Cessna Skycatcher and Facebook

K

ktsai91

Well-Known Member
Today on Facebook, PiperSport Facebook fan page announced that that fan page is the most popular aviation-related fan page on Facebook, making it more popular than AOPA, EAA, Sporty's, Cirrus, and Cessna, with over 12,100 fans!!!

I was wondering, why doesn't a marketer of Cessna Aircraft use Facebook to make a fan page on the Cessna Skycatcher? I saw some fan pages for the Skycatcher, but all those are new types of fan pages with info on it from Wikipedia. I don't have anything against PiperSport (except I don't like the fact that it has a 3 blade prop, I wanna with a 2 blade prop.), I'm even one of the fans on Facebook on the PiperSport.

If Cessna wanna get more customers to buy (or at least admire) the Skycatcher, then Cessna must use social media such as Facebook to get more fans. Plus, a fan page is a great way to post updates on the Cessna Skycatcher.

In the end, I say reluctantly that PiperSport will be the more popular LSA than the Skycatcher, because it has attracted all the loyal fans and customers. Come on Cessna! Don't be afraid to show your Skycatcher to the world!
 
While the fact that PiperSport has that many fans, I would bet that less than 0.5% of those who are fans actually have any real interest and the capacity to buy the thing. The fact of the matter is, both the PiperSport and GroundPounder (SkyCatcher) cost more than $100,000. You can go out and buy a lot more airplane than they are for that price. The only way it makes sense to buy one of these new S-LSA's is if you 1) can't get a medical or 2) want to run a flight operation for people who can't get a medical, and need a way to get a big write off on taxes for the loss you are going to have.

So, I would be hard pressed to call all the fans customers of the PiperSport. Fans, sure, I"ll call them that.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
While the fact that PiperSport has that many fans, I would bet that less than 0.5% of those who are fans actually have any real interest and the capacity to buy the thing. The fact of the matter is, both the PiperSport and GroundPounder (SkyCatcher) cost more than $100,000. You can go out and buy a lot more airplane than they are for that price. The only way it makes sense to buy one of these new S-LSA's is if you 1) can't get a medical or 2) want to run a flight operation for people who can't get a medical, and need a way to get a big write off on taxes for the loss you are going to have.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

It's an unbelievably expensive airframe for its performance and capabilities. I can get certain twins for less than that.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
:yeahthat:

It's an unbelievably expensive airframe for its performance and capabilities. I can get certain twins for less than that.
Click to expand...

Even for its class, the Skycatcher is nothing to write home about in capabilities. Cessna was a day late and at least a dollar short to the S-LSA market. I've never flown one, but if they are like many of the other S-LSA's, I'm sure its fun to fly.
 
Actually I kinda giggled when Piper said "We're getting back to our roots!"

Really? By licensing a Czech airplane?

BTW, if you look at the 162's stats it's basically a 150, except its a bit faster and has a wider cabin. If you try to find a "brand new" 150/152 you're going to pay about as much as you'll pay for a Skycatcher, and it wont be nearly as nice and definitely not as well equipped.

Personally, I think that the LSA market had zero credibility until Cessna threw their hat into the ring, then it really took off. It may be middle of the road in terms of performance and load and whatever else, but it'll be easy to fly, plentiful, aluminum, and well supported.
 
trafficinsight said:
BTW, if you look at the 162's stats it's basically a 150, except its a bit faster and has a wider cabin. If you try to find a "brand new" 150/152 you're going to pay about as much as you'll pay for a Skycatcher, and it wont be nearly as nice and definitely not as well equipped.
Click to expand...

No way! You can get a nice C150, IFR with Garmin 430, low SMOH, and less then 5000TT for 25K dollars. I saw some nice VFR 150s for less then 20K dollars.

I dunno about the US, but in Europe, where LSA are really popular nobody cares Cessna made an LSA, they will keep flying FDs, Tecnams and Remos.

If I would have to choose I would trust the piper sport more, it's been built by one of the world leaders in LSAs.
 
The PiperSport looks pretty cool. Definitely looks a little sportier than the Skycatcher. Just out of curiosity, why do you have so much interest in the Skycatcher vs. other LSAs? I've noticed most of your posts are relating to the 162.
 
swisspilot said:
No way! You can get a nice C150, IFR with Garmin 430, low SMOH, and less then 5000TT for 25K dollars. I saw some nice VFR 150s for less then 20K dollars.

I dunno about the US, but in Europe, where LSA are really popular nobody cares Cessna made an LSA, they will keep flying FDs, Tecnams and Remos.

If I would have to choose I would trust the piper sport more, it's been built by one of the world leaders in LSAs.
Click to expand...

Yes I know you can get a 150 with 5000tt for 25k

Find one with less than 1000tt and tell me what the price is.
 
trafficinsight said:
Personally, I think that the LSA market had zero credibility until Cessna threw their hat into the ring, then it really took off. It may be middle of the road in terms of performance and load and whatever else, but it'll be easy to fly, plentiful, aluminum, and well supported.
Click to expand...

What? Cessna's afterthought of the market is what makes me question them as a company. They got in the game so late, with an airplane that is so underwhelming in the market, that the only reason the thing is selling is because of the name. If it didn't have the name Cessna on it, it might sell 100 planes.

