BUY, CARD OR FRACTIONAL?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Santa Monica, CA & Placencia, Belize
Age: 73
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BUY, CARD OR FRACTIONAL?
Long time lurker, first time poster. I have read many informative threads and thank you all for your unintended education.
And yes, I did use the SEARCH function, but it did not give me the info that I would like for my somewhat unique situation.
I spend 90% of my time in Belize, 10% in L.A. From Belize, I need to go to L.A., Houston, Miami, NYC regularly. My wife is a Brit, so we like to hit the Old Sod a couple of times a year, as well as the Continent. Best guess on yearly hours would be 250-300.
I have traveled in many light jets that can make many of the above destinations in one hop, but I find them confining. I prefer a larger environment. Use is personal/business at the same time. Pax load would be 2-4 on a regular basis for shorter destinations, as many as 6 ( but normally 2) on the longer ones.
I have listened to a couple of card/frac companies tell me why I should go that route. The issue is that everyone would have to deadhead 2 to 3 hours to get me, do a roundtrip, and deadhead again. A couple of brokers have said (of course) that I should buy.
I have no preconceived notions on which way to go, and look for advice from those who actually fly or are Principals. If I were to buy, the budget would be in the 15M range, tops, and I would be interested in something that would meet the mission range for the longest trips (have been very comfortable in the past in a few GIV/SP, F900 series, CL or Embraer).
What should I consider along with DOC's, fuel efficiency, speed? A/C that are at mid-life or beyond?
OK, let 'er rip......
And yes, I did use the SEARCH function, but it did not give me the info that I would like for my somewhat unique situation.
I spend 90% of my time in Belize, 10% in L.A. From Belize, I need to go to L.A., Houston, Miami, NYC regularly. My wife is a Brit, so we like to hit the Old Sod a couple of times a year, as well as the Continent. Best guess on yearly hours would be 250-300.
I have traveled in many light jets that can make many of the above destinations in one hop, but I find them confining. I prefer a larger environment. Use is personal/business at the same time. Pax load would be 2-4 on a regular basis for shorter destinations, as many as 6 ( but normally 2) on the longer ones.
I have listened to a couple of card/frac companies tell me why I should go that route. The issue is that everyone would have to deadhead 2 to 3 hours to get me, do a roundtrip, and deadhead again. A couple of brokers have said (of course) that I should buy.
I have no preconceived notions on which way to go, and look for advice from those who actually fly or are Principals. If I were to buy, the budget would be in the 15M range, tops, and I would be interested in something that would meet the mission range for the longest trips (have been very comfortable in the past in a few GIV/SP, F900 series, CL or Embraer).
What should I consider along with DOC's, fuel efficiency, speed? A/C that are at mid-life or beyond?
OK, let 'er rip......
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Utah
Age: 48
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a broker, I also say buy. 250 - 300 hours a year is a lot of time. Buying a fractional for this amount of time would be super expensive, especially if they are still charging for positioning. You should buy and put on a management agreement with a reputable company (focus on reputable). If you can give enough notice of your flights you should be able to minimize at least some of your positioning costs (keep in mind Central America is not a charter hotspot, especially for one ways).
$15m will get you an early GV that will get you nonstop from Belize to London.
$15m will also get you a Falcon 2000EXy (maybe with winglets) that would be less than 10 years old and would have super operating costs. You would be nonstop on all your trips except to Europe.
An early - mid 90's vintage $6m GIV/SP will do all your other trips without a problem and 1 stop to London.
A late 90's vintage $6m Challenger 604 will pretty much do your trips the same as the GIV but with less passengers and less operating cost. This is probably the most efficient option for 2 - 4 pax.
$15m will get you an early GV that will get you nonstop from Belize to London.
$15m will also get you a Falcon 2000EXy (maybe with winglets) that would be less than 10 years old and would have super operating costs. You would be nonstop on all your trips except to Europe.
An early - mid 90's vintage $6m GIV/SP will do all your other trips without a problem and 1 stop to London.
