You'll get most of it back when you sell. Hopefully Daher won't have released a 950 and a 980 before it's time for you to sell the 930.

What you won't get back is the extra insurance you paid on the higher hull value, nor the interest paid to borrow or the foregone income on the money that you could have otherwise invested. There are real carrying costs of more expensive airplanes.

I'm not sure where you come up with this stuff. Show me a used TBM that sells for $2M more than a used Meridian of comparable years.

2015 or 2016 900/930 vs m500 would be about that much. Even if you get it back on sale (big if), that's a lot of lost investment income... 6% on 2m is 120k /yr. even after taxes that would buy a fair number of hours in a CJ.

You'll get most of it back when you sell. Hopefully Daher won't have released a 950 and a 980 before it's time for you to sell the 930.

What you won't get back is the extra insurance you paid on the higher hull value, nor the interest paid to borrow or the foregone income on the money that you could have otherwise invested. There are real carrying costs of more expensive airplanes.

2015 or 2016 900/930 vs m500 would be about that much. Even if you get it back on sale (big if), that's a lot of lost investment income... 6% on 2m is 120k /yr. even after taxes that would buy a fair number of hours in a CJ.

At first glance one would assume so. I am convinced it is not so. Note the brand new TBM that had a pressurization problem and killed its pilots.

You'll get most of it back when you sell. Hopefully Daher won't have released a 950 and a 980 before it's time for you to sell the 930.

What you won't get back is the extra insurance you paid on the higher hull value, nor the interest paid to borrow or the foregone income on the money that you could have otherwise invested. There are real carrying costs of more expensive airplanes.

At first glance one would assume so. I am convinced it is not so. Note the brand new TBM that had a pressurization problem and killed its pilots.

I just don't get the TBM

With an Eclipse you can go low and 50 knots faster


Or you can go high and be faster and burn less fuel


In either case it's safer and less expensive

To each his own

And of course you will be upside down

There are two Eclipses based at my home field and looked after by my A&P. I've heard more than enough stories of owners getting reamed out on parts and support from Eclipse to want no parts of those jets, unless my intent was to fly them until the first time I needed a part from Albuquerque and then part it out.

Conversely, I've heard mostly good things from the two TBM owners I've spoken with. Sure, 2 or 4 anecdotes don't make "data", but it seems to me like Eclipse is actively antagonistic to their owners.

We talk with buyer's and current owner's of each of the mentioned aircraft every week.

That instability is what scares me about Eclipse. You are married to whatever turbine aircraft company you buy.

But otherwise, the airplane seems like a great performer.

Jim,
When Alan K took over he recognized that Eclipse was being aggressive in it's dealing with owners. He has addressed this and parts pricing is better and support is excellent currently.

2015 or 2016 900/930 vs m500 would be about that much. Even if you get it back on sale (big if), that's a lot of lost investment income... 6% on 2m is 120k /yr. even after taxes that would buy a fair number of hours in a CJ.

Long term S&P 500 CAGR is well north of that, probably even without dividends but certainly with dividends reinvested, 6% nominal return is somewhere well in the rear-view mirror.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/market_cagr.htm