Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
You're splitting hairs over $1000 on Vref???
Easiest Airplane to Resell
- Thread starter PTheLionH
- Start date
You're splitting hairs over $1000 on Vref???
ahkahn
Line Up and Wait
Thanks! Happy to help.
I got the facts nailed down in the spreadsheet, which helped to easily discern who was realistic on their asking prices and who was ridiculous.
Ridiculous, though, can go 2 ways. 1) I have no idea what my plane is worth so I'll ask the highest market price and see what happens and 2) My wife wants me to list it because she hates me flying but I don't want to sell it. 2's get shaken out with the first attempt at contacting them (if you feel the need to). 1's will be excited to sell, but justifying a reasonable asking price may shatter their hopes. Along with reasonable data as to why you're asking what you are, they'll most likely be reasonable in accepting your offer. It's a justification thing... I'll justify why I'm offering you X, and you justify why you want Y. That's a typical negotiation, and usually the data wins. BTW, that was my plane's situation.
As far as selling prices go... that's a toughy. First off, Vref was completely outside of reality for me. It is dated (CRT radars, but no Aspen's or ADS-B). Totally worthless. I found the Mooney tool to be fantastic. The Mooney guys do a great job at keeping tabs on market trends.
http://www.themooneyflyer.com/tool.html
I used that to determine what selling vs. asking values should be with Mooney's, and then adapted it to the Pipers (ie. 10% below average asking, 15% below average asking, etc). That was how I based my initial offer.
In fact, when I made my offer on my plane, I sent over the spreadsheet with tail numbers, etc. to the seller. Basically said here is a listing of your competition, here is my offer, and here is why I am offering you that. It was a very fair proposition. I wasn't looking to screw the guy, and he knew that. We remain buddies to this day. He was also very emotionally attached to the plane, and you'll find that is common, as well. That's a tough one to break. Most people don't think rationally when there is emotion involved... so be as data-driven as possible. Emotion cannot argue with that.
Also, stay away from brokers. Buyer and seller side. In the aircraft case, at the low end, they monkey up deals more than help. Until you get north of roughly the $400-500k market, they just get in the way. Just make sure you have a friend who has owned an airplane that can help you out on the first one. Reading logbooks and discerning red flags is what is a huge deal.
paflyer
Final Approach
Just an observation...
A fellow plans to fly 4-500hrs a year and hasn't considered a 182 (most would call the plane a commodity)... then sell in two years. That budget sure seems rather large for a 172/pa-28 as well.
It looks as though someone is having a good laugh. I'm chuckling a little just watching the bait get swallowed.
Is Skynewbie back?
JimNtexas
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,259
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim - In Texas!
I think a C182 is best, but any of these suggestions will be fine. IMHO these are the things 2018 buyers will be looking for:
1) decent paint, interior, and instrument panel
2) IFR GPS
3) Autopilot (at least heading following)
4) ADS-B out
5) Airframe time less than 5000-6000 hours.
6) And I suspect the long pole for you: Engine time less than 50% of TBO
Put a clean 172/182/M20 with the above attributes on the market at a fair price in 2018 and it will sell quickly. Unless Sanders is elected.
1) decent paint, interior, and instrument panel
2) IFR GPS
3) Autopilot (at least heading following)
4) ADS-B out
5) Airframe time less than 5000-6000 hours.
6) And I suspect the long pole for you: Engine time less than 50% of TBO
Put a clean 172/182/M20 with the above attributes on the market at a fair price in 2018 and it will sell quickly. Unless Sanders is elected.
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Yep, the easiest ones to sell in the future will be the same models Piper, Cessna, and Beech sold in the past.
For a reason, 172's, 182's, PA28, etc were popular then, and easy for the factories to sell. Same planes are still easy to sell.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
Second the motion about #2's. Sometimes the wife doesn't mind the flying, but wants it sold because it isn't being flown any more. These guys don't want to sell and will waste your time hoping you will spend it telling them what a great airplane they have (and you covet). You are unlikely to ever close a deal. I know from experience. Run, don't walk, from that situation.
Last edited:
woodchucker
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2014
- Messages
- 1,840
- Display Name
Display name:
woodchucker
Just an observation...
A fellow plans to fly 4-500hrs a year and hasn't considered a 182 (most would call the plane a commodity)... then sell in two years. That budget sure seems rather large for a 172/pa-28 as well.
It looks as though someone is having a good laugh. I'm chuckling a little just watching the bait get swallowed.
I've been somewhat smirking here as well... poster chatting up a buy-in of up to $200k and seriously discussing used 172s. If you got the bank, buy whatever the hell pleases you, and if you don't, buy a 172. And even then, 400 hours a year? After mx downtime that's averaging around 2 hours daily, VFR.
ahkahn
Line Up and Wait
Yep, I probably could have worded the #2's a little better, but basically it's "external factors want me to sell my plane but I don't want to."
