BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:32

Username Protected wrote:

I'll bet you $100 this time next year the SF50 is still outselling the M2, Phenom 100 and Hondajet.

Here 2018 through the 3rd quarter:
SF50 41
Phenom 100 8
Hondajet 21
Citation M2 22

Once again, you have confused "selling" and "delivering".

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:32

Username Protected wrote:

That is a lot of money to buy one of these that have really high operating costs, and are all somewhat limited in what they can do. The SF50 is limited in what it can do (range, payload, short, high and hot) but is relatively cheap at 2.8 mil to these others at 4-5 mil. I think that is the crux. Every mil above 1 mil really starts weeding out owner pilots. At least that is the way I see it as an owner pilot that is always looking at the market. Why do the Turboprops like the PC12, M600 and TBM sell so well. A lot of reasons, but they don't have much in the way of limits. They can go most anywhere, most any time, fill all the seats, and not require a fuel stop. Plus no type rating hassle, but that is probably a minor point. Looking at the Hondajet, there are a lot of limitation. How many can I carry, how far, what time of day can I take off to make the climb gradient, is the runway going to be in good enough shape (meaning perfectly clean for the Honda and P100 ;-)

) Cirrus also has a cult following which helps. I think the majority of owners are going to be coming out of SR's.

I met an SAF50 owner on the ramp in Florida yesterday. He used to have an SR22. He flies back and forth from New Jersey. He loves it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:32

Username Protected wrote:

I'll bet you $100 this time next year the SF50 is still outselling the M2, Phenom 100 and Hondajet.

Here 2018 through the 3rd quarter:
SF50 41
Phenom 100 8
Hondajet 21
Citation M2 22

You have confused "selling" and "delivering" again.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:34

Username Protected wrote:

So far, the entrants into the personal VLJ have all been crippled by self inflicted wounds of engineering ego of one form or another. The plane doesn't need to be a gadget or be exotic, just be ordinary and functional.

Mike C.

To assume you know more than all of the combined knowledge of Embraer, Textron, Pilatus, Honda, etc. when you don't even work in the industry is the definition of engineering ego if you ask me.

:shrug:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:39

Username Protected wrote:

To assume you know more than all of the combined knowledge of Embraer, Textron, Pilatus, Honda, etc. when you don't even work in the industry is the definition of engineering ego if you ask me.

Amusingly, every OEM you listed sells twin jets, and never started an SEJ program.

I have not assumed I know more than they do, but they know more than Cirrus, and I use their example to substantiate that.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:42

Username Protected wrote:

So far, the entrants into the personal VLJ have all been crippled by self inflicted wounds of engineering ego of one form or another. The plane doesn't need to be a gadget or be exotic, just be ordinary and functional.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:57

https://www.avbuyer.com/aircraft/privat ... f50/353423

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 10:59

Username Protected wrote:

https://www.avbuyer.com/aircraft/private-jets/cirrus/vision-sf50/353423

and?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:01

https://www.controller.com/listings/air ... ision-sf50

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:02

Username Protected wrote:

I bet more purchase contracts were signed for each of those types than the SF50 in 2018, thus the SF50 is not outselling them presently. That's apples to apples.

You are comparing brochure sales made 10+ years ago against real actual planes today and you've stated that information from 10 years ago is meaningless.
Mike C.

How many of Honda's sales were pre-sales? Surely the sales team had been working contacts to make them. Maybe not 10 years of pre-sales, but there must be several years of them. I mentioned before that I fly over the Honda hangars twice a week. They have 18 planes stacked up complete and surely more in production that I can't see. 5-6 of the 18 are painted the same as if going to the same company.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:19

I agree with Mike's perspective. Had Cirrus set out to design and build a two engine VLJ, they would have ended up with a far superior product that performed much better and cost way less and been able to do it in far less time. We'd have a better Eclipse with G3000 avionics and mid to upper 300knots at FL410 for under 2 million from a manufacturer with history that isn't going anywhere.
Eclipse had the right idea and too little resources. Cirrus had a bad idea and the resources to ram it through. The market will ultimately decide but it hasn't fully spoken yet. We are still in the first half and just because its 28-3 doesn't mean the game is over. Just ask Atlanta....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:23

Username Protected wrote:

Eclipse had the right idea and too little resources. Cirrus had a bad idea and the resources to ram it through. The market will ultimately decide but it hasn't fully spoken yet. We are still in the first half and just because its 28-3 doesn't mean the game is over. Just ask Atlanta....

Eclipse burned through over $2 Billion, and from public documents, it looks like Cirrus went through no more than $200 Million.

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:29

Username Protected wrote:

Eclipse had the right idea and too little resources. Cirrus had a bad idea and the resources to ram it through. The market will ultimately decide but it hasn't fully spoken yet. We are still in the first half and just because its 28-3 doesn't mean the game is over. Just ask Atlanta....

Eclipse burned through over $2 Billion, and from public documents, it looks like Cirrus went through no more than $200 Million.

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:43

What are the new better options in your opinion?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Dec 2018, 11:52

Username Protected wrote:

What are the new better options in your opinion?

"NEW" changes the conversation. I'd rather have a used CJ1+ for under 2M than a brand new SF50. I think Cirrus could have delivered near CJ1+ performance NEW for $2M and changed everything. Instead they delivered a niche toy jet with meh performance. How much of the $200M did they spend on:
1. the chute
2. the mixing v tail
3. the deflected thrust
4. the top mounted engine
5. the redundancy engineering

Half? 75%? They could have "innovated" less and improved on proven technology and delivered a far more desirable and superior preforming plane for less money.

Cirrus SF50