Sounds like a good reason not to get a "modern" jet. Thankfully, I didn't, and I have choices.


Sending in a minimum of $75K in program payments per year isn't fun, either, nor having to pay for hours you didn't use due to not making minimums hours per year.

If you take the program payments and stick them into an SP500 ETF, it won't take very long to grow a very healthy cash reserve to deal with the unscheduled events. The 16 years of Williams payments, totaling $800K, grew to over $2M in value for 2400 hours of use. That's more than the market value of the airplane in some cases.

Programs reduce anxiety, but you pay for them dearly. Having $2M extra dollars is also a good anxiety reducer, too.

Mike C.

If it’s being sold to a Part 91 operator WHY would you overhaul an engine at 3600 hours when they routinely are used in the oil fields up to 90,000 hours without overhaul? Completely silly. Taking advantage of the aviation gold standard BS is all this is. (Pratt, not you Chip)

Fantastic, that makes them an even better value to own. Invest all that capital that isn't tied up in the plane and be way ahead.


There are engine programs for my plane and you do see a plane having it every now and then. It isn't common, or cheap.

Mike C.

Fantastic, that makes them an even better value to own. Invest all that capital that isn't tied up in the plane and be way ahead.


There are engine programs for my plane and you do see a plane having it every now and then. It isn't common, or cheap.

Mike C.

There's a case to be made that doing this way, the seller overhauls, is economically negative.

Let's say the seller overhauls the engine for $1.1M and sells the plane for $4M. He nets $2.9M from the deal.

His $4M sales price will cause capital gains against his depreciation. So he pays more in taxes.

The buyer spends $4M to purchase, so he pays more in sales tax on the transfer.

In many states, there is no sales tax on aviation parts and services, like an overhaul, so that could have been achieved without any sales tax. Indiana is one such state, for example.

The seller, if they have an agent, also pays a percentage of the sales price. That is now based on $4M.

There are also issues with the engine overhaul being require to be capitalized over a number of years per IRS rules, and added complexity for the seller.

In contrast, had the plane been sold for $2.9M with the run out engine and the buyer then overhauls it, they both save money.

The seller spends less commission with his agent and nets less capital gain on his taxes. No engine overhaul capitalization to deal with, either.

The buyer gets charged less sales taxes. His lower value of sale can also help justify a lower property tax bill going forward.

If the buyer does the overhaul, then they hold the warranty with the overhaul shop, too, and perhaps they can make decisions in the overhaul process that favor them, like which shop to use, or decisions during overhaul.

Having the seller do the overhaul in this situation is not always the best idea when you work through the effects.

Mike C.

JSSI says I can. I looked into it when I bought my plane.

In 2020, the rate was $256.20 per hour per engine once you bought into the program, with a 10 year contract commitment. At the time, that was quite a bit more than FJ44, so I presume the rate has increased like the FJ44 ones have.

The buy in was substantial (a final amount wasn't determined since that required a record review), but they also had a way to smooth that out over a longer period even though I was close to TBO.

They also had a TBO extension feature, FLEX.

None of the above should have been news to a Citation market expert.

Mike C.

JSSI says I can. I looked into it when I bought my plane.

In 2020, the rate was $256.20 per hour per engine once you bought into the program, with a 10 year contract commitment. At the time, that was quite a bit more than FJ44, so I presume the rate has increased like the FJ44 ones have.

The buy in was substantial (a final amount wasn't determined since that required a record review), but they also had a way to smooth that out over a longer period even though I was close to TBO.

They also had a TBO extension feature, FLEX.

None of the above should have been news to a Citation market expert.

Mike C.

An owner might do that for these reasons:

They get unscheduled insurance between now and overhaul, plus post overhaul.

They get protection from upside charges at overhaul. This depends a bit on the exact contract language, however.

It makes the program payments operating expenses instead of capital expenses, including the buy in.

An owner may decide that is the right path to take. Saying the option doesn't exist is incorrect.

Also, for FJ44, buying into the program, even at the last hour, is often cheaper than paying for the overhaul. Williams prices it that way on purpose.


I recommend you don't trust your source for this information since it isn't accurate.


I think JSSI would be amused that they are accused of not existing in the real world.


It as an option to lower the program buy in cost if near overhaul.

Mike C.

An owner might do that for these reasons:

They get unscheduled insurance between now and overhaul, plus post overhaul.

They get protection from upside charges at overhaul. This depends a bit on the exact contract language, however.

It makes the program payments operating expenses instead of capital expenses, including the buy in.

An owner may decide that is the right path to take. Saying the option doesn't exist is incorrect.

