tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post8234910287931809595..comments2023-09-17T04:46:20.879-07:00Comments on Eclipse Aviation Critic NG: Now THIS is the way to communicate bad newsShane Pricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07181451780244241883noreply@blogger.comBlogger176125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-30388988719729929922008-05-09T04:23:00.000-07:002008-05-09T04:23:00.000-07:00I know with all the new "news", the response was d...I know with all the new "news", the response was delayed a couple of days, but how ironic it would have been if it had been filed on a Tuesday....eclipsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11539880484640754973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-40413539930698554042008-05-08T23:20:00.000-07:002008-05-08T23:20:00.000-07:00Gorak -To start with, let me give you a couple of ...Gorak -<BR/><BR/>To start with, let me give you a couple of tissues - that was <I>quite</I> the ejaculation...<BR/><BR/>"1. None of the blog contributors have been subpoenaed. Yet."<BR/><BR/>Google <I>has</I> been subpoenaed - specifically for their identities. It would be a reasonable inference that the purpose of it is to subpoena the contributors so as to suppress public discourse on a matter of public interest.<BR/><BR/>"2. Just because someone doesn't appear on the list, doesn't mean that they won't be named later in a related suit."<BR/><BR/>I ... keep ... hoping.<BR/><BR/>"3. Why would someone who has never signed an NDA be named? Could be because EAC wants to subpoena them to reveal a source who may have violated an NDA, even if the blogger himself was not subject to it."<BR/><BR/>Bzzzzzt! Check your caselaw WRT Apple.<BR/><BR/>"some of you may be thinking about journalists being able to protect their sources, but that applies only to bonafide journalists, most assuredly not to mere bloggers."<BR/><BR/>Bzzzzzt! You haven't been keeping up on this stuff, have you? Bloggers ARE journalists, and caselaw has emerged which recognizes that.<BR/><BR/>"4. Some of you are fantasizing that once a judge hears your version of the Eclipse story, he'll throw out the case because of Eclipse's behavior."<BR/><BR/>Nope. (S)he'll throw it out because of protections afforded to anonymous speech by the First Amendment.<BR/><BR/>"The behaviors you are alleging have nothing to do with an NDA violation tort."<BR/><BR/>What are these "NDA violation torts" of which you speak? Though Vern made some public noise about such a thing, it sounded more like the cursing of a man experiencing a really bad bowel movement. Public posturing & court filings are frequently completely disconnected from each other. There is no public information available to suggest that anybody here, or anyplace else, has violated an NDA. Are you revealing non-public information? Are YOU violating a court order by revealing the terms of sealed court documents? Or are you just logging in and making scary faces at us?<BR/><BR/>Tell us more...<BR/><BR/>"some of you have tried to justify breaching an NDA because an employee disagrees with the way an employer is behaving"<BR/><BR/>Citation, please? I haven't seen that. And you may wish to review precedent regarding what need not be disclosed WRT to an NDA - sometimes the limitations presented are not deemed reasonable. And a prospective plaintiff has a lot of burdens to satisfy before that muscle may be successfully flexed. I'm not convinced that the Albuquerque Incomplete Aircraft Works has fulfilled those burdens.<BR/><BR/>And I'm still not sure why you keep prattling on about NDAs.<BR/><BR/>"If anyone has ever been a business owner or manager, think back to how many times you've had employees that didn't like the way your company was being run. Now imagine that those employees took their opinion as license to reveal proprietary company information to the public. Is that really the way you want things to work?"<BR/><BR/>I truly appreciate where you're coming from on this, as my stock-in-trade has been "trade secrets" that I developed. And I've taught those methods to hundreds - many who did not agree with me on how I was doing something. Sometimes it was a simple matter of hearing them out, realizing that their idea was valid, and giving them the authority to make it work. Sometimes it was a matter of letting them go into direct competition with me (although I could arrogantly say that I taught them everything they knew and be fundamentally right - I didn't teach them everything *I* know - heh, heh). I look around the region in which I work, and there are a DOZEN competitors started by people who got their start with me. I'm quite proud of that. And <I>every one of them</I> had a significant difference of opinion of how it should be done. We're all still friends - and furthermore, I'm kicking their asses in the market *I'm* interested in. Sometimes I'll see that they're still doing something I "invented" 15 years ago and berate them because I've since adopted something somebody else thought of that works better for less money. Who thought of it? Somebody else who disagreed with me.