Beechcraft sold

Mxsmanic wrote:

The new company won't care. The idea is to make as much money as
possible as quickly as possible, and then sell the remains for scrap.

Raytheon's aircraft subsidiary was making $200 million, or a
lousy 6% on the $3.3 billion to purchase it. Only a moron would
think this is a way to make a quick buck. Like raise prices for
more profit to get a decent return, and that won't reduce market
share, and still later sell it all off for more than $3.3
billion. Or much less as "scrap," to use your idiotic reference.

F--

Cessna builds quantity
Beech builds quality
Piper builds junk

Ah, the old Ford vs Chevy argument again. Sound and fury,
signifying...nothing.

I'm only a datapoint of one, but having owned two Pipers, and flown the
pants off both of them, I can say that I am more than satisfied with
their quality of construction.

To put it all in perspective, would you put your family into a 1974
Ford Galaxie 500 and drive it to California from Iowa? Probably not.
But my Pathfinder, built the same year, is as good (and some ways
better than) new, and we make the equivalent of that flight several
times per year. If that's not quality construction, I don't know what
is.

All the aircraft manufacturers build a quality product -- they have to,
by law -- and Beech has been especially quality-conscious. Where they
have failed is in innovation and cost control. In the end, it doesn't
matter how fantastic your product is, if no one buys it -- and I
sincerely hope that the new owners are able to address this problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mxsmanic wrote:
TxSrv writes:
...
For the pure fun of it? Just to be able to say, we own a company
which makes actual airplanes which fly. Net profit (ROIC)...who
cares.

Exactly. And some acquisitions are like that. But not with companies
like these. They have no romantic attachment to aviation, and if they
can gut Beechcraft to make more money faster, they will.

Hey moron, investors in big companies here are not romantic about
their company's products. Raytheon, present owner of Beech, is a
Fortune 500 company. However, if some aviation-romantic
individual or group thereof came along with $3.4 billion cash, I
imagine Raytheon would have sold to them.

F--

What on earth has Cessna or Piper done in the last 20 years?

I agree, they've been late to the game -- but at least they're starting
to get the hang of it.

Cessna is especially exciting, with their new LSA and composite planes.
Piper is shaking itself out of its old union mentality, and actually
looking at new things -- like jets. (When I heard Chuck Suma, Piper's
old CEO, making fun of Cirrus' "plastic planes" at the Cherokee Pilots
Association dinner in 2005, I knew he was history. 3 months later, he
got the axe.)

Raytheon/Beech still hasn't figured it out. Maybe the new owners will?


Cirrus, Katana, Columbia, and the like are the future of GA today.

No argument there -- although it may not be too late for Piper/Cessna
to recover. The fact that they've survived is a sign of underlying
strength.

Assuming there is any future left in GA :-(

Whether GA itself survives is a political, not economic, decision. If
the political class decides to tax it out of existence, as they've done
in Europe, GA will die.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
news:fx0jh.4958$_X.4839@bigfe9...
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:24:23 -0500, Doug Vetter
wrote:

If I had the
coin, I'd buy a G36 or Baron over the new plastic airplanes, and a King
Air over a VLJ any day -- even if it cost me more to buy and to operate
on a long-term basis. They're that good.

Lots of people WITH the money do as you would like. G

It'll be interesting how the certified VLJ's truly compare to King
Airs, when load, runway length, and true usability are compared.

Yes, excellent points.


Of course, if your mission is distance and speed, not load ...

BTW, an Eclipse 500 at SL will TO in 2297 feet, a King Air C90GT in 2392
feet. The E500 has an IFR range with four occupants of 1,300 nm, the King
Air has 931nm range. For landing, 2155' vs. 2355'.

In the six years I've had my B36-TN, I've had five of six seats filled maybe
ten times, and that was the whole family, nine of those times. Last August,
my wife and I became "empty nesters".


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
Cessna builds quantity
Beech builds quality
Piper builds junk

Ah, the old Ford vs Chevy argument again. Sound and fury,
signifying...nothing.

I'm only a datapoint of one, but having owned two Pipers, and flown the
pants off both of them, I can say that I am more than satisfied with
their quality of construction.

To put it all in perspective, would you put your family into a 1974
Ford Galaxie 500 and drive it to California from Iowa? Probably not.
But my Pathfinder, built the same year, is as good (and some ways
better than) new, and we make the equivalent of that flight several
times per year. If that's not quality construction, I don't know what
is.

Jay, about 98% of the cars built in 1973 are no longer on the road. What
percent of SE aircraft are still flying (more or less)?

Thank Gawd that Ford doesn't make aircraft!! :~) (at least since the
Tri-Motor...)

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
What on earth has Cessna or Piper done in the last 20 years?

I agree, they've been late to the game -- but at least they're starting
to get the hang of it.

Cessna is especially exciting, with their new LSA and composite planes.
Piper is shaking itself out of its old union mentality, and actually
looking at new things -- like jets. (When I heard Chuck Suma, Piper's
old CEO, making fun of Cirrus' "plastic planes" at the Cherokee Pilots
Association dinner in 2005, I knew he was history. 3 months later, he
got the axe.)

Raytheon/Beech still hasn't figured it out. Maybe the new owners will?


Cirrus, Katana, Columbia, and the like are the future of GA today.

No argument there -- although it may not be too late for Piper/Cessna
to recover. The fact that they've survived is a sign of underlying
strength.

How much $$$ is Cessna making on Citations? On SEs? What's their backorder
on the Citation X?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

In all fairness, it picked up twenty knots.
With increased fuel burn, to match!

That's what fuel is for. Nothing is free.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose schrieb:

In all fairness, it picked up twenty knots.
With increased fuel burn, to match!

That's what fuel is for. Nothing is free.

It's pretty easy to fly faster if you burn more fuel.

There's an old joke:

What do Europeans do if they want to fly faster? They develop better
aerodynamics.

What do Americans do if they want to fly faster? They put in a bigger
engine.

Stefan
(Just back from a 700nm trip at an average speed of 100 knots with a
fuel burn of 3.5 US gal/h of mogas. Or, in other words, more miles per
gallon than an average car.)

Step up products.

Warrior - Archer - Saratoga - MalibuMirage - PiperJet
\ - Seminole - Seneca - HondaJet

Montblack wrote:

Piper announces it will sell the HondaJet, then Piper announces they will
come out with their own jet.
That one had me scratching my head.