Icon Spirals In

[Dana]

The LSA reality is that folks clamored for really basic, cheap LSA’S. I think that was the original vision for Light Sport. But when it’s time to buy, the same folks tend to opt for multiple glass screens and autopilots and virtually every bell and whistle imaginable. Which ain’t cheap.

The don't show prices on their website any more, but last I knew, a new M-Squared Breese (a two seat SLSA version of the classic Quicksilver ultralight) was priced around $45K. A used 2 seat Quicksilver (EAB or ELSA) is around a quarter of that.

 

[Half Fast]

I take it you haven’t priced yachts recently.

Why do you think I bought a kayak?

 

[Maxnr]

Never made a splash

The problem is that they made too many.

 

[FastEddieB]

You can buy a SeaRay Sundancer 320 for under $380K brand new. Yacht certified. Lots of boats 26' and above are "yacht certified".

I’ll yield to your obvious yacht expertise.

But a 26’ anything is not what I’m referring to when I say yacht, “certified” or not.

 

[Daleandee]

I’ll yield to your obvious yacht expertise.

But a 26’ anything is not what I’m referring to when I say yacht, “certified” or not.

I know little to nothing of boats but I've never thought of a yacht as something you could pull behind your family sedan.

But then again Wikipedia says a yacht is at least 33' long so perhaps it could be pulled by a standard SUV or light pickup ...

 

[Racerx]

I should have known a stupid metaphor would have caused this much debate.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I know little to nothing of boats but I've never thought of a yacht as something you could pull behind your family sedan.

But then again Wikipedia says a yacht is at least 33' long so perhaps it could be pulled by a standard SUV or light pickup ...

The SeaRay Sundancer 320 still qualifies by even that definition since it's over 33' overall length. You could pull it with a 3/4 ton truck, but it wouldn't be particularly fun to trailer a boat that size, especially since it's a wide load. Still wouldn't want to try and take one out on the open ocean, lol.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I should have known a stupid metaphor would have caused this much debate.

Was mainly pointing out that yachts are technically cheaper than this particular aviation toy. Which is absolutely amazing to me given the cost of materials in each of them.

 

[Dana]

Was mainly pointing out that yachts are technically cheaper than this particular aviation toy. Which is absolutely amazing to me given the cost of materials in each of them.

It's the cost of skilled labor to make them, and the cost of the insurance for the manufacturer, and the economies of scale that the boat builder enjoys.

 

[SoonerAviator]

It's the cost of skilled labor to make them, and the cost of the insurance for the manufacturer, and the economies of scale that the boat builder enjoys.

I understand where the extra cost comes from for aviation. I'm just still amazed that something far less complex like the Icon can be so expensive. The yacht example has twin engines, a genset, 12V/120V electrical system, fresh water system, and often advanced GPS/joystick/autopilot. I honestly have a hard time believing the "skilled labor" is much different for the Icon in question. Economies of scale and insurance liability likely makes up most of the difference.

 

[Grum.Man]

They targeted an extremely small piece of the market. Add in their flashy advertisements, huge booths at shows, and highly publicized mishaps and I am shocked they lasted this long.

 

[StraightnLevel]

I understand where the extra cost comes from for aviation. I'm just still amazed that something far less complex like the Icon can be so expensive. The yacht example has twin engines, a genset, 12V/120V electrical system, fresh water system, and often advanced GPS/joystick/autopilot. I honestly have a hard time believing the "skilled labor" is much different for the Icon in question. Economies of scale and insurance liability likely makes up most of the difference.

It's scale.

There are tens of millions of boaters and more than 250,000 new boats sold each year, compared to 700,000 pilots and a few thousand planes. It's literally two orders of magnitude difference.

Think of it this way: Assume it costs $20M to get a new plane or boat designed, prototyped, tested, certified, and released to the market (completely fictitious number, but it makes the math easy).