A late 90's vintage $6m Challenger 604 will pretty much do your trips the same as the GIV but with less passengers and less operating cost. This is probably the most efficient option for 2 - 4 pax.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Santa Monica, CA & Placencia, Belize
Age: 73
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..."You should buy and put on a management agreement with a reputable company (focus on reputable). If you can give enough notice of your flights you should be able to minimize at least some of your positioning costs (keep in mind Central America is not a charter hotspot, especially for one ways)."
Thanks very much for the input.
I presume that the above means "buy and charter out through a management company"?
The examples that you gave are great; I have no need for a newer aircraft, as my mission would require only a very serviceable and reliable aircraft. If an aircraft does not already have a Part 135, is it difficult to get, and is the cost to get there from Part 91 make sense financially if my charter traffic was relatively slow?
My intention would be to find a well-thought-of broker who could tell me whether I would be better off with an aircraft that had just gone through a mid-life, or needed one, along with a pre-buy inspection that would point out potential flaws. I am assuming that an existing maintenance contract on the airframe, engines and APU should be my starting point?
Thanks very much for the input.
I presume that the above means "buy and charter out through a management company"?
The examples that you gave are great; I have no need for a newer aircraft, as my mission would require only a very serviceable and reliable aircraft. If an aircraft does not already have a Part 135, is it difficult to get, and is the cost to get there from Part 91 make sense financially if my charter traffic was relatively slow?
My intention would be to find a well-thought-of broker who could tell me whether I would be better off with an aircraft that had just gone through a mid-life, or needed one, along with a pre-buy inspection that would point out potential flaws. I am assuming that an existing maintenance contract on the airframe, engines and APU should be my starting point?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not buying a somewhat smaller airplane to serve your needs going to the US, like a Citation Sovereign or a Hawker 850 and do the hops to the UK either via a charter airplane or airline ex, say, Miami...
Buying an airplane that can do all of that is going to cost you a lot more, in purchase and also to run the show. (insurance, fuel, hangar space etcetc.) - in the end, do you really need the space in a Gulfstream when travelling with 2-6 people, are you willing to spent the money ?
IŽm just evaluating a Falcon 2000 vs the Sovereign we do operate currently and the difference is bigger than I thought.
If you buy, make sure to buy an airplane that has upgradable avionics, as we will see a major change in these requirements (like ADSB, CPDLC, SBAS etcetc)
This MIGHT be a problem for bigger 'old iron' versus younger smaller tintubes... but having mentioned the Hawker, they went sort of out of the market and that might pose a prob in future...
All in all, have a good evaluation made one or better two sources. Thats for sure money well spent IMO.
Buying an airplane that can do all of that is going to cost you a lot more, in purchase and also to run the show. (insurance, fuel, hangar space etcetc.) - in the end, do you really need the space in a Gulfstream when travelling with 2-6 people, are you willing to spent the money ?
IŽm just evaluating a Falcon 2000 vs the Sovereign we do operate currently and the difference is bigger than I thought.
If you buy, make sure to buy an airplane that has upgradable avionics, as we will see a major change in these requirements (like ADSB, CPDLC, SBAS etcetc)
This MIGHT be a problem for bigger 'old iron' versus younger smaller tintubes... but having mentioned the Hawker, they went sort of out of the market and that might pose a prob in future...
All in all, have a good evaluation made one or better two sources. Thats for sure money well spent IMO.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Your nearest Marriott
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A late model G-IV SP is probably the best bang for your buck right now. Slightly higher running cost than a 604 but how much are you willing to pay for bulletproof reliability? You are one stop from anywhere and the difference in acquisition cost between that and a G-V buys a lot of fuel...
> I also know of a good example for sale...just sayin...
> I also know of a good example for sale...just sayin...
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Only upon request
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would recommend buying an aircraft you can have hangared and which can be or is already FANS updated.
I would tend to think of the Falcon 900B/C/EX which burns about a third less fuel and weighs a third less than a IV. But if Gulfstream minded, which I still can understand, what about the G350? It's at the limit of your budget, but you would own a lot newer airframe with modern avionics and its resale behavior should be better than the IV's, specially when the market will pick up again.
