BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 14:29

Username Protected wrote:

Not at all. I'm just willing to bet you $500 bucks they will deliver 25 next year. But, since it's for charity, I'm willing to keep the wager the same but specify that they must deliver 75 next year.

There is zero chance they deliver 75 next year.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 14:37

It seems like you are making a silly bet that you know you will lose but justifying it because it's for charity?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 14:46

Username Protected wrote:

It seems like you are making a silly bet that you know you will lose but justifying it because it's for charity?

No. I think Mike is convinced he's right. I'm not sure he is. I think some of the discussion of this particular airplane is silly, including whether or not it will get built, how fast it will be, how useful it will be, how well it will sell, how well the company that is making it will fare among other things. I've grown tired of the debate where everyone has orifices and opinions. If Mike is as confident in his ceaseless pronouncements regarding these things as he insistently appears to be then he ought to seize the opportunity to benefit an organization he cares about by taking the wager. Unless there is

moral opposition to a friendly wager on a sure thing, of course...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 15:21

Username Protected wrote:

All Cirrus has to do to succeed is get people to buy it. They're devoting their formidable marketing engine to sell buyers on the planes "inefficient" mission. I think Cirrus has far better chances than Eclipse.

You can't keep telling yourself the only reason for Cirrus success is their marketing.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 15:27

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:05

Username Protected wrote:

I'm just willing to bet you $500 bucks they will deliver 25 next year. But, since it's for charity, I'm willing to keep the wager the same but specify that they must deliver 75 next year.

I'll even specify where you're money will be going if you like:

http://www.keithsicecoldbeverages.com

What say you?

Hi Tony,
Your charity looks like a great cause. I have no idea if Cirrus will make 75 deliveries, and don't really care.

But since I care about your charity, and mine, I'm happy to take your "bet" since there are no losers here. If we could somehow both lose that would be ideal.

My charity: Council for Life.

Talk to you in a year.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:12

Username Protected wrote:

I'm just willing to bet you $500 bucks they will deliver 25 next year. But, since it's for charity, I'm willing to keep the wager the same but specify that they must deliver 75 next year.

I'll even specify where you're money will be going if you like:

http://www.keithsicecoldbeverages.com

What say you?

Hi Tony,
Your charity looks like a great cause. I have no idea if Cirrus will make 75 deliveries, and don't really care.

But since I care about your charity, and mine, I'm happy to take your "bet" since there are no losers here. If we could somehow both lose that would be ideal.

My charity: Council for Life.

Talk to you in a year.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:17

Username Protected wrote:

Greg,

Thanks for the offer! But I didn't offer to bet all comers. I offered to bet Mike. Originally, I was conservative at 25 but offered 75 because he seemed hesitant to back up his pessimism about the SF50 making it to market which is strewn over this thread. I doubt Cirrus will produce 75 next year but I doubt Mike's pessimism will be justified either. An offer of 75 should be easy for him but he hasn't said so yet. Probably busy doing something else. I think it would be fun to have that wager with him and it benefits a good mission. If he wants to cover the offer we're on. As far as you and I are concerned let's just write checks. Council for Life looks like a terrific cause.

My bad, sorry for being presumptuous. But I'll still contribute to your charity if you're right.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:39

Username Protected wrote:

Hardly - I said they're a proven company using a proven technology. Marketing doesnt sell a technically incapable/incompetent product. But marketing matters - and I use this term broadly in the sense of meeting the real psychological needs of individual owners that may not be performance based. Cirrus is very good at marketing.

What piston plane produced right now is better than a Cirrus? Cirrus isn't tricking folks into buying. It actually is the best piston plane being built right now. What option does one have?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:43

Assuming the cirrus is the best piston, that doesn't have any bearing on whether the jet will sell or not - which is what I was discussing.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 17:43

Username Protected wrote:

Assuming the cirrus is the best piston, that doesn't have any bearing on whether the jet will sell or not - which is what I was discussing.

Did you watch the video of the man flying it? What's not to like?

I flew an Eclipse 550 not long ago and I really loved it...... except for the avionics. You can't buy a plane with a bad avionics program nowadays. You can't do it. You're gonna be left with a boat anchor.

If the SF50 comes in at $2.2MM it will have no equal. Everything else is a lot more expensive. Yes, it remains to be seen what the price is.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 18:50

I saw the video.

5 Degrees pitch on take off in a jet??

2000 FPM climb on a cool day with just the pilot on board?

Nobody cares about the view!

Somebody tell that sales guy to get the mic out of his mouth!

Things I must have missed.

Engine out performance demonstration.

Time to climb?

High speed flight/ Slow speed flight Demonstration.

Loading plane with people and or cargo.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 18:52

You Cirrus bashes are funny... :crazy:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 19:01

I remember the same arguments when I first started flying in 2007 regarding the SR22. Now Beech is out of Business.

Steve, how many new generation of planes need to be sold before you'll come around? I'm pretty sure more people died in Phenoms and Premiers last year than died in SR22's and there are a lot more SR22's flying.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Dec 2015, 19:01

Username Protected wrote:

You Cirrus bashes are funny... :crazy:

It's quite amusing to watch.

Cirrus SF50