buy or rent a 2006 182

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 25 May 2007 11:08:26 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

I've a problem with your numbers; I don't see how they can be correct.
It's not any specific number you've described, but the overall sum.
Essentially: how can the two work out to anything but the rental costing
the same or more?

Several reasons:

The main economic difference is probably that the rental aircraft should have
much higher utilization because it is available to far more pilots. This would
distribute the fixed costs among far more flying hours.

Another reason is leasebacks. Leasebacks are often a rather bad deal for
the airplane owner. Owners either enter into the leasback because they have
been "sold" on the idea along with the purchase of a new airplane, or they
already own the plane and are trying to reduce their ownership costs. Simple
fact: if it were cheaper for flying schools/FBOs to own their fleets outright,
that is what more of them would be doing.

Anytime anyone tries to convince you that any form of aircraft ownership is
cheaper than renting, check the figures several times and then go get a second
and third opinion before signing any dotted lines.

Vaughn

On Mon, 28 May 2007 19:31:10 +0000, Vaughn Simon wrote:


The main economic difference is probably that the rental aircraft should
have
much higher utilization because it is available to far more pilots. This
would distribute the fixed costs among far more flying hours.

Okay. If we equalize flight hours, does this advantage disappear?

- Andrew

On May 28, 8:00 pm, Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2007 19:31:10 +0000, Vaughn Simon wrote:
The main economic difference is probably that the rental aircraft should
have
much higher utilization because it is available to far more pilots. This
would distribute the fixed costs among far more flying hours.

Okay. If we equalize flight hours, does this advantage disappear?

No. When you rent an aircraft, you are most likely renting it from
someone who deducts depreciation on the rental asset, which the single
owner generally can't do without jumping through a lot of hoops.

And the amount of hours we are talking about is a lot -- 50-100 hours
a month for the rental aircraft. If an owner can fly that much, every
month, consistently, month in and month out, then I'm very jealous of
his lifestyle.

Also, with the rental aircraft, the overall cost to everyone totalled
up is probably more than an owner pays, but it's many more renters so
the each individual's cost is lower, and it's financially more
flexible -- as a renter you don't pay fixed costs in the months when
you don't fly, for example.

On Tue, 29 May 2007 11:14:14 -0700, xyzzy wrote:

If an owner can fly that much, every
month, consistently, month in and month out, then I'm very jealous of his
lifestyle.


Heh That's a good point.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 29 May 2007 11:14:14 -0700, xyzzy wrote:

If an owner can fly that much, every
month, consistently, month in and month out, then I'm very jealous of his
lifestyle.


Heh That's a good point.

That would be someone using it for business, not merely for pleasure
(outside some Hollyweird celebrity).