BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Feb 2016, 01:05

Username Protected wrote:

cirrus will sell them faster than they can make them

They have already achieved that.

What is not yet evident to the used market is the compromises and negatives of the SF50. People are buying a concept, and it remains to be seen how well reality matches.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Feb 2016, 01:33

Username Protected wrote:

What is not yet evident to the used market is the compromises and negatives of the SF50. People are buying a concept, and it remains to be seen how well reality matches.

We were talking about 5 years out, right ? By that point, the plane will be able to either stand on its merits or flop.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Feb 2016, 01:37

Username Protected wrote:

The only way they could end up cheap is if they suck. If they perform as expected and are easy to fly, cirrus will sell them faster than they can make them and there will be robust demand on the used maket. Lear 25 vs PC12.

Not true with the cirrus piston market. They work well and there are so many out there that they are a relative bargain.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Feb 2016, 09:07

Username Protected wrote:

I wish the third generation models depreciated a bit faster.

We read between the lines there.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Feb 2016, 09:53

Username Protected wrote:

They have already achieved that.

I don't agree with your position on this thread, but credit where credit is due, well played sir

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Feb 2016, 00:53

Username Protected wrote:

cirrus will sell them faster than they can make them

They have already achieved that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Feb 2016, 00:59

Username Protected wrote:

The increases in price over time along with the generational changes in the model accounts for most of the gradient in prices between a 2002 and a 2012 model. I wish the third generation models depreciated a bit faster.

My memory is a bit hazy, but I am sure SR22's cost a lot more than $160K when they came out in 2002.

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... irrus-sr22

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Feb 2016, 06:32

Username Protected wrote:

The increases in price over time along with the generational changes in the model accounts for most of the gradient in prices between a 2002 and a 2012 model. I wish the third generation models depreciated a bit faster.

My memory is a bit hazy, but I am sure SR22's cost a lot more than $160K when they came out in 2002.

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... irrus-sr22

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Feb 2016, 13:44

Quote:

….“I truly think that this airplane is going to help enhance this industry and bring people in who never thought they would be part of it. It feels like we’re creating a new category. Our owners are savvy individuals, and they have figured out that even though this is the slowest jet out there, it’s still quite a bit faster than their current airplane. I think with this airplane, with its low price point, we’re hoping it will bring people into aviation who might not think of personal travel as attainable.

“The Vision jet will be the solution to many of them. And it will encourage them to learn to fly. We’re hoping that the jet brings that to the next level, and will [attract] people who may not have [considered buying a Cirrus] because it had a prop in front.” ….

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2016-02-13/cirrus-expanding-asia-pacific-presence

maybe the analogy that I will make is not completely right..

but then again, who would have thought , when Cessna orginally came out with the first Citation 500, that the Citation line would become such a huge success? It was actually kind of slow compared to other types then, but great worldwide support network, easy to fly and maintain..had reasonable ops costs..

or when Pilatus introduced the PC-12?

could well be that this little Cirrus jet will open up the industry again for quite a number of newcomers…and create new interest…and our whole aviation industry certainly could need some boost..and some new ideas…

so should they become successful I am sure it will be good for the whole industry..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Feb 2016, 11:38

Kind of a neat little jet. I hope it succeeds.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Feb 2016, 13:39

Yeah....what do these guys know about selling planes?

http://cirrusaircraft.com/whats-new-in- ... 2LgNWhg%3D

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Feb 2016, 13:49

Username Protected wrote:

...when Cessna orginally came out with the first Citation 500, that the Citation line would become such a huge success?
...
or when Pilatus introduced the PC-12?

What is common between those two?

Utilitarian, designed to get a job done, substance over style, boring even. Yet, wildly successful because that is what people want, get somewhere. The plane isn't what it looks like, it is what it does.

The SF50 is not that, it has severe limitations on speed, range, altitude but designed to stroke jet lust, a fashion accessory. The plane is more about what it looks like than what it does.

Quote:

so should they become successful I am sure it will be good for the whole industry..

Selling former SF50 owners real jets will be a good business. If I was Cessna, I'd be working on the marketing campaign for that right now. The few hundred SF50s that will exist will turn over owners regularly generating new buyers for real jets.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Feb 2016, 15:51

Quote:

Selling former SF50 owners real jets will be a good business. If I was Cessna, I'd be working on the marketing campaign for that right now. The few hundred SF50s that will exist will turn over owners regularly generating new buyers for real jets.

Mike C.

agree 100%

mg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Feb 2016, 22:29

Username Protected wrote:

Selling former SF50 owners real jets will be a good business. If I was Cessna, I'd be working on the marketing campaign for that right now. The few hundred SF50s that will exist will turn over owners regularly generating new buyers for real jets.

What would Cessna offer them, a Mustang? Sounds like a reasonable proposition - buy an entry level jet for $2 million, fly it for a few years, then when you are ready to move up - get a better jet for $3.5M.

Then again, going from 300 kts/950 range to 340 kts/1,200 range is not that much of an upgrade to justify $1.5M price difference. Might as well step up to M2, but now we are at $4.5M.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2016, 01:40

Username Protected wrote:

Selling former SF50 owners real jets will be a good business. If I was Cessna, I'd be working on the marketing campaign for that right now. The few hundred SF50s that will exist will turn over owners regularly generating new buyers for real jets.

What would Cessna offer them, a Mustang? Sounds like a reasonable proposition - buy an entry level jet for $2 million, fly it for a few years, then when you are ready to move up - get a better jet for $3.5M.

Then again, going from 300 kts/950 range to 340 kts/1,200 range is not that much of an upgrade to justify $1.5M price difference. Might as well step up to M2, but now we are at $4.5M.

Cirrus SF50