There is a guy that has a Mooney C for sale over at the airport next to me. It's been for sale I'll bet at least 3 years. It's really a heap of junk... needs a lot of work. I valued the plane around $25k, which is a pretty generous offer. The guy is asking $50k for it. Needs paint, interior, has no decent avionics, and has a 1500 hour engine. He is obviously not very realistic and has no intention of selling the plane. He's a #2 for sure.
I have just the plane.
I resemble this remark, as it is my wife who told me to sell it and it was her plane:
It has seat heat and cabin heat.
Anti-splat nose strut brace.
Avionics:
GTN 650
Garmin Aera 560 (ADS-b weather and traffic display)
Garmin GDL 39 ads-b receiver coupled to Aera 560
Trio Pro Pilot autopilot coupled to GTN 650
midcontinent MD200-306 indicator
Navworx ADS 600-EXP 2020 compliant ADS-b in/out
Round gauges
electronic elevator trim with indicator
manual aileron trim
Angle of attack indicator
digital outside air temp indicator
panel mounted alternate static source
oil cooler with cockpit control
carb heat and separate cockpit control for emergency alternate air source
built for compatibility with mogas
inside cabin rudder gust lock
based in East Tennessee
looking to get what I have in it, 75k
I resemble this remark, as it is my wife who told me to sell it and it was her plane:
and it has all of this:
170 TTSN airframe and prop; 170 SMOH Lycoming O-320 that uses zero oil between changes. Metal Sensenich fixed pitch prop.
It has seat heat and cabin heat.
Anti-splat nose strut brace.
Avionics:
GTN 650
Garmin Aera 560 (ADS-b weather and traffic display)
Garmin GDL 39 ads-b receiver coupled to Aera 560
Trio Pro Pilot autopilot coupled to GTN 650
midcontinent MD200-306 indicator
Navworx ADS 600-EXP 2020 compliant ADS-b in/out
Round gauges
electronic elevator trim with indicator
manual aileron trim
Angle of attack indicator
digital outside air temp indicator
panel mounted alternate static source
oil cooler with cockpit control
carb heat and separate cockpit control for emergency alternate air source
built for compatibility with mogas
inside cabin rudder gust lock
based in East Tennessee
looking to get what I have in it, 75k
Attachments
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Should be able to get a very nice 182 for that money. Including GPS, and IFR.
All the models have advantages and disadvantages. Narrow cabins vs wide cabins. Straight tails vs slanted. Etc
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
![brian]](/community/data/avatars/m/21/21096.jpg?1456258959){kind=avatar}
brian]
Cleared for Takeoff
I went with a different thought: buy an airplane that I wouldn't be too upset about if I couldn't sell it when I was "done with it". Basically a 500+ hour time builder and platform to get a few ratings in.
... Well ... Now I'm getting a kick out of working on the old timer ...
Current thought is to keep the oldie for me (staying current, having fun, etc.) and add a partnership at some point for the long haul multi person aircraft. Opens the door to a late (ish) model bonanza, cirrus, or even a baron. Just a different way of looking at it..
... Well ... Now I'm getting a kick out of working on the old timer ...
Current thought is to keep the oldie for me (staying current, having fun, etc.) and add a partnership at some point for the long haul multi person aircraft. Opens the door to a late (ish) model bonanza, cirrus, or even a baron. Just a different way of looking at it..
Last edited:
MooneyDriver78
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,542
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom
Is airframe time really an issue?
I don't want to belabor this point, it is somewhat of a tangent, and you can see from my comment #25 that I fully agree the data I digged up to show differences between 172MNP models is probably not statistically significant.
But ok, if you want to ask my opinion, from the data I am aware of, including the Vref, yes, I think it points to that the broad population of airplane buyers see the late 172M as slightly better value compared to the early 172N, all other things being equal.
And we are not talking about $1k here. The 172N was a new model in 1977, it should be at least $2-3k ABOVE the older 172M from 1976. Just look at difference between the 172N and 172P:
- Vref 1980 172N: $51k (0SMOH, default AFTT)
- Vref 1981 172P: $54k (0SMOH, default AFTT)
Anyway, a swing of $1k+$2-3k: $4k is ~8% of $49k. The Vref data may well be showing a statistically significant bump here.
By pointing in the Experimental direction, you are looking at the type of airplane I hope/expect to fly long term. It is not an RV9A, but those are great airplanes, as I hinted to in my first post. I just want to fly while I finish my Experimental. However, I thought that was irrelevant to the whole discussion of how quickly different airplanes sell.
I can add that I am pretty concerned of what 2018 will look like, the input JimNtexas gave is exactly what I have been thinking about myself. Besides the ADS-B out mandate, I am also nervous about what FAA/EPA will end up with in respect to the 100LL replacement.
It may not be pretty in respect to price, the 100LL days may suddenly seem cheap. The result could be that a whole segment of our GA fleet gets grounded because they were marginal in the first place and ADS-B-mandate/100LL-replacement take them over the edge (not worth upgrading, not worth operating).
