try and keep up. Never was."
MP was an investor, and he was a major player in the secondary market for the ea50, taking commissions for finding folks to buy delivery slots and used planes.
None of this should be any problem for an owner looking to sue anyone
Mike Press was a "partner in crime" in the way he shamelessly promoted Eclipse, but he was not actually an employee of Eclipse Aviation. In criminal terminology, he'd be an accomplice.
Shadow wrote, "Mike Press was a "partner in crime" in the way he shamelessly promoted Eclipse"
Shamelessly? Mike Press proudly promoted the aircraft.
He believed then and continues to believe today that the Eclipse 500 is an extraordinary aircraft for its niche. I completely agree with him.
The suggestion that Mike was in cahoots with Eclipse management in *anything* illegal or improper is ill-considered, incorrect, and downright nasty.
After Chapter 11 was declared, Mike Press was selected to be one of just 10 members of the Ad Hoc Committee of Eclipse Customers along with David Green, Mason Holland and others. You honestly think customers would want Mike Press or Mason Holland representing them if they had any complicity whatsoever in the Eclipse affair?
Of course not. It's a silly accusation.
Ken
Turn and Burn
You sources and/or suspicions are again flawed.
Wanna bet?
And be very careful with the amount you're prepared to lose, as you have NO idea who my 'sources' are...
I, on the other hand, know exactly who's doing what, to whom. I also know when, and where the meetings took place. I know who attended, what they said to each other, hell I even know what the had for light refreshments.
I promise you, the book will be a laugh to read.
Nearly as much fun as it is to write.
Ken,
Wrong again. Roel was a partner in Eclipse Aerospace. The 'Q&A' that Mike released (I'm sure you have the same copy I do) simply said that Roel was no longer 'involved'.
Yet, within a matter of days of that communication, Bart Peiper (you can't make this stuff up, but he is, honestly, Roel's son) was on a private, early morning tour of EAC.
Now, I don't know about you, but I can't fail to see a link.
And another thing. Mike Press might have 'proudly' promoted the FPJ, but he's one of the few that managed to do so PROFITABLY.
Usually at other peoples expense.
People, for instance, like you. He was personally responsible, through his regular 'reports', for generating a market in positions, one of which STILL has your name attached. That would be one Mike didn't manage to sell in time, I presume.
Or is it still on the market?
Your unrelenting support for EAC has already ended in tears (of ironic laughter, for some) once already.
Methinks you might be regarded as a bit of a Jonah should Eclipse Aerospace trip up....
What do you think?
Shane
I see that, in addition to the bickering, there is the perennial forecast that a meteoric shower of lawsuits will be filed against EAC individuals after some event.
A - If those lawsuits were to be filed, there is nothing to be gained in waiting. Anyone that has a contract with EAC that was unfulfilled because of alleged fraud can bring that action now, tomorrow, yesterday. GOOD LUCK TRYING TO PIERCE THE CORPORATE VAIL.
B - EA can hire anyone from former EAC they want - that is a new entity that simply bought assets. No liability would attach to them.
It's funny to see that the wet/bloody dreams of Shane et all to see this big court battle remains unabated.
EVEN if such claims were brought up, they'd be settled very readily by the EAC and/or liability policies that were then in place.
Keep on wet dreaming about epic court battles.
Shane said... I, on the other hand, know exactly who's doing what, to whom. I also know when, and where the meetings took place. I know who attended, what they said to each other, hell I even know what the had for light refreshments.
Come on Shane. If you have some information, state it. We'll see how good your "sources" are by how things play out. Otherwise, stop making the "you don't know what I know" claims. Put up, or shut up.
And another thing, there still is NO entries of jetcomplete in the documents you reference. As it appears that you and I are the only ones that keep up with the court documents, the "faithful" critics will believe just about anything you say. But I know the truth, and I know you for the charlatan that you are.
Plane Truth, how's about you post the total numbers that you, I mean Ken and Shari in their various and total guises have at risk according to the court documents that only you and Shane apparently keep up with.
