My comment about buying an airplane was slightly tongue-in-cheek. But what all commentators here have done is trying to base predictions for the future on extrapolating the past 20 years or so.
Let’s say we get annual inflation rates of 10 %. If we assume that interest rates continue to stay low for a while after inflation picks up, the nominal value of your plane should go up by 10 % each year (all things equal i.e. you maintain it to the same condition). You can then spend 10 % of the plane’s value on hangarage, maintenance, engine fund and insurance each year, and you get a plane to fly “for free”. 
The fallacy in my argument is that it works only if interest paid on cash remains at zero.
Well, for now the policy rate of the Swiss National Bank is negative at -0.75%
WhiskeyPapa wrote:
The carrying cost of the investment
Yes, the costs of owning an airplane are high, but the point of my question was not to think of the aircraft as an investment compared to real estate or stocks (i.e. appreciate, generate a return etc..) but to use as “material value money storage”. For instance a 150k C172, well kept, will sell in 5 years for how much?
Rwy20 wrote:
The fallacy in my argument is that it works only if interest paid on cash remains at zero.
Wouldn’t the same hold true if the plane is paid for in cash?
Snoopy wrote:
Wouldn’t the same hold true if the plane is paid for in cash?
Nope unless your aircraft value increases exactly as the global inflation index otherwise you need a mix of credit and cash for capital costs 
WhiskeyPapa point on carry is very important as much as the happiness from flying it to offset that if you can’t afford the running costs or don’t feel happy while flying it, then it is the “wrong investment” one can come up with to protect against inflation !
When I bought my aircraft 13 years ago the exchange rate was £2.05 to the USD.
Today I see the rate is £1.24 to the USD.
The aircraft has lost around 34% of its original cost but the GBP has lost around 40% compared to the USD
Consequently I am still in profit and have had 13 years of flying for just the cost of the fuel, maintenance, hangarage, insurance, etc.
Snoopy wrote:
Wouldn’t the same hold true if the plane is paid for in cash?
This supposes you have the money lying around, and have to decide between
a) Let it sit in a bank account with 0 % interest. In the inflation scenario, the “real” value of that money would decrease by 10 % each year, i.e. you can buy 10 % less stuff with it each year
b) Buy a plane, which generates some associated costs, but can be resold later. If money is devalued each year by 10 %, you can sell your plane for 10 % more €/£/$ each year, if the market (supply/demand) for planes and the state of your plane remain the same.
As a variant on a) – if you can take out a loan for 0 % interest it works exactly the same. The comparison is not about the financing, but about the “opportunity cost” if you don’t buy a plane. Both assumptions of 0 % are what is unrealistic and what will make this less interesting in reality.
WhiskeyPapa wrote:
The carrying cost of the investment is far too high to think of even an appreciating aircraft as an investment. All aircraft are liabilities (assuming you take care of them)
It takes some knowledge and involvement to keep aircraft costs under control but friends spend more on their hobby cars and motorcycles than I spend on my $35K plane, including my costs for maintenance (not a huge amount) and storage (my greatest expense). Obviously you can’t do any of the above if you are in the earliest stages of investing for the future with limited income but there comes a time when that phase is done, and spending a greater fraction of your income to enjoy life is appropriate. At that point the choice should definitely be influenced and aided by limiting depreciation, but as far as I’m concerned does not need to make money.
One thing for sure true is that a 150K plane is not three times more fun than a well chosen 50K plane, and likely costs a lot more more over the period of ownership.
My 2002 investment of $30K (plane plus some parts etc) in my first aircraft was sold in 2019 for $28K, which most agreed was slightly under market value but I decided to sell it quickly, before I changed my mind (again).
Silvaire wrote:
One thing for sure true is that a 150K plane is not three times more fun than a well chosen 50K plane, and likely costs a lot more more over the period of ownership.
The value of a plane is measured by how much you fly it nothing else
Probably half my fun in aircraft ownership is the ownership itself, the other half is the flying I think the ratio depends on the plane, the owner and the storage and maintenance situation.
If I understand Snoopy a little better, he is already quite familiar with aircraft types and costs, and on-going costs.
I think he’s more interested in whether someone could ‘store’ cash as an airframe rather than under the bed.
So if the airframe is well chosen, (hours/times, condition, avionics, appropriate model) with a plan on how to use it, excluding a catastrophe can that work. I think as a store, yes, as an investment, no.
If a quality 182 or Cirrus 22 could be put to work, it should be able to make it’s keep. Then how much would it depreciate? If it’s +/- the same well looked after model it could be worth within 10% of the original value. If that’s acceptable to the guy who may have a reason to consider this, then it’s got legs.
My first aircraft was a group but increased in value over the years as poor quality ones disappeared and ok ones became rarer and desirable.
My current machine has held value for 15 years across 2, and now me as 3 owners. No increase due to high running costs but a possibility of holding value as the fleet gets smaller.
Other models that are desirable become rarer and even more desirable as the the poorer looked after models retire.
For example, there’s no way Peters TB 20 will depreciate under normal circumstances as we all know, and he can demonstrate the care with which it has been looked after.
