PC12's come with 11 seats. How many you actually install is up to you. To fit all 11 seats you need to remove the lav. 8 total seats is the perfect setup. 9 is fine too.

There is a way to calculate the best-bang-for-buck of an airframe, I posted it in this thread:

https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=144270&p=2017167#p2017167

It's basically efficiency number (fuel burn/kts) x average used price. This number will now forever be referred to as the Frisch-number worldwide.

In that you can see that the SETP's finish almost last:

If bang for buck is your criteria (efficiency x used purchase price in millions) - lower is better:
1. Commander 3.98 ($1.2 million)
2. Mustang 4.27 ($1.2 million)
3. Avanti 4.89 ($1.5 million)
1. TBM 900 8.94 ($3 million)
4. PC12NG 10.47 ($3 million)
6. CJ3 19.6 ($4 million)
5. CJ4 25.32 ($6 million)

Treasuries, but that's tangential to the point.

What I do have is historical rates of return over decades of time (the same duration we expect to own airplanes) that shows a remarkably smooth rate of return over multi-decade periods. That's what allows us to plan for retirement and for insurance companies to offer annuities.

Mikko, you got a forward club with four forward facing chairs behind the club?

Treasuries, but that's tangential to the point.

What I do have is historical rates of return over decades of time (the same duration we expect to own airplanes) that shows a remarkably smooth rate of return over multi-decade periods. That's what allows us to plan for retirement and for insurance companies to offer annuities.

I'm not singling out the PC-12.

By my logic, the guy buying a $60MM Gulfstream has a cost of capital of $3MM/year minimum. Doesn't mean it's a bad call for him or that he should be in an MU-2, but it is a cost.

Again..... a short term 3-5 year investment does not come with a "guarantee".

We have both. We have our "commuter" seating (which is my personal favorite), which is 8 seats, all facing forward. Then we have "executive" seating, which is forward club, and 4 forward facing seats in the back.
The great thing about a PC12 is that you can remove a seat literally in a matter of seconds, and our W&B sheets are pre-calculated for every possible seat configuration. Need more cargo room but want the club seating -> just remove a seat and you're good to go.

The Gulfsream and the PC12 do not do the same thing. They are different missions.

Comparing the PC12 to MU2/Commander/King Air/441 is a much more reasonable comparison in that they do roughly similar things. Whether you want capital cost vs operating cost is kind of dependent on your situation. But the PC12 doesn’t reasonably compare to the G-V.

That said, your best argument was a couple posts ago - “It’s your money, spend it how you want”.

Again..... a short term 3-5 year investment does not come with a "guarantee".

I think JC has done what we all do in some form or fashion. We rationalize flying, planes, costs etc. in such a way that we are comfortable paying the number whatever it may be for whatever plane we end up deciding on. JC has some great points about the PC12 but his logic doesn't work for everyone. What's clear is that it works for him.

JC - I think you are a hell of a salesman. If you leased cars for me I'd probably be able to buy a PC-12!

"Roughly" similar.???? In your opinion of course.

If they were "roughly similar" they would be "roughly" the same price. The market doesn't agree with you.

In ordert to count "cost of capital" in your airplane costs you must make the following assumptions:

1. Not buying the airplane is an option

2. You're guaranteed not to lose ANY of said capital during the course of the ownership of that airplane. If you own the airplane for 5 years then you have 5 years to not only make 5% on your money but also lose none of it. There's not way that's reasonable in my book.

I have a good feeling how 2018 will go and I'm invested accordingly. I have no way of "feeling good" about how things will go beyond that. There are too many unknowns.

The choice is not as simple as, to buy or not to buy an airplane.

You have other choices to make.

Primarily how much should you spend.

The cost of capital comes into that equation.

"How much to spend" applies to every airplane then.....

Also, why are the funds used to fund the higher OPEX of the cheaper airplane not placed into your "cost of capital" column? Think of all the investments you could be making with that extra money!!!!

By your logic, why buy a car when you can ride the bus? Why buy steak when there's chicken? Why buy an iPhone when you can just use an old Motorola Razor? Why go to Hawaii when there's Florida? It's all "roughly" the same thing right? I can only assume you're putting every saved $$ into some sort of investment right?