And since you seem to have a great finger on the pulse of specifically what you, I mean Ken and Shari in their various and total guises, had that money at risk for, since you claim to have special knowledge of your, I mean Ken and Shari, in their various and total guises, stakes at Eclipse.
Thanks
I've already posted the details of Ken and Shari in the previous thread, which were contrary to what Shane posted, and later confirmed to be correct and Shane's numbers wrong.
Mackeral, how's the Epic thing working out? I thought you said Rick was a stand-up guy. Turns out he was no better than Vern.
Actually, I expect that Epic will be in good hands and operational before Eclipse is.
As for Shramek, I can say I was taken in, he is an engaging guy, as is Vern, he is a bit of a control freak, as is Vern, and he is now out of the company he founded, as is Vern.
As a lesson to the faithful I am quite happy to say I was wrong about some of the leadership at Epic. I am also terribly disappointed in the disruption of the lives of over 200 employees at Epic, and the delays for many builders, and the fact that like the Eclipse guys, many will have to pony up additional funds beyond the agreed to price in order to get to a completed aircraft.
I still beleive the LT to be the best value in its' price range, certified or experimental for people of an open mind, although like all planes there are things that part of the design and marketing that are not in reality what they were promised to be.
My specific question as to your, I mean Ken and Shari in their various and total guises at-risk monies was specifically the ~$35K number, what was that actually for? Incomplete/undelivered options? Eclipse Sportswear? Eclipse logo coffee mugs?
Mackeral, thanks for an honest, no bullshit answer. That's refreshing. As I stated, and Ken confirmed, there was never a payment to the jetcomplete program.
You're welcome, I have always been and remain WYSIWYG.
The question remains though, if the $35K was not for JetInComplete as has been stated, what WAS it for? 1000 Eclipse polo shirts? 500 Eclipse Logo jackets? Options never delivered?
Admittedly, $35K in the grand scheme of things is rather small potatoes but it still begs the question, what was it really for?
That was a claim made by Shane. I never said that there was a 35K loss. In my opinion, Shane made it up as a lame attempt save face on the blog. All I know is that there is no breakdown that I have seen for jetcomplete or other details that are claimed by Shane. The documents are all public. So there should not be any that are "you don't know what I know" based.
PlainTruth,
Contact Phil and I'll mail you the spreadsheet, which is, after all, the official one EAC supplied to the Bankruptcy Court.
It's clear from your statements you don't have the facts, which is hardly unusual for someone who's clearly blinded by the broken promises EAC represents.
The ones I have show Ken's JetComplete payment. And, as a special bonus, they also list other amounts involving Ken and EAC....
If anyone else wants a copy, I'd be happy to oblige.
Now, about that bet I suggested.
Still want to take me on?
Or would you prefer to wait for the book?
You can reserve your advance copy with a 10% down payment, which I'll spend on writing it. 6 months before I send it to the publishers, you will pay me an additional 60%, which I'll spend on an extensive, worldwide series of public appearences and magazine advertising. I'll also make more money selling 'book positions' in the secondary market, charging a very modest handling fee.
Then, before I deliver a single, finished book, I'll declare boredom and leave everyone hung out to dry.
Sound familiar?
Shane
Fred,
naturally, if there is a lot of money, AVIO NG 1.5,,, or EASA cert (at least partial) are a no-brainer!
I was thinking about a "normal" fpj owner who is not willing or able to pay more money for maintenace than budgeted or wants to wait several months before an urgent repair can be done.
But the fpj world might be different!
Julius
P.S.: I am curious to learn when the last deposit was paid plus the related confirmed delivery date. I think Kathy showed a link to the Eclipse Club where someone (in 2007) blamed EAC for requesting deposits without a reviewed production plan! Furthermore a honourable member said "don't worry, EAC will do it..."!
Shane...
How much for the advanced tickets to the movie? Say 2015...
You can probably make sme money selling the TV rights, too...
