They serve a market. The customers just need to know what they ground rules are. They will try to make the plane basically new. There are customers who want that and will pay for it. And there are those who won't.


He actually owns and operates these planes, so yes, I believe him over someone who doesn't. I saw the estimate.

The Textron price for the gear leg was well over $200K. This was a few years back.

Mike C.

Not my call or plane.

I'd be curious how your contract defined "no damage history" and the language that made that required. It is a very vague term, so if it was in a contract, that had the be legally defined.

Presumably you produced this contract and thus can provide a blank copy of what you expect from buyers.

Mike C.

Not my call or plane.

I'd be curious how your contract defined "no damage history" and the language that made that required. It is a very vague term, so if it was in a contract, that had the be legally defined.

Presumably you produced this contract and thus can provide a blank copy of what you expect from buyers.

Mike C.

Not my call or plane.

I'd be curious how your contract defined "no damage history" and the language that made that required. It is a very vague term, so if it was in a contract, that had the be legally defined.

Presumably you produced this contract and thus can provide a blank copy of what you expect from buyers.

Mike C.

Edit: I just realized I misspoke.

We do not have that language in every purchase agreement, the purchase agreement we use for new aircraft does not have that language for obvious reasons.

Here’s a couple more, an older Citation V like yours all the way up to a 2022 Phenom 300E

So you shook down a seller who delivered an airworthy aircraft? Is that your service?

I would have said the aircraft is airworthy so take it or walk.

Mike C.

The contract language:

"For the purposes of this agreement, the term "Material Damage" means any damage to the Aircraft, including any damage that occurred after the commencement of the Inspection but specifically excluding any damage or history of damage occurring prior to the commencement of the Inspection and disclosed in the Aircraft Documents..."

Since you found it in the Aircraft Documents, the above contract language says that is excluded as a consideration.

This means the buyer was in conformance with the agreement but you shook them down for $100K regardless.

The above clause would only come into effect if the damage was not documented in the aircraft documents, but you explicitly said it was.

Mike C.

Mike: why do care so much about Chip's business?

Chip: why do you keep engaging with Mike?

Sheesh you guys, give it rest. Filtering through the chaff to actually learn about aircraft levels is tiring.

They don't suck per se, but you have to have reasonable expectations. Every single prebuy I have had missed some major things and the one time I didn't have a prebuy, the experience was not materially different.

As a buyer, you want to take the plane to a nit picky shop like Stevens where small issues are blown up to major money and use that as contract leverage. As a seller, you realize that is going to happen, so you make it clear only airworthy issues are in play. If they find something they claim is airworthy in nature, you always have the ability to take the plane to some other shop to have it addressed.

Would I have preferred to have a prebuy on my Citation V purchase? Yes, but the situation in late 2020 simply didn't allow for it.
No shop had time, the airplane market was a in a frenzy, etc. So it was an "as is, where is" purchase, with a price to match.

It turned out quite nicely for me in this case now 4 years hence. I have fixed a ton of stuff on the plane and the things the Textron service center did or left in place was shocking to me. I am certain a Stevens like shop would have charged me well over $100K to fix all these things (assuming the prebuy found them, which is debatable). However, my maintenance strategies solved these problems all for under $20K, which is likely less than the prebuy would have cost.

You can always find horror stories to use fear to drive behavior, and to a large extent, Chip's business runs on that primary motivation, his customers fear what they don't know. So they hire someone presenting themselves as an expert which gives them comfort.

Mike C.

We know. You’ve told us. Quite a few times.

I don’t remember the late 2020 market as a frenzy. I remember it as a time when high end aircraft sellers were numerous and dumping aircraft at historically low prices.

We understand. It worked for you (this time). Great!
Some of us have had that approach not work so great, or personally know people that have had it not work so great. I would hazard a guess that over the late 2020 timeframe, your experience is more outlier than norm.

The contract language:

"For the purposes of this agreement, the term "Material Damage" means any damage to the Aircraft, including any damage that occurred after the commencement of the Inspection but specifically excluding any damage or history of damage occurring prior to the commencement of the Inspection and disclosed in the Aircraft Documents..."

Since you found it in the Aircraft Documents, the above contract language says that is excluded as a consideration.

This means the buyer was in conformance with the agreement but you shook them down for $100K regardless.

The above clause would only come into effect if the damage was not documented in the aircraft documents, but you explicitly said it was.

Mike C.

We know. You’ve told us. Quite a few times.

I don’t remember the late 2020 market as a frenzy. I remember it as a time when high end aircraft sellers were numerous and dumping aircraft at historically low prices.

I like Mike. I know, it doesn't sound like it by what I post, but we've talked on the phone, he's a nice guy.

He also has a ton of great information that he freely shares.

In addition to that, when he challenges my positions and I defend them, buyers get to watch the back and forth, which can be entertaining, but more importantly draws out information and deeper insight than can just be shared in a post.