Also, for FJ44, buying into the program, even at the last hour, is often cheaper than paying for the overhaul. Williams prices it that way on purpose.


I recommend you don't trust your source for this information since it isn't accurate.


I think JSSI would be amused that they are accused of not existing in the real world.


It as an option to lower the program buy in cost if near overhaul.

Mike C.

I'm not savvy enough to follow the cage match, guys.

Current average market pricing appears to follow this relationship:

Average Asking Price = $1.75mm + $200k * (Mfg Year - 2009)

that curve is good to +/-$250k, with a couple of exceptions. One is a mid-time, newly painted, non-engine program plane which is under contract $250k below that curve (priced well). The other is a mid-time, engine program plane which is $500k above that curve.

The rest all follow that relationship, regardless of engine program, boot status, etc.

I found JetAviva to be an awesome resource, and not outside the curve of what I expect is normal pricing. I'm definitely keeping them in the hunt. There is another broker which is significantly higher than market for apples-to-apples planes, and I won't consider them unless they get more reasonable. When you call someone out on a high price, the reasonable people will say, "the price is always negotiable, the seller might consider X" or "the seller would be interested in your offer". When you get the "this plane is a unicorn, and priced well" without any data to back it up,

Now, all of that is pricing. Obviously, the market is going to dictate sales, and the only data I have on that is a plane which was $250k below the curve, fresh paint, good boots, and is under contract. This suggests the transaction price might be in the realm of:

Transaction Price = $1.5mm + $200k * (Mfg Year - 2009)

Now, before you all start banging away at your keyboards telling me this is oversimplified, I'm just sharing the asking price facts as I've found them. Almost all Mustangs are owner flown, and do not get extremely high hours. They're mostly in the ~ 100 hours / year trend. Yes, there is one on market that is way way above that, and it is priced very low, reflecting a need for new engines. It might be perfect for a Mike. I'm too busy to take on that kind of project.

Regarding engine program, the cohort I've reviewed so far are almost all on engine programs and that fact is baked into the asking price. Two are not on a program, and one is well below the curve the other is well above the curve. Takeaway, asking prices are not fundamentally driven by inclusion / exclusion in engine programs.

Where does this lead? I think it says pricing is pretty predictable based upon model year and is not directly or significantly influenced by engine program or other items. Actual transaction price and negotiating strategy would of course leverage facts such as engine program, boot status, maintenance history, etc. But it's not complicated. And of course there are delusional sellers in this cohort too that think that their plane should be priced well above the market in spite of the fact that it is older, higher time, or not on an engine program. Those planes won't sell (at least to me).

And... if you are willing to branch outside the "US operated / maintained" you can realize a significant savings in acquisition costs. Normally, I've treated this as a hard and fast rule. But! What about an Australian owned/operated 510?

The market is pretty smart. There is no free lunch.

That’s why a new market equivalent of a Citation V is five to ten times the cost to acquire. And has a 2+ year wait.

It’s also why you can’t economically buy into an engine program to guarantee predictable costs for old JT15D’s. The real liability to support them vs. owner perception of value doesn’t agree. Simple market dynamics.

Always remember, it’s not what you pay for it… it IS the difference between what you pay for it and what you sell it for!

Always remember, it’s not what you pay for it… it IS the difference between what you pay for it and what you sell it for!

The $1.2M more you held in your hand during the 10 years could have been put in an SP500 ETF. That would now be worth $3.6M today (the rise in Sp550 since May 2015 to May 2025). That doesn't include the dividends which add a few points on top of that.

Even if you sold the $3.0M plane for $3.0M, no numeric depreciation, you are still ahead with the cheaper airplane. Meanwhile, the $3M airplane cost more for the sales taxes on purchase, more to insure, and more in property taxes.

You could literally throw the $1.8M airplane away after 10 years and still beat the economics of the $3.0M airplane.

If the $3.0M airplane is on an engine program, say TAP by Williams, you paid for 1500 hours (due to 150 hours per minimum). That adds up to $720K in today dollars. If you instead put that money each year into the ETF, that is now worth about $1.5M.

To say it another way, if you bought the $1.8M airplane 10 years ago, and then invested the money it would have taken to buy the $3.0M airplane and keep it on an engine program, you would have $5.1M in your account today.

Owners really don't understand the huge effect capital costs have on your true total cost of ownership. It is staggering.


For most owners, the engine program is about preserving hull value. The airplane is logically "zero SMOH" all the time.

In reality, the cost of the engine program, if otherwise invested, turns into more value than the hull loss from engine hours.


It is not foolish to truly account for capital and program costs.

It is a great time to get into a jet, airplane prices are coming down and fuel is getting cheaper, too.

Mike C.