Looking Over Just A Few More Of the Questions Raised By The Icon Aircraft Fiasco

News/Analysis/Commentary by Jim Campbell, ANN CEO/Editor-In-Chief

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft, which has yet to produce a single airplane delivered to a real-live customer, can 'slow down production' and have much of the aero-media report it just that way?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can blow through 85 million dollars, that we know of, without producing a single real delivery of a production airplane and have it reported as a 'temporary setback?'

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can put forth a highly restrictive 40 page sales contract, defend it for weeks on end as a product of the 'Genius' of the company's leadership... and not have it reported for what it was -- a huge mistake that shows that the company has little knowledge of who their customer is and how to serve their interests in a lasting manner?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can take 10 years developing an amphibious aircraft that will NOT outperform much of their competition, and cost as much as $100K (or more), without having to answer questions about the competence of their business plan, management, R&D team, and overall approach to serving the sport aviation market?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can continue to throw wild parties, host massive booths and displays at events/airshows/conventions, spend lavishly on PR functions, blow though an incredible money and NOT have to answer for such foolishness... even while everyone in the industry saw this and so few spoke up about it?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can limit/obfuscate access to information about their problems and issues, even barring the few journalists that wrote critical/credible reports on their 'progress' and not earn the suspicion and enmity of most other journalists?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can issue instructions to journalists demanding control over what they write about their aircraft without the rest of the aero-media community condemning it for what it is... an Un-American, noncredible attempt to paint an unrealistic rosy picture while hiding their faults and pulling one over on the flying public?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can continue to be run by managers who have led this company so poorly that, in 10 years and some 85 million dollars, they have failed to produce a single delivered customer airplane, have admitted that production is too hard (even months after supposedly starting production), has alienated hundreds of members of their customer base, and made so many conflicting statements that it's hard to understand what story they're telling (this time) from day to day? Does someone at Icon have naked pictures of important people with small animals or something? When do you get rid of those who can't do the job and get some folks who can?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft, that has blown through the better part of 85 million dollars (and admits that it will have to blow through even more) convince investors that this thing has a chance to make a buck? Even if Icon makes the incredible sum of $50K per airplane, they're going to have to produce some 1700 airplanes just to break even... and after all this nonsense has transpired, do they really believe that they're going to keep enough of their reported customer base (even if it has big as they say) or sell enough new airplanes to get anywhere near break-even?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft can fool so many general journalists and quite a number of aero-writers into writing fluffy, incredible, glowing stories on aircraft that do not live up to their promise, that can't do what was committed to when the project was introduced, that have had SO many mis-steps -- and still be hailed as the second coming? Worse still; why are the few journalists that have tried to write critical and credible stories about this mess taking flak and getting attacked for it? Does it matter that much of what has been positively written about this debacle is, at best, hot air?

How is it that a company like Icon Aircraft might come back from this... without admitting the truth of their foul-ups, while trying to paint everything as temporary setbacks -- all the while laying off people and telling customers that have waited for years, that they have to wait some more? The smart money says they can't... not with the current corporate structure, not with the current management, and not with the growing cloud (which is still not nearly as large as it should be) that is finally gathering over them now that a few reports are starting to prove that the emperor needs a new wardrobe?

OK... that's a few of the many questions that have been raised in the last few days, except for one thing -- After the aviation industry managed to survive scandals like Bede Aircraft, Revolution Helicopter, and so many others -- with varying degrees of lasting damage -- how will the rest of the industry fare in light of Icon's shortcomings, falsehoods, failings and the growing scandal that is beginning to appear as if this might become one of the biggest sport aviation business disasters of all time?

These questions MUST be considered... answers must be found, and this industry needs to commit itself to building a lasting rep for integrity, honest and credibility that we believe to have been sorely missing from the Icon experience... and from which we believe this industry will feel much pain and experience much damage.

FMI: ANN Readers... What say you?