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:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 729 Newer› Newest»The difference to me Baron is one of character. If they are willing to either be less than honest about their intentions (never go into production), or instead are knowingly going to divert needed resources immediately in order to meet their 'in two years' storyline, either way it speaks to the ability to simply tell the truth.
The failure of Adam and Eclipse and ATG and Safire, as well as the current situation at Epic all speak to the results of this kind of approach, this kind of management ethos.
Insanity can be defined as doing the same thing you have always done and expecting a different result.
How refreshing would it be for a truly different approach, one that only foucused on providing boutique engineering and support services to a small fleet of incomplete aircraft with an unknown series of configurations?
Guess I am getting jaded, I just want people to be honest from the get-go and am tired of getting burned or nearly burned by accomplished liars and folks who are less than honest (for whatever reason).
airsafetyman,
Re: Cheyenne/Navajo tooling at Piper. The story I heard was that this tooling was destroyed when Hurricane Frances tore through Piper's Vero Beach complex in 2004. Can anyone else confirm this story I heard first hand from a senior exec at Piper?
ATM: just like that - we type fast and move on...
Sometimes without even thinking about what is written.
"The story I heard was that this tooling was destroyed when Hurricane Frances tore through Piper's Vero Beach complex in 2004."
Nope. The buiding where the tooling was stored was practically undamaged. The management used the hurricane as an excuse to get rid of it.
On another note EASA has a proposed AD note on the Thales airspeed probe used on the A-330 and A-340. Go 'ad.easa.europa.eu'. The Goodrich probe must be used.
About the Epic Aircraft - wasn't it absolutely insane to have so many projects/aircraft going on at the same time? There was hardly any period of 'consolidation' in this company - not even a month would go by and they would announce yet again model, a new venture.
“Assuming something” is always dangerous . . . but just for fun, let’s assume that all the financial ducks are lined up, quacking in unison, etc., . . . and sub-contractors have forgiven unpaid debt and all returned to do their part.
(Oh, and then there’s the “tooling” . . . let’s pretend that the tooling doesn’t matter . . . almost no-one has ever addressed that stinky little issue, so we’ll simply pretend it either doesn’t exist, or doesn’t really matter . . . and besides, who needs serious tooling when a person can simply push a “drill” (drill bit, to the carpenters reading this) through a couple layers of aluminum, and hope that the hole will be covered by a generous rivet, or at least by paint, or as I was told by at least one who knew, “Bondo”.)
Now what? Is there someone who really knows how to bring this design back within reasonable limits? . . . Someone who truly understands aeronautical type stuff, and the delicate balance between structural integrity, system integration, manufacturing methods, and the multitude of skills that must come together, to either “complete” the bird, or build the “Mark II”?
(Hang the final price . . . the “committed”, the “faithful”, will somehow come up with the bucks . . . they did it before, they’ll do it again.)
There’s a lot of talk about innovative financing, and inventive methods of running a company, while avoiding lawsuits, and recovering lost confidence, but I haven’t heard much talk about the technical issues. Maybe there is somewhere in all that a “flying spread sheet”, sort of like a flying “Persian Carpet”.
Frankly, I’d be extremely impressed if just one of the little birds was ever completed . . . and I’m not even expecting it to have the first promised capabilities.
gadfly
(Maybe there’s a “South Beach Diet” for overweight “VLJ’s”. ‘Let’s hope Obama doesn’t come up with a tax on obese aircraft.)
The “gadfly” speaks:
There’s an expression, ‘I wish I were a fly on the wall listening to . . . whatever . . . !” Well, this fly on the wall has been “listening” (as it were) to the various conversations between “y’all” for a few years. And mostly, it seems to be a battle of name calling or avoiding a direct answer to a legitimate question, seemingly to protect “pride” or something . . . (the motives get rather vague at times).
Presently, I no longer have any employees . . . and at my age, that’s OK. There is nothing so exhausting as “super vision” . . . it’s everything the words imply. But if I ever had a crew that behaved in the childish manner I have observed of some, I would have helped such individuals out the door at the earliest opportunity. Any employer knows that letting someone go is no big deal . . . there are a myriad of methods, without jeopardizing their future prospects at another position.
When I ask a question, I usually attempt to phrase it in a manner requiring a short answer, “Yes”, “No”, or “I don’t know”, or “I don’t know, but I’ll get back”, avoiding references to the person’s character or morals. And when I get such an answer, my impression of that person goes up a notch or two. When I ask a question, and I get a long “gerrymandering” answer, and soon detect a complete refusal to answer the question, I confirm the old saying, “Ignorance can be fixed, but Stupid is forever” . . . and “Ignorance is a condition, but Stupid is a choice!”.
It’s OK to be ignorant. To admit ignorance is to invite new information, to gain knowledge, and, hopefully, wisdom (which is the ability to properly apply knowledge to “whatever”).
“Stupidity” is that choice to remain ignorant, and protect “pride” at all costs. Unfortunately, “stupidity” becomes a habit after while . . . leaving both the “stupid” and the listener in deep depression. It remains a mystery, to me, as to what such an attitude is meant to gain . . . ?
Well, there you have the “sermon of the day” from the gadfly. It’s not worth much, but there it is.
gadfly
I guess to some, a typing error is the same as not thinking through an issue....
To me, there's substance over form... but I guess that what makes the world go around...
If you want to believe someone did not think through their point, becasue of missing a ' ... I guess this says something about you we should all keep in mind.
ATman,
I was the one being accused of not knowing what I was talking about.
Me?!!??
If you ever get your hands on my emails, that 'assertion' would make you laugh out loud.
For weeks.
Nope, Plain Truth decided to call me out. It's up to him to suggest a bet.
Now, between you and me, I don't care what amount he suggests, I'll double it.
Wanna know why?
Because even before Roel 'imploded' every single 'interested party' has contacted me, either directly or through agents.
No exceptions.
Ken is shilling for Colonel Mike, and has been since it became apparent (even through rose tinted spectacles) that Roel was a man of straw.
Now, what odds that Ken turns into an avid supported of whichever bidder actually 'wins'?
Remember, first Vern could do NO wrong, then Roel, and now Mike is the 'second coming'.
Who's next?
No, forget that, it doesn't matter. Within a very short time after 'winning' we'll hear rumblings from Ken and his ilk, then squeals of pain (financially based) followed by howls of outrage.
So, I'm past caring about details which supporters of this scam trot out to annoy us.
My primary mission is to warn the unwary off.
The EA500 might indeed be an excellent twin jet. It could well represent the future of GA.
But I don't think so.
I believe it's a money pit for the unwary, and I can't see a happy outcome for those foolish enough to pour good money after bad.
Let me tell you a little family story. My grandfather was an engineer, who owned a port, amongst other things. He decided, in about 1988, that he knew more about port construction than the accumulated knowledge of civil engineers going back 5000 years.
A new method of port construction was decreed. A very, VERY considerable amount of his own cash was poured into the Irish sea.
His 'new method' turned out to be a complete crock. Not only did it fail, but in failing it blocked a portion of the existing quay wall for months.
I learned from this. Not only did I understand that my grandfather (with whom I lived at the time) had HAD to try his idea out, but that, on balance, and despite apparent skills, risks sometimes overwhelm potential advantages.
Don't get me wrong, the man was a charming individual and I loved him dearly. He also achieved some remarkable successes in his other activities and lived (and worked) until almost the day he died at the age of 98.
But you can't ignore the lessons of history.
And you can't build a twin jet, 6 place aircraft and sell it for a profit at $1.x million.
Or even $2.x (where x is less than 5) million.
Anyone who aspires to one, that will get supported with the required technical backup, over the lifetime of the purchase, is fooling themselves if they pay less.
Sadly, that appears to be this particular 'history lesson'.
ColdWet,
Welcome back. We needed an injection of sanity around here.
Gad,
You were right.
There never was, or will be, a completed EA500, as per the original spec.
Shane
Michal,
There was a certain method to the madness re: Epic's simultaneous design efforts that actually makes a lot of sense but I cannot expound on it out of respect for an NDA related to a proposed but never executed consulting arrangement (literally in work as the the house of cards was apparently collapsing).
I personally really liked the business model being pursued at Epic, think of it as Scaled Composites but with aircraft that might be successful in the marketplace and which can actually be built.
Given the current situation, I would counsel the folks who will likely end up with the company to simply focus on the LT and its' derivatives, but I know they already know that.
Notice for the 'unwary'
I'm still getting email from EAC depositors, who cling to some small shred of hope.
You'll understand that I've tried to be gentle and tell them I don't think they'll see either their money, or an aircraft, from Eclipse Aviation Corporation.
For the very simple and sound reason that the company is bankrupt.
So, in advance, and betting 'blind' I'm prepared to offer this hostage to the future.
It doesn't matter who tries, the EA500 is a dead parrot.
If a billion dollars (at least) couldn't make it work, I don't think $40 million will either...
Q. How do you make a small fortune out of aviation?
A. Start with a large one....
The old jokes are always the best, I think everyone can agree.
Yet another lesson from history.
Now I really must get back to writing the book. Don't forget to send those 10% deposits! Hurry hurry hurry, lines are open for a limited time only, the first 100 orders will get a signed t-shirt. It will of course be the wrong size, torn, with mud and dirt all over it, but I'm sure Ken will be happy to promote it for me.
I really do miss Vern, at times like this. He was so inspirational, in a 'cash arsonist' kind of way.
Shane
airsafetyman:
Your comments about tooling should be pursued.
Whenever tooling is designed and fabricated (machined, assembled, and put into service), there goes with that tooling the knowledge and philosophy of its use and application by the designer. In other words, “tooling” is almost a living thing. (Oh man, what a subject for a Bible study . . . but I’ll have to leave that for another time.)
Many times I have designed and built tooling for any variety of applications, for major companies, only to observe the turnover of those in charge, with a new crop of workers presented with expensive tooling, with no knowledge of the proper use of that tooling . . . and before long, it makes its way to the scrap heap.
(One example stands out, the exception to the rule: Thirteen years of use of one of my machines . . . the customer complained that it needed to be “re-designed”. I examined the machine (the customer had performed no maintenance in those thirteen years). . . someone else had changed the “logic” of the pneumatic circuit. I changed it back to its original design (mine), and returned it to the production line, installing hundreds of thousands of LCD displays on home thermostats. The exception to the rule was that I designed the machine in such a way that no training was necessary. We were invited to build three more . . . and give a price. I gave them the price for three. They then said I needed to include complete detailed drawings with the “bid” . . . and I said, “I don’t think so!” Within three months or so, Honeywell had packed up from Bluewater Road in Albuquerque, and moved the operation to China. They may figure it out and build new machines . . . but I didn’t give them the computer files. But if they do build the machines, at least the next generation of LCD installation machines will not require much in the way of training, on the assembly line . . . somewhere in China.)
This presents a major problem for those that would wish to “resurrect” the Eclipse . . . if there is no continuation of the knowledge base, there is no company to resurrect. Any company, no matter how successful, or lacking success, is not a collection of machines, factory space, and un-assembled parts, it is an “organism” more than an organization. The continuing knowledge base is almost more important . . . no, I take that back . . . it IS the most important part of the company. Without that knowledge base, all the tooling in the world is worthless.
gadfly
I'm curious where Harbour Air in Canada comes into play. They were supposed to be just as "connected" as NAJ where MX and mods are concerned. There were lead techs from both companies at EAC to watch mods take place (almost like training...but not quite) and were treated to see how folks operate within a company when they don't know if they will have a job the next day (or a paycheck for the previous week). They got to see firsthand how the flow coating of "crosslink" on the windshields works (or doesn't) as well as see a boot or two replaced (no biggie there). It was embarrassing.
This new venture, if it goes through will line a small group of people's pockets for a season. Nothing more, nothing less.
NAJ has the upper hand in EA500 MX regardless of who get's the big bag of tricks.
"NAJ has the upper hand in EA500 MX regardless of who get's the big bag of tricks."
It will be interesting IF anyone acquires some "rights" that has the potential to limit the open market for parts and service.
This may sound like a simplistic statement, but I have a feeling, it is a complex issue... from many perspectives.
Could prove to be an expensive issue as well, for perhaps more than one group of stakeholders.
Shane, I'm interested in getting a platinum position for your book. But I won't be able to pay you for it until Tuesday.
I could also envision the day naj says screw this all and distances itself from the bonfire. They are not out to screw people. The other guys that they let in the front door are! Time will tell.
I’m not personally familiar with Harbour Air, but I’ll take an educated guess.
They probably ran the numbers and realized doing the EAC SB work only made sense IF they had no other aircraft to work on. For FIKI, I estimated a GROSS of $16/hr vs the regular $95/hr turbine rate for aircraft that had far better factory support. And this fantastic $16 was making the following assumptions:
- we spread tooling costs over 20 aircraft, although 6 was a more likely number.
- we did not repaint the entire lower wings and nose, which EAC strongly encouraged.
- the windshield coating would work after the first attempt (highly unlikely).
- we didn’t induce any RVSM errors when working on the static port areas (unlikely), and create another certification nightmare.
- there was no rework required (highly unlikely).
- the AvioNG SB went smoothly and was fully functional (highly unlikely) If it didn’t, you didn’t get paid for FIKI.
- we didn’t have to buy any parts (“at full list price”) from EAC, who didn’t even have prices established then. Based on their tooling prices, probably 5X the industry standards.
-we wouldn’t have to shell out additional tens of thousands of $$ for increased liability insurance.
(EAC wanted a financial scapegoat for any smoking holes).
- we would actually get paid by EAC (highly unlikely with the terms of the contract).
The MRO was supposed to solve technical problems that the factory couldn’t, give the aircraft back to the owner, submit a bill to EAC, and, IF EAC ever got around to inspecting your repair work & bill for compliance with the ridiculous contract, AND decided it complied (unlikely), it would then submit it to A.P. for payment two months later. An MRO would have completed 10-12 aircraft before seeing their first dime, or realized EAC wasn’t going to pay because they were broke. The MRO was prohibited from seeking payment from the aircraft owner, using a mechanic lien, or suing EAC.
EAC should have just promised five magic beans, and they could have shared in the laughter.
We decided to let our competitors lose $80/hr, perhaps much more, and assume the huge liabilities. Very few did.
I really hope the newco can succeed at the upgrades, and start giving owners something to smile about. When I meet owners, I deliberately don’t mention the aircraft, because it is painful to talk about.
Monsieur Shane :
If a billion dollars (at least) couldn't make it work, I don't think $40 million will either... ...
sorry to point it out ...
at the moment of writing (without thinking) $40 M. is what is said ...
what is deposited is ONLY $5 M. !
Baron :
you are wrong , sorry !
if they had to make a show or to lie to attract capital =
the mass is "already" said !
never heard of "if you lie for an egg , you'll lie for a beef" ?