I would love to know how much this ordeal cost Ken, in total... every time I hear $1.1M... $1.1M...I just shake my head.
Oopps... gotta run to dispatch more flight students....
TB, I find it curious, that in a BK case, assets or liabilities would be omitted from the case, such as deposits or amounts due under a warrantee or support program.
Just this common sennse issue would make me curious about your claim that no where in the case does this appear?
How would you explain this?
PT, why not take Shane's wager, and man a man of yourself... it would be the first time one of the faithful accused someone here of being wrong, and actually took the offer of a wager.
Shane, I suggest you put forth an amount... move the bet along... this can make for a nice resolution to who is FOS... also, some nice new material for the book
;)
Gutten tag , herr Julius ...
GENAU !
a "normal" fpj owner ...
are mentioning an average person that would like to know how to fathom the abyss ... just before jumping in it ?
the fpj world might be different! ...
yes , in fact it is wonderland , where all is painted in pink with big flowers in yellow or orange ...
a place where there is only Happy customers and Nice Agents ... ;-)
ps: i prefer to stick to my old ratio " Price/quality/use" , might not be as glamorous but at least without nasty surprises ...
Monsieur Shane :
for your Book , i am willing to offer you translation-works in a few languages ...
"WE" could darken all libraries in about no times , on many different continents ...
THE only thing you would have to pay is to allow me to publish the BOOK with my name printed on cover with the mention : " Col. Fred "
this said , in no way i could be held for responsible of all "60% down payments" we would waste in Luxurious Hotels , Fancy restaurants and Advertising campaigns in order to promote your/our work
(here , i must draw your attention on : Wherever money is to be made = the word "WE" is to be used ... ; wherever money is lost = the word "YOU" or " YOUR WORK" must be used )
Plain Truth :
Shane made it up as a lame attempt save face on the blog ...
may be i am some kind of E.T. ...
but i really do not see HOW anyone can loose face in having an opinion ...
even if it is wrong or wrongly backed , still peoples have the right to believe whatever they want ...
Mackarel said... The question remains though, if the $35K was not for JetInComplete as has been stated, what WAS it for? 1000 Eclipse polo shirts? 500 Eclipse Logo jackets? Options never delivered?
As I have said, Ken was a very vocal proponent of NOT signing up for jetcomplete during the Eclipse new plane warranty period. He therefore never signed up for or paid for said services. What Shane does not tell you, or is too lame to point out, is that the same spreadsheet also shows that there is a $52K accounts receivable entry offsetting the same claims entry. The $52K is the list price of a similar number of hours for jetcomplete at the prepaid discounted rate of $35K. There are many similar entry errors made in the documents, as they are not audited, and claims are up to the filings of the creditor, not as supplied by Eclipse. But, as Shane would have it, his interest only goes so far as to provide innuendo and one sided views. He has little interest in the whole picture, as long as it suits his argument.
ColdWet--I don't know what the $35,611 in the court listing is for. It says it is for "Prepaid Jet Complete," but given that I never paid for JetComplete, it strikes me as a goof. Eclipse Aviation accounting was all along a bit fouled up, you know. That was one of their problems.
I don't think it matters; it's pretty unlikely they're going to be sending me a check for $35K :)
Actually the whole thing is very flattering, if bizarre. That this entry, of thousands of entries, in an obscure court document has generated such interest among an august body of aviation enthusasts who could spend their time discussing any number of more interesting aviation issues is....well, heartwarming :)
Ken
Here is a KRQE news report that has a nice summary of the current status:
KRQE report
Key facts in the story:
1. Eclipse Aerospace put its deposit money down and is right now the only qualified bidder.
2. If any other group wants to bid, they have to do so by noon EDT on Friday
3. If there are any other bidders, the auction would be Monday, August 17
4. The sale hearing, where the court presumably will approve the sale, is August 20
5. The city officials in Albuquerque seem to be very pleased with the Eclipse Aerospace plan
Things are moving along.
Ken
Ken,
Things are moving along.