<BR/><BR/>Open exchange of techniques & ideas (including disagreements) has made ALL of us stronger - and best of all, customers like the results. This ain't a nuclear arms race - no need for Big Secrecy...<BR/><BR/>"5. Finally, I think that Vern Raburn would have ample grounds for a defamation lawsuit, if he could ever find out who some of the libelous bloggers were."<BR/><BR/>Vern Raburn is a limited-purpose public figure, who has solicited and spent upwards of a billion investor dollars on a project that by all appearances is an abject failure when compared to what he promised. And who has promoted that effort VERY publically. The threshold for defamation is quite high for somebody in his shoes. It would require actual malice - something that is not evident here. To a man, I believe that everybody here at one point or another has hoped for Vern to succeed at this. But the free pass long ago expired, and his actions have made him subject to public criticism commensurate with his actions, and with the incongruity between his words & those actions. Sometimes criticism does *not* take the form of polite disagreement.<BR/><BR/>When Vern's response to it is to attempt suing the critics rather than STANDING AND DELIVERING, the result can easily be predicted.<BR/><BR/>"Hey, wait a minute, he just might end up with some of that information."<BR/><BR/>On that notion, I will politely disagree with you.<BR/><BR/>"Gunner, does your attorney know that you are defaming Vern Raburn? One doesn't have to look any further than this thread to find examples. You might ask your lawyer if you are opening yourself to any liability with your name-calling."<BR/><BR/>Name-calling of a non-performing public figure is not defamation. It does not fulfill the definition of actual malice. It's name-calling. If Vern's tender sensibilities are wounded - tough titty. Send him home to mommy for some mother's milk.<BR/><BR/>"And by the way, saying that it is just your opinion is NOT a defense."<BR/><BR/>Check Norwood. The First Amendment affords more rights to ideological communication than to commercial speech.<BR/><BR/>HTH HAND<BR/><BR/>Would you like fries or pie with that?<BR/>IANALPawnShophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07091676046998796061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-36403436310598817652008-05-08T22:37:00.000-07:002008-05-08T22:37:00.000-07:00WooHoo!Karen Di Piazza, you are MY personal hero! ...WooHoo!<BR/><BR/>Karen Di Piazza, you are MY personal hero! A journalist who truly understands the Bill of Rights of The Constitution of the United States of America! <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.charterx.com/resources/article.aspx?id=3313" REL="nofollow">Read Karen's Sitrep Here</A><BR/><BR/>Ms. Di Piazza, wherever you are, we don't see thoughts like the following expressed by many of the talking heads who bring us the news these days:<BR/><I>"Legal documents aren't known for being a good read, however, the legal response is interesting; it might provoke thought and consideration of how important it is as an American to be able to practice expression of speech."</I><BR/><BR/>Good on ya, KDP!<BR/><BR/>Oh, and Mr. Gadfly. I have a strong suspicion you'll not be receiving an invite to Vern's Christmas Party this year. <BR/>GunnerRich Lucibellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03317914081455082454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-47794126282815347732008-05-08T22:25:00.000-07:002008-05-08T22:25:00.000-07:00Gorak-What can I possibly say that hasn't been art...Gorak-<BR/>What can I possibly say that hasn't been articulated to perfection already. Nada.<BR/><BR/>I do, however, reserve the right to respond where my name is invoked in vain. Specifically, "<I>Gunner, does your attorney know that you are defaming Vern Raburn? One doesn't have to look any further than this thread to find examples. You might ask your lawyer if you are opening yourself to any liability with your name-calling. And by the way, saying that it is just your opinion is NOT a defense.</I>"<BR/><BR/>Oh, I think I've just wet my pants from fear. <BR/><BR/>Without further ado, I's like to publicly apologize to all the cowards, humps and tools of the world whom I've defamed by linking them to Vern Raburn. They probably deserved better from me and may, in fact, have a cause for action against me.<BR/><BR/>Now, you'll have to excuse me while I reset my Twit Filter. It's being continually tripped.