R

rv12builder

Member
Hi all,

Searching for advice on selling my RV-12 kits for a fair and equitable price. My question to the group is do you think that the price i have set is unreasonable?

I tried offering a 20 percent discount to original price on the combined kits (empennage, wing, fuselage and lighting) and then also tried offering each kit by themselves. That works out to be approx a $3000 savings over buying from Vans. The empennage kit is built. All parts were primed prior to assembly. Wing ribs are ready for priming. The rest of the kit parts have only been inventoried.

I am located about 1 hour south of Boston on Cape Cod and in a couple of inquiries transportation costs became a factor. The obvious thought is to lower the price which I do not need to do. I am thinking of continuing to build out the kits I have and just keep them "ready for sale" to anyone who has the misfortune of damaging their plane and would like a faster fix. I would offer no discount but would only charge what the kit actually cost.

What do you all think? Perhaps I am missing something. Comments, suggestions, etc. would be appreciated.

Dave
 
From what I can see, the sale of RV 12 kits has slowed down, and I can for sure tell you the aircraft market is soft. I have a similar problem, I have been trying to clean out my hangar for the 12 by selling my Ercoupe. Although I paid $28k for it, spent additional $3k cash plus MANY A&P hours of work on it, I cannot find a buyer at $25.9.
Transportation would be a major factor for you I am sure, if located in Kansas City it would be lots easier. I am not sure price is what is driving the market, probably if I were you I would stick to my price.
 
rv12builder said:
snip

I am thinking of continuing to build out the kits I have and just keep them "ready for sale" to anyone who has the misfortune of damaging their plane and would like a faster fix. I would offer no discount but would only charge what the kit actually cost.

What do you all think? Perhaps I am missing something. Comments, suggestions, etc. would be appreciated.

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave,
I think RV12 has different buyers unlike 7 or 8. Those well established in life types who are not much into little bargains. They would probably desire at least 50% discount which you won't offer. Don suggested the market is "soft" I would say the market is not formed yet for your offer. New machine, parts on relatively high price scale need couple years to create a niche.

I would suggest keep building but "build for yourself" not for sale as you indicated. Just change the perception/attitude and eventually you will have a flyable aircraft for yourself or a valuable commodity for somebody. If not, discount heavily and market agressively. Just an opinion you asked for it.
 
There does seem to be a "secondary" market for them, several persons here have finished one and done another. I intend to start another plane when I am done with mine, if I can get a "real bargain" on a 12 kit or partially completed one, I would jump at it.
Not mentioned, there has always seemed to be reluctance to buy a partially constructed aircraft, the chance that poor workmanship may require some rebuilding and buying some new parts.
As was said, the market for RV12's and parts has not really established itself yet either.
 
As a potential builder, I'd have to say that I'd look forward to assembling the airframe. But I wouldn't look forward to installing the avionics.

I'd regard shipping an unbuilt kit in the original boxes as routine, but shipping a partially built airplane as a major hassle, regardless of distance. I'd prefer a flying one so that I could simply fly it home. If it were partially built I'd prefer to have the opportunity to bring it home on my own trailer or in my pickup truck. That would tend to limit how far away I'd consider a purchase.

As for workmanship, I'd guess that if a builder followed the directions and didn't use a torch to get things to fit, or hammer mating parts together (both have been mentioned in the RV-12 section recently) that probably the workmanship of an RV-12 would be acceptable. There's less opportunity to screw it up than for some of the others, and the plans are excellent.

Finally, there have been hundreds of kits ordered. There's bound to be some bargains at some time or other, and I'm not in a hurry.

Good luck on selling the airplane. I think I've seen more completed ones for sale than partially-built, so patience might be the most important factor here. That and advertising.

Dave
 
Ercoupe

DonFromTX said:
I have a similar problem, I have been trying to clean out my hangar for the 12 by selling my Ercoupe. Although I paid $28k for it, spent additional $3k cash plus MANY A&P hours of work on it, I cannot find a buyer at $25.9.
Click to expand...

Just an idea for the sale of your ercoupe. You might try selling it in shares. Say thee shares at 9000 each and establish a partnership. :)
 
That is also a good idea for any of us. I have tried that also, and have three on a string who are willing to go to the $5000 range, a couple more and it would be gone. I would even be open to owning a fifth share myself, I like the plane.

CPSONE said:
Just an idea for the sale of your ercoupe. You might try selling it in shares. Say thee shares at 9000 each and establish a partnership. :)
Click to expand...
 