Shadow :
But I won't be able to pay you for it until Tuesday. ...
i don't think it going to be a big deal for our Irish friend ...
if you only can go in all TV"late show" or radio-talks to claim how wonderful the Book is (while it is not written yet) ...
i am sure Monsieur Shane will attribute you a serial number very close to 1 !
For one customers reaction to the delays at Boeing please see:
Hitler and the Boeing 787
BT,
Fantastic. One of the funniest links I have ever seen posted anywhere! Now all we need is another one with Benito Mussolini ranting about how much he could have saved if he had ordered the Piaggio Avaniti rather than the Cessna Columbus.
EAP,
what we've learned from EAC is a simple thing:
Anyone can promise anything
Anyone can guarantee anything
After they have your money, its more your problem than theirs.
I suspect, if you are correct regarding the cost of upgrades, this will be more of the same...
Shane writes, "Ken is shilling for Colonel Mike"
Let's be clear, here, okay? "Colonel Mike" is a degrading name you've put together to belittle Mike Press. I resent you doing that.
Mike Press is a genuine American hero in a great line of Americans that fought wars and died for thankless and thoughtless *foreigners* like you. Saps, we Americans are, sometimes, I guess, when it comes to saving the asses of asses like you.
Mike was a highly-decorated USAF pilot, having been awarded the Legion of Merit, two DFCs, and 13 Air Medals. He was a graduate of the National War College and an early member of the Aggressor Squadron, training a generation of USAF pilots. You can read more about his early exploits in the book "Red Eagles, America's Secret MiGs" by Steve Davies.
In his latter years in the Air Force, Mike managed all USAF foreign military sales for Europe and Asia including huge AWACS and F-15 programs that put him working closely with Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas.
After retiring from the Air Force, Mike worked for years in the private Aerospace industry with major involvement in such programs as the B-747, B-2 bomber, and multiple fighter programs of Grumman, M-D, GD, Boeing, and Lockheed-Martin. That's where he garnered the experience he's now putting to use for Eclipse Aerospace.
So let's cut the derogatory "Colonel Mike" crap.
And as for me "shilling" for him, I like the plane and I like the Eclipse Aerospace plan for supporting it. I am not paid to support Eclipse Aerospace, nor do I lose anything if they fail. Your use of the word "shilling" in that context suggests that your grasp of English word definitions is about as good as your use of English grammar.
Ken
Ken, in all fairness I think you would have to admit that Press brought at least some of this on himself by continuing to use Col. as a title which is atypical at best once someone has retired.
Keep in mind too that there is a history of comments made about Press, and his actions, by many folks including owners and position holders, here and elsewhere that paint a less savory picture - especially in the run up to the final collapse of EAC V2.0.
I think acknowledging that history and the baggage that potentially comes with it would go a long way towards establishing some credibility. Just a suggestion.
In his latter years in the Air Force, Mike managed all USAF foreign military sales for Europe ...
i remember this time quite well ...
many Govs and High-official were linked thereafter to bribery scandals ...
may be you should check before writing (with or without thinking ?)
ps : i thought you were from Zuid-Afrika ?
i forgot ...
was confucius that said :
"Grammar is the science for who has nothing to say " ?
ColdWet writes, "Ken, in all fairness I think you would have to admit that Press brought at least some of this on himself by continuing to use Col. as a title which is atypical at best once someone has retired."
US Code Title 10, 772(c):
"A retired officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may bear the title and wear the uniform of his retired grade."
That's the law. I think it's a good one.
In this case, the use of the title is also highly pertinent as it establishes expertise in the particular area in question.
Ken
OH BROTHER...
"That's the law. I think it's a good one."
- from the guy who tramples the First Amendment which shelters the right to speak anonymously.
Not talking about the law Ken, talking about common practice when people seperate from their service and re-enter the public sector as a private citizen.
Typically, you only see guys maintain the title/rank when they are either, high-level consultants (usually security and policy commentator) or when they are using the title/rank to create gravitas.
Your mileage can, and will, vary, but at least I tried.
Woaw ....
if it is the law ... ! ;-)
bit odd , my father was one of the boss of Air-Force ...
once he retired , i do not remember a single time he mentioned his rank ...
ColdWet writes, "Not talking about the law Ken, talking about common practice when people seperate from their service and re-enter the public sector as a private citizen."
It's not as if Mike introduces himself at cocktail parties with, "Hi, I'm *Colonel* Mike Press, retired Air Force guy."
He used the title in some releases for Eclipse Aerospace, where his work in the Air Force helps establish his expertise.
But whatever.
If you think the only thing wrong with Eclipse Aerospace is that their press release said Mike is a retired Air Force colonel, then I guess the plan must be pretty good!
:)
Ken
Actusally Ken, I have been critical of each iteration of the Press/Holland plan - I only chimed in to clarify, as you later agreed, that it was Press himself who initiated the whole thing by referring to himself as Colonel Mike Press in the press releases.
I don't believe that Press's experience in various program offices provides any significant benefit, as his rank would not typically afford him high-level management or leadership duties. I have worked a number of DoD programs, Colonels do the flying and report back to the brass in my experience. They push paper around, make recommendations but it takes Stars to be at the same level in a government program as a would-be CEO/COO.
I mean, I am the Master of All I Survey, but I don't go around saying it... ;^)
To clarify my statement above, in my experience, Colonels occupy a space similar to a Manager, perhaps as high as a Director, but in no way equivalent to a C level.
Did not want to create the impression that Colonels are not important or do not play an important role in the programs they are involved in, they do, just wanted to say it would not be equivalent to a C level position.
OK, RR,
Ken has tried to discredit folks here for not revealing themselves, and has also, attempted to defend MP as credible for using his Col. emblem, stating US law provides for a Col to be able to use his rank/title and uniform after he is retired...
... and, I remark that Ken is the last person who should seek remedies under the US law, since he apparently neglects one fundamental constitutional right - privacy.
Its OK, if you don;t seem to understand the First Ammendment - I don't have much time between flight school dispatches... so I cannot explain. Go online, you can learn how this works.
ALso, its common sense that IF a fraud or crime, or just cicvil action is involved, there is the ability ot to vercome this right as it may exist online - -but the case will be made prima facie, in order to protect this fundamental right.
As it applies to Ken, lickily hypocracy is not mentioned specifically under the US Constitution, nor is it a crime or cause of civil acti
oopps... more dispatches... later
CWMR makes an interesting (and correct) point about relative analogues between the civil and military domains.
I've hired several Colonels and they were fine people but in my case they worked as pilots and Directors. They did not seem generally prepared for or interested in executive management. I have found the same true for those retired and in corporations.
Moreover, taking on the entrepreneur role (as EAC requires) is even a step way above the "C-suite." I've also hired many corporate execs and they were fish out of water in a start up, where the environment changes by the day. Both military officers and corporate executives are trained to work through hierarchy and to give and follow commands.
But they are not necessarily "leaders" where leader is defined as an individual that can articulate and drive forward a business plan and can convince and persuade.
Don't know the gentlemen in question here; but I would say whoever wishes to take on EAC will need not only an over-abundance of money but a very savvy team that has been through the start-up and turnaround routines and battle-tested in these areas.
I think Mike Press has done a fine "entrepreneurial" job as it relates to EAC and the EA50.
- He invested in EAC
- He set up a cottage industry promoting EAC and the Plane
- He successfully convinced clients to buy and sell delivery positions and used EA jets
What else do you want from the guy?
In fact, FWIW, I think he probably forgot everything they taught him in the military in order to accomplish all of this.
Back to dispatch....
knot funny!
CW said ... speak to the results of this kind of approach, this kind of management ethos.
======================
I see it differently CW. I think an startup speculative venture, by definition, is a long shot, offers no guarantees, and frequently changes very fast.
The best battleplans change the second first contact is made.
Job ONE of an entrepreneur in these ventures is to line up funding to get them off the ground. Job TWO is to continue to raise funds to support the unavoidable setbacks and changes. Job three is to execute whatever plan is workable given the available funding and marketplace/technology realities. Job four is to return equity to the investors.
Simple as that.
You need to be FULL OF IT (exuberance, confidence, ego, vision, etc...) to accomplish job 1 and job 2. With out that, you never get to three (e.g. Safire) or four (e.g. Eclipse).
If you are putting down deposits or investments or becoming a supplier to these ventures you HAVE TO ASSUME THEY WILL FAIL.
You should be pleasantly surprised if they succeed.
If you look at it any other way you WILL be disappointed.
It's beyond me why people seem to forget this lesson.
RonRoe said... However, when someone puts up a headline post, and it contains egregious errors that have been repeatedly pointed out, and he refuses to correct them, what does that say about that person's pride of workmanship?
=======================
Not my fight or interest, but I agree. Shane bragged about how much care and how long (weeks) it used to take him to get a headline post up.
And they were ALL underwhelming and full of errors. As a publishing executive (as he claims), that is an indication that he is sloppy with his claims.
He also is very naive and seems to put in a pedestal some clearly incompetent and out of touch individuals, like his "professional pilot" friend, who was an endless pit of inaccurate statements posted by Shane attributed to him.
Why am I'm posting this? Shane thank you for the service you provided on v2.0. I KNOW it is much easier to criticize than to DO, like I am now. But as a common contributor to this blog...
This annoying habit of yours of, in every post, hide behind the "if you knew what is in my inbox" and other silliness like this is completely discrediting you.
If you can't post some info, than don't mention it. You are trying to sound "in the know" and "important" without producing the goods. That just make you sound like a Vernesque fake and fraud.
So, again, thank you, but come on - there is a limit to this crap you've been posting lately.
It is beyond me why people KOWINGLY go in with less than honest approaches Baron - IOW, if you have to NOT be honest in order to get the money, you ought NOT be doing it in the first place - using OPM places a higher burden on ethics, it does not excuse bad behavior.
"It's beyond me why people seem to forget this lesson."
Well, it should not be... just like you accuse Shane of hiding behind some GRAND claim of KNOWING something you do not... every invetment was made based on SOME GRAND CLAIM of KNOWING something you do not...
I personally believe hane... and I personally never believed on bit of EAC crap regarding technology, pricing or market application/demand for the plane.
You can chose to believe whatever you wish - you have 2 choices:
Believe the guy who understand HOW to fool people, or believe the guy who understands something you really do not perhaps leading to achieving something remarkable and new., or the truth.
Its really tough to tell which is which.
Ken said... That's where he garnered the experience he's now putting to use for Eclipse Aerospace.
=======================
Nice summary - I'm glad someone posted.
However, that is unlikely to persuade the likes of Shane and Fred, to accord some common courtesy to people like Mike Press that:
a - They don't know / know about.
b - Has done them no harm.
c - Is trying to improve on a difficult situation by doing something.
d - Are clearly intelligent, capable and have a successful track record to stand on.
e - Are truly heroic in important ways.
To the likes of Fred and Shane, these things are irrelevant. They hate for hate sakes.
Fred probably because he can't take the US-led western dominated values that conquered the world.
Shane, due to some likely equally "small" reason.
There is no need to demonize people to express the failings of a venture. The hate and demonizing is their goal. The EA500, Ken and Mike and EA are just the excuse.
I am really tired of this petty school yard bickering.
I wish there was an asterisk for any post that actually had a piece or real information or a reasonable rumor so I could skip the noise.
I enjoy the factual posts about airplanes etc and even the posts on management style, health insurance, business conditions around the world etc. These all are ideas that can be considered and may affect the future sucess of Eclipse and other business enterprises.
But spare me the petty bickering about Col or other things that basically immaterial to the future of aircraft business.
Baron said "Job four is to return equity to the investors" and then suggested that Eclipse met this job.
I call shenanigans. I want to know exactly what equity was returned to the investors, and I'm not referring to airplanes delivered to customers. The customer deposits should have never been considered investments in Eclipse. They were just payments toward an aircraft/asset, not some kind of stock/company equity purchase.
RonRoe said...
ATM, you might want to reread that First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:
===================
I am extremely disappointed by the quality of the posts of the so-called "critics" lately.
You guys are being schooled left and right by the "supporters" based on really basic failings of understandings of simple concepts.
You get up to the soap box, beat your chest and then spill something that is completely flawed in an attempt to admonish another poster.
Can't you tell how silly it makes you look?
The example of ATM's post referenced above is a typical illustration (not to pick on ATM).
Geez, guys, you can do better. Read CW's posts. Well articulated and clearly sourced information. He just had a disagreement with Ken on the merits of Mike Press referencing his rank in the USAF, and no one called anyone names.
I hope you do better. As a "independent" on this partisan fight, I want both sides to provide vigorous, but valuable info/points.
Incidentally, my opinion is the Mike Press should be low key at referencing his rank - if part of his executive bio, it is relevant however.
I also think that it is completely proper to note that Mike Press has an economic interest and a personal reputation interest and promoting the viability of the EA500 and the secondary and even primary market for the type.
I think this is plain obvious to those familiar with the story, but worthwhile of noting here every now and then.
airtaximan said...
I think Mike Press has done a fine "entrepreneurial" job as it relates to EAC and the EA50.
- He invested in EAC
- He set up a cottage industry promoting EAC and the Plane
- He successfully convinced clients to buy and sell delivery positions and used EA jets
What else do you want from the guy?
=================
All very fair and relevant comments.
Relevant for owners decision to do future business with EA AND for the creditors to place a value on the $20M in notes.
I place the value of those notes at ZERO. Hardly worthy of the extra attorney costs to negotiate the contract to receive them.
Baron I think valuing the notes at zero is being overly generous.
If you include the money that will be needed to BEGIN to support the planes, after the $40M to buy the assets, (which I still think will be Eclipsed by a foreign power), the $20M in notes represents about $80M that will be required and likely blown by this time in 2011 (if it even takes that long).
The $40M is the ante, the true cost, IMO, is about three times that as I have repeatedly stated. It will be months before parts are flowing out of ABQ (if ever) - the up and coming cottage industry currently supporting the planes will continue to fill that void and will set expectations of service and pricing (I have met some of the guys doing it now, very sharp) that will increase the challenge for Press/Holland, or the Chinese.
REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS are needed, and I see precious little evidence of that being encouraged or supported, at least out here in the open.
I don't see why anyone gives a rats a$$ what this Press guy puts before his name. He's a position broker. IMO that's worse than a charter trip broker. Here are a few of his "listings" just to give an idea:
Oct08 1st in line for Garmin/FIKI to be done in Jan!?
Aug08 "No Risk" position in low 300's due delivery Oct or Nov!?
Jun08 SN's for sale 266 and up.
It's not like these positions were being peddled in 2006 when the money tree was ripe, this was at the end of LAST YEAR when everything was obviously doomed.
