08 Jan 2026, 21:05 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 14:33 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 03/28/17 Posts: 241 Post Likes: +511
|
|
Summation of 358 pages on the Cirrus SF50: 1) Some members love the aircraft, hopes it succeeds. 2) Some members hate the aircraft, hopes it fails. 3) Lots of speculation, baseless opinions and tons of rhetoric. 4) Some members have little interest, knowing they'll never be able to afford one, but "tune in" here to see any new information and/or developments on the aircraft. The number of pages would be reduced by a sizable number if a few members either PM'ed each other or just fought to the death in a cage match. Either way.....a more concise, informative discussion would occur. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 14:38 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 02/13/10 Posts: 20417 Post Likes: +25585 Location: Castle Rock, Colorado
Aircraft: Prior C310,BE33,SR22
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Summation of 358 pages on the Cirrus SF50: 1) Some members love the aircraft, hopes it succeeds. 2) Some members hate the aircraft, hopes it fails. 3) Lots of speculation, baseless opinions and tons of rhetoric. 4) Some members have little interest, knowing they'll never be able to afford one, but "tune in" here to see any new information and/or developments on the aircraft. The number of pages would be reduced by a sizable number if a few members either PM'ed each other or just fought to the death in a cage match. Either way.....a more concise, informative discussion would occur.  And, in November, this thread will be 3 years old....and going strong! Sad to say that I've read every post on all 359 pages! 
_________________ Arlen Get your motor runnin' Head out on the highway - Mars Bonfire
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 14:59 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12201 Post Likes: +3086 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Summation of 358 pages on the Cirrus SF50: 1) Some members love the aircraft, hopes it succeeds. 2) Some members hate the aircraft, hopes it fails. 3) Lots of speculation, baseless opinions and tons of rhetoric. 4) Some members have little interest, knowing they'll never be able to afford one, but "tune in" here to see any new information and/or developments on the aircraft. The number of pages would be reduced by a sizable number if a few members either PM'ed each other or just fought to the death in a cage match. Either way.....a more concise, informative discussion would occur.  Nah you missed at least one other group. I think the plane super stupid; but will sell like hot cakes and succeed. Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 15:00 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12201 Post Likes: +3086 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: And, in November, this thread will be 3 years old....and going strong! Sad to say that I've read every post on all 359 pages!  If we do one word per post, can we get to 360? You can then skip a page. I promise, nothing new will be stated. Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 15:37 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/13/09 Posts: 1124 Post Likes: +885 Location: Boise, Idaho
Aircraft: Bonanza A35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: . Either way.....a more concise, informative discussion would occur.  Yes, true, but would it be as entertaining?
_________________ Frank Stutzman '49 A35 Bonanza ("the Hula Girl") Boise, ID
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 16:22 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/05/11 Posts: 5248 Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: BE-55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Summation of 358 pages on the Cirrus SF50: 1) Some members love the aircraft, hopes it succeeds. 2) Some members hate the aircraft, hopes it fails. 3) Lots of speculation, baseless opinions and tons of rhetoric. 4) Some members have little interest, knowing they'll never be able to afford one, but "tune in" here to see any new information and/or developments on the aircraft. The number of pages would be reduced by a sizable number if a few members either PM'ed each other or just fought to the death in a cage match. Either way.....a more concise, informative discussion would occur.  I think this summary first came up on about page 10....
_________________ “ Embrace the Suck”
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 22:02 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21007 Post Likes: +26481 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It will help the light jet market overall. Very much so, it is a gateway drug that will make its owners want a real jet in short order. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 22:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21007 Post Likes: +26481 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: You are making the assumption they lose money at 1.39 Million. It is a fairly solid assumption. They raised the price a lot. You don't do that if you have margin, you'd rather build a larger order book and build more of them. After they raised the price, sales crawled. Then there is the basic math of adding up the parts. FJ33-5A OEM cost is around $800K. The Garmin package is around $200K. Start adding up all the costs for the bill of materials, wheels, brakes, pumps, environmental, etc, and you soon run out of margin before you even bolt them together. You also have to include liability, labor, overhead, etc. The odds Cirrus is making a profit at $1.39M is very low, and if they are, it is microscopic. It will be a challenge to break even as they make at least 350 of the units at the low price point. Quote: The point is you do not know. So unless you have access to the financial reports, you just have speculation. It doesn't take a genius to estimate what the parts cost and to see that making a profit is challenging. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 23:17 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07 Posts: 8236 Post Likes: +7971 Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: $1,350/hr. Where's all the money you are supposed to be saving with having only one engine? You can fly a real jet for that much, especially when you consider the cost per mile.
Can you RENT one for that price? $1,350 isn't the operating cost, it's the price that outfit rents you SF-50 for one-hour "Cirrus experience". I am sure they are making a healthy profit on that.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 23:40 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12201 Post Likes: +3086 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
|
Mike C,
You are making a lot of assumptions there. Starting with the engine price. Consider, Cirrus has a 600 plane backlog, that is a rather large volume order to negotiate discounts. So unless you can produce financials, or contracts all we have is speculation. As much as some people here make fun of the current owners, they do have a stereotype of being good in math. As such, if there was no hope of making a return like you postulate, they likely would never have approved the project to start. These basic details were known years ago, before Cirrus was even acquired.
As for profit margin, I laugh at your statement about raising it. I dealt with a database vendor who purchased another company. Minimal to no new development going on, and the product was to phased out over the next few releases. A federal agency decided it was the new standard, the following year the database price more than tripled with almost no new features.
More then one company charges exactly what the market will bear, only engineers try and match production costs to product price. Sales/business people find ways to change the rules to cover the costs or raise it to make as much as the market will stand.
Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 23:49 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07 Posts: 8236 Post Likes: +7971 Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The odds Cirrus is making a profit at $1.39M is very low, and if they are, it is microscopic. It will be a challenge to break even as they make at least 350 of the units at the low price point.
Right, they are not going to be making a profit at $1.39M, but they won't be losing much money either. The jump to $2M+ is what will allow them to recoup the development costs and make a profit. That will have to wait for a couple of years, but they can afford it with all the free money Chinese pumped into Cirrus. This isn't the Eclipse situation of being at the mercy of venture capitalist investors. They are are basically owned by Chinese government.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 21 Sep 2017, 23:59 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21007 Post Likes: +26481 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Right, they are not going to be making a profit at $1.39M, but they won't be losing much money either. So if everything goes just right, they will make ~400 airplanes over the next 3 years and only lose a little money on production, never mind development costs. Sounds like an aviation business plan to me. Quote: The jump to $2M+ is what will allow them to recoup the development costs and make a profit. If anybody buys at that price. The order book length basically froze with the price increase. Quote: This isn't the Eclipse situation of being at the mercy of venture capitalist investors. Eclipse spent nearly $6M per airplane and sold most of them at around $1.3M. Why do you think the VCs caused their problems? It was vendors who refused to ship any more product without payment. Duh. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 22 Sep 2017, 00:17 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07 Posts: 8236 Post Likes: +7971 Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Eclipse spent nearly $6M per airplane and sold most of them at around $1.3M. Why do you think the VCs caused their problems? It was vendors who refused to ship any more product without payment. Duh.
VCs caused the problem because they didn't give them more money to pay the vendors. Chinese is a different story. They have unlimited funds, they are a patient bunch, and the profit isn't a primary motivator for them in this case.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2026
|
|
|
|