Translation:-
Rolling rapidly downhill.
You know it, I know it, and the Trustee knows it.
The Russians ARE coming.
Oh, and the Chinese, too.
"Out of the frying pan, into the fire."
I can see it now. The Russians get their hands on it, and FIKI will be completed but their 'home grown' upgrades will be crap. And weigh three times more, leaving you with no payload.
The Chinese win, they'll strip everything out of ABQ (including the paint on the walls), and then fully implement AvioNG. But the manuals will make no sense, and the parts quality will be crap, leaving you with dark screens, over water, at night.
With no backup instruments....
Now everyone knows how little money will pick up the bits. Just one of the listings of parts at the factory values them north of $100 million. Buy, liquidate and sell the off the remains. Easiest $50 million that anyone will ever make.
That's the Colonel's fatal error in this. He should have waited until someone else forced the Trustee to put an actual amount forward.
I know everyone thought $50 million would 'do' it, but Mike couldn't (and still can't) produce that much cash. The best he could manage was a few dollars down and the balance on 'Tuesday'.
All the Chinese (or the Russians) have to do now is come up with an all cash bid, and the CIFUS smokescreen Eclipse Aerospace are hiding behind will melt away like the morning dew.
Yes Ken, I know what's going on. Probably a lot more than you'd like me to know....
Plain Truth,
I'm happy that you admit the facts of Ken's JetComplete. His promotion of 'don't buy JetComplete' on E5C and EAC saying that he'd PAID for JetComplete (and I still don't buy 'the accountant screwed up' excuse) is entirely consistent with the record.
He regularly complained about various matters to the 'private club' that was/is E5C, but at exactly at the same time he shamelessly promoted the FPJ on the blog(s).
Why am I so down on poor old Ken?
Because he's trying to lead others down the path to ruin.
Eclipse Aviation Corporation proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that you can't profitable build and sell a twin jet, 6 place aircraft for $1.x million.
Eclipse Aerospace will end up spending at least $2.3 million, in parts and (American) labour, to build an FPJ. They need to make money, so expect a selling price of between $2.5 and $2.8 million, depending on options.
Can Colonel Mike and his merry crew get orders, of the volume required to make a business case?
I don't think so, and I think that people who promote this effort are wrong.
Dangerously so.
EAC couldn't make this work. Vern spent at least $1 billion PROVING it couldn't work.
This parrot is dead.
Even if it's a 'Norwegian Blue'....
Shane
Shane, for someone who claims to be "in the know", all you post is nonsense and sarcasm. That very much indicates the contrary.
Well, we'll see by the end of this week how many more bids there will be.
Shane, it is very rare for the liquidating value of assets of a manufacturer to be higher than what can be achieved by a sale to a party that will take it forward as a going concern. These $200M tools/jigs for example, are only worth their scrap value, unless you plan to make plans/parts with them.
Example - why can't the US restart B2 production or F22 production or C17 production after the line is shut down?
Because the $10B in tooling at Boeing, LM, suppliers, etc is taken down and scrapped.
GM and Chrysler tooling in the shutdown factories are fetching 1c-2c on the dollar.
So I find it hard to believe there will be a bidder intent on simply asset liquidation.
Could happen, but I doubt it.
Anyway - we are days/weeks away from finding out.
"The Russians are coming! FIKI will weigh too much!"
"The Chinese are coming! The parts will be crap!"
But, "Nobody can make this work; this parrot is dead."
Huh? We don't need to contradict you, Shane; you're doing an excellent job of that yourself.
Ken
Yes indeed. Shane seems to be conjuring up 7 plagues against the EA500 owners.
1 - Someone (Russians) will pickup the assets and have a certified FIKI solution that will be too heavy.
2 - Someone else (Chinese) will pickup the assets and start manufacturing replacement parts that will be "crap".
(incidentally - quite a racist remark about the Russians that are subcontractors to such minor projects like Boeing airliners and the Chinese who assemble A320 airliners)
3 - EA will get the assets and won't do anything with them.