If he actually DID and DOES believe his own BS God bless him.
Now we have this Ken guy who seems to spend time under Press' skirt. At least Ken was smart enough not to originally option for the useless 6th seat like Press did. He also got himself a radar altimeter and premium entertainment package instead of the plated metals package. At least they are both 135 LX's. Green/Tan or Burgundy/Blue...they will become the same recycled aluminum in 8 years, God willing they make it that far (in time, not "statute miles"). Neither of them intend on bad happenings or they both would have the skid plate option (for those of you that don't know...yes there WAS a skid plate option). Hell, way back when there was almost a speed brake option that didn't quite work into production. One of the test planes has it.
So what about these folks:
Mr. L SN269 N500YD
Mr. S SN270 N202JG
Mr. S SN272 N444EJ
Mr. S SN277 N510JA
And on and on we could go...
Look them up. They're still registered to EAC! When will that change? How much did they already spend? So close ;) One is sitting in NM with engines installed ready for paint! 3 more are almost done just waiting for engine installation. So close!
Ken,
Let's be clear, here, okay? "Colonel Mike" is a degrading name you've put together to belittle Mike Press. I resent you doing that.
Don't know why it bothers you, as it's how he signs off his emails, so it clearly not bothering him.
Check out who's more 'American' around here by the way, before you start waving the 'star spangled banner'.
There's an excellent chance that my ancestors got to North America a long, long time before yours ever did.
Baron,
Sorry to interrupt your flow, but I'm not now, nor never have been, involved in publishing. Put it another way, there's an excellent chance that I've shaped the way information gets to your morning paper, or the look of a magazine you read. I'm one of those dreaded 'geeks' who's always coming up with new ways to do old things.
And I don't 'hate' anyone. I'm simply trying to protect the innocent, who think that the FPJ can be bought, flown and supported on the cheap.
Anyone who claims this is laying a trap. One that almost 700'depositors' in the (now bankrupt) EAC have already fallen into.
Do you have a problem with my attempts to warn people?
If you do, fine, but you really should explain why you think pouring another few hundred million dollars down this 'money pit' is such a good idea.
Answer me one more question, if you will.
Why should I 'share' the details of the bidding? Those twists and turns, shifting alliances and attempted backstabbing(s)? It's pure magic, all of it.
I suppose I'm just a bit more astute than you, by keeping my head down until I've written the book.
Speaking of 'book' where's that bet, Plain Truth?
Plain Truth, are you there?
Ooops, looks like he's headed back to 'South Africa'.
So sad, I was enjoying his posts. They reminded me of another one of The Faithful, who also lost his deposit.
No, not Ken, another chap. There were more than a few who shared Ken's fate, just for the record.
Black Tulip,
Please tell me that 'Downfall' clip was all yours? If it is, please keep up the good work.
Shane
Ken said, "n this case, the use of the title is also highly pertinent as it establishes expertise in the particular area in question."
Col. Mike Press. Col. Harlan Sanders. Both people shilled for a company that sold birds that didn't fly particularly well!
For our foreign friends, Col. Harlan Sanders was the founder of Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Bubba,
I resent your attempt to associate Kentucky Fried Chicken with our own 'dead parrot'.
Please desist from this appalling practice forthwith.
After all, you can still buy KFC, brand new (pun intended), even in the remoter parts of this lovely Emerald Isle.
Something which, sadly, one can no longer say about the Eclipse Aviation Corporation EA500...
Did I mention EAC had gone bankrupt, by the way?
Oh, I did. Well, I'm glad I cleared that up.
Wouldn't want anyone to think that KFC were in ANY way associated with EAC.
Shane
"Ken said, "n this case, the use of the title is also highly pertinent as it establishes expertise in the particular area in question.""
I does? How? Was Col Mike a squadron flightline maintenance officer, a support squadron maintenance officer, a wing Director of Maintenance on a par with the Director of Operations and reporting to the Wing Commander? No. None of these. Did Col Mike have ANY expertise in aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul AT ALL?
Doesn't matter what he did in the military just look at what he's done with Eclipse over the past few years. He was military now he's a futures broker.
airsafetyman,
obviously Col. M and Madson are not the doers: They said they would have competent people at hand doing the job...
I do not think that any of them (Col.M. or M. or both of them) have the money to do the investment (buy assets, run the TC business, develop maintenance,...) without "investors".
Who is backing them - Remember the wedge: Finally RiP had to accept ch 7!
Next Tuesday plus...
Julius
Well, might I opine here a bit.
Shane is right: the whole enchilada is cooked: EAC V.1 is BK; any other versions are BS.
Press and Company are amateurs. They will amount to absolutely nothing. It's all BS.
B95: I like your faith in life and business, but you are simply assigning too much credit here to the bidders (including others outside the US group) But I guess someone is making money on all this Blog traffic.
Please note: The plane has faulty rivets that hold it together (despite FSW). The planes must be scrapped in a few years. Vern told me this in person. He blamed it on "supplier failures."
Here's a quick and easy way to cut the BS into two camps:
1. Those who know the truth (SP is in this group, although you may not like his honesty)
2. Those who are owners (God love them) and those trying to salvage something economically
Keep in mind: if EAC were so great, Vern would be camping out in ABQ. But he's not. He's AWOL. Why? He knows the plane is a ticking timebomb.
Deep Blue wrote, "if EAC were so great, Vern would be camping out in ABQ. But he's not. He's AWOL. Why? He knows the plane is a ticking timebomb."
Actually, Deep, I heard he tried to join one of the bidding groups, but he's still a bit too radioactive.
Either way, based on several indicators including talking to him after he left EAC, I think you're off base on his feelings about the plane. I think he loves it.
As well he should. It really was his "dream plane" that he was building. And it came out awfully good.
This plane really does fit in nicely at multiple levels of general aviation. Yesterday, we landed at this private airport with a calm-wind runway having less than 2600 feet usable due to a displaced threshold.
Now, that would have been impossible in many jets, but the Eclipse fit right in with the 172s and Bonanzas on the field. We were the only jet.
On the opposite end, we regularly cruise at more than 360 knots in the mid-thirties. That's versatility.
Trust me: Vern loves the Eclipse.
:)
Ken
Baron said...
Not my fight or interest, but I agree. Shane bragged about how much care and how long (weeks) it used to take him to get a headline post up.
And they were ALL underwhelming and full of errors. As a publishing executive (as he claims), that is an indication that he is sloppy with his claims.
He also is very naive and seems to put in a pedestal some clearly incompetent and out of touch individuals, like his "professional pilot" friend, who was an endless pit of inaccurate statements posted by Shane attributed to him.
Why am I'm posting this? Shane thank you for the service you provided on v2.0. I KNOW it is much easier to criticize than to DO, like I am now. But as a common contributor to this blog...
This annoying habit of yours of, in every post, hide behind the "if you knew what is in my inbox" and other silliness like this is completely discrediting you.
If you can't post some info, than don't mention it. You are trying to sound "in the know" and "important" without producing the goods. That just make you sound like a Vernesque fake and fraud.
So, again, thank you, but come on - there is a limit to this crap you've been posting lately.
Period
Deep Blue said,
The plane has faulty rivets that hold it together (despite FSW). The planes must be scrapped in a few years. Vern told me this in person. He blamed it on "supplier failures."
WTF? Do we have any real empirical evidence of this rivet issue? Where is the FAA for all of this? Why haven't they grounded the entire fleet if this is true? I can't say I'm a master of engineering, but in my college days I remember one automotive mechanical engr class ...all the kids had to do Finite Element Analysis (I didn't get that experience since I was the business student 'helping' with their race car project). I think FEA is still one of the major standards used today. But more important, I remember Peg making a big deal about flight test bird 105, the one they sent to Texas for static fatigue testing. I remember having to work on that plane, BRIEFLY (thank God) in June/July 2006 when there was a mad rush to get things done. Yet I don't think it got to Texas until 2007. If there really was a rivet problem, wouldn't we have seen it with a/c 105?
Even with a CH7 company, I'm pretty sure Ken Harness would get a knock on his door today - no matter where he is working - if there is a structural integrity issue with the EA500. The FAA already has enough egg on their face lately.
AND to top it all off, I know my 1st boss -- the guy who hired me to work at EAC -- is working at the FAA today. Between my old boss, and the 2 killer FAA auditors I personally saw in action (Mike Sloat and Fidel Ballesteros), I'd bet my OWN money that Press / Holland have some basic gentlemen's agreement that the FAA won't F**K them over the day after the Court approves the sale. I'm sure Press/Holland knows how much time they have before the FAA would have to crack the whip. Rational expectations of all parties is to see the 260 planes supported even with the caveat that the FAA already knows where/if corners were cut. IF I was Press/Holland, I know I'd try to get as much information out of the FAA before I made a bid on the company, so I have a $$$ estimate in terms of what it will take to fix things, with a 10-20% contingency for overruns, etc....
My God, if there is any chance in hell that I could get called back to work for them, the FIRST thing I would ask is WHEN is the FAA audit scheduled to happen? How much time do I have to prepare? Is overtime going to be approved? Do I get to green-light stuff for my old vendor? Do I need to butter them up and 'tip' them in some way to get Net 30 day terms ASAP? Christ, and I'm not even a really savvy biz dude. But I will make that bet that Press/Holland have a real good idea as to what $$$ they need to be properly capitalized for the 1st 12-18 months, including $$$ needed to get thru another FAA audit. It just wouldn't make any sense at all for the FAA to go thru the expense on their side of another audit, only to see EA fizz out X months from now.
I do truly think this effort has a better chance of success because at least THIS time we have the benefit of hindsight .....combined with new personalities that (I hope) have checked their ego's at the door. No one in their right mind gets into the aviation biz with the goal to fail.
e.d.t.
edt smart post.
On another note, it seems this blog has gone way downhill since Shane doesn't seem to need to check his ego at the door. I am sure your book will be fun and all buddy. I just hope you get somebody to proof it first. Geeze.
EclipsePilotOMSIV,
Not 'my' blog anymore, mate.
I'm 'retired' so I'm playing the part of the grumpy old man.
What are part are you 'playing'?
Plain Truth,
Try writing your own comments, it really is more fun.
Interested in a bit of betting, just for fun? It appears that you are happy to call me a liar, but fail to stand the test when challenged.
Back to 'South Africa' with you. Or at least, try and avoid posting within minutes of your 'alter ego'.
Ken,
Vern tried to get together a group to continue the ConJet.
Not the EA500.
In fact, he loves the FPJ soooo much that he didn't buy one himself, unlike Al Mann, who had the good grace to stump up $250,000 for his.
So, if the price for an FPJ (to a 'founding' shareholder and director) is a mere $250,000, and Vern DIDN'T buy one, and his only visible effort since departing the company more than a year ago is aimed at the E400, I have a serious question for you, and others in your position.
What does Vern know that you don't?
As you well know, Vern's FPJ belongs to the 'remains' of EAC, and he only 'has' it for another 20 months or so.
So, your 'report' of what Vern SAYS about the FPJ seems to be a odds with what Vern actually DOES, with an FPJ that he doesn't even bother to own himself.
Come to think of it, Vern was always smarter than his many of his customers, so it's hardly a surprise that he avoided this particular mistake.
And watch out for those short runways. They must be very hard on those 'dodgy' tires of yours....
Shane
Ken,
This plane really does fit in nicely at multiple levels of general aviation.
there is the old gap - again and again!
Your plane is incomplete and was paid below costs.
The last estimate for a fpj was $2.15 M (EAC,2008$) (and I think with a production rate of more than 200 fpj p/a).
Ken, if professionals in GA (that is not you or me) see a chance for "this plane" then there will be more than one bidder on "next Tuesday"!
(Last time there was nobody
and you read gadfly's or baron95's posts on tooling!)
I am not sure if you like to see new "RiPs" ("Yes I can, as long as they can pay") with limited interest in AVIO NG 1.5 or FIKI and an cash return target of 150% in three years!
Julius
P.S.: Is there a "missing link"!
Someone will solve this problem - perhaps in Africa?
the US-led western dominated values that conquered the world. ...
something of the past ... man ... something of the past !
what about future ?
Confucius said :
(i'm in a philo-mood ;-) )
"Experience is a light attached to a pole ...
you can carry it on your shoulder , it will light only the path you've already been ...
you can carry it with your both hands , it will en-light the path you're about to take ..."
something of the past :
USA = +/- 300 Millions , most swimming if not drowning in debts ...
China =+/- 1300 Millions , with one of the best saving-ratio worldwide ...
E.U. = +/- 500 Millions with a debt-ratio of less than a third of an average US citizen ...
like being the biggest world market (your words) = something of the past !!
ps: why does it have to be led ? is it some kind of competition in who is getting ruined the faster ?
not for me ... thank you , but no thank you !
Shane lamented... Interested in a bit of betting, just for fun? It appears that you are happy to call me a liar, but fail to stand the test when challenged.
Answered above. Pay attention.
Shane again... Plain Truth,
Try writing your own comments, it really is more fun.
Actually I couldn't state it better than this. Period.
Not my fight or interest, but I agree. Shane bragged about how much care and how long (weeks) it used to take him to get a headline post up.
And they were ALL underwhelming and full of errors. As a publishing executive (as he claims), that is an indication that he is sloppy with his claims.
He also is very naive and seems to put in a pedestal some clearly incompetent and out of touch individuals, like his "professional pilot" friend, who was an endless pit of inaccurate statements posted by Shane attributed to him.
Why am I'm posting this? Shane thank you for the service you provided on v2.0. I KNOW it is much easier to criticize than to DO, like I am now. But as a common contributor to this blog...
This annoying habit of yours of, in every post, hide behind the "if you knew what is in my inbox" and other silliness like this is completely discrediting you.
If you can't post some info, than don't mention it. You are trying to sound "in the know" and "important" without producing the goods. That just make you sound like a Vernesque fake and fraud.
So, again, thank you, but come on - there is a limit to this crap you've been posting lately.
More Shane... As you well know, Vern's FPJ belongs to the 'remains' of EAC, and he only 'has' it for another 20 months or so.
Actually, that's not what you said before. Originally you claimed that Vern was given an aircraft on departure from the company. I pointed out that his severance gave him the use of an Eclipse. Where do you get these trash facts. The plane Vern was using is now locked up in ABQ with the rest of the assets. Vern never bought an Eclipse because he didn't have to. He had free access to the aircraft before and after his leaving the company - so why buy one? If you were given a company car as a perk, would you buy another one personally? Well, maybe you would, but most normal people would not. What Vern didn't plan on was that Roel would fail to come up with the rest of the money from Russia, and Vern would lose access to the Eclipse company registered planes. Don't make more of that than it really is. Vern simply didn't buy one, because he had use of one.