Now, let's say that you can sell 500 new planes over 10 years vs 50,000 new boats. That's $40,000 in capitalization cost per plane vs $400 per boat.

 

[SoonerAviator]

It's scale.

There are tens of millions of boaters and more than 250,000 new boats sold each year, compared to 700,000 pilots and a few thousand planes. It's literally two orders of magnitude difference.

Think of it this way: Assume it costs $20M to get a new plane or boat designed, prototyped, tested, certified, and released to the market (completely fictitious number, but it makes the math easy).

Now, let's say that you can sell 500 new planes over 10 years vs 50,000 new boats. That's $40,000 in capitalization cost per plane vs $400 per boat.

Only flaw in the math is that the capital cost on most any Cessna, Piper, Mooney, or Beechcraft product was paid for long ago. Molds and tooling has been fully depreciated for aircraft designs that haven't seen any notable change in 30 years. If you keep trying to apply that overhead rate to new aircraft, while volume continues to drop, you end up with $300K+ C172 when there can't be that many "real dollars" invested in it. It's what happens when a company doesn't really think piston GA is worth making an effort for anymore.

 

[StraightnLevel]

Only flaw in the math is that the capital cost on most any Cessna, Piper, Mooney, or Beechcraft product was paid for long ago. Molds and tooling has been fully depreciated for aircraft designs that haven't seen any notable change in 30 years.

So, a 1994 PA-28 came with ADS-B, GPS, CO detector, taxi assist system, seat belt airbags, WiFi portable device connection, coupled go-around, auto-level....?

 

[Grum.Man]

Only flaw in the math is that the capital cost on most any Cessna, Piper, Mooney, or Beechcraft product was paid for long ago. Molds and tooling has been fully depreciated for aircraft designs that haven't seen any notable change in 30 years. If you keep trying to apply that overhead rate to new aircraft, while volume continues to drop, you end up with $300K+ C172 when there can't be that many "real dollars" invested in it. It's what happens when a company doesn't really think piston GA is worth making an effort for anymore.

The reality is every plane sold has to have a high enough mark up to cover the multi million dollar potential lawsuit for the next 40+ years the product is around. If a boat fails out of warranty worst case they loose a customer.

 

[SoonerAviator]

So, a 1994 PA-28 came with ADS-B, GPS, CO detector, taxi assist system, seat belt airbags, WiFi portable device connection, coupled go-around, auto-level....?

None of that really changes molds and major capital tooling. That's almost exclusively avionics advancements. Certainly nothing that was going to swing the needle for CapEx.

 

[Racerx]

What does a new engine, prop, and avionics cost? Easily 6 figures and probably 125k just in hardware.

 

[Half Fast]

The reality is every plane sold has to have a high enough mark up to cover the multi million dollar potential lawsuit for the next 40+ years the product is around. If a boat fails out of warranty worst case they loose a customer.

Remember this one?

Lawsuit Madness - OMG

Or... why Aviation costs so much... a recently-trained pilot (CTsw) was on a cross-country flight that encountered serious headwinds. Fearing that his flight fuel planning didn’t consider the winds, he stopped short of his destination, only to confirm he was very low on fuel. Figuring he had...

www.pilotsofamerica.com

Our pilot (lawyer) friend has filed a $10 Million lawsuit against Flight Design, the place he bought his aircraft from, his flight instructor, and several un-named John Doe’s…. for not specifically telling him he shouldn’t fly when you are very low on fuel! He also states the FAA curriculum for Light Sport Pilot doesn’t include that a “Light Sport Pilot know or be trained (on) fuel starvation to the pilot’s engine…”. So, I guess we can presume the FAA could be one of the John Doe’s. Some of the monetary damages are to cover “attorney fees to protect himself against governmental investigations regarding his piloting”. Any admission of guilt there?

 

[StraightnLevel]

None of that really changes molds and major capital tooling. That's almost exclusively avionics advancements. Certainly nothing that was going to swing the needle for CapEx.

