Talk about not being innovative... Cessna Denali

Denali....you'd think GMC would have that trademarked? Maybe it's Yukon Denali...

That's the first thing that came to mind. Maybe that's their intention.
 
Boy, has Cessna come a Long way from the days of hitting jackpot with Light Jets in a twin piston era. I would have just produced a fancier, pressurized and retractable gear of the Caravan rather than pulling a Copy-Pasta.

Inverted said:
Yea we will see. For all intent and purpose, the Corvallis could have pro D.C. that theory but Cirrus continues to outsell the Corvallis.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that, since the plane was not home-bred, it doesn't sell because Cessna doesn't really want it. Kinda like the MD-11 when Boeing bought MD. Plus the Columbia is maintenance hungry.
 
z987k said:
You would think you couldn't trademark a public name and national park. Or at the very least there is some sort of fair use.
Click to expand...

Successful intellectual property protection depends, in some part, on similar usage and the potential for confusion in the public's mind. You could probably get away with naming this aircraft 'Kleenex" without being (successfully) sued by Kimberly-Clark. Would the US Dept of Justice sue Disney if they opened a mountain theme park and called it "Denali?" Maybe,

Of course, this is what allows attorneys to purchase Cirruses.
 
Th difference between this and the PC12 is that some rich bloke deciding he wants to buy a plane but doesn't know jack about aviation has heard of Cessna and has not heard of Pilatus.
 
That's a big gamble. I highly doubt the HondaJet will sell to the demographic of people who have no clue about aviation, but they have an Accord in the driveway.
 
Inverted said:
That's a big gamble. I highly doubt the HondaJet will sell to the demographic of people who have no clue about aviation, but they have an Accord in the driveway.
Click to expand...
But Honda isn't known for aviation. Honda is known for great reliable cars. Cessna is the Honda of the skies. Plus my guess is if you can afford a HondaJet the only Honda in your driveway is an NSX
 
Yea but how many people know Cessna that don't know Learjet? If you want to talk about unknowning aviation purchasers, you would think Lear would profit from such a recognizable name but they don't. Cessna is recognizable to us, I'm not sure how much that name carries to the non aviation world.
 
z987k said:
You would think you couldn't trademark a public name and national park. Or at the very least there is some sort of fair use.
Click to expand...
I had a mountain bike called a Denali. I traded it for a sweet 1989 Bottechia, replica of the one Lemons won the tour of France on. But that's not important right now.
You guys are failing to realize the brand loyalty of a large group of people that would like to move up to an aircraft like this but are entangled in a life long two step with Cessna. Many owner operators come up like this and Cessna putting g1000 in its 172 and its Mustang is working the heck out of that model.
I agree with @killbilly , they know what they are doing. If they fail with this aircraft, it doesn't mean they weren't sure that they were right, before they bravely went ahead.
Stay in your armchairs, succeed or fail, I'd say they are righteous.
 
bucksmith said:
I had a mountain bike called a Denali. I traded it for a sweet 1989 Bottechia, replica of the one Lemons won the tour of France on. But that's not important right now.
You guys are failing to realize the brand loyalty of a large group of people that would like to move up to an aircraft like this but are entangled in a life long two step with Cessna. Many owner operators come up like this and Cessna putting g1000 in its 172 and its Mustang is working the heck out of that model.
I agree with @killbilly , they know what they are doing. If they fail with this aircraft, it doesn't mean they weren't sure that they were right, before they bravely went ahead.
Stay in your armchairs, succeed or fail, I'd say they are righteous.
Click to expand...

Who actually knows, firsthand, a person who is an owner-operator that started on skyhawks and moved on to wanting something in this class? You always hear people referring to this theoretical segment of the GA market but how many are there actually? Like 100? And most of them already own Pilatus?
 
gotWXdagain said:
Who actually knows, firsthand, a person who is an owner-operator that started on skyhawks and moved on to wanting something in this class? You always hear people referring to this theoretical segment of the GA market but how many are there actually? Like 100? And most of them already own Pilatus?
Click to expand...
Based on my experience in the DC metro area and it's endless supply of taxpayer money flowing in, the number might be 100 here. I tend to exaggerate to make my stories better (I'm from NJ), so maybe it's actually 50. I can think of 3 or 4 that came out of my alma mater flight school.
I can tell you from conversation with Cessna people, that is exactly the model they pursue. Keep the flight deck the same and let people move up thru the airframes.
The only thing missing is the light twin with g1000, we always used the DA42 for that mission to prep guys for the mustang. (2 of them I can think of and one other that ended up getting a phenom. And another I can think that pulled back a bit and settled into a Merridian)
 
I could see if somebody owned a 421 and maybe wanted something new that could go higher, and would be of similar operational cost, but I struggle to believe that this will be the niche' owner/operator airplane. Hell, the PC-12 isn't known as an owner/operator aircraft. The Meridian and TBM does though, but those are less than half the cost of a Denali. I am trying to find a way to believe this will be successful but I am struggling. To put it in perspective, the Mustang is less than half the cost of the Denali...
 
bucksmith said:
Based on my experience in the DC metro area and it's endless supply of taxpayer money flowing in, the number might be 100 here. I tend to exaggerate to make my stories better (I'm from NJ), so maybe it's actually 50. I can think of 3 or 4 that came out of my alma mater flight school.
I can tell you from conversation with Cessna people, that is exactly the model they pursue. Keep the flight deck the same and let people move up thru the airframes.
The only thing missing is the light twin with g1000, we always used the DA42 for that mission to prep guys for the mustang. (2 of them I can think of and one other that ended up getting a phenom. And another I can think that pulled back a bit and settled into a Merridian)
Click to expand...

See that market is so small to begin with, and already saturated with products, that Cessna can't possibly expect this airplane to do well for their bottom line in that market alone. They need the Planesense and the Surf Air and the Boutiques of the world, and the Air Method's and AMRGs, who all own PC-12s and are all happy with them.
 
gotWXdagain said:
See that market is so small to begin with, and already saturated with products, that Cessna can't possibly expect this airplane to do well for their bottom line in that market alone. They need the Planesense and the Surf Air and the Boutiques of the world, and the Air Method's and AMRGs, who all own PC-12s and are all happy with them.
Click to expand...
I see what you mean, but I don't know how many they gotta sell to stay in the black.
 
killbilly said:
Fair point. They got that one wrong, in my opinion. But they've gotten a whole lot right.
Click to expand...

Nokia did a lot right in their first 100 years. They then didn't make the right calls in their last 10. Now, they don't exist. Same with Kodak.

This isn't a bet-the-company move, but I see challenges in all markets Cessna is currently in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top