PT, he was given a plane on departure, for his use... slicing and dicing words is pretty silly here - the blog characterized his plane as a loaner... get over it.
Compared to the MASSIVE inaccuracies put forth by your favorite defunct aeroplane manufacturing company EAC... your nits are smaller than a pimple on an elephant's ass.
Your continued defence of EAC and hypocritical nit picking here, are curious - anyone who cares that much about truth and detail WOULD NEVER BE A FAN OF EAC.
I have been asking myself a of late, why do I maintain such a facination for this blog -
I have always been interested in the "thinking" that goes into buying one of the risky little planes... from a company that looked like a massive mistake and then a sham, for a long time. What kind of person... how does their brain work?
The level of hypocracy which I see in the posts, at this point, makes me think dishonesty attracts and begets dishonesty.
How can anyone who is so in love with punctuation/detail/stats/a few pennies worth of fuel savings... OVERLOOK ALL THE MAJOR ISSUES, THE ONES THAT REALLY MATTER.
Perhaps I am wrong to think its hypocracy or dishonesty? But what is it - a facination for all that is small? Small planes, small savings, small issues, punctuation?
The larger, more significant issues seem to be of no concern? Risk, as in risky tech application, risky program plan, risky (new) market, risky start up, risky support, risky deposit programs... risk associated with the outlandish claims and statements by the company?
Perhaps we can deal with major issues... and try to find out some basic asnwers:
1- how is the new buyer of EAc assets going to make life easier for the owneres and make a profit? They seem to be in competition with a netwrok of adequate support (as reported by the owners here) who are keeping the birds in the air at affordable prices, and who will not have saddled themselves with upfront money for assets?
2- How is the new owner of the asstes going to reposition the EA50such that it can be a money maker?
- price/volume relationship, based in real world competitive analysis with other jets... how can this be reconciled?
I appologize in advance if I've missed a key, misspelled, or mis-typed. I promised, between flight school student dispatches, I have thought about these issues a lot...
Also, please refrain from cutting a few words here and there, and accusing me of some unintended meaning... the meaning is the entire post...
Shane,
You must be really chapping someone's ass... from what I have seen over the last 3 years on this blog...only those who write importnat truths regarding EAC are treated the way you are being treated by the faithful.
I still do not see taking you up on the wager - which is a clear indication (coupled with the nasty, baseless remarks) that they are FOS.
"what you say is FALSE"
"would you like to make a wager on that?"
silence on the bet... plus.... name calling / personal attacks... plus nit picking...
you know how it goes... we've seen this before... must be something pretty painful....
;)
Plain Truth,
Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding of the current position with the FPJ that Vern had been using.
But I ask you, again:-
For a mere $250,000, why didn't he buy one?
At the very least, why didn't he buy one, then flog it off? Executives do this all the time with 'share option schemes'.
Why only show interest in the ConJet?
What does Vern KNOW about the FPJ that caused him to ignore such an easy gain?
Just asking....
Also, to be clear, I don't 'get' your repeated posting of a comment from Baron. One which I've responded to, with answers which I thought even an Eclipse customer could understand.
So, I'll spell it out for you, using the simplest English I can.
Why give away cheaply that which I can sell in the market at a profit?
I know Vern tried this approach, but look where it got him.
No company, and now (thanks for the info) not even a toy jet to fly around in....
Shane
ATman,
I know how 'painful' these issues are.
In fact, I know how painful the EOG discussions are, even as we chatter away here.
But you have to admit, for the owners at least, that these wounds are largely self inflicted. They thought they were getting into a jet which would be low cost to purchase, operate and support.
Instead many of them have had close to 10 years of delays, price increases, 'upgrades' (which usually don't actually appear) personnel changes, broken delivery promises and yes, the whole bankruptcy thing.
No wonder they're in pain. If I was in their position, I'd be too.
All I'm trying to do is point out to the 'web researcher' looking for a twin jet that he (or she) should move right along.
Look at a Mustang, or a Phenom, or anything other than an Eclipse EA500.
And if you INSIST on joining those unfortunate enough to be stuck with one right now, do so with your eyes wide open.
Shane
ATM,
In all your talk of risk this and risk that....
I think you are missing the point here that EAC is the ONLY company to design, build, get certified, (and finally get 260 flying) a jet in quite some time. They did all that racing the Citation Mustang. I think we all know Cessna is a well established company as well, with lots of resources. So I am sorry I have to give them some credit, they succeded where many have failed.
So you know what, hell yes it was risky. But there have been a great deal of things in this country that have been built on a little risk, and have turned out well.
You continue to fire away at EAC and their management, a lot of them deserve it. But they have done more than you ever will most likely.
Shane wrote, "For a mere $250,000, why didn't [Vern Raburn] buy one?"
I believe he wasn't offered the option.
But he sure as heck put his *faith* in the plane. Remember, he flew it a lot.
I talked with Vern Raburn some months after his departure from EAC about his experience flying the Eclipse 500. He was loving it.
And it's easy to understand why. Take a look at this NexRad.
Looking at that picture, if you were in a piston plane, you'd be sweating it out. But here's what it looked like from jet altitude. No worries.
The Eclipse is fast, fun, and affordable. And it tops weather.
Ken
WTF? Do we have any real empirical evidence of this rivet issue? Where is the FAA for all of this?
Having been on the "Honor Roll" and written sworn affidavits to the DOT/IG, being asked to testify...rivets are LEAST worry for this POS thing (not worthy of being called an aircraft...Shane DOES have that in his inbox and I feel probaly MUCH more truths...ticking time bomb?...At least with a bomb, one KNOWS what is coming
eclipso writes, "Having been on the "Honor Roll" and written sworn affidavits to the DOT/IG, being asked to testify...rivets are LEAST worry for this POS thing"
The Special Certification Review said nothing about rivets. Even the DOT IG, who had an agenda obvious to most, didn't report any global problem with faulty rivets in the EA500.
You had your chance. Either you didn't tell anybody when the time was right to air all this stuff, or you did and they dismissed your allegations. Either way, it makes it very hard for people to embrace this issue now.
Ken
"You had your chance. Either you didn't tell anybody when the time was right to air all this stuff, or you did and they dismissed your allegations"
They did NOT dismiss anything....once again the rivets are the LEAST of the problems..that's why it's called "on-going"....Some stayed to live the BS..some of us found it unacceptable and left...however, IF the company gets going again, be sure that it will cost MUCH, MUCH more than just upgrades...all that has been identifed will have to be corrected....how do you feel about a COMPLETE do-over of you O2 system...think that will be free?
"They did NOT dismiss anything"
It's not in either report.
"how do you feel about a COMPLETE do-over of you O2 system...think that will be free?"
The only thing that has to be done on my O2 system is a routine recertification of the O2 tank in late 2011.
The company had an occasional problem with destructive employees, including at least one episode of actual sabotage that resulted in a criminal investigation. I do fault management for creating an environment in which guys actually try to sabotage their own company either while they're working there or, like you, long after the fact.
Ken
Ken,
I believe he wasn't offered the option.
Huh?!?!!
John Travolta gets one for nothing, literally.
Al Mann gets one for $250,000.
You're telling me that Vern stood by, as CEO and founding shareholder, saw and/or approved these sweetheart deals and ignored the opportunity to (at the very least) turn a few bucks for himself?
Vern Raburn was never 'ignorant' while at EAC. Stupid, blind to the truth, money grabbing to keep his dream alive and a host of other venal sins.
But missing a chance to squirrel away one of his very own FPJ's?
I find that very hard to believe.
Nice photo of a blue sky and clouds.
What, exactly, did that have to do with Vern's attempt to kick start the E400 and not the E500?
You do agree he sent that 'circular' seeking support, don't you?
Oh, he didn't include you?
Sorry to hear that, you spending so much time with him and all....
Shane
"how do you feel about a COMPLETE do-over of you O2 system...think that will be free?"
You OBVIOUSLY have never been a mechanic or engineer....Think "disimilar metal" and rememeber when the time comes...Care to take one of those bets that it WILL not be pretty for the fleet?
And I was there when the sabotage happened...as well as they should, the one responsible should be thrown under the jail. Having said that, I have been working on aircraft WAY longer than you have been flying them, so without supporting evidence, please don't ever insinuate I would do ANYTHING to harm an aircraft. It's people like me that TRY to get it corrected so others' ignorance does not get them killed!
Shane writes, "John Travolta gets one for nothing, literally."
No, that's not actually correct. Check again.
Doesn't matter. That dog won't hunt, Shane. Vern Raburn's a guy who flew in the Eclipse many, many times, but you're asking folks to believe he didn't trust it.
Why are you wasting everybody's time with obvious hogwash? Is there nothing useful you can contribute here?
Ken
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (“Coughlin Stoia”) (http://www.csgrr.com/cases/textron/) today announced that a class action has been commenced on behalf of an institutional investor in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island on behalf of purchasers of Textron Inc. (“Textron” or the “Company”) (NYSE:TXT - News) securities between July 17, 2007 and January 29, 2009 (the “Class Period”).
The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements concerning Textron’s stability and profitability by repeatedly publicizing record “backlogs” of unfilled customer orders for aircraft generated primarily by Cessna and by making positive statements about the Company's finance segment. As alleged in the complaint, these statements were materially false and misleading because defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts, among others: (i) that Textron was accepting orders for business jets from a growing number of customers that were mere startup and/or financially distressed fleet operators who neither intended nor possessed the financial resources to pay for or take delivery of aircraft during 2008-09 and beyond, which materially inflated Textron’s “backlog” of unfilled orders for the Company’s Cessna segment, which in turn materially overstated the Company’s current financial condition and future prospects; (ii) that hundreds of orders reported as “backlog” at Cessna for future business-jet production were subject to deferral and cancellation causing the Company to overstate its projected fiscal 2008-09 business-jet production and to initiate costly production cutbacks and worker reduction programs, which eroded Textron’s revenues and earnings; (iii) that the Company’s Finance segment had incurred material losses in the fair market value of its finance receivables and other financial assets, and these unrealized market losses were omitted from or misrepresented in the Company’s periodic reports of earnings and income; and (iv) that Textron’s credit ratings were deteriorating in light of its Finance segment’s losses and the additional debt the Company would incur in connection with its Finance segment’s distressed asset base.
On January 29, 2009, the last day of the Class Period, Textron announced that an estimated $30 million of the $65 million in “restructuring” costs would be incurred by the Company’s Cessna segment due to production cutbacks and worker layoffs planned for the first quarter of 2009. After this announcement, Textron common stock traded to a new low of $8.83 per share before closing at $9.05 per share on volume of more than 26 million shares, a one day decline of $4.19, or 31%.
Shane said.... Do you have a problem with my attempts to warn people?
------------------------
Absolutely not.
I had no problem with you warning people about the huge risks of buying EA500s when they were for sale by EAC.
But exactly WHO and WHAT are you warning now?
The asset sale and future support plans is only of present interest to existing EA500 owners like Ken.
They know a whole lot more than you and me about the good, the bad and the ugly about the EA500 and its present situation.
So what are you saying other than "Ken is a fool/sell-out", "EA500s are doomed, "Mike Press is a joke".
Those are not usable "WARNINGS". Those are sour opinions.
EA is not asking for anything upfront from Ken and other owners.
At some point, if they are successful, they may offer something like FIKI upgrade for $xxx under yyyy terms.
At that time, lets have a discussion about the risks of taking the offer. The risks about being the first. Lets see what that does to plane values and warn/advise/encourage owners as appropriate (not that they need it).
Usable info Shane - not unusable hate.
P.S. My apologies if I misunderstood that you were in the publishing business. From your description it still sounds like you are, but if you are not, I retract that part.
Baron writes, "My apologies if I misunderstood that you were in the publishing business."
"Publishing" is the business Shane himself listed in his profile. It's also what Karen Di Piazza got from him for use in this story.
So, of course, the reader is left wondering which Shane Price now says, "I'm not now, nor never have been, involved in publishing."
Ken
OMSIV,
I think I caught all that BS, from you... I guess you givre these guys kudos for bilking investors and lifelong friends out of hundreds of millions, and the same with unsuspecting buyers... every bozo has his Delilah...
What about dealing with the future questions I posed, instead of making ignorant remarks about what I have or have not doen, compared to say the illustrius management team that was at EAC burning $3B?
I must say, it appears as if some people have an incredible way of slicing and dicing and dodging the facts and issues, on this blog...
The real issue is how is all this going to add up to a successful aircraft endeavor and how is this going to result in an affordably maintained fleet?
I think, you should provide some inisght into these important issues, regarding HOW successful the EA50 can be?
Is there a future beyond some silly remarks about fuel and fun?
Or are we satisfied the story is over, and it's OK with you that your favorite business managers managed to burn $3 billion while delivering some 260 unfinished planes? and left them with no factory support or warantee?
Comparing this disaster to Cessna is funny, as the mustang is completed, still has factory support and ha a future - the only comparison might be related to the above post, where there's a class action suit against Cessna for lying about their order book.
THIS IS SOMETHING ECLIPSE DID WITH WORLD-CLASS FLAIR...
ATM, the ambulance chasers in the Textron suit are really grasping at straws, the class action period goes back 2 and a half years and suggests not only that customers were KNOWINGLY entering into purchase agreements they did not intend to follow through on, that Cessna and therefore Textron, knew that - it is BS.
The truth is that Cessna went out of its' way to avoid/prevent the exact kind of speculation that SP Jets and its' principal, a certain retired USAF Colonel, profited on in the Eclipse secondary market right up until the collapse of EAC V2.0.
I predict this thing will get tossed out with prejudice before there is anything of substance flowing from ABQ.
Ron, read line 3.
Ken
Deep Blue,
Thanks for the post on Cessna orders. If I remember right Cessna held up the taxpayers of Kansas for money to build the Columbus plant in the state rather than leaving. The nearly-dead Piper did the same thing with Florida and Vero Beach with the Piper Jet. Of course the screwing that the New Mexico taxpayer got by Eclipse probably sets the standard. Is this Barons "free market" at work? Or socialism for corporations while the worker-bees are thrown under the bus?
For me all this discussion become a bit useless. Entertaining reading but essentially useless. Shane made a bold prediction that this new Eclipse venture will amount to another big failure so I will be watching the whole situation to see if he is proven right. If he is right he will be an absolute hero in my book and all his alleged 'transgressions' against some forum participants should be forgiven. But if he is wrong - well ....
Ken,
Trying to explain what I actually do, in terms that Eclipse customers can understand, reduces me to putting in my profile that I'm in 'publishing'.
Bit like saying you're in 'teeth'.
Close, but no cigar.
Now, about that photo of nice blue sky and fluffy clouds.
What, exactly does that do to EXPLAIN why Vern is keen to promote the ConJet?
