If I've said it once here, I've said it 50 times, I've been a huge supporter of this airplane(& not the CEO) since it had a glitzy Hollywood rollout in 2008. IMO, it will be as much of a Differencemaker to LSA and GA in general as Cirrus was in the 90's. You can take that to the bankOriginally Posted by Eaglerhythm
Absolutely true, for 50 years now the aviation industry boardrooms have internally believed that they bear the financial liability for safety issues and as a result they should have the right to specify the levels of safety and the allocation of assets towards the same. And for many years the "people's FAA" hasn't quite agreed. Having been there I can assure you it is with good reason that the "people's FAA" doesn't trust the boardroom. This is the very reason for the composition of the ICON Board. The outcome of this battle will indeed have long range effects on GA safety. As I indicated previously the FAA needs to send the VC's back to the drawing board to follow the rules instead of trying to waive them.it will be as much of a Differencemaker to LSA and GA in general as Cirrus was in the 90's. You can take that to the bank
While A5 is a beautiful airplane, the investors (as a whole) are unlikely to get the money back. The current round of 64M (millions) is round D. Two years ago Icon raised 25M, that should be round C. I do not have the number of the first two rounds, let us assume a modest $20M (anyone has the number?). All together this is something like $110M! Assume Icon makes 20,000 dollars profit out of each A5, that would take 5,500 airplanes to get the $110M back! When can Icon sell 5,500 LSA? The bad news is that LSA is waning. The market is simply not that big regardless how sexy the airplane is.
An interesting observation is that this time it is the Chinese that put all the money into GA, from Cirrus to Continental (engine), from Lisa (another LSA amphibian) to Icon. These novice will learn quickly that there is no much profit, if any, in GA. What they are paying is expensive tuition for this simple and public lesson.
For Icon, they will learn burning cash at this rate is not good for survival in GA.
Last edited by wantobe; 06-25-2013 at 04:03 AM.
I think they can make more than 20,000 USD per ICON. Consider the potential Chinese market, remember a BMW in China costs twice as much as the price in the US, ICONˊs price is just like a BMW 7 in China. Cirrus(500,000 per plane)can sell 300 per year, ICON should be double than that. Donˊt know how much they can make in the future, to get money back still sounds possible.
The problem with the domestic Chinese market is that it is at its heart part of a Communist run government.
General aviation is very closely controlled and limited in China, and I don't see them changing the rules on that any time soon.
Freedom of movement - especially the kind of freedom general aviation provides - is not something the Chicoms are really interested in fostering.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
I don't see them needing a Special Light Sport Aircraft, either. Dunno what the certification rules are in China, but I bet they don't care if it weighs 250 more than the US Light Sport limit. You'd think they're a bit confused over the delay...if I were a Chinese investor intending to sell plane in China, I'd be clamoring for delivery NOW.
Ron Wanttaja
Well, Chinese government actually is the largest capitalist in the whole world. Anything can help them get more tax and GDP, has always been the top priority. Think about how tightly US controls the air permit, compared with how bad the air over China now.
Anyway, ICONˊs maket will be in the western world first for sure.
Capitalist in running factories to sell stuff for export, mostly. One of the reasons there's very little restrictions on factory pollution by the government is that the factory is largely owned by the government...or overseen by a Communist official on the take.
In personal freedoms, Communist China is very much still Communist China. Freedom of assembly, expression, press, movement and religion don't really exist.
Their airspace is tightly controlled, and it is very unlikely that they'll suddenly embrace the Average Lee getting a civilian personal pilot license, his own plane and travel itinerary....particularly with an amphibious aircraft which could land anywhere along the coast, on rivers and lakes undetected.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
July 10, 2013 Status Report:
FAA disposition--still pending
Icon disposition--madder than a cat on a hot tin roof
If they are so mad, then why did they go forward with their design on the assumption that they would be granted an exemption?
Ryan Winslow
EAA 525529
Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote