Piper dropping Jet???

flyersfan31

flyersfan31

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
14,269
Display Name
Display name:
Freiburgfan31
Just read in this week's AW&ST that Imprimis, owners of Piper, shook up mgmt at Piper and that the Altaire is possibly (probably??) on the chopping block.

Wow. They've completely restructured that company around the jet. And now, possibly, nada?
 
Yep. They took a hard look at the S/E jet market segment and concluded that the other manufacturers (Diamond, Cirrus, etc.) are having so much success and delivering so many units that they will never catch up.

flyersfan31 said:
Just read in this week's AW&ST that Imprimis, owners of Piper, shook up mgmt at Piper and that the Altaire is possibly (probably??) on the chopping block.

Wow. They've completely restructured that company around the jet. And now, possibly, nada?
Click to expand...
 
they were in wichita 3 weeks ago holding a job fair for jet jobs. i hope no one had gotten around to moving yet.
 
I think it was predictable.
When Eclipse was at the height of its glory everyone else also wanted to have a VLJ in a pipeline, a sort of "me too" syndrome. Now finally economic realities are catching up. I think people responsible for those short sighted decisions should be let go, it only drained coffers of many companies that were not very healthy to begin with. Really stupid.
 
Like Boeing says.."Its gotta pass the looks about right test".....I wish Honda would just mount those engines on the fuselage...would really make it look "normal"
 
Bout time

Other than a feather for new pipers cap it really was a product with out a market
 
More like a product entering late to an overcrowded market. Took them too long.
 
Thing is, the jet wasn't a Cirrus/DJet competitor. It was significantly larger (and had a real potty). Clg of something like 41k, not 25k. More competition for mustang than anything else, and a decent step-up from the Meridian.

Still, maybe the after-market care and feeding of Bjet owners gave them pause. I can't believe the market for "new" Archers and Seminoles is more attractive than the single-pilot jet market.

Maybe they'll take the engine, put it up front and put a prop on it and create a step-up turboprop. Makes sense to me.
 
flyersfan31 said:
Thing is, the jet wasn't a Cirrus/DJet competitor. It was significantly larger (and had a real potty). Clg of something like 41k, not 25k. More competition for mustang than anything else, and a decent step-up from the Meridian.

Still, maybe the after-market care and feeding of Bjet owners gave them pause. I can't believe the market for "new" Archers and Seminoles is more attractive than the single-pilot jet market.

Maybe they'll take the engine, put it up front and put a prop on it and create a step-up turboprop. Makes sense to me.
Click to expand...

Upgraded Cheyenne 4LS..would be kick ass.....
 
taters said:
it hasn't been in production since 93 I think...but why not update or re-design it.(I love Garrett's)..just dreaming.
Click to expand...

Piper doesn't have enough money to buy a wooly-worm a warm-up suit, let alone throw a bunch of money at a turboprop that wouldn't sell 20 units a year in a good market.
 
They got into it too late and there are too many options already in a very limited market.

Our phenom gobbles 150k In fuel a year. Thats more than most people have invested in their entire aircraft.

Not many people can afford to feed these turbines for pleasure use, and they are too small for many business uses.
 
The mission for the Piper Jet would have been, what?

The buyers would have been, who?
 
Looking historically, it seems that Piper hasn't done well with anything turbine other than the Meridian. The Cheyenne series was overall not that great. There are two of them at my airport and, while I'll happily fly in them, I wouldn't buy one.

Similarly, I'm not sure that the Piper Jet would've really fit a market that wasn't already being satisfied by something else that did the job better. Piper should resurrect the Navajo and stick to what it does well - piston aircraft.
 
At the price point at which they would need to sell it in today's market, I don't think it's practical to re-birth any of the piston twins. A new Baron is now north of $1 mil, so a Navajo would be even more. Can't see spending that kind of money for a recip when a nice King Air can be had for much less money.

Ted DuPuis said:
Looking historically, it seems that Piper hasn't done well with anything turbine other than the Meridian. The Cheyenne series was overall not that great. There are two of them at my airport and, while I'll happily fly in them, I wouldn't buy one.

Similarly, I'm not sure that the Piper Jet would've really fit a market that wasn't already being satisfied by something else that did the job better. Piper should resurrect the Navajo and stick to what it does well - piston aircraft.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
At the price point at which they would need to sell it in today's market, I don't think it's practical to re-birth any of the piston twins. A new Baron is now north of $1 mil, so a Navajo would be even more. Can't see spending that kind of money for a recip when a nice King Air can be had for much less money.
Click to expand...

A lot of it probably depends on your views and your mission. I have one trip I routinely do that would be well-served by a turbine (assuming something that was the appropriate size), but everything else is served best by pistons, primarily due to the distance of the hops we do.

However, my niche is a rather unpopular one. I should just build my own plane.
 