But is not so keen on the FPJ?
Your answer, please...
Shane
PS We both know what the answer is, so no more misdirection. Just this once.
Ken said, "And it's easy to understand why. Take a look at this NexRad."
I took a look at the photo. Now, keep in mind I don't own either an eclipse or a Garmin 496. Therefore I'm not certain what I'm seeing. Is this a photo taken of the Garmin 496 that provides most of your weather and navigation and is mounted on your glareshield? If so, I thought that Garmin used XM weather, not WX Works.
Seriously, exactly what functions still don't work on your E500? I assume you still need to hand fly the ILS aproaches? No FIKI, no charts, no weather, etc. I know when I flew one of the E500s nothing really worked and the factory demo (er...test) pilot sheepishly admitted, "It's under the seat. Every new plane is delivered with a new Garmin 496."
Since I haven't seen 260 units listed on Ebay for sale I assume they are still being used? Or have you moved up to the more sophisticated Garmin 496 as your primary source for charts, weather, and navigation. Does it link up well with that autopilot? Tell us Ken. Tell us just how great that POS plane operates using a non-certified Garmin as your primary means of navigation, weather, etc.
Or did you upgrade to the Garmin 400s or whatever model number they chose to use for the partially crippled units. Is that where you view your charts and weather. Boy...those 4 shades of gray must make weather cells really pop on those 320 x 200 display units.
Give it up Fanboy. You're looking to be a bigger fool than anyone would have ever believed.
Vern 'Snippet'
I 'got' this, from one of my many sources that monitor Vern. It shows, beyond 'reasonable doubt' that a) Vern was/is more interested in the ConJet and b) that I'm no 'publisher'.
Otherwise I'd have 'used' it ages ago....
There is one other thing that could turn into a longer term activity. There are a whole lot of people that have left Eclipse that really want to do the Eclipse 400. And frankly I’m in that group. Besides being a really cool little airplane I am convinced after flying the E500 nearly 400 hours that the E400 is in fact the true VLJ. And it could be a super successful product.
IF (notice capitalization) I decide to do this the whole development program would be very different from the conventional approach. I will not bore you with the details but it would be an approach that would significantly lower risk in a lot of dimensions and also lower costs. But it would also take a lot longer to get the plane into the market if this approach is used.
I already have some money lined up and I believe I can raise enough money prior to starting up to take the airplane through the development program to TC. Like I said a different approach. I have been quietly working on this idea for several months. But the whole thing is very dependent upon what happens at Eclipse. The issue is not Eclipse doing the 400 – they simply can’t without some very major changes and investments. It is more of how to get some of the rights and components out of Eclipse. So this is far from a done deal and we have to see what happens at Eclipse in the next few weeks.
But if I do go through with this idea then ****** and I would definitely want to spend some time with ***** and ***** to understand where you are heading with ***********. That part of the 400 (or whatever its name becomes) would not change. Right now there is nothing to do but I wanted to let you know that I am thinking about this idea a lot.
I’ll keep you informed as events progress.
Vern
Oooops....
Vern likes the ConJet more than he likes 'your' jet.
Sad, so sad. The ConJet was, after all, not even built by EAC. Vern did it, in secret, to extract yet another few hundred million out of a gullible following.
That also included your wife.
Still want a copy of my book, Ken?
Hurry, hurry, hurry. I'm asking a mere 10% down, followed by a 60% progress payment and then you get....
A few facts you didn't know.
It will probably help you get over EAC, and your part in it's downfall.
It will help explain why normally rational people (like you) were suckered out of at least a BILLION dollars.
Shane
nope, but apparently you were WRONG!
and as I have said here before, the facination with the "little" makes me cringe when there is so much BIG..
;)
I guess my dispatch responsibilities at the flight school have me thinking in terms of systemic view on things rather than syntax?
Shane asks "Still want a copy of my book, Ken?"
Shane, *I* never asked for your book. It would obviously be a work of fiction.
Just like your occupation: bad enough you put "publishing" in your Google bio, but you also told it to a news reporter and she used it in her story. Now you're saying, "I'm not now, nor never have been, involved in publishing....I'm no 'publisher'"
Well it turns out there are TWO Shane Prices hanging around here:
This one
and
This one.
Shane #1 tells the world, including a reporter, that he's in publishing.
Shane #2 says he's "I'm not now, nor never have been, involved in publishing....I'm no 'publisher'".
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."
Gives new meaning to Schizophrenia, doesn't it? And casts doubt on every single word ever written under the name "Shane Price."
:)
Ken
Bubba asks, "I don't own either an eclipse or a Garmin 496. Therefore I'm not certain what I'm seeing. Is this a photo taken of the Garmin 496 that provides most of your weather and navigation and is mounted on your glareshield?"
Nope; that's not a 496. Here's the setup we use for weather:
WxWorx using Fujitsu P1610
It's a real good arrangement.
But I think what you're really asking is do Eclipse 500's have GPS and moving map capability?
GPS, yes. They always did actually have GPS units onboard. But the old company failed to complete the modifications to Avio that would allow us to really use them. That problem is fixed in Avio NG version 1.5, and the new company is intent on installing that upgrade quickly to the fleet. It is also fixed by the many ad hoc G400W upgrades owners have had installed.
What about FIKI? The FIKI mod is approved and being installed on aircraft right now.
Moving map? Part of NG 1.5.
Onboard weather radar? Already included in Avio NG.
But right now I don't have all the bells and whistles the plane is capable of having. And that any decent Cirrus has. So why on earth do I say the Eclipse is so good when the old company never did fulfill all their promises? Why not just buy a piston Cirrus with Perspective?
Here's why:
Mach .642 at FL 370
We routinely cruise at 360+ knots while getting well over 6 MPG. Show me *any* other jet that does that!
Flight Level flying
It's just raw fun to fly where the Eclipse flies!
The plane is fast, fun, affordable jet transportation. It's not a slow piston. It's a perfect choice for the owner/pilot who wants the benefits of a jet without the high price.
Ken
Ken Meter said... Gives new meaning to Schizophrenia, doesn't it? And casts doubt on every single word ever written under the name "Shane Price."
Baron posted... Not my fight or interest, but I agree. Shane bragged about how much care and how long (weeks) it used to take him to get a headline post up.
And they were ALL underwhelming and full of errors. As a publishing executive (as he claims), that is an indication that he is sloppy with his claims.
He also is very naive and seems to put in a pedestal some clearly incompetent and out of touch individuals, like his "professional pilot" friend, who was an endless pit of inaccurate statements posted by Shane attributed to him.
Why am I'm posting this? Shane thank you for the service you provided on v2.0. I KNOW it is much easier to criticize than to DO, like I am now. But as a common contributor to this blog...
This annoying habit of yours of, in every post, hide behind the "if you knew what is in my inbox" and other silliness like this is completely discrediting you.
If you can't post some info, than don't mention it. You are trying to sound "in the know" and "important" without producing the goods. That just make you sound like a Vernesque fake and fraud.
So, again, thank you, but come on - there is a limit to this crap you've been posting lately.
So let's get down to the brass tacks and skip the repetitive and pathetic attempts at character assasination. It adds nothing to the discussion and is getting distracting.
These are the questions that should already be answered, since we are about to see a couple tens of millions of dollars change hands.
How much will Avio NG 1.5 cost from NewCo?
How much will the new tire STC cost from NewCo (if someone doesn't beat them to it first)? And of course that will only matter to the operators who are not already putting unapproved tires on their planes (and it is happening).
How much will the repetitive flowcoating for FIKI cost from NewCo? Are replacement transparencies available to replace the windshields that are slowly pitted/crazed by the flowcoating process.
How much, if anything, is NewCo asking each owner to pony up to help them actually come up with the rest of the $20M and to cover the $20M in notes?
How much, if anything, is NewCo asking to help fund operations until they can become profitable based on expected service revenues?
How many engineers will NewCo have? What specialities will they represent?
How many critical vendors have said 'not no but hell no'? or are TU or about to be TU?
Are replacement vendors already identified and ready to contract for current spares needs as well as for the 'future' restart of production?
Is NewCo asking prepayment for their fixes?
What will service cost from NewCo?
Let's chew on that rather than each other for a few posts and see if we can learn anything productive.
There's nothing significant here on this blog anymore. Stan had a mission to discuss the technical merits or faults of Eclipse. It became a head hunting mission under Shane, where fact checking suffered, and rumor ran free. And it's a joke under Phil. What a waste.
Ken,
nice pictures - in "standard atmosphere"!
Your texts or pictures - like always - are leaving question marks...like "statute miles" when "hours" and "cycles" should be used!
RiP put a number onto the table with the update to AVIO NG 1.5 and others infos...
"Ad hoc updates" ....
Perhaps M&M will present precise data when talking about facts related to the fpj.
Ken, isn't it just another incomplete PR stunt - what for?
Julius
There's nothing significant here on this blog anymore
There's not that much significant about Eclipse any more, so right now there's not that much to say - at least for the time being. Maybe Eclipse 2.0 will have lots of money going through it to work on technical issues and at that time there will be developments, but right now there's not much going on. For a long time there was constant press releases, news articles and all sorts of other things coming from both inside and outside of Eclipse, but that's not happening right now.
Stan had a mission to discuss the technical merits or faults of Eclipse. It became a head hunting mission under Shane, where fact checking suffered, and rumor ran free. And it's a joke under Phil. What a waste.
I think much of that stems from the status of Eclipse. Stan was there in the ascendency of Eclipse, Shane in the decline and Phil so far in the BK netherworld.
Hey EB,
Thanks for stopping by, and adding value to the blog. (Okay- just kidding- mostly :)
I'll remind you of the home page "mission statement":
"Special thanks to Stan Blankenship for starting the Eclipse Aviation Critic blog, and to Shane Price for continuing it as Eclipse Aviation Critic NG.
Those two fine chaps MADE those blogs the marvelous successes they were.
But on this site- it is up to YOU to make the blog enjoyable, informative and entertaining."
So - get with it and contribute.
Or, if you want someone to do work to entertain you, buy a magazine or a book.
(I'd suggest Shane's !!)
ASM said...Is this Barons "free market" at work?
-----------------
Freemarket (or as free as can be). If there are taxes, capital will seek low tax locales and/or concessions. If there are usurious union wages/work-rules, capital will seek union free locales and/or contract concessions.
Why is that surprising to you.
If you were about to invest $1B in a new plant and hire 2,000 people wouldn't you want to put it up for bid on the best offer by local/state/national governments?
Or would you seek the most expensive, highest tax spot no questions asked?
The former is free market and smart. The second and simply stupid and suicidal.
Get used to it people. Service jobs are very mobile and manufacturing jobs are also.
Want a plant in your town/state/country - be ready to bid and make the case for it.
It is like the Olympics - Each town puts an incentive package to win the business.
And that is how it should be.
Mercedes, BMW, Toyota, don't seem to be a bit disadvantaged by locating factories where - oh my god - there were no experienced UAW auto workers. They have no problem training high school grads with no previous experience to build better cars than $78/hr Michigan UAW workers.
Oh, and they paid about $1B less in taxes.
Cool. Extra cool. Stick it to the high tax states. Stick it to the high cost unions. Build great cars in the US.
Awesome. I want more. I want an EADS/Airbus plant in the US South.
My apologies to the blog- I've been out of town for several days- unexpected developments from the weekend- will be on the road until Monday.
But I have to admit, while this thread started out somewhat acrimoniously- I think it's been a spirited (and to my relief- entertaining) banter.
(And in "principal", I confess to being "busted" by RonRoe for my heterographic transgressions!)
Shane asks....
What, exactly does that do to EXPLAIN why Vern is keen to promote the ConJet?
-------------------
Because he learned his lesson and the market has moved.
If the VLJ's mission is now expected to be primarily personal transportation vs ait-taxi, THEN one engine is better than two, 4 seats are probably enough and a price tag about 60% of a Mustang is prob the right one.
When he launched the EA500, there was NO mustang. The least expensive jet on the market, the CJ1/CJ1+ was $4M+ in current $.
Now there is a $2.8M jet. Now he knows the EA500 can't be built in volumes to achieve anything less than $2.5M. Now he knows there is no huge air-taxi demand. Now he knows that the vast majority of the EA500 customer base flies with 4 pax or less over 95% of the time.
What would you expect him to do? Ignore the market realities?
OR
Propose the right plane to address those market realities.
If the EA400 came to market with a 4+1 interior and anywhere close to specs and around a $1.5M and properly established and supported, it would be the perfect plane for me. And I suspect a lot of other pilot/owners.
While on the topic of Shane's potential potent poignant expose' of the blog's favorite VLJ, contemplation leads me to believe something more "disruptive" is in order- perhaps a holographic multimedia DVD- complete with life-like projections of our favorite EAC personalities.
I'd suggest an introductory price of 99 cents on the first 100 million copies. (Losses to be made up within months on the next billion units).
Maybe a leather bound LX version.
Add an errata/maintenance service for a modest subscription price.
Tsk tsk...where do these notions come from...
Hi Ken,
Thank you for posting the nice pictures and narratives.
Q: Have you heard any owner buzz about EDT's observation:
"Peg making a big deal about flight test bird 105, the one they sent to Texas for static fatigue testing."
For the past few months, there has been some discussion on a fatigue life limit- I think the 10K hour limit from the FAA was just a temporary number, to be refined at a later date. Any news on how that progressed? (The press release is dated Sept 14, 2005- a Wednesday :).
Thanks!
(Please keep the great pix coming! :)
I think EAC really shot themselves in the foot when they unveiled the EA400.
It was sleek, sexy and those raked tailfins were uber cool.
I spoke with a number of FPJ deposit holders and potential depositors, all of whom decided they'd rather wait and have the EA400, which probably put a kink in Wedge's financial plans.
The EA500 suddenly became the portly middle-aged sedan, the family truckster. I think the change in demand forced Wedge to announced it would be produced, although I doubt much $$$ or labor was ever funneled to it.
The Eclipse is fast, fun, and affordable. And it tops weather. ...
Ok so since someone wrote here to "THINK" before writing :
let's do a common-sens check ...
Fast : well , what would be the point to have a jet ?
Fun : this is the "Typical Thinking" = "i find it good and fun" is that the only reason to be sure to be right ?
beauty is in the eye of the beholder , NO ?
Affordable : OUUCH ! this one hurts ! how can something not finished , not serviced and with a future that remain a mystery be "Affordable" ?
some prefers to spend 1 for nothing , some others 2 for something ...
does it makes one more stupid than the other one ?
A: only if one tries to convince the other of making the best and most rational decision !