<BR/>GunnerRich Lucibellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03317914081455082454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-25346913836393938022008-05-08T22:10:00.000-07:002008-05-08T22:10:00.000-07:00To CW and Dave,Great response to "Gorak". To "Gor...To CW and Dave,<BR/><BR/>Great response to "Gorak". <BR/><BR/>To "Gorak", Vern, or whoever you are, you are so far out of your league it isn't even funny.<BR/><BR/>If you're going play with the big boys, you need to bring your A game, if you have one.<BR/><BR/>Never the less, you are hysterical. Keep 'em coming!<BR/><BR/>Fondly,<BR/><BR/>MagicskyTeresa Klinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12286093253367215395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-62208360618257911962008-05-08T21:47:00.000-07:002008-05-08T21:47:00.000-07:00GAMA numbers for Q1 have been released. Total sal...GAMA numbers for Q1 have been released. Total sales were $5.3B, yes, Beeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllioooooon, for 781 units. <BR/><BR/>Eclipse reported 52 deliveries for $64M in revenues - about $1.23M each. A far cry from the predicted 1 per day rate, made only in January. <BR/><BR/>This did amount to a respectable 6.6% of units, but only about 1% of billings, when there are only 24 reporting companies, with several like Maule, Gippsland, Piaggio that report no or almost no sales.<BR/><BR/>By comparison, Diamond delivered just over 100 planes for about $37M.<BR/><BR/>Falcon delivered 15 jets for $503M.<BR/><BR/>Gulfstream delivered 37 jets for $1.28B - yes, Beeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllioooooon.<BR/><BR/>Cessna delivered 226 aircraft for $955M - including 15 Mustangs, 38 CJ's of varying stripes, and 43 Citations - a total of 96 jets.<BR/><BR/>Hawker-Beech delivered 72 aircraft worth $331M, including 20 jets from Premier to Hawker 900XP.<BR/><BR/>That dinosaur Bombardier delivered 67 jets, worth $1.64B, yes, Beeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllioooooon.<BR/><BR/>So we see that other OEM's have no problem keeping up with the delivery rate at Eclipse.<BR/><BR/>The fundamental difference remains that where none of the aircraft delivered by the other companies were partially functional, none of the planes delivered by Eclipse were fully functioning, not one.ColdWetMackarelofRealityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15946506673589233990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-88086090911399973052008-05-08T21:37:00.000-07:002008-05-08T21:37:00.000-07:00Also in honor of Borat:http://www.avweb.com/avwebf...Also in honor of Borat:<BR/>http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/briefs/186918-1.html<BR/>http://www.abqjournal.com/biz/157783business04-04-04.htm<BR/>Vern by his own statements on transarency is forcing a comparison between Eclipse and Enron, Tyco and Parmalat. Vern by his own previous statements on transparency can lead one to believe that Eclipse is not confident in what it's been telling people and that by extension the lawsuit was a no confidence vote in Eclipse's credibility.Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08301246864437379349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-89548106646663856612008-05-08T21:21:00.000-07:002008-05-08T21:21:00.000-07:00Nice to see Borat decided to add some comedy to th...Nice to see Borat decided to add some comedy to the thread!<BR/><BR/><I>2. Just because someone doesn't appear on the list, doesn't mean that they won't be named later in a related suit.</I><BR/><BR/>You're right! Sometime later I'm waiting for the feds to put Vern in an orange jumpsuit. Just because it hasn't happened it, you're very correct that in the future it could happen.<BR/><BR/><I>3. Why would someone who has never signed an NDA be named? Could be because EAC wants to subpoena them to reveal a source who may have violated an NDA, even if the blogger himself was not subject to it. By the way, some of you may be thinking about journalists being able to protect their sources, but that applies only to bonafide journalists, most assuredly not to mere bloggers.</I><BR/><BR/>Now you're encouraging people to leak whatever Eclipse-related information they have to "bonafide journalists."<BR/><BR/><I>Protection of journalistic sources is also a matter of state, not federal law.</I><BR/><BR/>Eclipse didn't file a federal lawsuit. The subpoena is being done through the California State Court. Doh! Brilliant lawyering on Eclipse's part by the way taking so long to even get a valid subpoena to the California Courts.<BR/><BR/><I>And, some of you have tried to justify breaching an NDA because an employee disagrees with the way an employer is behaving. If anyone has ever been a business owner or manager, think back to how many times you've had employees that didn't like the way your company was being run. Now imagine that those employees took their opinion as license to reveal proprietary company information to the public. Is that really the way you want things to work?