Because that's a cost of operation (opex) not a cost of capital (projection of capex into an opex item).

The purpose of a cost of capital item is to put the total expenses into a common $/yr framework where they can be added and compared. Opex is already in that format.

I always agreed.... Hence my Gulfstream reference. Why would anyone buy a Gulfstream when they could buy an MU2? Is a brand new G650 the only airplane that can cross the pond? Why spend then extra money?

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.

From the MX numbers posted in this thread about the cost to operate a PC12 you are wrong about the higher opex costs on cheaper plane.

Spending more does not always mean cheaper to operate.

I would bet just about everybody here operating a MU2 or Commander does it cheaper than a PC12.

I know I do.

Less income taxes what are we at?

If what you say is true..... why isn't everyone flying an MU2 or Commander? Why is Pilatus sold out of PC12's and growing?

Because most people are sheep. Eager to follow the herd.

PC12 is a great plane. No one is arguing otherwise. But there are other great planes that do roughly similar things for different amounts of money. For people who can’t or don’t want to pay for a PC12, there are options that fit different scenarios.

And yes - roughly similar things. Travel at something like 270kts or better, roughly 1300nm or better, carrying 4-8 people. Landing at airports that have similar characteristics.

Because most people are sheep. Eager to follow the herd.

Lack of knowledge.

I am guessing you had no idea what a MU2 or Commander, was when you bought your Pilatus.

The pilatus is also a good airplane if you can get over the lack of an engine! Its biggest attribute has been its ability to holds it value.

Really anything bought right should hold its value, legacy TP included. It just take more research to buy the right airplane.

So far all pilatus have held their value, that won’t contunue forever.

MU2: 407 built, 330 fatalities.

But you wanna act like PC12 is dangerous cuz it has 1 engine?

I think there are better 3 million dollar airplanes, but that’s just me and maybe a few others here.

Personal preference, I just like two engines better than one for that kind of money.

My comments were not about the safety of the Pilatus nor the MU2.

MU2: 407 built, 330 fatalities.

But you wanna act like PC12 is dangerous cuz it has 1 engine?

I agree.

Steve, what's your hourly on your commander?

I looked very carefully at a 900/1000........I really, really liked those airplanes. Felt that going with an airplane in current production offered more options from service to parts to ongoing 'stuff'.

When I reviewed total cost of ownership the PC12 won by a hair (my spreadsheet, maybe not reality).