Tops weather : well ... is that a characteristic found ONLY on one plane ?
writing and thinking ... definitely a good practice ! ;-)
Monsieur Shane :
honestly , if you comb dead rats , boil babies or publish anything ...
what this has to do with the topic ?
remember : when someone wants to kill his dog : he says "my dog has rabbis " ...
isn't it a Vernastic attempt ?
a kind of : " i know damn well what you're talking about , so let's destroy your credibility before ..."
I think EAC really shot themselves in the foot when they unveiled the EA400....
yes , kind of !
i never really understood if it was an attempt at correcting errors due to lack of maturity (Ea500)
or
a desperate attempt to have an other reason to explain lateness , postpone and all the unfinished ...
as well as all the $ sunken !
On another note EASA has a proposed AD note on the Thales airspeed probe used on the A-330 and A-340. Go 'ad.easa.europa.eu'. The Goodrich probe must be used. ...
this has been an "Advise" for quite some times ...
but some Airways (including Air-France) decided that the matter was expensive enough to change the Thalès for the Goodrich ...
(in the same kind of manners our baron love so much = out of pure 24 carats GREED)
not showing enough diligence to do so has landed to those company an obligation to comply "immediately" !
Freemarket (or as free as can be) ...
yes , free market ... (i am laughing so much ....)
like the Hundreds of Billions $ spent to rescue AIG with the Tax-payers money ...
AIG that was one the worst exposure of Goldamnn&Sachs ...
decision made by a former Top-Executive of G&S ... who had become the one in the right place to decide where to waste public-money ...
free-market ? you just made my day , i am laughing so much ...
Fred,
As a result of the EASA Airworthiness Directive on the Airbus pitot probe, Thales is poised to take a massive, massive, financial hit from the accident.
Baron,
Thanks for the lesson in Ann Rand economics! I always thought mature companies like Cessna and Piper GAVE BACK to the communities they were in such as making college endowments, underwriting hospital wings, building community parks, ect. It is gratifying to know that corporate greed really has no limits! I never would have figured that out in America 2009.
AirSafety ...
i was aiming mostly at the difference between "what could be good" and "what IS good" ...
like EASA and EA500 ...
like "Advising" airlines to change the Thalès probe , but being ignored because of the financial impact it would have had ...
or When "Good old Greed" is not second to safety ...
a shame for the entire Aviation world ...
unfortunately seen too often when Big$ are at stake !
ps: Thalès being a (french) firm working in Military-Aviation , i don't have the smallest fear for their future ...
exactly like Northrop , Boeing and the like ...
do as i say but don't do as i do !
I never would have figured that out in America 2009. ...
this is exactly why we all are in the situation of now ...
but try to explain this to the ones :
who have lost home...
who have lost job ...
who has lost hopes ...
kind of : gimme an other grant that i don't see anything !! ;-)
Fred,
In something like the Thales probe replacement, any delay by the airlines may have been the result of availability issues with the Goodrich replacement probe. Nobody, not even the airlines, are so stupid as to delay replacement in a case like this.
ASM :
i really dearly hope you are right on this ...
unfortunately "some" pilot's unions seems to disagree ...
time will tell , if Big$ do not shut everybody before !
don't get me wrong :
the FIRST culprit (in my view and as far as i know about ...)
EASA Itself !
why "Advising" in the first place ?
they exist and are paid to MAKE decisions ...
failing to do so , or tempering with reality should lead to their termination !
(afaik : read in different newspapers ... Intox or reality ? )
Nobody, not even the airlines, are so stupid as to delay replacement in a case like this. ...
Vern didn't try ?
(it is a question do not send me to inquisition !)
this is where GREED (and its correlative : Stocks Holders and much too well paid BOD) come into the game ...
airsafetyman,
I always thought mature companies like Cessna and Piper GAVE BACK to the communities they were in such as making college endowments, underwriting hospital wings, building community parks, ect.
what's the objective of a company?
Doing something for the community or the shareholders or the management or all the employees?
They give it back by paying taxes,
employing locals, who pay taxes and spend the money in the community.
All other "Giving Back" is "at will", a windfall profit or an annoyence (pollution,...).
I think it's a difficult task for a smaller community to attract a company and make real profit!
At the end everybody knows the better solution.
Julius
P.S.: Alenia pleased Boeing with problems at fuselage parts. Production had to be stopped since more than a month. At least these big parts mustn't be put on stock...and paid!
"The EA500 suddenly became the portly middle-aged sedan, the family truckster"
kinda like the HONDA "I'm not a car/I'm not a turck" thing?
...Ridgeline
Phil,
I think you are right regarding the 10,000 hour life... its not a hard stop, IMO... just perhaps needs an inspection, or work from the company to demonstrate an extended life.
I do not think this will play out as the big deal anyone here has been saying.
I'd say, a minor risk... unless some of the "Stories" about rivits and FSW durability prove correct.
For now, not a major issue.
Baron's post aboutt he Conjet is very smart..
Vern was following the market (not leading it....) and decided the ea50 was already obsolete...
He knew he could not make enough of them based on the private owner market, and he saw oter cheaper planes coming out... so he followed.
Single engine is NOT the huge problem everyone thought in 1998... just like props are not a huge problem like the tiny-jet makers think today, from a taxi perspective, IMO
Any how, this begs the question... how would EAC compete - ewhat were theyr core competencies that would allow them to beat OEMs and other incumbents, if/when they opted to develop their own models?
My answer is, they had none.
- they could not find a market and design a plane for it, really
- they were not a low cost operator, by any definition of the word
How would they compete by finding and burning cash, which seemed to be their one basic strength, compared to the others?
I guess we should be thankful the guys trying to buy the assets of EAC will be different? They won't be able to find and incinerate cash like Vern... but does this answer the question about HOW they will compete with the existing shops on service, and how could they resurrect the DOA ea50, or the 400, which hasn't even begun?
Hmmm..... any takers?
from Mr. Shill:
"But right now I don't have all the bells and whistles the plane is capable of having. And that any decent Cirrus has. So why on earth do I say the Eclipse is so good when the old company never did fulfill all their promises? Why not just buy a piston Cirrus with Perspective?"
nice comparison, your JET versus a single Prop...
get a grip
from CW....
These are the questions that should already be answered, since we are about to see a couple tens of millions of dollars change hands.
How much will Avio NG 1.5 cost from NewCo?
How much will the new tire STC cost from NewCo (if someone doesn't beat them to it first)? And of course that will only matter to the operators who are not already putting unapproved tires on their planes (and it is happening).
How much will the repetitive flowcoating for FIKI cost from NewCo? Are replacement transparencies available to replace the windshields that are slowly pitted/crazed by the flowcoating process.
How much, if anything, is NewCo asking each owner to pony up to help them actually come up with the rest of the $20M and to cover the $20M in notes?
How much, if anything, is NewCo asking to help fund operations until they can become profitable based on expected service revenues?
How many engineers will NewCo have? What specialities will they represent?
How many critical vendors have said 'not no but hell no'? or are TU or about to be TU?
Are replacement vendors already identified and ready to contract for current spares needs as well as for the 'future' restart of production?
Is NewCo asking prepayment for their fixes?
What will service cost from NewCo?
Let's chew on that rather than each other for a few posts and see if we can learn anything productive.
Atm :
i'll be the first to shoot ...
(if someone doesn't beat them to it first) ...
in fact if such thing does happen , the NewCo. will be bankrupt in a matter of months ...
if some owners decide that the "Price X" is too much , they may go to some others ...
out of 260 , less the ones which are already doomed for scrap :
more than a handful is really a BIG problem ...
especially if anyone consider that most peoples can brag about something in public and do exactly the opposite in private ...
so the choice for already owners is some kind of tough :
Pay XXX in NexCo. in hope there will be a future ...
Pay XX to competitors at the risk there is no possible future ...
tough choice , but i fear that's definition for "captive market" and its hostages ...
airtaximan,
How much will the new tire STC cost from NewCo (if someone doesn't beat them to it first)? And of course that will only matter to the operators who are not already putting unapproved tires on their planes (and it is happening).
add to this Ken's remarks (f. e. on Garmin updates), then there are
(not might be) already some experimental fpjs flying around!
Challenging environment for a new TC holder!
Julius
From today's WSJ/Wire:
Boeing Halted Work at Dreamliner Plant
"Boeing Co. has encountered new flaws in the production of its 787 Dreamliner aircraft that have led it to order work to be halted at a plant in Italy that was making parts of the fuselage, the company confirmed Thursday night.
It is unclear how the work stoppage, ordered almost two months ago, will impact the delivery of the 787, which is already two years behind schedule.
The production flaw found in the Italian factory is the latest issue to beset the 787. On the same day that the company ordered work to be stopped at the fuselage plant, Boeing announced in a conference call that it had found a separate structural flaw where the wings meet the body of the plane. That flaw set back the Dreamliner's first test flight. Boeing still hasn't rescheduled the plane's maiden flight or updated its delivery schedule.
Though Boeing officials knew about the problem at the fuselage plant at the same time, they never mentioned it publicly.
The work-stoppage order is detailed in a letter written on June 23 by Boeing to Alenia Aeronautica in Naples. Boeing officials instructed them to stop manufacturing the two mid-fuselage sections it builds for the 787 after flaws in the fuselage's composite skin were discovered.
The existence of the work stoppage and the letter were first reported on the FlightBlogger Web site, which covers the aviation industry.
The problems with the center barrel of the plane's body could "lead to significant degradation of the structure," the letter said, according to the report on the Web site. Alenia is one of hundreds of global subcontractors Boeing is using to build the 787.
Boeing downplayed the significance of the problem. In a statement emailed Thursday night, a Boeing spokeswoman said "a modification needed to accommodate these findings is already designed and being installed" on the affected fuselage parts.
"After a thorough review we found only two locations on each airplane that needed to be strengthened with a fairly simple patch," said Lori Gunter, spokeswoman for the 787 program in Everett, Wash. The two patches can be applied externally and should prevent any "wrinkling" of the composite material, which could lead to further damage if left unrepaired.
Ms. Gunter confirmed that the first 23 production aircraft will need the fix, which can be applied at factories in Washington, South Carolina or Italy, depending on how far along each aircraft is in the production cycle.
The affected areas are located on the fuselage behind the wing and were first introduced on parts for the fifth Dreamliner, when the Italian factory began using a new tooling machine.
Ms. Gunter said the company was still trying to confirm that two of the six aircraft that will be used in Boeing's test flights won't need a modification before they make their first flights, but Boeing didn't rule out the possibility.
She said the Alenia factory in Italy hasn't resumed manufacturing of new fuselage parts. Boeing engineers continue to try to rework the design to reduce the potential for fatigue and "wrinkle" in the Dreamliner's composite skin on that part of the fuselage. Work also continues on the fuselage barrels that had been fabricated before production was halted nearly two months ago.
Asked if the company should have disclosed the Alenia factory closure, Ms. Gunter said via email, "The stoppage of work has no affect on schedule or cost. This is fairly normal for a new development program. These issues come up and we deal with them and move on."
However, Boeing customers have already complained about a lack of transparency as delays have accumulated."
Conjecture:
I don't think the 787 ever goes to market under this management and Board team. Moreover, the "Dreamliner" will become a modified 767 or 777.
Bubba,
It is interesting that you saw my Mustang on the ramp at ACK. I'd love to get together. Shoot me an e-mail at kcurran@gcctech.com and lets see what works.
And for others reading whom I have met before, any interest in another lunch at Bamboo?
Regards
Phil asks, "For the past few months, there has been some discussion on a fatigue life limit- I think the 10K hour limit from the FAA was just a temporary number, to be refined at a later date. Any news on how that progressed?"
Sure. The fatigue testing had been going along month after month until Eclipse stopped sending in the payments. I'm informed that the new company would like to resume the testing imminently, assuming they successfully close on the sale.
IIRC, the 10 year, 10,000 hour life limit on the airframe was assigned without the benefit of *any* fatigue testing. I do not know how far the testing got before it was shut down; it may be that there is already sufficient data accumulated to apply for a life limit extension.
"Please keep the great pix coming! :) "
Sure. Here's a couple:
Yosemite from 36,000 feet
On a clear day like this one, you can see Yosemite Falls and Half Dome pretty well from altitude.
And here's yet another reason why pilots like the Eclipse. Compare this photo of an MU2 throttle quadrant with all kinds of "junk" in the way with this photo of the Eclipse with its neat, clean, easy-to-use quadrant.
Ken
Deep :
i suppose Black Tulip was right when he made "Hitler" say ...
"Stick with the french turd " ;-)
Guten Abend , Herr Julius ...
yes , very challenging for an Eventual NewCo. :
they have to "unite" most owners ...
they have to make profits ...
they have to finish ...
and they have to be cheap enough to not see their potentials customers flying off ...
very tough , IMHO , almost unfeasable
The reg's have changed in regard to extending inspection intervals and service life (now limited to no more than 10% extension at a time - and with a requirement for significant supporting data).
Given that it will not be the original OEM or original players involved in requesting the service life and inspection extensions I suspect this will at least marginally troublesome.
This is in fact, IMO, the single largest technical risk for the Eclipse fleet living beyond 2018.
That of course ignores practical/commercial issues like
parts availability, mechanic liability, software compatability, etc.
And that of course ignores the potential ramifications, if any, from next week's 'sale hearing' which may already be in jeopardy.
Into the looking glass indeed.
Seriously, I asked some good questions above, nobody wants to take a crack at them?
"Yosemite from 36,000 feet
On a clear day like this one, you can see Yosemite Falls and Half Dome pretty well from altitude."
Seriously, I rather view Yosemite from 25000 ft. or even less.
Ken,
Of course there's 'two' of me.
One is the 'Shane Price', that I started when contributing to Stan's blog.
The other was for EclipseCriticNG.
It's a quirk of Google's blogspot.com that you couldn't use a 'gmail' address to set up a blog.
So now I'm stuck with two profiles. One, which is as 'blog custodian' and the other my 'ordinary' one. I've gotten used to using both, and will continue to do so.
But neither of 'me' has anything to do with 'publishing' so for the avoidance of confusion I've changed the one that seems to have fascinated you.
I hope you enjoy my new 'occupation'.
So, after yet another failed misdirection by you, can we get back to the real issue, which is of course Vern's love affair with the ConJet.
Don't you find it passing strange that the originator of your twin jet thinks a single is the way forward?
Or are you hoping that Vern is wrong about something, for once?
ColdWet,
I'm worried too. It appears that even the 'relentless promoters' of all things Eclipse (Aerospace or otherwise) can't extract answers to such relevant questions from Mike and/or Mason.
I think the real reason for this disturbing lack of detail is truly scary.
'They' don't have a clue.
All the material I've see from the EA camp is pure waffle. They've fallen into another classic 'first mover' trap of spending so much time trying to outfox any other potential bidder they've failed to nail down the business basics.