I'm waiting for....
4 - Flood will destroy the ABQ factory.
5 - Locust will invade the Chicago FBO doing the mods and devour all parts.
6/7 - I failed Sunday school - so can't remember all the plagues, but I'm sure Shane will wish them on Ken is due time.
Baron,
What with the BANKRUPTCY at Eclipse, I don't think they need any biblical troubles.
But as I'm a firm believer in 'never say never' you could be right about future disasters 'lurking', ready to deprive another set of depositors of the odd few hundred thousand dollars. Ken will fill you in on what that feels like.
Ken,
The Russians and Chinese might not bid. That seems unlikely,as I'm hearing they are all 'locked and loaded'.
But
If they do, one of them will likely win. That can't improve the 'quality' of the upgrades, service or parts, regardless of which direction (East or West) the remains of EAC end up at.
Which illustrates my central point.
There is NO future for this 'disruptive' toy. It's broken, beyond economic repair. Any attempt to revive it is doomed.
Just like the original attempt, which ended in BANKRUPTCY.
You know that, I know that and even Vern has admitted that.
Wake up and smell the roses, my friend.
Plain Truth,
I will admit to a healthy application of irony in my attempts to mitigate some of the more 'rose tinted' comments from Eclipse supporters, but I've never really tried to be sarcastic.
Despite the failure of Eclipse Aviation Corporation.
I think you'll agree that I've mention the BANKRUPTCY of Eclipse often enough....
However, I do believe there IS a place for sarcasm in robust debate, so here goes:-
That very much indicates the contrary.
Contrary to what, exactly?
Logic?
Commonsense?
Business ethics?
English grammar, syntax or rhetoric?
I'm standing by, breathlessly, for your answer.
Oh, and what about our little bet.
Lost interest?
No more brave pills to hand?
Do tell.....
Shane
PS That last bit is very sarcastic, don't you think?
Hey , girls ...
don't be so overexcited ... ;-)
at the time being , it is only a 5M$ down payment ...
it wouldn't exactly a first-timer to see the balance delayed for next Tuesday , next year any Tuesday or next century last Tuesday ...
time will tell !
for the moment , i wouldn't to see a next deception for the victims !
so until everything is paid for , signed for , granted for , the lights on in ABQ and staff doing what they are supposed to do ...
i wouldn't call the champagne !!
the painful questions remain :
who is going to pay ?
How much is going to be the price ?
who is going to be customer ?
what is the size of market ?
ps: that one i know the answer : extremely small ... small enough to never make a cent anymore as profit !
I for one would love to see (underground) aftermarket parts and service in the US on a Chinese or Russian plane...
- in all seriouslness, there's no reason to think the Russians or Chinese won't figure out how to support the ea50, well, upgrade it well, and provide a high level of service in the US... also, there's no reason to think they cannot resume production on their turf, and make the planes for under $1M and sell them at a profit.
This just means one thing... THIS BLOG WILL BE AROUND FOR A LOT LONGER THAN EVEN I THOUGHT!
And for the record, I sincerely hope I read "my plane is worth more than one of those, it was made in the US" from one of our friendly bloggers.
Shane claims... That very much indicates the contrary.
Contrary to what, exactly?
Your rants here display no new facts that you claims to have. You stated, "you don't know what I know." Well then, give us a taste of what you DO know that hasn't been released or discussed. Put up, or shut up.
Shane, make a bet....
In my opinion, the good Col. and Messr. Holland have blinked and are trying a Verntastic bluff in a high stakes poker game.
My money is on the Chinese, which is probably the best overall outcome IF the Chinese are interested in the market and not just the technology (such as it is).
Press, Holland and Co. will not, IMO, have enough in the pot to make it to the River Card - and if they do, it will only create the beginning of the next smoking crater.
I have said it before and I will say it again, ANY talk of restarting production, right-pricing the plane, yadda yadda yadda is the warning flag to any current owner who only wishes someone had warned them before they drank the Kool-Aid the first time.