<BR/><BR/>5. Finally, I think that Vern Raburn would have ample grounds for a defamation lawsuit, if he could ever find out who some of the libelous bloggers were. Hey, wait a minute, he just might end up with some of that information.</I><BR/><BR/>So now you are claiming that Vern personally lied to the media by claiming the lawsuit was about "lies and rumors" by people who were speculating. You are trying a quite obviously comical janus-faced approach of on one hand saying this blog is too accurate while on the other hand this blog isn't accurate at all while further eroding Vern's credibility that what he says is the truth.<BR/><BR/><I>Gunner, does your attorney know that you are defaming Vern Raburn? One doesn't have to look any further than this thread to find examples. You might ask your lawyer if you are opening yourself to any liability with your name-calling. And by the way, saying that it is just your opinion is NOT a defense.</I><BR/><BR/>This is the funniest paragraph of all! Vern is crying his eyes out WAH WAH WAH because somebody called him a coward. Da poor lil baby! Trying to do the lawyer act that name-calling isn't allowed just shows how ridiculous your whole post is - name-calling (unless it's racial/sexist) isn't something compensable and it just make Vern and Eclipse look incredibly weak to consider that even an option.<BR/><BR/>It was also obvious that your post was a joke because of the ID you selected:<BR/>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gorak<BR/>And also if what you said was true, it would apply to you as well...if the bloggers here aren't protected and you blog here ergo you are not protected.<BR/><BR/>I hope that's not your last post since you sound funny attempting legalspeak with something anyone in 1L could see right through as hogwash. It would be great for Vern to be connected to some wannabe lawyer saying that people can't call Vern names or else he might sue them - that would be great for Eclipse PR!Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08301246864437379349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-28564639326288596222008-05-08T21:19:00.000-07:002008-05-08T21:19:00.000-07:00Gorak,Welcome. First off, nobody has declared vic...Gorak,<BR/><BR/>Welcome. <BR/><BR/>First off, nobody has declared victory, you need to read more carefully before slandering/libeling we anonymous bloggers and accusing us of things we are not being accused of by the person or company in question.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, I don't believe anyone was encouraging violation of NDAs - there were questions about the doctrine of unclean hands. NDA's by the way are notoriously difficult to enforce. I have had employees caught, redhanded, breaking NDA's and causing actual damages - still tough to prove/prosecute.<BR/><BR/>How familiar are you with the Eclipse project, the promises made, made again and then remade for good measure? <BR/><BR/>How about the performance of the company to those very public promises it has made?<BR/><BR/>Do you work for Vern?<BR/><BR/>Why not use your real name?<BR/><BR/>Did you know Gorak is a name appearing in both Star Trek and Star Wars stories?<BR/><BR/>Did you know Goraks are monsters from a video game?<BR/><BR/>Did you know that Gorak means 'bitter' in Croatian?<BR/><BR/>Does your wife own an Eclipse?<BR/><BR/>Given that there are significant rumors that Vern himself could well be accused of real world slander and libel in regards to former employees (not to mention the threatening letter sent out), I think a defamation suit should be the last thing on his agenda - the spotlight it would force would very likely backfire - kind of like picking on the 1st Amendment - but then again, he does seem to have a problem making those critical decisions.<BR/><BR/>You should try to learn about recent court decisions re: internet anonymity when considered against confidentiality/NDA and the high burden that the courts have been enforcing as necessary to pierce the veil so to speak.<BR/><BR/>The net Eclipse tried to cast is far too wide and burdensome when compared to the 1st Amendment rights IMO, but a Judge will decide that soon enough. I am honored to be considered worthy of a fishing trip by a billion dollar company, but I have absolutley nothing to do with the sealed case that the subpoena was issued for. Remember, in the US we are presumed innocent until proven guilty - that bar is rather high, by design.<BR/><BR/>Do you suppose Vern is drawing up papers for the Business Week article? The AIN Online headline? CharterX?<BR/><BR/>Richard Aboulafia at Teal has been a skeptic since day one. How about Mac at Flying? Clay Lacy?<BR/><BR/>When the book is written about this adventure, the only difference at the end of the day between we bloggers and the mainstream industry media will be we broke/predicted the stories earlier and with more flavor and a witty sense of humor.