he will never get anywhere near looking after my money, because that’s a totally duff argument. It is the depreciation that is the real cost.
If you are selling it in 2 years, yes you are right, if you are looking to own it later it’s different…some depreciate 1m$ aircraft down to zero in 2 years, the quickest it goes to zero the better but these are accounting tricks for tax offset in books & records
At the top end of piston GA there are people who buy a new SR22 every year or two. It costs them about 100k-200k/year. There are far too few of these to make any difference to GA activity though.
How many buys them as private individuals rather than company owned?
Maybe this not the case in UK & EU as there is less room for accounting treatments but in US it is the case: you can argue it’s the one single reason why every US business owner who never flew SEP now go get PPL and buys a new shinny Cirrus printed in pink (huge depreciation, tax advantage and cheap interest rates), the 2nd reason is having his mid-life crisis 
If you are selling it in 2 years, yes you are right, if you are looking to own it later it’s different…some depreciate 1m$ aircraft down to zero in 2 years, the quickest it goes to zero the better but these are accounting tricks for tax offset in books & records
That is confusing capital allowances with depreciation. Also you cannot write down a plane over 2 years. Or actually most other capital items.
How many buys them as private individuals rather than company owned?
Makes no difference unless the said company is making taxable profits against which the capital allowances can be offset. Unless it is a charter operation, or the plane flies exclusively for business, you won’t get away with this in any civilised country.
This is not what actually happens in the US either.
Peter wrote:
Getting back to
his argument was 4% interest only on 1m£ is 40k£ per year
he will never get anywhere near looking after my money, because that’s a totally duff argument. It is the depreciation that is the real cost.
Doesn’t that strengthen his argument? Looking only at financing costs, he is better off. Add in depreciation as well, and he is even better off renting.
Renting is cheaper if:
- You don’t do long trips where you don’t fly in between, e.g. 2 weeks holiday somewhere, fly there, park, fly back.
- You fly less than 100 hrs a year or so.
- You are not dependent on high availability or specific dates.
Renting can be really cheap for you if you find someone who has an underused plane and wishes to recover some cost (like I did the last years). Great availability and flexibility too. I had several renters who did longer trips on a yearly basis.
Renting will be expensive if
- you fly more than 100 hours or so a year and don’t get a specific rate reflecting that
- you have to pay up for periods of long parking away from homebase (most rental organisations charge 2 hrs per day if flown or not, some more)
- you will find that most of the time you want to fly there is no airplane available. Ok, that is not financially expensive (unless you have to buy last minute airline tickets) but it’s a pest.
Depreciation is the huge money pit, that is absolultely true. Best to get a 2nd hand airplane which is past that, usually about 10 years old. From then on, depreciation slows markedly and eventually levels out.
You don’t do long trips where you don’t fly in between, e.g. 2 weeks holiday somewhere, fly there, park, fly back.
99% of renters are not allowed to do that.
Renting is a dead end. It leads into a hole in the ground. Every time. It’s only a matter of time.
It’s not just the high marginal cost, crap planes, etc. It is also the zero committment to flying, so the person is generally pretty close to chucking it all in.
Now one could argue that the above describes the average aeroclub pretty well too Yet they carry on, and even dominate the activity in say France. This is probably due to the social scene which is on offer. It becomes somewhere where people hang out even if they don’t fly.
Peter wrote:
Renting is a dead end. It leads into a hole in the ground. Every time. It’s only a matter of time.
So at what time is my hole in the ground? I’ve been at it a total of 23 years. And I’m not the only one in my club.
You didn’t read the rest of my post
You are not only in an aeroclub but are the president!
Peter wrote:
You are not only in an aeroclub but are the president!
Not for 23 years. 
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Yes, I know there are some 4 seaters
No, there are no 4 seaters. UL/Microlights/ULM (or whatever it’s called) is defined by EASA, and the definition is:
aeroplanes having measurable stall speed or the minimum steady flight speed in landing configuration not
exceeding 35 knots calibrated air speed (CAS), helicopters, powered parachutes, sailplanes and powered
sailplanes, having no more than two seats and a maximum take-off mass (MTOM), as recorded by the Member
States, of no more than:
LeSving wrote:
No, there are no 4 seaters. UL/Microlights/ULM (or whatever it’s called) is defined by EASA, and the definition is:
Understood. I thought I read something that there were some of those things with 4 seats now, but obviously I got confused… So even more so, the UL variant is a non-starter for anyone with a family who wants to fly them.