Indulge me while I attempt to illustrate my point.
Robert Redford starred in a wonderful movie released in 1972, 'The Candidate'. Many of you will be familiar with the plot, which sees an initially reluctant Redford railroaded into running against an incumbent Senator, in what was supposed to be a hopeless cause.
Of course our 'hero' wins the election, and the film ends with him asking his chief advisor:-
"What do we do now?"
If Mike and Mason have indeed 'won', I'm quite sure they'll be asking each other the exact same question....
Shane 'Shane Price' Price
(I think!)
Ok, I might have been a bit hard on Mike and Mason, by associating them with a '70's political satire.
But I'm sure fans of the film will be annoyed that I've linked a piece of cinematic excellence with the 'rather unlikely story that is Eclipse'.
To paraphrase your current President.
Will they 'win' with their bid?
Almost certainly.
What will happen when they wake up, after popping the champagne, and realize what they've done?
I'm not sure, but I've a fair idea. This recovery attempt will be brutally difficult. Not only do they have a raft of technical and financial hurdles to overcome, but the economic situation is less than optimal.
1. Suppliers are nervous, and not just about 'start ups'.
2. Existing owners, like Ken, are bound to be disappointed, with some part of the 'new' experience.
3. Parts and upgrades will be more expensive than expected, or take longer to ship.
4. Service and support facilities will initially be overwhelmed and unable to cope, which won't help improve the already strained situation.
None of this will be Mike/Mason's 'fault', but they'll be blamed anyway.
Such is life, in the real business world.
I believe that they will operate Eclipse Aerospace to higher ethical standards than EAC, but I'd also caution them about dealing with some of the people who had 'positions of authority' at Eclipse Aviation Corporation.
I wish them all the best, sincerely. It will be hard, and if they make it work I'll be a cheerleader for a brilliant turnaround.
Just not as naive as Ken....
Shane
Shane says, "Will they 'win' with their bid?
Almost certainly."
That's a remarkable deathbed conversion, Shane. 3 days ago, you had both the Russians and the Chinese outbidding EA.
Ken
Fred,
I think the idea was for all the operators to change out the Thales probes with Goodrich units; Airbus would at the same time issue a Service Bulletin specifying ONLY the Goodrich probe. Since all the airplanes would be modified there would be no need for an EASA AD note on the probes. It did not work out that way and the AD note will be a scarlett letter on Thales forehead. Having said that EASA is taking its own sweet time actually issuing the AD note.
Cold Fish
It’s most difficult to answer your questions when “words” have such illusive meanings with these folks . . . it’s like nailing “gelatin” to a wall on a hot day. As an example, recent announcements have been made that “Government Motors” will soon introduce a new wonder car, the “Volt”, which will get (up to) 230 miles per gallon.
Assuming they mean “230 miles per gallon of gasoline”, how do they do that? Well, in careful examination of the data as published by the manufacturer, they have a 16 kilowatt hour battery, that is limited to a complete charge of “80%”, and a minimum of “30%”, yielding a maximum useful charge of 8 kilowatt hours. Provided the 450 pound battery is not allowed to drop below “Zero C” (32 degrees F), the car can operate up to 40 miles on a single charge (in town, on nearly level roads, with “slight” inclines). A gasoline engine can assist, with expected “50 mpg” fuel usage. The gasoline engine runs a generator, to power the “motor(s)”, but does not charge the battery. Somewhere in there, possibly because the engine might only be used to “get you back home”, within power-cord range of 120vac outlet (for a six hour charge) or an optional 240vac adapter kit (for a three hour charge), the actual use of gasoline “might” under maximum ideal conditions use the one gallon every 230 miles driven.
Now, if the charge cycle were 100% efficient, and you live back east, and electricity is produced by nuclear power and/or hydroelectric power, you could call the thing a “green car” (whatever that is). Out west, where most energy comes from “coal” or “oil”, the energy to charge the battery is the equivalent of eight to twelve pounds of coal (about one pound of coal produces about one kilowatt hour of electricity) . . . so, the bottom line is that GM has in fact produced (or “promised to produce”), a coal fired car, with an average equivalent of “maybe” 40 mpg, under ideal circumstances.
But that is not what is being published, far and wide.
Someone did a study (business news in some major eastern paper), comparing the Obama-Mobile to a Toyota Corolla . . . and the break even point was somewhere around 240,000 miles . . . or if you get the “$7,500" government rebate, it’s only around 140,000 miles . . . take your pick. The $40,000 basic entry price does not provide any profit for “GM”.
All this “hype” reminded me of earlier “hype” about a certain little jet, not so long ago. But who knows . . . !
gadfly
I find there are two types of people blogging here
1. the business people like Shane, Gadfly etc. people who have operated businesses. and the best information comes from those that have actually owned the businesses they ran. they have actually navigated the perilous waters of business and managed to avoid many of the rocks and learned from the ones they hit.
2 the others: talented professionals like doctor's lawyers, engineers, mechanics accountants etc. they are very useful, smart people but they have never actually created an operating company. they have basically sold only their talent for a fee and never taken any real risks.
I pay attention to the predictions of business people much more than the others because the businesspeople's predictions are actually based on experience (in many cases lessons hard bought with their own money).
I, as a result, pay great attention to the prediction of the businessmen, as their predictions come from actual experience not casual observations from a distance.
Whats' the difference between a MU-2 throttle quadrant and that of a EA-500?
How about one was poorly designed and poorly built with the result of almost causing a fatal accident which resulted in an emergency gounding AD note as well as a follow-on AD note. And one has has almost 40 years of trouble-free service?
Shane said... All the material I've see from the EA camp is pure waffle. They've fallen into another classic 'first mover' trap of spending so much time trying to outfox any other potential bidder they've failed to nail down the business basics.
Indulge me while I attempt to illustrate my point.
There you go again... "all the material I've seen", "you don't know what I know"...
Then as an example you bring up a Robert Redford movie instead of giving us some of your deep dark top secret facts. I really think you have NO contact with any of the sources you claim.
Beedriver . . . Thank you for your kind words. My question would be, "If I'm so smart, how come I ain't rich?" But actually in the things that I count "rich", I am most blessed.
You are correct in the comment, "in many cases lessons hard bought with their own money" . . . but, you know what? In the end (according to an excellent source of information), "It's all going to burn."
So, like the comment of the old Swede, "Too soon old, too late smart!" (I'm not a Swede, but married one . . . the challenge has been good . . . no, make that excellent!)
gadfly
(Most of us are wondering what will take place in the next few hours . . . days . . . and what sort of "sign" will appear over the buildings at the west end of ABQ. And have the manufacturing companies in the Albuquerque area learned their lesson? . . . or will they "do it again". I have my own thoughts . . . some folks never learn.)
"...That's a remarkable deathbed conversion, Shane. 3 days ago, you had both the Russians and the Chinese outbidding EA."
No Ken, I think this is what he means by "they will win"
;)
Shane's Top Four List...
1. Suppliers are nervous, and not just about 'start ups'.
2. Existing owners, like Ken, are bound to be disappointed, with some part of the 'new' experience.
3. Parts and upgrades will be more expensive than expected, or take longer to ship.
4. Service and support facilities will initially be overwhelmed and unable to cope, which won't help improve the already strained situation.
1) Now is a perfect time to start a business! Plenty of very skilled people out of work, looking for any reasonable job, and at lower wages than could be had in a better economy. Suppliers are hungry, and very willing to sign up new production contracts under favorable terms just to keep their employees busy so they don't have to lay them off.
2) Been there, done that, still here. The customers have faced the reality of this situation, it's not as bad as the "critics" want the world to believe. Airplanes are being serviced, some parts are readily available, some parts are difficult to obtain, some parts are not available. I've seen the same before with other aircraft.
3) Part will be more expensive than free replacement under warranty - sure. It's not clear that they will be any more expensive than any other parts in aviation.
4) Service and support is available now. Not a problem. Your issue with this just emphasizes that you don't know what is going on with the fleet today, and you don't have any information on what Holland/Press have in mind. There is just not that much that is going to change. It will only get better.
Shane what do you plan on doing with all your inside info?
"I really think you have NO contact with any of the sources you claim."
wow... such a skeptic... and you believed EAC... hmm... curious mindset.
I for one, believe Shane is being 100% honet, and I think EAC leaders were big liars...
Curious.
Wass there a wager mentioned on some issue you took exception with?
Why not take it?
BassMaster said... Shane what do you plan on doing with all your inside info?
LOL
RonRoe . . . you made a comment that got me thinking, “. . . those who have created new products and services, and jobs” . . . and it was the last thing “jobs” that was the key. Actually, I wished you had taken it to the next step: “skills”! And, of course, that would have led to even higher goals . . . ethics, . . . all that good stuff that makes for an excellent product, and complete satisfaction in a person’s vocation.
Over the years one of the greatest rewards I have experienced is to train people to move up in their skills, abilities, etc., . . . often “losing” them in the process to better positions in other companies . . . but even then, I have been rewarded, as they brought business back to our little company . . . repaying our efforts, many, many times over in terms of business dollars. But the greater reward was to see these people go on to much higher goals than I could have provided.
The final results are maybe not for me to see in this life . . . it doesn’t matter. But to see lives changed and move up on all fronts . . . that is something money cannot buy.
It is not enough to train folks in certain skills, but to educate them in the sense that they fully understand the “what” and “why” of what they are doing . . . and the importance of providing a “quality” product to the person that will use the “thing” that they helped produce.
All these things bring being a business owner, etc., to a much higher level than ‘just making a living at something.
gadfly
(Ignore these basic things, and you have another “Eclipse” fiasco . . . pay close attention to these basics, and you’ll probably have a true winner.)
Would the faithful like to fill the rest of the blog in on who the trustee is meeting with today?
There are sources, and then there are sources.
There is information, and then there is information.
There is the story, and then there is the whole story.
The fact that service is avaialble already, and from some good sources, is one of the reasons this whole thing makes no sense to 'purchase' or 'rescue'.
Where will the $20M that Press and Holland are promising go, IF they deliver it? To the bond holders and secured creditors? To the long suffering unpaid vendors? To Albuquerque and the State of New Mexico? To the employees screwed out of vacation, deferred compensation and such?
No, it will barely cover the DIP and trustee fees - IF, and I stresss IF the transaction actually occurs (50-50 at best IMO at this point).
So let us assume that Press and Holland actually win (see above).
Now what do we do?
$5-10M/yr in payroll (bare minimum) to SUPPORT - triple it to restart production, add it the original figure, then consider adding a fudge factor - yes, I am serious.
Leases, hiring and headhunting expenses, contract labor arrangements, deposits on utility and communication infrastructure, prepaid unemployment insurance, good faith monies to vendors - how much for this? $1M? $2M? $5M?
Re-establishing of parts supply - how much for this? $2M? $5M? $10M?
Starting to pay for re-establishment of static and fatigue testing (assuming the test articles remain in usable shape). How much for this? $500K? $2M?
If Press and Holland are not SITTING on an EXISTING $40-50M beyond the $20M in cash they represent they can pay in the next 2 weeks, this thing will crater perhaps before any spare or software of significance is delivered to a single customer. I am not talking about promises or commitments or LOI's, I am talking about cold hard cash.
And still many questions unanswered which I will not bore you to repeat but they are on this page.
I know that we have no reponsibility to the owners, potential investors, potential employees, potential vendors, etc. I am not my brothers keeper.
But it would be nice to see more skepticism of the goings on from the guys who certainly should have learned from all this drama by now.
Things were always going to be better, someday, somehow.
Isn't that mantra worn out?
Isn't it time for some critical thinking? Critical evaluation of what is and is not being offered? Of what information is and is not available at this point?
Consider one thing, if the two division concept to restart production in the next 'couple years' is still part of the plan, Press and Holland need an extra $15-20M or so/yr for 2 years (minimum) above and beyond the numbers above just for engineering/design. Is that in the plan? Where is that money coming from? If they are talking about production resuming, back out 2 years from when they say they want to resume, and figure $15-20M/yr for each of those years. How will they pay for that? Are they talking about trying to monopolize service and support (maybe couched as 'authorized' etc)?
At least the next hearing isn't on a Tuesday....
Was the BK auction supposed to happen this Friday, or next week?
SHANE:
Imagine if Ken was so picky with EAC?
He is taking issue with yu describing yourself as a publisher, when no matter what, you were "publishing" this blog at the time... kinda transparent, wouldn't you say?
Imagne IF Ken (outwardly) was dissappointed with EAC, and perhaps even his financial decision to but the plane he says he so LOVES because it sips fuel and is fun to fly... as he is with you stating you are a publisher...
funny... its the H thing again
Well, I am glad to see some inteligent comments on the future of the EA50- my take:
1- "we're no worse than anyone else" support is going to be just fine with the owners... and this means that there will probably be strong competition from the network of indys already doing work... tough to make a buck, but what else is new in GA? Maybe Cesna will have a "support" advantage as well... really
2- upgrades will be costly - anyone have a number? The planes will be in the shopa while and thi will increase the fuel advantage, while limiting the fun!
Once again, it would be great to understand the rational someone isusing while deciding to buy these "assets"... how much can you make on the mods without really PO-ing the owners? Parts? Service? Before someone else steps in and does it without having ROI issues regarding burning a ot of capital on this?
Is there a future for the ea50? CONjet? at what price and volume, and has the entrenched competition figured out long ago the price/volume quotient that makes sense, so the market for these planes is VERY small, so as to not make any commercial sense?
ideas?
Company wants to take over Eclipse Aviation assets
(AP) – 54 minutes ago
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A company that wants to buy the assets of now-closed Eclipse Aviation hopes to close on the sale by the end of the month.
Eclipse Aerospace president Mason Holland Jr. said Friday he's not aware of any other bidders. The deadline was noon Friday.
Eclipse Aerospace has submitted a $40 million plan to purchase the assets of Eclipse, which entered bankruptcy proceedings last November.
Albuquerque-based Eclipse Aviation made the Eclipse 500 very light jet aircraft, which has been likened to an SUV with wings.
A federal bankruptcy judge set an Aug. 20 sale hearing for Eclipse Aviation's assets.
Holland says the hearing will set out procedures for closing, which he expects to take place before the end of August.......
So if EA can swing the funds it should be a done deal, right?
Brainstorm time:
If I were to start a new company, with new technology, like the original claims of the little bird, I would not sell the aircraft to anyone . . . but “lease it”, and maintain 100% control over all maintenance, repairs, etc.
That would do at least two things: First, it would hold my feet to the fire to produce exactly what I claimed. Second, it would free the customer from the concerns of buying an “un-known”, etc.