Tom,

I too have been looking at the viking engine. Saw it at OSH and talked to Jan. Given his track record I am hesitant at this point to do anything other than wait. On the surface it looks great but without any long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations I would not want to make that commitment to going from ELSA to EAB using that engine. I have also been following the UL engine too. It would certainly be less expensive to build EAB but I think harder to sell in the world of LSA's given the target audience.

Having said that if the FAA does change the third class medical requirement then the LSA marketplace is going to go thru huge changes and not necessarily for the better from a resale pricing perspective.

Just my $.02

Dave
 
Hi all,

Just wanted to say thanks to you all for your input. Your points of view tend to mirror mine and I will just be patient and occasionally toss an ad here and there to see if there is any interest.

Dave
 
I am not sure that I share your concern about EAB being a bad thing. The market for Vans planes is very good, and you must realize that out of over 7000 planes, only a hundred of them are ELSA. Your desire to wait until "long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations" would indicate that you have no business with an experimentals, that stuff is abundant for the spam cans of aviation.
rv12builder said:
Tom,

I too have been looking at the viking engine. Saw it at OSH and talked to Jan. Given his track record I am hesitant at this point to do anything other than wait. On the surface it looks great but without any long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations I would not want to make that commitment to going from ELSA to EAB using that engine. I have also been following the UL engine too. It would certainly be less expensive to build EAB but I think harder to sell in the world of LSA's given the target audience.

Having said that if the FAA does change the third class medical requirement then the LSA marketplace is going to go thru huge changes and not necessarily for the better from a resale pricing perspective.

Just my $.02

Dave
Click to expand...
 
Yes but...

Your desire to wait until "long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations" would indicate that you have no business with an experimentals, that stuff is abundant for the spam cans of aviation
Click to expand...
.

No doubt the Honda engine that Viking uses is just great. In cars... I too tho, would want to see what kind of testing, engineering, etc. that Viking has done to ensure that the redrive would stand up to the tremendous forces that a whirling, gyroscopic propeller will induce, something I don't think Honda endorses. Correct me if wrong.

Given some of the adventures and misadventures that Viking's owner has been associated with, I would be careful, very careful.

Oh, and then there is the cooling, electronics, a bevy of problems for other alternative engines. How about those Subies that went into "limp home" mode, not a great thing in aircraft.

YMMV, IMMHO, etc.
 
We all have our threshold of exploration and experimenting. For me, I am still feeling bad I could not be the very first to experiment with the Honda engine If it don't work out for me, I can either fix it, or there are other choices. Others have used the engine with great success as well. We ARE talking experimental here.
By the way, there were two Subaru "limp mode" incidents to my knowledge, neither was an Eggenfellner conversion, and the ECU for the Viking does not even HAVE a limp mode.
For most of us the 400 hours of non issues with this combination on the prototype is going to make my use quite boring.

Jerry Cochran said:
.

No doubt the Honda engine that Viking uses is just great. In cars... I too tho, would want to see what kind of testing, engineering, etc. that Viking has done to ensure that the redrive would stand up to the tremendous forces that a whirling, gyroscopic propeller will induce, something I don't think Honda endorses. Correct me if wrong.

Given some of the adventures and misadventures that Viking's owner has been associated with, I would be careful, very careful.

Oh, and then there is the cooling, electronics, a bevy of problems for other alternative engines. How about those Subies that went into "limp home" mode, not a great thing in aircraft.

YMMV, IMMHO, etc.
Click to expand...
 
DonFromTX said:
Your desire to wait until "long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations" would indicate that you have no business with an experimentals,
Click to expand...

This corollary would eliminate an RV-12 airframe from the experimental community since it's design is based on "long term data and some formalized testing and engineering evaluations".

But we've been down this path of discussion before so probably no need to rehash. I hope the Viking proves to be a good alternative.
 
Don,

Have to disagree with you. Deciding to use data to make an informed decision is not a bad idea and has nothing to do with whether one should fly experimental airplanes or be a member of the experimental community.

In aviation, as in the financial community (to make a comparison), there are different degrees of risk that you can decide upon. Two people can be in the aggressive emerging markets sector yet one chooses a fund with a lower beta, which still may be higher than the norm, but not as high as you can go on a risk scale. Both selections are considered risky by the mainstream but not by all.

So for better or worse I am happy to build an airplane anytime but will still use data to make parts choices. We will just have to agree to disagree. (What a concept :>)


Dave
 
Your concept is sound, I have no dislike for those that think differently than I. Nothing wrong with making experimentals as safe as you can. That is the reason I am building an RV12 as opposed to other makes, or my own design..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.