<BR/><BR/>Also, the blog is greater than the sum of its parts, we have each been both right and wrong with individual predictions, but the overal blog record is far better and more accurate than Eclipse has been.<BR/><BR/>In any case, welcome to our blog - we appreciate a good Eclipse apologist.ColdWetMackarelofRealityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15946506673589233990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-12091085084715333402008-05-08T20:23:00.000-07:002008-05-08T20:23:00.000-07:00Some comments:1. None of the blog contributors hav...Some comments:<BR/><BR/>1. None of the blog contributors have been subpoenaed. Yet.<BR/><BR/>2. Just because someone doesn't appear on the list, doesn't mean that they won't be named later in a related suit. For example, the identities of Stan B., Shane P., and Gunner are already known, so there is no need to subpoena Google to discover their identity.<BR/><BR/>3. Why would someone who has never signed an NDA be named? Could be because EAC wants to subpoena them to reveal a source who may have violated an NDA, even if the blogger himself was not subject to it. By the way, some of you may be thinking about journalists being able to protect their sources, but that applies only to bonafide journalists, most assuredly not to mere bloggers. Protection of journalistic sources is also a matter of state, not federal law.<BR/><BR/>4. Some of you are fantasizing that once a judge hears your version of the Eclipse story, he'll throw out the case because of Eclipse's behavior. Wrong. The behaviors you are alleging have nothing to do with an NDA violation tort.<BR/><BR/>And, some of you have tried to justify breaching an NDA because an employee disagrees with the way an employer is behaving. If anyone has ever been a business owner or manager, think back to how many times you've had employees that didn't like the way your company was being run. Now imagine that those employees took their opinion as license to reveal proprietary company information to the public. Is that really the way you want things to work?<BR/><BR/>5. Finally, I think that Vern Raburn would have ample grounds for a defamation lawsuit, if he could ever find out who some of the libelous bloggers were. Hey, wait a minute, he just might end up with some of that information.<BR/><BR/>Gunner, does your attorney know that you are defaming Vern Raburn? One doesn't have to look any further than this thread to find examples. You might ask your lawyer if you are opening yourself to any liability with your name-calling. And by the way, saying that it is just your opinion is NOT a defense.<BR/><BR/>GAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-4890578796381303372008-05-08T19:25:00.000-07:002008-05-08T19:25:00.000-07:00When I worked for one of the major airlines, our c...When I worked for one of the major airlines, our company store sold Leggo (tm) planes with our logo, incluing the little marshallers and tug. (hardest dang plane I ever worked on). As my grandkids keep finding it, a piece goes here, one there. As I look here at it (what's left, I smile as I think of the little jet that could have been. (except for those darn missing pieces)<BR/><BR/>To the workers at EAC, (you guys know who I'm talking to), maybe things will lighten up now that this has all come to a head. WE know who needs to go and although Vern tops the list, there are more who enabled it. Yea Todd, you know who I'm talking about. And as far as the threatening email, whoever wrote it did not have the nads to reply and even got scared enough to delete the account. Nothing here to hide as I said in the reply. (Shane and Rich know) and are free to post it. <BR/><BR/>To everyone one here, it's been great being a part of this. Cold Wet and Gadfly need to be on stanby the next writer's strike.<BR/><BR/>You can't buy stuff like this....eclipsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11539880484640754973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-29612311325683833732008-05-08T19:06:00.000-07:002008-05-08T19:06:00.000-07:00StevenH-Just 'cuz there's already a Barbie Jet, it...StevenH-<BR/><BR/>Just 'cuz there's <I>already</I> a Barbie Jet, it doesn't disqualify either candidate. <A HREF="http://www.funkandjunk.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=30_98&products_id=14021&zenid=386dbb77433aef8b0f37d21f35ac21ff" REL="nofollow">The Fisher Price Jet</A> looks a lot like my beloved NextTuesdayJet, and the pilots head swivels back & forth with a complete lack of cognizance - just like they train dentists to do in South Africa...PawnShophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07091676046998796061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-69763510922238222002008-05-08T19:05:00.000-07:002008-05-08T19:05:00.000-07:00This day is called the feast of Subpoena: He that ...This day is called the feast of Subpoena:<BR/> <BR/>He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,<BR/> <BR/>Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,<BR/> <BR/>And rouse him at the name of the Vernster.