But, of course, the founders of Eclipse probably knew from the start that they didn’t really believe in their own product . . . history has demonstrated their true character. And many of the customers saw an opportunity to “make a fast buck” on the opportunity to buy/and re-sell positions, etc. A limited number may have made the quick profit . . . but me thinks history will take care of these folks in ways they would just as soon avoid. Many workers have been seriously hurt, with little if no recourse for the disruption of their hopes, dreams, family life . . . etc.
But why would I take such a risk? For one thing, if something such as “brake/tire” failure were a problem, I could address the problem, with a consistent fix. Throttle problem? . . . same thing! . . . and on and on. I would maintain control, so that no matter which aircraft a person were to “fly”, there is no question as to “what and how and why” . . . all things being uniform.
However, early on, the owners of Eclipse decided to deceive the customers and the public . . . flew around for what? . . . an hour? . . . with an overheating pair of under-powered engines, took in money out of escrow from gullible depositors, finally admitted their deception (sort of’), by blaming the engine manufacturer (not their fault, but an easy “out”), and going to Canada for a “fix”. And then in time, began delivering unfinished, incomplete aircraft, to the “gullible” early depositors, that in effect became collaborators, to hopefully get back the money that by now they realized they’d lost.
No matter what the “new” Eclipse does, the stain of past behavior is forever deeply imbedded in the “warp and woof” of the original fabric . . . and there is no stain remover powerful enough to remove all traces. The best stain remover is to never allow it in the first place.
gadfly
(Prediction: Within a month, maybe less, of the “take-over” of any new owner, we’ll have enough information about the ethics and future of Eclipse . . . watch carefully their interaction with the local political leaders . . . and scrutinize each and every public statement they make to the media.)
(And, to quote a person in the Bible, "I'm neither a prophet, nor the son of a prophet" . . . but I'll stand by my earlier predictions, concerning ever completing a single "Eclipse", and it's future.)
Freedoms,
IIRC, bidders must show up today at..and the auction will take place on Monday (So I read it on Tuesday, if...).
On the 20th of August the result of the auction will be accepted or not!
If Col.M&M (M&M - sorry,there are too many of them) pay their cash part, we will experience how they will make good their promises and who will pay the bills!
Julius
P.S.: How many bidders? New appointments?
As per the AP report, the deadline for higher bids has come and gone. Eclipse Aerospace is the high bidder. There are no others bidding against them; there will be no auction. The only hurdles remaining for Eclipse Aerospace are the approval of the court (the hearing is scheduled for August 20), and of course the payment of the money.
Congratulations to Mike, Mason, and all the others at Eclipse Aerospace who have worked tirelessly to accomplish this difficult task. All Eclipse enthusiasts wish you good luck in your new endeavor.
Shane certainly missed the mark on this one when he insisted the Chinese or the Russians would outbid Eclipse Aerospace. The Russians are out of it; ditto the Chinese, unless they want to do a deal with Eclipse Aerospace (which seems like it could be a good match and therefore a reasonable possibility to happen).
Those who insisted that the death of Eclipse Aviation meant the demise of the Eclipse 500 airplane have been proven wrong once again. As even some of the most vocal detractors of the old company will concede, the plane is a fundamentally good design, filling an otherwise vacant niche for jet transportation at an affordable price point for the owner/operator and cost-conscious charter operator. It can be a great plane as the new company restarts the parts chain and upgrades the fleet to FIKI and Avio NG 1.5.
I must say that lately we're seeing an awful lot of "Critic" and not very much "Enthusiast" action on this blog with regard to Eclipse issues. That's unfortunate, so I remind readers interested in hearing more on the pros and cons of the Eclipse 500 without all the rancor to post their questions and comments at The Eclipse Owners Club, where we welcome Eclipse enthusiasts rather than try to chase them away.
Ken
Ken
With all due respect, I looked at the Eclipse Owners website as you indicated . . . and I have a question. Is there anything for us to read after December 25, 2008?
'Just asking . . . since you seemed to imply that all is well with the little bird. But between last December and August of this year is a long, long time, in "very light jet years".
gadfly
Gad, we have an active set of discussion forums that cover the entire gamut of topics about the plane. We have 1253 registered members and almost 20,000 total posts, the latest one being just minutes ago.
Those who do not qualify for full membership can join as enthusiasts. They cannot read everything posted on the website for obvious reasons, but they can post any questions they have in the Enthusiast section and get the answers they seek from owners and operators. Full members support the Enthusiast section so that non-members can learn more about the airplane. If you post a question or comment there, it will be seen by the full members and answered appropriately.
Ken
Ken, Ken,
the plane is a fundamentally good design, filling an otherwise vacant niche for ..
It can be a great plane as the new company restarts the parts chain and upgrades the fleet to FIKI and Avio NG 1.5.
fundamentally Is there anything wrong with the design?
Hey, Col.M&M didn't have a chance to pay their bid!
Ken, you have proved that you can!
You can fly without FIKI and AVIO NG 1.5 ...or...!
Wait a little bit!
Julius
Ken
Thank you for your answer. At this time, I'll let you continue to be the spokesman for the "Eclipse". And we'll see what the "media" has to report on your behalf over the next few weeks.
gadfly
Congratulations to Mike and Mason.
It will be hard work for them and those that choose to join the team.
We'll all be watching, and hoping they can pull this particular program back from the brink.
And find a 'white knight' with long term finance and the technical expertise required.
Shane
"Congratulations to Mike, Mason, and all the others at Eclipse Aerospace who have worked tirelessly to accomplish this difficult task. "
Ken, as usual, you are a bit premature. With no competing bids, this was the easiest part. Now lets see if the Col et al can:
1. come up with the cash
2. close the transaction
3. raise enough capital to attempt to get the business up and running
4. actually get the business up and running
At this point, then a modest level of congratulations is in order. Dont open the champagne until things are really humming.
Plain Truth,
BassMaster said... Shane what do you plan on doing with all your inside info?
LOL
Actually, I'm the one having 'lots of laughs'.
I don't own an FPJ.
I avoided (thanks again, Stan) losing a deposit on one.
I'm not waiting to find out how much support, upgrades and parts are going to cost me.
In fact, this whole sorry mess hasn't cost me a red cent, and is never likely to.
Hell, if the book sells, I might even make a dime (or possibly a quarter) out of it.
How about you?
Shane
Ken said,
“The plane is a fundamentally good design, filling an otherwise vacant niche for jet transportation.”
There is a reason the niche has been otherwise vacant. The niche is very, very small… hardly big enough for one vendor.
Regarding the ‘throttle’ quadrant - you can only hope the Eclipse 500 is supported as well as the Mitsubishi MU-2, now so many years out of production. All those knobs and buttons meant something when the aircraft was designed and produced two (people) generations ago. Now a responsible company with resources stands behind an outdated product. For the Eclipse 500?
Real Planes –
I believe I saw your Mustang at Jet Aviation at Hanscom Bedford this afternoon. Nice ramp presence especially compared to an Eclipse. Lunch at the Bamboo in Burlington would be nice.
Freedom,
Was the BK auction supposed to happen this Friday, or next week?
There was only ever going to be an auction if there was more than one bidder. To be a bidder you had to put $5 million into a escrow account by noon, Eastern, today.
Only one $5 million turned up, from Eclipse Aerospace, the vehicle fronted by Mike Press and Mason Holland.
A measly $20 million in cash and another $20 million in 'notes', presumably payable by 'Tuesday' was all it took. Pretty much sums up poor old Eclipse Aviation Corporation, doesn't it?
I'm sure the 'M&M' crew will give it their best shot. I hope they make it, but my native common sense tells me it's a long shot.
Shane
Shane said... I don't own an FPJ.
Ouch. LOL. What a comeback. That the best you got. You are so out of touch with reality. This blog is all you have, you need it to feel important.
Yes, I do have an Eclipse, it has been reliable, and it does fly great. With parts availability on the very near horizon, the fleet will be just fine.
"Those who insisted that the death of Eclipse Aviation meant the demise of the Eclipse 500 airplane have been proven wrong once again."
I do not remember anyone ever insisting this -
- I personally think its the other way around!
OK, Ken: I'll bite... what are the cons?
Gad,
I know for fact someone suggested exactly your Brainstorm Plan... and it was refused....
"There are no others bidding against them"
What is the definition of an EAC "Die Hard"?
I think we have our answer, folks.
Monsieur Shane ...
my native common sense tells me it's a long shot. ...
yes , definitely !
as stated by ColdWet (which had IMHO probably the only plan making sens ...) :
The fact that service is avaialble already, and from some good sources, is one of the reasons this whole thing makes no sense to 'purchase' or 'rescue'. ...
so here we have what is called "Scissors Effect" ...
NewCo. is starting out with a capability of raising a mere $20 Millions (otherwise , they wouldn't have to use such trick as "Notes" worth about the faith you can have in them ...)
only starting and already $20 Millions in the red ( on purely accounting way , those $20M are a kind of obligation , bearing interests (?) ...)
at same time , they have to attract most owners ...
out of 260 , ONLY 26 is already 10% down ...
so they cannot afford to loose-free any of previous victims ! (which explain the voicing and concern shilling toward the NewCo. )
but those owners may have other ways to "KEEP" (whatever that means) their plane Operational (same as previous remark)
so here is the scissors : lack of proper funds + need to attract ALL owners + NEED to make profits + OBLIGATION to be AT LEAST not more expensive than service-competitors + NEED to Raise enough Capital and credibility to start again production ...
so lets see what are the + and - in this story :
Downs =
*credibility to be made out less than nothing
*lack of proper funds
* obligation to make profits
*VERY small market possibilities
*Economic downturn
*foreseeable future to be reached at "sorry , wrong number"
the + =
*faith
*what else ?
ok , someone started a business based on faith some 2000 years ago ...
any other attempt has been a miserable failure since !
will it be enough to pop champagne corks like crazy ?
this is where Mr GadFly's prediction takes all its flavor !
i forgot to add :
EAC assets were valuated at something north of $100 Millions ...
lack of Bidders which just had to put $25 Millions to pick-up $100M+ assets ($20M from Col.M + $5M)
just that explain already what peoples with REAL money (and brain) think of the matter ...
at $25 Millions = No Go !
Shane....
Wheres Russia and China mate? I guess they decided not to show. They probably are hiding out in the same vicinity as your credibility and your sources credibility...
Seriously brother you are starting to sound about as well informed as Fred. It will be interesting if your posts on this blog end up being just white noise as well...
Ken said,
“The plane is a fundamentally good design,:
I would be willing to go as far as a "good concept." The design has been shown to be badly flawed.
WT,
"a good design" based on what criteria? Fun to fly? Saves a few pennies on fuel?
Aerospace/Aviation engineering today is based on designing for a purpose, mission and a market.
This plane is about as far from a good design as it gets, based on the initial criteria set by the company.
"Concepts" (many of them) are reviewed every year by advanced engineering teams and executives in this industry. How THIS plane got from CONCEPT to production is a complete mystery to me, except "progress" had to be made in order to attract more deposits and investment... plus they were pregnant with this design, and couldn't just back peddle and say "look, we need to fundamentally change the concept" after 5 years, millions and millions spent on marketing and a lackluster order book compared to the hype and marketing spend.
Tomorrows problems are the same as yesterdays, in this story - how will THIS design become a good design - -in other words, how can it ever be sold at a fair price and make money?
I hope we find out the answer.
ron :
if i would like to be funny , i could point out that "Mon ami" should be written in the non plural form ...! (ok , i am more than one in my little head but it still count as one !) ;-)
let's be frank with each other :
what are the notes made of ?
simple = find anybody who has a check-book (even one who has a bank crazy enough to leave it to his good care ) ...
have him writing $20 Millions on a check ...
have accepted by the seller (here trustee + court) ...
there we are !
notes only engage the ones who who accept such form of payment !
as for cash = it is much less , hence the + 5 Millions in cash to overbid ...
making a today price as $25 Millions ...
the notes have no real meaning as for today !!
EclipseMachin ...
stop doing so many compliments ...
i could get used to it !!
;-)
Fred,
Please refrain from reminding the faithful that a promise is just a promise...
Ron
no problem ...!
if you use "Mon" (mine) you have to use a singular masculine form , here : "ami"
french is a weird language , in the same case , you could use the singular feminine form , here it would be "amie"
as for "amis" (with emphasis on S) , you should have used "Mes " ...
don't worry german is even worse ...
in french : things are either male or female ...
in german : they can be male , female or neither ;-) !
that said , it can be an other good way to make Hitler's funny speech :
"how can we stick to those french turd if we cannot use their language properly ...!"
ok, only kidding on the use of grammar ...
hope you don't mind !! ;-)
Airtaxi :
OK , Roger ! (am i a good student ?)
funny HOW some seems to forget the REAL NAME of those NOTES :
"PROMISSORY Notes" ... ;-)
guess everyone has the Maddoff he deserve !! ;-)
To top it on Real price :
not long ago most investors in W.S. were happy to get a P.E.R. (price earning ratio) of 30/40 to 1 ...
(meaning paying a certain amount to buy a share having a yearly return of 1)
here in the case of EAC Assets : the situation is completely the opposite ...
since the valuation gave a "Value" (i don't like this word , too ambiguous ) of $100 Millions + (i don't remember but i think it was real north of this ...)
anyone used to play in stocks or more simply with money should deduce :
[actual bid = $20M in real cash + $20M in notes ] + $5 Millions in cash = $25 Millions in cash to be found for a potential earning on resale of $100 Millions ...
(while $25M for W.S. need about a coffee-break to be found and ready for use )
which in return means a P.E.R. of an unprecedented ONE to FOUR !
(or a "potential" return of $4 for $1 put into ...)
if the thing had really the attraction faithful claims :
W.S. Gurus would be queuing out of trustee , probably fighting one an other , to place their overbid ...
but i am so badly misinformed that i am probably 150% wrong ... ;-)
Guys don't forget, essentially none of the $20M in cash will go to anyone other than Al Mann (DIP priority claim)and the BK Court (trustee fees).
The creditors can say still say no.
M&M can still fail to come up with the balance of $15M.
If M&M don't have another $40-50M in their grubby little hands, right now, this is a no-go.
If they do have another $40-50M in their grubby little hands, tight now, they might have a chance, but....
If they can't bring the promised monies and notes on the 20th, then it WILL be an courthouse step auction.
Interesting that we see premature celebration (just like when Roel's stalking horse 363 bid seemed like it would work), and still no discussion of the challenges from the faithful, still no answers to the questions I posed earlier.
Guess it is true that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
ColdWet :
may i respectfully point out that it is NOT Mann and then after trustee ... (IMHO)
i would bet my hat on
Trustee FIRST ! ;-)
no way out ? let's get something on $20M ...
better than a lot more on something never coming ! ! !
(we are still with the rabbit in the pot ! ;-) )
Post a Comment