Geico266 said:
Just like electric cars! :rofl:
Click to expand...

Not to hijack the thread, but I would buy an electric car in a heartbeat.

Sadly, the versions now available are over-priced, and (worse) they have pushed the other, less-expensive options (Zenn, Gem) to the brink of bankruptcy.

I've been looking for an electric car since 2006. For the way we drive, and especially where I live now, it would be perfect. Unfortunately, it just doesn't exist at an affordable price...yet.
 
So Piper's failed in the LSA market and the light-medium jet market. Ouch for them.

I read that article yesterday that it would take Boeing 1100 aircraft to re-coup costs on the 787, and that they have 800 solid orders.

High-stakes stuff. Tough biz, making airplanes...
 
I can't believe how much money it takes to bring a new aircraft to market. Piper parts supplies for current production aircraft have been very slow due to a large part of the production being devoted to the Altaire program. Piper's recent response to a RACE form that I sent in was very good, it looks like a lot more effort may be put into building heritage aircraft parts. At 26 years old, would my Malibu be a heritage model?

I hope they can hang in there. Kevin
 
I suspect within the decade Piper will be a parts manufacturer, just like Mooney is now. I just don't see them getting that far with a couple very old airframe designs.
 
kmead said:
I can't believe how much money it takes to bring a new aircraft to market. Piper parts supplies for current production aircraft have been very slow due to a large part of the production being devoted to the Altaire program. Piper's recent response to a RACE form that I sent in was very good, it looks like a lot more effort may be put into building heritage aircraft parts. At 26 years old, would my Malibu be a heritage model?

I hope they can hang in there. Kevin
Click to expand...

The problem is that the costs are high, and I suspect that for something big and transport-category that the costs aren't as high proportionally to the cost. Plus Boeing has the advantage of being the Ford of aviation, with lots of units in service all over the world.

But what GA needs is a Henry Ford...

steingar said:
I suspect within the decade Piper will be a parts manufacturer, just like Mooney is now. I just don't see them getting that far with a couple very old airframe designs.
Click to expand...

Actually, I like their airframe designs just fine, and the Malibu/Matrix/Meridian seems to be doing them well. Cessna has managed to corner the flight training market with the 172, so they Archer will probably never get as much popularity as they could use.

Like I said, what they do well are piston aircraft.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Actually, I like their airframe designs just fine, and the Malibu/Matrix/Meridian seems to be doing them well. Cessna has managed to corner the flight training market with the 172, so they Archer will probably never get as much popularity as they could use.

Like I said, what they do well are piston aircraft.
Click to expand...

Never said there was a damn thing wrong with the designs, but the one problem with specialization is you become susceptible to changing conditions.
 
Nobody ever said that the leading buggy-whip guy wasn't making a damn fine product.

steingar said:
Never said there was a damn thing wrong with the designs, but the one problem with specialization is you become susceptible to changing conditions.
Click to expand...
 
steingar said:
Never said there was a damn thing wrong with the designs, but the one problem with specialization is you become susceptible to changing conditions.
Click to expand...
Cirrus became extremely successful depending pretty much on a single frame, you can call it highly 'specialized'. Frankly I don't believe for a second in theory that in order to be viable aircraft company you must do a bit everything - some piston, some turboprop, some jets, etc. In my opinion Cirrus going after the jet market is not enhancing viability of the company - it can even be putting the company in danger. I wish them plenty of luck of course.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
The mission for the Piper Jet would have been, what?

The buyers would have been, who?
Click to expand...

The discount go faster/go higher crowd stepping up from the TBM850

The discount "like a Cessna Mustang, hate the price" crowd.

The "PC12 rocks but who needs to tote around 10 people" crowd.

I think, of all the VLJ competitors, Piper actually had the most sensible product. I think the DJet is a joke - 25k ft ceiling??? Pointless in a burner, unless it's spinning a prop.

Well, no matter then. A bigger, single-engine turboprop, though, that would make sense.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Looking historically, it seems that Piper hasn't done well with anything turbine other than the Meridian. The Cheyenne series was overall not that great. There are two of them at my airport and, while I'll happily fly in them, I wouldn't buy one.

Similarly, I'm not sure that the Piper Jet would've really fit a market that wasn't already being satisfied by something else that did the job better. Piper should resurrect the Navajo and stick to what it does well - piston aircraft.
Click to expand...


Do love me some Navajos but would folks really pay the price delta from the ones currently flying required of a new airframe? There would have to be some "update" to draw in a sufficent market. I suppose new avionics would be a big help (like Cessna managed with the G1000 singles) and including the stuff that should have always been there like VGs might help. However what would probably be a close to a 2 Million dollar plane would be a hard sell when you look at what you can get on the used market.
 