<BR/> <BR/>He that shall live this day, and see old age,<BR/> <BR/>Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,<BR/> <BR/>And say 'To-morrow is Subpoena Day:'<BR/> <BR/>Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.<BR/> <BR/>And say 'These wounds I had on Subpoena Day.'<BR/> <BR/>Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,<BR/> <BR/>But he'll remember with advantages<BR/> <BR/>What feats he did that day: then shall our names.<BR/> <BR/>Familiar in his mouth as household words,<BR/> <BR/>Gunner the Gladiator, Norman the Advocate,<BR/> <BR/>Shane of Eire, Bloggers and Blogettes,<BR/> <BR/>Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.<BR/> <BR/>This story shall the good man teach his son;<BR/> <BR/>And Subpoena Day shall ne'er go by,<BR/> <BR/>From this day to the ending of the world,<BR/> <BR/>But we in it shall be remember'd;<BR/> <BR/>We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;<BR/> <BR/>For he to-day that sheds his blood with me<BR/> <BR/>Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,<BR/> <BR/>This day shall gentle his condition:<BR/> <BR/>And gentlemen in the land now a-bed<BR/> <BR/>Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,<BR/> <BR/>And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks<BR/> <BR/>That fought with us upon Subpoena Day"<BR/><BR/>With apologies to William Shakespeare and Henry V.Black Tuliphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657938226341343450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-28571071421841216552008-05-08T18:55:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:55:00.000-07:0068 listings on controller....an all time highre-sa...68 listings on controller....<BR/><BR/>an all time high<BR/><BR/>re-sale values must be skyrocketing!<BR/><BR/>Think anyones figger'n since Dayjet is not taking their planes any time soon - cannot say cancelled their order, right? - the end is very near...<BR/><BR/>I guess when you have a "2700 card" house of cards, and you yank out say 1400 of them... the whole house falls?<BR/><BR/>Dayjets the last company Vern's worried about.airtaximanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12977944795556689805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-33566227294564737012008-05-08T18:34:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:34:00.000-07:00> Vote 1 for "Barbie Doll Jet"Sorry - the Barbie D...> Vote 1 for "Barbie Doll Jet"<BR/><BR/>Sorry - the Barbie Doll Jet already exists and is a 737 Classic. My baby sister had one back in the 70s and I used to help her tow it around the house. At that time Barbie was a flight attendent; today I think the set comes with both pilot and FA uniforms.<BR/><BR/>sPhsphealeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00170553526763720025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-47546793698915273492008-05-08T18:30:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:30:00.000-07:00Isn't a Critic lovefest just what the Dr. ordered ...Isn't a Critic lovefest just what the Dr. ordered on the eve of another life lesson for one Vern Raburn, late of Albuquerque New Mexico?<BR/><BR/>First off, major kudos and thanks to Gunner for taking up the challenge and to one of us for taking on the burden of being John Doe #1 for the purposes of our collective defense.<BR/><BR/>Second, no matter how this all plays out, I must say that I am proud to have been even a small part of this effort.<BR/><BR/>Third, I have seen an advance copy of the Motion to Quash and I want to issue kudo's to Norman and the legal team, nicely done.<BR/><BR/>Because it seems to have been lost on the Faithful and of course the subject of our criticism and satire, I want to say again what most of we critics have repeatedly said - we really wish that we were wrong and that there was no need for our critical eye.<BR/><BR/>Would that Vern had quietly led a revolution marked not by outrageous claims, unmet promises and resultant lowered expectation, but rather by successful execution after successful execution - resulting in the advanced and remarkable plane they promised, not the partially functional incomplete preemie jet they have rushed out the door in pursuit of 'unprecedented production'.<BR/><BR/>To my fellow critics, it has been, remains and will continue be a pleasure to serve with you.<BR/><BR/>To the employees of Eclipse and Dayjet - we have routinely tried to go out of our way to separate you from the 'leadership' you have suffered under but I will do so again. We have not, do not, and will not wish you any harm - we want you to find security, stability and respect from leadership.<BR/><BR/>To the Faithful Following of the Church of Flyantology, otherwise known as the 'diehard' (thanks for that one Vern), we still hope you get the plane you thought you were buying, and we forgive you for the most ridiculous of your apologist shenanigans for L. Vern Raburn, the galactic overlord Vernu.