Is this true?!

[jethro99]

From a company/corporate stand point it makes perfectly good sense to completely scrap most/all of the airplanes, and related spare parts, if any.

This is all now just residual un-needed production inventory. Might be more costs to the company to sell components than profit to be realized. No costs to warehouse stuff not needed. No potential liability head aches down the road.

Does Cessna even sell standalone engines, avionics, instruments and other similar non-Cessna proprietary spare parts? Why retain stuff that is not sold as part of the core business? Scrap it and take the tax write off.

If the stuff that manufacturers scrap on a daily basis could be seen it would make eyes roll. But in the scheme of things it makes sense to do it.

[DaleB]

But in the scheme of things it makes sense to do it.

That would depend on who you are, and who's running the business.

Cessna could have easily offered the parts (for example, just the front half of the fuselage, where 90% of the value is) as a scrap lot, and simply not required that the parts all be entirely destroyed. It's not had to imagine those bringing several thousand per, if the avionics, engines, wheels, brakes and tires could be recovered. But accountants and corporate counsel can make even the most basic transaction look suicidal, I suppose.

I completely understand why they would do a thing like this. I've seen similarly senseless things done at the last couple of places I worked. Doesn't mean I agree with it. Not being a Cessna stockholder, though, they are free to ignore my outrage and carry on.