I would tend to think of the Falcon 900B/C/EX which burns about a third less fuel and weighs a third less than a IV. But if Gulfstream minded, which I still can understand, what about the G350? It's at the limit of your budget, but you would own a lot newer airframe with modern avionics and its resale behavior should be better than the IV's, specially when the market will pick up again.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Utah
Age: 48
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New is nice, but it depends on how you allocate your money - tie up a lot of capital on the front end and hope it won't depreciate very much, or make a much smaller capital investment on an airplane that is already highly depreciated but has higher operating costs.
FANS and other regulatory improvements should be considered as additional capital costs on older airplanes such as the GIV and 604. You also want to be cognizant of the upcoming maintenance requirements and part 135 applicability when considering individual examples, as those costs can escalate quickly.
FANS and other regulatory improvements should be considered as additional capital costs on older airplanes such as the GIV and 604. You also want to be cognizant of the upcoming maintenance requirements and part 135 applicability when considering individual examples, as those costs can escalate quickly.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Santa Monica, CA & Placencia, Belize
Age: 73
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of curiosity, what is the drop off point for depreciation for an aircraft in general, or is it brand specific? It would seem that an a/c that is now 7 years old is worth just less than 1/2 what the rack rate was when purchased. At what point does one start to factor in mid-life costs, based on hours, as a purchasing marker?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Utah
Age: 48
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
50% value at 7 years is a good rule of thumb but depreciation is model specific with lots of factors playing into it - has the model been superseded, how many are for sale, how does it compare to competing models, etc. Value of maintenance, options, pedigree, etc vary by individual example.
How about buying an aircraft optimised for your short-haul Belize-North America routes, which are all on the same-ish time zone, then using the change from the do-it-all options to buy first-class airline travel on long-haul routes?
You'd have the advantages of luxurious but relatively economic travel, with your own aircraft and crew, for the bulk of your same-time-zone travel needs - but first class service on airlines for the long-haul which (let's be honest) is more comfortable than most long-range private jets can offer crossing multiple time-zones with only a single cabin crew and limited catering.
You'd have the advantages of luxurious but relatively economic travel, with your own aircraft and crew, for the bulk of your same-time-zone travel needs - but first class service on airlines for the long-haul which (let's be honest) is more comfortable than most long-range private jets can offer crossing multiple time-zones with only a single cabin crew and limited catering.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the Money Takes Me
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are all missing a trick on the valuation side. The latest recession had a devastating effect on values like no other. Simply because of two main factors. 1. The sheer scale of the Banking crisis and 2. The fact that the market became so global centric rather than US centric and thus when the crisis occurred, it affected many more machines than it did before.
Be careful with trying to assess FMVs - there is simply no set science.
Be careful with trying to assess FMVs - there is simply no set science.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ch.
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Location location
With the ownership, reliability becomes essential. No need for the fancy electronics aircraft in the tropics. Get a proven airframe, like a G4 (SP), and let it sit in the tropics most of the time. Maintenance in Houston and South Florida is close by. And techs and crews can easily airline in and out via MIA/HOU in worse case scenario of AOG.
Hangar there would be very advantageous for any airplane based there. Low used prices will certainly help offset the fuel savings costs of the newer planes. You don't burn million dollars of fuel in your ownership.
Hangar there would be very advantageous for any airplane based there. Low used prices will certainly help offset the fuel savings costs of the newer planes. You don't burn million dollars of fuel in your ownership.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250 hours a year is a lot of fuel -burn...a 25% saving is a not-insignificant sum...newer. more economical, seems the way to go, also, all things being equal, newer should = less maintenance-repairs and lower parts-costs.
All hypothesis, I've never chartered, owned or rented and don't have a pilot's licence!
All hypothesis, I've never chartered, owned or rented and don't have a pilot's licence!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Santa Monica, CA & Placencia, Belize
Age: 73
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.....And there is the conundrum; fuel or avionics/airframe. This is the issue that I am struggling with. I would like to keep my hard costs low as possible while meeting the mission, as I don't like to piss away money just for the sake of it, but the posts above regarding upgradeable avionics and a newer airframe carry a lot of validity.
The a/c will have a hangar in the tropics. Close to parts and service when necessary (MIA/HOU). But when does reliability come in to play? 3,000 hours? 6,000 hours? It would seem that purchasing a 7 year old aircraft would eliminate (or prolong) the need for the more expensive mid-lifes, o/h, and APU re-do's even though the net out-of-pocket would be the same over a period of time; pay up-front for newer, or pay as you go for older. I am planning on using this a/c for 10 years. Should that have an affect on what I purchase?
I see some sense in buying for the short haul trips and flying commercial to Europe, but there seem to be a number of larger a/c that can cross in one hop that, even at 7-10 years of age, offer a good value while still being "newer". And I hate airports, crowds and stuffed planes, the result of spending much of my adult life on airliners. And if I own one, I would rather fly in it than pay an airline while my own crew is sitting in a bar waiting for me to return.
Thanks all for your continued comments. I am very new to this and want at least a rudimentary grounding before I start searching in earnest with a broker.
The a/c will have a hangar in the tropics. Close to parts and service when necessary (MIA/HOU). But when does reliability come in to play? 3,000 hours? 6,000 hours? It would seem that purchasing a 7 year old aircraft would eliminate (or prolong) the need for the more expensive mid-lifes, o/h, and APU re-do's even though the net out-of-pocket would be the same over a period of time; pay up-front for newer, or pay as you go for older. I am planning on using this a/c for 10 years. Should that have an affect on what I purchase?
I see some sense in buying for the short haul trips and flying commercial to Europe, but there seem to be a number of larger a/c that can cross in one hop that, even at 7-10 years of age, offer a good value while still being "newer". And I hate airports, crowds and stuffed planes, the result of spending much of my adult life on airliners. And if I own one, I would rather fly in it than pay an airline while my own crew is sitting in a bar waiting for me to return.
Thanks all for your continued comments. I am very new to this and want at least a rudimentary grounding before I start searching in earnest with a broker.
Last edited by NastyPirate; 23rd Feb 2014 at 03:16.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have taken a brandnew Challenger over to Europe and on landing we had a chip detect light in one engine that had to be changed. I flew a Kingair that had an issue with retrofitted avionics during 7-10 years after being build and that was dealt with with a small mod - the airplane was very reliable for the next 4 years and then was replaced by a newer one.
What I want to say: youŽll never can tell with a reasonable degree of certainty. At least that is my experience. As with all mechanical things, the older, the more often it will break, but the airframe also needs time to be developed into a reliable one....
If you buy a brandnew Citation Sovereign+ youŽll get a 5 year / 1500hrs program called "Sovereign shield" which basically is a cover (all the programmes paid for by Cessna) for all your maintenance needs bar a few minor things such as annual airworthiness checks. This might be the reassurance you want ? No idea if other manufacturers offer the same...OTOH you can repair a lot of thing with the roughly 1.3 million USD that the programme is worth and you can buy a used airframe that is on a programme - just check what the conditions are. You can even buy into one if you buy a used airframe without one.
Use your plane to fly to,say , Teterboro and then spent a few minutes for immigration in an FBO and then board a rented GV or whatever to hop over to the UK. If you do that say twice a year I personally would think the saved money is worth the bother, but then I am a person that most likely will never have to decide between 2 such 'problems'...
I work for a big company with business on all continents but antarctica and south america - they use the Sovereign in Europe, in Africa and for trips to Russia, Kasachstan and the like.
All the rest they do either with the airlines or rented bigger iron. Seems to work for them.
.
What I want to say: youŽll never can tell with a reasonable degree of certainty. At least that is my experience. As with all mechanical things, the older, the more often it will break, but the airframe also needs time to be developed into a reliable one....
If you buy a brandnew Citation Sovereign+ youŽll get a 5 year / 1500hrs program called "Sovereign shield" which basically is a cover (all the programmes paid for by Cessna) for all your maintenance needs bar a few minor things such as annual airworthiness checks. This might be the reassurance you want ? No idea if other manufacturers offer the same...OTOH you can repair a lot of thing with the roughly 1.3 million USD that the programme is worth and you can buy a used airframe that is on a programme - just check what the conditions are. You can even buy into one if you buy a used airframe without one.