<BR/><BR/>And lastly to the reason for all this hubbub, Vern.<BR/><BR/>There are simply not enough words Vern to describe how we got here, but I will give it a shot in no particular order: Hubris, Arrogance, Dishonest, Misleading, Disengenuous, and Bully.<BR/><BR/>The higher the run, the harder the fall Vern - none of this was necessary had you simply done what you said you would do.ColdWetMackarelofRealityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15946506673589233990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-23057006408382707662008-05-08T18:28:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:28:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.ColdWetMackarelofRealityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15946506673589233990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-12528068933679638792008-05-08T18:10:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:10:00.000-07:00ATM-Funny you should mention regulation of deposit...ATM-<BR/>Funny you should mention regulation of deposits. Are you aware that in many states, you cannot sell someone a membership to a Health Club without posting a significant bond? Seriously, Gold's Gym in many states must post a bond to be able to sell future services at a discount today.<BR/><BR/>Yet someone like Vern Raburn can CONTINUE to take advance deposits and actually muscle existing Depositors for Progress Payments when even THEY know he can't deliver on time. And he can do that repeatedly and in the very wake of boasting about near insolvency. <BR/><BR/>Personally, I'm not in favor of .gov protecting Man from his own Folly, but just think about it....Gold's Gym can't take $99 from you for next year's Gym Workouts, but Vern can take tens of millions!<BR/><BR/>As to hero's in this struggle, other than Stan and Shane, there is one man here who deserves ENORMOUS credit for his willingness to publicly stand in front of the Response we filed, if that were necessary to give us "standing" with the Court. It has not been, but may yet be required. <BR/><BR/>Now THAT took guts and conviction. When the time comes it's going to be my distinct pleasure to reintroduce him to the Members of this little fraternity.<BR/>GunnerRich Lucibellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03317914081455082454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-73734876409181387892008-05-08T16:25:00.000-07:002008-05-08T16:25:00.000-07:00rich,man, you are amazing!A hearfelt thanks... esp...rich,<BR/><BR/>man, you are amazing!<BR/><BR/>A hearfelt thanks... especialy for the laugh<BR/><BR/>"For those 28 named, you few, you proud, you thorns in the side of disruption, email me if you simply can't wait to read the entire text."<BR/><BR/>As you know, I love the fact that: <BR/>1- we broke the Dayjet 1000 plus order BS story, with taking welcher-Ken up on his offer to bet - he did not go with the $10k wager, eventhough he was SOOOO sure I was wrong. A few weeks later, the story broke about Dayjet having even more order than I gonculated... imagine that?<BR/><BR/>2- how about CW and the grounding of the fleet?<BR/><BR/>3- how about your read on Mike Press, who basically told us Eclipse was almost BK last summer... and your insistance they were out of cash? A few weeks later, in Verns own words: "they almost put us in bankruptcy".<BR/><BR/>4- how about the not-so-revolutionary nature of the little plane that couldn't make it as a taxi? Te BS about how this contraption would revolutionize air taxi? C'mon.<BR/><BR/>... we can make a long thorny list of "intuition, smarts, opinions, and rumor, inuendo, thoughts and ideas..." none of which came as a breach of contract or trust - all of which are apparently poking one of the greatest aviation bullshit artists in the history of mankind (pun intended)...right between the eyes.<BR/><BR/>This guy had every chance to do it right. All the time, money and available talent in the world... and he screwed up so badly - sometimes, it surprises even me - one of the critics' critics.<BR/><BR/>A resonable judge should conclude that the blog has done a service - and more blogs like this need to be created. To protect the public, provide an open forum where ideas and opinions can flow.<BR/><BR/>I sincerely believe that there will be "new rules" set by a regulatory body regardng the collection and management of deposits on airplanes. The treatment of the customer's money is a complete travesty.<BR/><BR/>I would not be surprised if someone goes to jail... and certainly not surprised if the "deposit instruments" are regulated by the SEC - because of Vern and Eclipse.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Gunner.