[Username Protected]

What are the members thoughts on the Icon Operating Agreement? Here is a snippet from an email I sent the company a while back.

One longstanding annoyance of mine with Icon is the Operating Agreement. As a backgrounder, I have owned three Cirrus SR22, two Eclipse 500, a Carbon Cub, two Phenom 100, and one Phenom 300. Planes capable of flying at 450 kts and 45,000 ft.


None of those purchases have had anything resembling the convoluted Operating Agreement that Icon does. I don't understand the point of it other than being a roadblock to sales. If I break a condition of the agreement, is Icon really going take a customer to arbitration? And to what recourse?


As you ramp up production and have higher sales goals, I think the current operating agreement will be such a roadblock for sales - especially when selling to existing pilots - that the leadership team will have to start looking at alternative means of achieving the same goals. Usually these matters are left to the FARs or incorporated into the Operating Limitations of the POH.


People are going to do stupid things that hurt themselves and the brand regardless of a piece of paper. I don't see how the operating agreement contributes much other than as an obstacle to close. I did some research of Icon affinity in various online pilot communities last year before I purchased #111 and the consensus seems to be neat plane (bit expensive, bit underpowered) but draconian company. That is a disconnect from what I believe is the true ethos of Icon.


Same on the indemnity waiver, isn't it easier to raise the price by 10k and just avoid having the conversation during the sales process altogether? If the plane was 150k, sure 10k starts to matter. At 350k it doesn't move the needle. If someone is looking for savings it can be offered as an "up-sell" instead of negative.