And I hate airports, crowds and stuffed planes, the result of spending much of my adult life on airliners. And if I own one, I would rather fly in it than pay an airline while my own crew is sitting in a bar waiting for me to return.
I work for a big company with business on all continents but antarctica and south america - they use the Sovereign in Europe, in Africa and for trips to Russia, Kasachstan and the like.
All the rest they do either with the airlines or rented bigger iron. Seems to work for them.
.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: KSAN
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am have been following this thread and Pirate I am going to read between the lines here.
First, congratulations on being able to afford your own jet.
I agree with many of the other members here who recommend to buy something newer that can handle flights from Belize to USA. HisDudeness even recommended the aircraft I would I would have suggested as well for the mission/price.
To buy a G4 or a large cabin jet just to hop the pond twice a year makes no financial sense really at all. BUT it is your money and if that is what you want then do it.
At the end of the day as I said prior it is you're money and I am sure even though you are asking on here for input on mission/fuel/etc you do have a jet in mind. (Large Cabin) Every time you respond you keep trying to push the conversation towards a older large cabin jet. It is as if you are waiting for someone to stand up and say
Hey' a mid life large cabin jet would be great and this are all the reasons why!
So here it is. There are many many aircraft out there that are large cabin that still fly every day. Many from the late 80's and 90's... anyone who tells you there are not is full of it. If you want to buy a Jet from early 2000 I think you would find some great opportunities. As far as reliability it is a total toss up. Age of a aircraft is to give you a understanding that it has been used and would probably need to be replaced sooner then later. That does not mean it will break. We just had our 2 year old Gulfstream in the shop for flaps not wanting to come up and another time for the main cabin door not wanting to lock from he exterior. By the argument of age we should not have these issues but stuff happens.
At the end of the day buy what you want.
Enter it into a program.
Understand it could burn more fuel.. not a crazy amount more but more.
Understand you might have to write some checks for some upgrades.
I get everyone wants to save money when possible and the talk of fuel burn is a big one. But if you are owning a private jet and the cost of fuel is a concern to you then you probable should not own.
At the airport a few weeks ago Jimmy Buffet was leaving next to us. He fly his own Falcon900 the air-frame is from 96. A golfer at my home airport sold his GIII and but a 2000 G5. Just saying there are more older flying jets then one might realize so if those owners are making it work I am sure you can as well.
First, congratulations on being able to afford your own jet.
I agree with many of the other members here who recommend to buy something newer that can handle flights from Belize to USA. HisDudeness even recommended the aircraft I would I would have suggested as well for the mission/price.
To buy a G4 or a large cabin jet just to hop the pond twice a year makes no financial sense really at all. BUT it is your money and if that is what you want then do it.
At the end of the day as I said prior it is you're money and I am sure even though you are asking on here for input on mission/fuel/etc you do have a jet in mind. (Large Cabin) Every time you respond you keep trying to push the conversation towards a older large cabin jet. It is as if you are waiting for someone to stand up and say
Hey' a mid life large cabin jet would be great and this are all the reasons why!
So here it is. There are many many aircraft out there that are large cabin that still fly every day. Many from the late 80's and 90's... anyone who tells you there are not is full of it. If you want to buy a Jet from early 2000 I think you would find some great opportunities. As far as reliability it is a total toss up. Age of a aircraft is to give you a understanding that it has been used and would probably need to be replaced sooner then later. That does not mean it will break. We just had our 2 year old Gulfstream in the shop for flaps not wanting to come up and another time for the main cabin door not wanting to lock from he exterior. By the argument of age we should not have these issues but stuff happens.
At the end of the day buy what you want.
Enter it into a program.
Understand it could burn more fuel.. not a crazy amount more but more.
Understand you might have to write some checks for some upgrades.
I get everyone wants to save money when possible and the talk of fuel burn is a big one. But if you are owning a private jet and the cost of fuel is a concern to you then you probable should not own.
At the airport a few weeks ago Jimmy Buffet was leaving next to us. He fly his own Falcon900 the air-frame is from 96. A golfer at my home airport sold his GIII and but a 2000 G5. Just saying there are more older flying jets then one might realize so if those owners are making it work I am sure you can as well.