Skylane81E said:
Do love me some Navajos but would folks really pay the price delta from the ones currently flying required of a new airframe? There would have to be some "update" to draw in a sufficent market. I suppose new avionics would be a big help (like Cessna managed with the G1000 singles) and including the stuff that should have always been there like VGs might help. However what would probably be a close to a 2 Million dollar plane would be a hard sell when you look at what you can get on the used market.
Click to expand...

While I agree, I also don't understand why people spend the money that they do on new Cessna and Beechcraft piston aircraft. I think the used ones represent a much, much better value.

Yes, the big thing you'd need would be new avionics and updating the cabin. Getting rid of the Janitrol would be a big, big plus as well...
 
People who have money buy new, because they don't want someones elses plane that they learned to fly and beat the crap out of.

People who have money thing different than the rest of us. I work for an individual with money. He doesn't but anything used.
 
flyersfan31 said:
The discount go faster/go higher crowd stepping up from the TBM850

The discount "like a Cessna Mustang, hate the price" crowd.

The "PC12 rocks but who needs to tote around 10 people" crowd.
Click to expand...
I don't see that much of a market for any of those things. There are the people who want an jet just because it's a jet. I also know at least two owners who traded in their King Airs for jets when times were good and are regretting it now. One is sold and the other one is parked.
 
n20junkie said:
People who have money buy new, because they don't want someones elses plane that they learned to fly and beat the crap out of.

People who have money thing different than the rest of us. I work for an individual with money. He doesn't but anything used.
Click to expand...

I've been providing buyer representation in the biz-jet market since 1993, and have worked with hundreds of potential buyers. All jet owners are people of wealth. A great number of them have bought used airplanes.

If you compare the number of bizjet transactions each year (an easily obtainable number) to the number of new airplane deliveries each year, you'll find that the annual number of used airplane sales is much higher than the new airplane sales.
 
Well of course there are more used transactions than new.

But there is a reason some buy brand new over 1 year used. Because they can.
 
Because they can doesn't have as much to do with the decision as because they want to. Most who buy a used airplane could buy a new one if they desired. Those that want/need bonus depreciation are currently the most likely prospects for new.

n20junkie said:
Well of course there are more used transactions than new.

But there is a reason some buy brand new over 1 year used. Because they can.
Click to expand...
 
Maybe thats the case for some.

But I am in the middle of the 4th aircraft transaction, 2nd jet, plus a turboprop. Clean seats and brand new tires were more important than a few hundred K.

Bonus depreciation, or normal depreciation, you can write it all off, and people were buying new shiny jets well before bonus depreciation.

From what I see. Rich guys are always competing. The only thing cooler than a used jet, is a new jet :)
 
n20junkie said:
From what I see. Rich guys are always competing. The only thing cooler than a used jet, is a new jet :)
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a rich guy vs. normal guy thing, more just how some people think vs. others. If I recall correctly, you're flying a new Phenom - not exactly a new G-V. There's always someone with more money (well, unless you're that 1 guy who has the most money in the world). I'll bet Wayne's been involved with a number of used jet sales that went for more than the new Phenom costs.

This view of needing to show off extends down to the people who save all their pennies to buy a Cadillac, but eat ramen noodles. It's not about being rich vs. poor, it's just a way that people choose to spend their money. If I could afford a jet (and could justify it), I'd likely still buy used - depending on what the other financial advantages were.
 
One of the richest guys in New York bought a used G-V rather than a new G-IV. Spent the same amount of money, had a much better ride. I'd love to be in the room when Junkie tells Tom what he can and can't afford and why new is better.

Ted DuPuis said:
I don't think it's a rich guy vs. normal guy thing, more just how some people think vs. others. If I recall correctly, you're flying a new Phenom - not exactly a new G-V. There's always someone with more money (well, unless you're that 1 guy who has the most money in the world). I'll bet Wayne's been involved with a number of used jet sales that went for more than the new Phenom costs.

This view of needing to show off extends down to the people who save all their pennies to buy a Cadillac, but eat ramen noodles. It's not about being rich vs. poor, it's just a way that people choose to spend their money. If I could afford a jet (and could justify it), I'd likely still buy used - depending on what the other financial advantages were.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
One of the richest guys in New York bought a used G-V rather than a new G-IV. Spent the same amount of money, had a much better ride. I'd love to be in the room when Junkie tells Tom what he can and can't afford and why new is better.
Click to expand...

Like I said, it seems to me like an attitude. One exceedingly wealthy person I knew who's since passed away drove a mid-scale Audi with cloth interior and the base engine. She could have easily afforded a Rolls Royce and a G-V, but chose instead to fly first class when she traveled.

I've always preferred to buy used vehicles simply because they represent a better value for me. I once purchased a new truck, and will be surprised if I do that again. I even like my piston aircraft that are older than me, and think it's pretty cool when I fly something with turbos. I guess I'm just simple folk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top