As of August 2010, they had less than 1.5% of the total number of S-LSA's delivered within the United States (http://www.bydanjohnson.com/Sidebar.cfm?Article_ID=1344). No matter what Cessna does, its going to take a long, long time for them to catch up.
 
WildcatPilot said:
The PiperSport looks pretty cool. Definitely looks a little sportier than the Skycatcher. Just out of curiosity, why do you have so much interest in the Skycatcher vs. other LSAs? I've noticed most of your posts are relating to the 162.
Click to expand...

I don't know why I like it, I guess because of the cool Garmin G300. I guess I mainly like LSAs with a 2 blade prop, high wing or low wing, doesn't matter, a 80-100 hp engine, and with flaps. I do like other LSAs. The Tecnam P2008 looks very sleek and sexy and the Tecnam Eaglet closely resembles a 150/152, only it got a Rotax engine and there's 2 throttles on the Eaglet. (I wonder if you can get an Eaglet with one throttle only?)
 
To the OP: You're right, Cessna really ought to use social media more effectively for marketing the Skycatcher. But a Facebook page won't make or break anything, regardless of the manufacturer or aircraft. We're talking about a $100k+ vehicle. Much bigger factors come in to play than if the vehicle has a Facebook page or not.

To everyone talking about how a 5000 hour Cessna 150 is basically the same as a Skycatcher...that's cool, go have fun banging around in an old C-150.

I've probably got 500+ hours in the 150/152 series and I just got my first 45 minutes in a Skycatcher last week. There's no comparison. The Skycatcher is faster, more comfortable, better ergonomics, climbs *significantly* better, has better visibility, better avionics, better ventilation, a sportier feel...it's a new plane.

Heck, look at the flight training industry. How many really good, busy, profitable flight schools are running vintage 172s compared to the new R- or S-model 172s? Sure, the old stuff is out there, but it's becoming more and more rare. The new planes are generally the money makers, the old stuff generally isn't.

But this topic has been beaten to death. Go have fun flying whatever you want to fly. I, personally, can't wait to get our Skycatcher.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
What? Cessna's afterthought of the market is what makes me question them as a company. They got in the game so late, with an airplane that is so underwhelming in the market, that the only reason the thing is selling is because of the name. If it didn't have the name Cessna on it, it might sell 100 planes.

As of August 2010, they had less than 1.5% of the total number of S-LSA's delivered within the United States (http://www.bydanjohnson.com/Sidebar.cfm?Article_ID=1344). No matter what Cessna does, its going to take a long, long time for them to catch up.
Click to expand...


Quoted directly from your link:

The theory is that when Cessna (and Cirrus) first announced LSA projects, the existing LSA market benefitted from the validation this represented. Cessna studied long and hard and concluded, "Yes, we are sure a market for a Light-Sport Aircraft exists."
Click to expand...
 
jrh said:
To the OP: You're right, Cessna really ought to use social media more effectively for marketing the Skycatcher. But a Facebook page won't make or break anything, regardless of the manufacturer or aircraft. We're talking about a $100k+ vehicle. Much bigger factors come in to play than if the vehicle has a Facebook page or not.

To everyone talking about how a 5000 hour Cessna 150 is basically the same as a Skycatcher...that's cool, go have fun banging around in an old C-150.

I've probably got 500+ hours in the 150/152 series and I just got my first 45 minutes in a Skycatcher last week. There's no comparison. The Skycatcher is faster, more comfortable, better ergonomics, climbs *significantly* better, has better visibility, better avionics, better ventilation, a sportier feel...it's a new plane.

Heck, look at the flight training industry. How many really good, busy, profitable flight schools are running vintage 172s compared to the new R- or S-model 172s? Sure, the old stuff is out there, but it's becoming more and more rare. The new planes are generally the money makers, the old stuff generally isn't.

But this topic has been beaten to death. Go have fun flying whatever you want to fly. I, personally, can't wait to get our Skycatcher.
Click to expand...

well said! I dont think the primary market for the SkyCatcher is going to be pilots using the medical cert loophole. Its going to be used for primary training for Private Pilots! I cant imagine a more economical way to get students who want to fly a new aircraft for thier training! Of course there is always the lightsport only crowd too and with the 162, you an serve both. Its a win win situation to me. I am sure flight schools that buy these will be renting them quite a bit!

Of course there are other LSA's out there, but I would buy the Cessna just because its a Cessna. They lead the light aircraft market and can support thier product. I am pretty sure Cessna will still be around in 10+ years, long after these other LSA only manufactures in Europe or wherever have disappeared.
 
SIUav8er said:
Of course there are other LSA's out there, but I would buy the Cessna just because its a Cessna. They lead the light aircraft market and can support thier product. I am pretty sure Cessna will still be around in 10+ years, long after these other LSA only manufactures in Europe or wherever have disappeared.
Click to expand...

Another interesting point for people to consider: parts availability in the future.

I just found this out when I went to the Cessna headquarters last week. There are no "FAA/PMA" parts for ASTM light sport aircraft. Nor can you fabricate a part or get field approval for it. If something breaks, the only way to fix it is to get the part from the original manufacturer.

If you can't get a part (like if the manufacturer goes belly up), you're SOL. The only way to keep the aircraft flying is to reclassify it as experimental...not exactly a viable solution for a flight school.

I'm confident Cessna will last in to the future...Remos, Tecnam, and all the other LSA manufacturers...who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top