The ONLY concern should be supporting currently AOG planes (which is a bigger number than is being suggested by Eclipse proponents), developing a plan to complete the planes to perhaps as few as 3 configurations, then developing a life extension program (current FAA regulations will make this a time and cash consuming effort) there can be no easy extension.
There are still other court actions underway as well, the only thing that is a given is the show must go on.
Why can't North American Jet handle this on their own? Is it their idea that Press and Co. come in and take a piece of the action? It seems that these guys have been leeches on EACs potential and actual customer base for years. On the E5C you can see these guys selling positions as late as Sept 2008. And look at the SNs! As if they knew nothing was going on? Production was STOPPED! SP Jets didn't know this?
Whatever.
North American already had and continues to have a good rep for taking care of EA500s among other types. They have their own busy little fleet of part 135 EA500s whooshing around and that helped them in the MX learning curve. Once the former "VP of customer care" began talking with NAJ there was IP up to and including tooling that went to Chicago. They have everything they need regardless of who gets the "assets" whether domestic, Chinese or whoever. Customers learned that NAJ was quicker, cheaper and better quality MX than the EAC service centers toward the middle of last year.
There aren't enough planes in the air, nor will there ever be for the small market to support the kind of predatory BS that has and continues to be proposed. We'd all like to see what could be proposed to extend the life beyond 10 years. For now lets see what happens as more jets reach 600hrs. It won't be pretty but hopefully everything will continue to fly safely...above all that should and seems to be everyone's concern. Profit is a VERY close second (1st to some).
baron95,
...So I find it hard to believe there will be a bidder intent on simply asset liquidation.
Could happen, but I doubt it.
good start!
Why did you stop your résumé?
Because of next Tuesday?
CWMR wrote what most of us expect: Col. M's and Madson's bid is just an interlude!
It's tough to talk about 100 to 200 employees in ABQ!
What's their initial math?
Revenue > $45M = Y00/per hour *Z00 000 total flight hours of the customers? (Ken might calculate it in "per statute miles")
Julius
What needs to not get lost in the noise is that the purchase price of the assets is but a SMALL down payment on the costs to do anything other than support the existing fleet and that is why I believe Press/Holland are not really in the game.
The engineering resources needed just to get to maybe 3 consistent configurations and to begin on a life extension plan are measured in the millions of dollars per year, then there is facilities and utilities - this will be hard to do on a fair-market service cost unless the vast majority of planes are true hangar queens which I do not believe to be true (although there are more than has been represented).
More money will be required after the purchase, in the tens of millions, just to get to a stable set of configurations, to complete the needed options, to establish real service capability, to re-establish vendor relationships and build new ones when needed, and to start the process for getting past the 10 year shelf life which is 20-30% used up now on a not insignificant portion of the fleet.
Anyone without immediate access to $80-100M to spend in the next 18-24 months is not a serious contender, and that EXCLUDES any talk of bringing the plane back into production. With a resumption of production you had better have a minimum of $250-300M burning a hole in your pocket.
This is a game involving very, very big numbers - $5M is the table minimum, I fear Eclipse Aerospace is like the kid who just turned 21 and is playing at the $500 table on his first trip to Vegas, trouble is, he only has $1000 in his pocket - he will be all-in before the pro's are even warmed up.
there are no pros at tis table... I can assure you of this...
There's a huge problem going on here...
In order for anyone to be serious about buying EAC assets... they need to believe they can restart production, otherwise, just read BAssMaster's post, again and again, until you get the point.
It does not surprise me that a group of owners are trying to graduate to OEM status... they LOVE the plan.. THEY loved the IDEA and DREAM of EAC... now, they can OWN it!!! I can almost smell the arrogance/exhuberance covered in ego...
So, they are trying to buy the asets... they think they can revive the plane and bring it back to market, PLUS they think they have a captive audience for support.
- Support will find its way to the CHAPEST provider, especially in the market where clients only bought the plane because it was cheap. Really cheap...