<BR/><BR/>Your friend and co-critic since a few years bac already,<BR/><BR/>ATmanairtaximanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12977944795556689805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-9016145567843543102008-05-08T16:03:00.000-07:002008-05-08T16:03:00.000-07:00If you squeeze the sponge of truth hard enough, li...If you squeeze the sponge of truth hard enough, little by little, the facts begin to dribble out. In the "Business Week" article, we get just a "dribble" . . . "It flies tiny three-passenger Eclipse 500 jets" . . . whereas, most of what we had been led to believe was that the "Eclipse" was a "six place jet".<BR/><BR/>Oh my . . . sure, there was no deceit involved, but just a "half truth" . . . 'just a shade off target.<BR/><BR/>gadfly<BR/><BR/>(A dribble here, a dribble there . . . before you know it, it’s time to get the mop . . . and a big bucket.)gadflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13191372920897029941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-84829153880751322702008-05-08T15:47:00.000-07:002008-05-08T15:47:00.000-07:00flyger,You are of course right, I apologize and ca...flyger,<BR/><BR/>You are of course right, I apologize and can only blame my mistake on old age.chickasawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14045891705532327182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-51574501389605739382008-05-08T15:44:00.000-07:002008-05-08T15:44:00.000-07:00This may seem off track . . . but not really. Six...This may seem off track . . . but not really. Sixty three years ago, today, 8 May 1945, our fathers, grandfathers, and families found a certain sense of relief, as victory in Europe took place . . . “VE Day”. The war would go on for a few more months, as we looked to the “Western Pacific”. . . but victory was in sight. ‘Little did we know how that victory would change all war from that point on. (And the funny thing is that the “ignition” point was right here in New Mexico.)<BR/><BR/>Whether the battle is large, or small, it takes courage which is often lacking at all levels to do that which must be done.<BR/><BR/>One . . . yes, two (or more) stepped up to the plate on behalf of many, who may not be able to speak for themselves . . . for fear of intimidation, or suffering legal battles, etc., far beyond their resources.<BR/><BR/>We owe a debt of thanks, to those, who speak on behalf of the weaker members of the aviation community. Granted, some of us have little to risk. But others have put their money where their mouth is . . . and dare to carry on.<BR/><BR/>On behalf of us all,<BR/><BR/>Thank you!gadflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13191372920897029941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-35181711050210300442008-05-08T15:42:00.000-07:002008-05-08T15:42:00.000-07:00DayJet called a "debacle":http://www.usnews.com/bl...DayJet called a "debacle":<BR/>http://www.usnews.com/blogs/money-matters/2008/05/08/the-latest-in-the-airline-debacle.html<BR/>The Ed And Vern Show went out of their way to get international publicity, but the downside of that is when things head south...<BR/><BR/>I'm still perplexed that after all of DayJet's media saturation they only got 1500 people registered, 500 people who flew at least once and a backbone of only 50 people. Perhaps things look that bad at Eclipse too, just Vern can cover it up with phantom orders and wookies.Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08301246864437379349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-11448298465254949782008-05-08T15:41:00.001-07:002008-05-08T15:41:00.001-07:00Rich,You are the type person that keeps this count...Rich,<BR/>You are the type person that keeps this country strong. A heatfelt thanks for all you've done. As all of us, you surely had more to do with your time, but took the ball and ran with it. This blog has brought together some of the finest minds in the industry. Being from Florida, I have brothers in St Pete and owe you dinner next trip.<BR/><BR/>Shane, <BR/>We all owe you a toast of the finest ale made. I don't know how close to Shannon you are, but will contact you before my next visit there. Drinks and dinner all night on me. <BR/><BR/>THANKS to all here for being open and calling down the BS at the 505.eclipsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11539880484640754973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3817101653623448889.post-28639889443522695822008-05-08T15:41:00.000-07:002008-05-08T15:41:00.000-07:00chickasaw said...flyger,The manufacturing of the 5...chickasaw said...<BR/><BR/><I>flyger,<BR/><BR/>The manufacturing of the 500 is very labor intensive.</I><BR/><BR/>Flying it is not.<BR/><BR/>You need to read more closely, the comment was about 160 people left at DayJet which is more than 13 people per each of the 12 remaining EA500s DayJet is using. So this had nothing to do with Eclipse manufacturing.<BR/><BR/>Got it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com