How much do you think it costs to change a major component in a new plane, get it tested, get it certified, and roll it into production?

Even adding a single USB port to the panel means changing tooling and going through a re-cert process of the electrical system with the FAA. Is that capitalized as part of product development, or do they treat it as on-going expense? Either way, it gets rolled into the total cost for that product line, just every single one of those changes.

 

[SoonerAviator]

How much do you think it costs to change a major component in a new plane, get it tested, get it certified, and roll it into production?

Even adding a single USB port to the panel means changing tooling and going through a re-cert process of the electrical system with the FAA. Is that capitalized as part of product development, or do they treat it as on-going expense? Either way, it gets rolled into the total cost for that product line, just every single one of those changes.

There's certainly a cost to some of those items. I doubt airbag seatbelts have a ton of impact in that area, nor does WiFi integration. Autopilots and servos existed prior to the latest gadgets, so it's not as if they're having to reinvent the wheel. It's mostly paperwork. They aren't redesigning the airfoil or putting in engines that are vastly different. There is a cost to that paperwork, absolutely. The legal liability is the big hairy number that no one seems to know. I'm sure it's a significant reserve on the books, but we can only speculate as to what that portion truly is.

 

[hindsight2020]

are there no frivolous wrongful death lawsuits in the boating world?

 

[SoonerAviator]

are there no frivolous wrongful death lawsuits in the boating world?

Probably not targeted as much due to the nature of operation. However, as stated before, greatly increased volume of sales means the cost burden to each vessel is smaller. The absurd lawsuit payouts for product liability needs tort reform really badly. Aircraft manufacturers shouldn't be on the hook for some aircraft they made 20 years ago and be a named party in a lawsuit where some a-hole ran out of fuel in his Cessna 152.

 

[DeadStick]

The reality is every plane sold has to have a high enough mark up to cover the multi million dollar potential lawsuit for the next 40+ years the product is around. If a boat fails out of warranty worst case they loose a customer.

Are manufacturers actually putting aside this cash though? I can't find any info from Textron where they disclose how much they cash on hand they keep specifically for legal liability, but in their most recent investor report they keep about $2B in cash or short-term investments which is around 12% of their total assets.

https://investor.textron.com/news/news-releases/press-release-details/2024/Textron-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-2023-Results-Announces-2024-Financial-Outlook/default.aspx

To put that in perspective, the same report shows that Textron spent over $1B in 2023 to buy back its own stock.

So yeah, I have a hard time believing that the insane rate of inflation we've seen in General Aviation can be blamed on lawsuits when Textron is spending so much money buying up its own stock. Their own financial statement shows Textron spent $400 Million on CapEx in 2023 but the stock buybacks cost them $800 Million over the same time period. In other words, Textron is spending twice as much money to buy it's own stock then it is spending on R&D and investments in factories, equipment, etc.

 

[kyleb]

What does a new engine, prop, and avionics cost? Easily 6 figures and probably 125k just in hardware.

Probably $100k assuming a 4 cylinder lycoming. Then add in $50k for airframe parts and another $20k for odds and ends (you need an interior, a ton of firewall forward stuff). So you’re in for $170k before you assemble it at a shop rate of $150/hr for 1,000 man hours. Now you’re at $320k and that’s before paint and profit. That’s what a certified RV-7 equivalent is gonna cost you.

 

[hindsight2020]

Probably $100k assuming a 4 cylinder lycoming. Then add in $50k for airframe parts and another $20k for odds and ends (you need an interior, a ton of firewall forward stuff). So you’re in for $170k before you assemble it at a shop rate of $150/hr for 1,000 man hours. Now you’re at $320k and that’s before paint and profit. That’s what a certified RV-7 equivalent is gonna cost you.

yup yup. complete non-starter. The labor hours are out of whack. Bottom end tract houses (what these simple lawnmower kits are) are contracted for less on labor.