So, there's no money in the support aspect.
- There's no large market for this plane, and with a small market the price will be too high, and no one will care to buy it, except for a fetish marketplace of maybe 20-50 a year at most.
++ if the Chinese or Russians decide to use the plane for some shuttle service(s) within their countries... the plane can work... because it can be forced upon the clients, so to speak. The US market will be a non-issue for these buyers - too small at realistic prices.
Ooopps... back to dispatching....
Why all this talk about re-starting production?
I think EA has been very clear. Their intent for the first YEARS is fleet support, upgrading and selling DayJet planes, etc.
New production - if it happens - is years in the future.
They have said so, we all agree.
So why continue to post like if they are setting up to focus on new production.
It is just not so - as I understand it.
To support this jet, can be as little as investment already made (e.g. for North American Jet to continue to support the planes as they have) to $10M to prime the upgrade pump and start generating billings from upgrading owners.
Again, the model, for me, is the Aerostar model. They have a lot of configurations that basically can all be upgraded to something similar to the Aerostar 700 (a couple of variations there).
The fleet VALUE (forget size - it is not relevant) of EA500s is substantially higher than Aerostars.
Baron I think you are missing my point. I said ANY talk of restarting production should be a warning sign, and they clearly ARE talking about restart - it is immaterial whether it is right away or in a couple years (which is the same as 'right away' in all reality).
The reason of course is they believe they will not be seen as serious and will not be able to attract the necessary capital if the plan was only to provide boutique engineering and support services to a small fleet of incomplete aircraft with an unknown series of configurations.
This artificially inflates the percieved value of the assets in my opinion, making it less likely that Eclipse Aero can win a contested auction in the first place, and would then have any capital left over to figure out what they have purchased if there were to win. Then they would have to begin in earnest on putting a solid and executable plan together.
If certain other actions are decided soon, there would be no need to purchase the assets in the first place, and the money about to incinerated on what will be, I think, a surprising bidding war, could instead go to the development and certification of needed fixes and upgrades.
I believe there is NO effective market for the plane without a significant redesign to bring it up to the current state of the art with stable suppliers while also being even reasonably producible - my put is about $200-250M.
Does Eclipse Aero have access to this level of capital? If not, how does anyone suppose they would get to that kind of money unless it involves predatory pricing on parts and service, and aggressively pushing any non-Eclipse Aero providers of parts and service out of the picture to get a monopoly on the captive audience?
My belief is that most of the current parties are grossly underestimating the capital requirements, and other than a communist government, everyone else will need to be interested in being at least marginally profit oriented.
CW said...
The reason of course is they believe they will not be seen as serious and will not be able to attract the necessary capital if the plan was only to provide boutique engineering and support services to a small fleet of incomplete aircraft with an unknown series of configurations.
===================
Got It. And Agree. Talk of future production is just like original talk of 1,000 planes/year.
Needed and necessary to attract capital.
But CW - what difference does it make? They get the money, get the assets, start to service the fleet - production never restarts - so?
I have no concerns about protecting speculative capital. Their greed, their due diligence, their loss.
If ANYONE believes this venture will be consistently profitable, they are smoking JetA fumes.
This will be, at best, a limp along, with regular need for cash infusion. As is all of GA.
"Because the $10B in tooling at Boeing, LM, suppliers, etc is taken down and scrapped."
Why would any sentient person scrap the tooling? Piper recently wanted to restart the Cheyenne line and found out that a previous generation of idiot "managers" had scrapped all the Cheyenne and Navajo tooling. Cessna could probably sell all the Conquests they gould crank out but they prefer to shove half their workforce down the stairwell and suck up to China. The twin truboprop market defaults to Hawker Beech with a nod to the Italians.
yeah Ron, he forgot the '... and this is your point. Ken used to nit pick everyones posts here, just like that - we type fast and move on....
OOpps... gotta go dipitch sum mor plans
WELCOME BACK BARON! Where did that imposter go?
;)
Post a Comment