Which takes us back to why I started this thread, why price is not so important to me, but ability to resell is.
I am partial to this argument too, and it explains what why there is not a single 172MNP available at Controller in California at this very moment. Nearly 16k of these produced, but reality is that there are so many more buyers in the market for a $50k airplane than for one costing $150k that demand swamps supply.
My biggest hesitation is whether I can find a clean 172MNP that is priced right. We will see ...
Vf6cruiser
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2012
- Messages
- 181
- Display Name
Display name:
Vf6cruiser
You could be the first kid on your block to buy a Sportys Lite 172..............
http://www.sportys.com/172LITE
http://www.sportys.com/172LITE
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
I'd add "No damage history" to your list. Justifiably or not, damage - even when fully and properly repaired - reduces the pool of prospective buyers willing to consider a given plane. It just does. It also, therefore, reduces the price these planes fetch. They tend to sit longer on the market.
Ads that say "no damage history" get more attention than ones that don't. That claim must later be verified, of course.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,733
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
Take a deep breath. Y2K didn't cripple our banking system, and ADSB and 100LL will not mean an end to GA in 2020. If anything, user fees without a carveout would hurt more in the pocketbook of piston GA than ADSB.
BTW, the part 23 re-write is overdue legally, but the FAA said 2017. By then you'd be able to slap a bunch of experimental avionics and work on spam cans the same way you can exAB, and all of the sudden, the resale question when compared to exAB gets flipped on its head. Nobody knows, but I wouldn't forego your ability to enjoy the privilege of flight today for the prospect of doom tomorrow. Full pay til the last day, like our starved regional pilots often remark in their often doomed labor negotiations.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
cheap aircraft.....always sell fast.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,733
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
cheap aircraft.....always sell fast.
Agreed. I've always bought-low/sold-low. Never got stuck with an aircraft I didn't want anymore and never lost any money I'd otherwise miss, since the magnitude of percentage loss translated to smaller amounts. Liquidity of transaction is something I value. It's risky, but such is life.
MIFlyer
Pattern Altitude
i'd like more insight into this. There are a lot of great planes out there with terrible panels that would be the cat's meow with moving map GPS, autopilot and a new interior. If I can use the experimental stuff, that all will cost 10-15K. for certified seems like 35K.
Big difference on a 30-50K airplane.
I'd love to find a run out real four seater (or limited 6 seater) that needs a panel and maybe an engine (would love to buy one at 1900 hrs and get 300 free hours out before remanufacturing it)
Conventional wisdom says to buy with the panel you want, but if they are going to let us stick the garmin g3-x for $6K and have a nice 10" screen that changes the kind of plane you want to buy now.
N747JB
Final Approach
Later model 172's with the G-1000 and GFC-700 autopilot sell very well, more so than the non-WAAS ones with the other A/P. BUT, if you are commuting, speed will matter and I think a good 182 with a GOOD autopilot would be the ticket. Hand flying those 2 hour flights will be fun at first, but if you fly 3-400 hours per year, you will want a good autopilot. 
Tip number 2 is buy it ready to go, with the avionics, paint and interior you want. These things take twice as long to change and cost twice as much as you think. You could easily be down for 2 months for paint, 6 weeks for interior and no body knows for avionics.
Tip number 2 is buy it ready to go, with the avionics, paint and interior you want. These things take twice as long to change and cost twice as much as you think. You could easily be down for 2 months for paint, 6 weeks for interior and no body knows for avionics.
genna
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,720
- Display Name
Display name:
ТУ-104
If the goal is to be able to easily sell the plane after use and not lose a lot of money, wouldn't this be achieved by buying any reasonably popular(model and equipment) plane in a good condition for a GOOD(cheap) price?
If you paid little to buy, you can sell for low price after the use. Vref makes no difference.
Normally I'd say anything less complex and on the cheap side would probably be your best bet. However, if you really are doing long commutes, you will put less wear and tear on a faster plane. 500h in C172 may only result in 300h in a Mooney. That's 400h saved over 2 years on the engine... that's a big resale difference.
If you paid little to buy, you can sell for low price after the use. Vref makes no difference.
Normally I'd say anything less complex and on the cheap side would probably be your best bet. However, if you really are doing long commutes, you will put less wear and tear on a faster plane. 500h in C172 may only result in 300h in a Mooney. That's 400h saved over 2 years on the engine... that's a big resale difference.
Exactly, 'first' is the key, making this the LAST airplane you want to buy if your intention is easy resell in the future
Spot on! If you do the 172P/M20J comparison @ 75% cruise, you will actually, funny enough, find that the engine+airframe depreciations per mile are nearly identical!
Well said! If I didn't fully believe this, flying & airplane ownership would be one of the last things I would pursue
But this should not make you blind to the changes already on the horizon, trying ones best to negotiate/plan for them.