Way to go Cessna!

[James_Dean]

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Textron Inc. said Thursday that its first-quarter net income rose on higher revenue for its Bell and Cessna aircraft segments, and the aerospace company raised its earnings forecast for the rest of 2006. <img class="pixelTracking" border="0" height="1" width="1">

Profits rose to $168 million, or $1.26 a share, compared with $126 million or 92 cents a share in the year-ago period.
Textron would have earned $1.19 a share if it stripped out 7 cents a share worth of profit attributed to discontinued operations. Analysts expected Textron to report a profit of $1.06 a share, according to a Thomson First Call survey.

"While still a beat, it is not the blowout we have been accustomed to seeing," wrote Credit Suisse analysts in a research note after the results.
Sales rose 16% to $2.63 billion from $2.27 billion; Wall Street's consensus estimate was $2.49 billion.

Higher revenue related to V-22 military-aircraft sales helped increase Bell segment revenue by $167 million. Cessna segment revenue rose by $156 million. Profit at Bell fell by $6 million, however, while Cessna's earnings rose by $30 million during the quarter.

Commercial-aviation demand also has been strong, which helps the Cessna airplane and Bell helicopter businesses.

UBS analysts called the results "generally solid," noting that the consensus estimate for 2006 earnings is already at the high end of the range.

In its 2006 forecast, Textron raised its outlook to earnings of $4.95 to $5.15 a share for continuing operations, up 5 cents from its previous range. It left its second-quarter estimate at $1.15 to $1.25 a share.
The 2006 First Call forecast is for a profit of $5.10 a share, with a range from $5 to $5.20 a share.

On Thursday, Textron shares slipped 1.6% to close at $93.49 but not before notching a high of $95.70 - a level last seen in 1999.

Shares have rallied this year on broad gains for defense contractor stocks. Budget plans for U.S. defense spending have turned out to be more favorable than had been expected.

James Dean

 

[Steve]

and the 172 is 50 years young this year....

 

[ScottM]

Who is buying these? I only see new ones for sale and on rental at FBOs. Do groups of investors buy them and just stick them on lease back?

 

[gmwalk]

Nothing wrong with a 50 year old design. It's reliable, meets the market demand and is well tested. Also, from Cessna's point of view, it's much cheaper than designing and certifying a new plane. Just keep stamping out copies of the old one as long it sells!

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Nothing wrong with a 50 year old design. It's reliable, meets the market demand and is well tested. Also, from Cessna's point of view, it's much cheaper than designing and certifying a new plane. Just keep stamping out copies of the old one as long it sells!

Cessna apparantly doesn't agree since they're supposedly working on a new design.

If I were in the matket for a new 4 seater, I don't think I would even consider either a Cessna or a Piper -- I'd go for one of the new composites probably. Or a Mooney. Or a Columbia. Or?