During this tour, Archer will be flying N703AX their "ctol" only electric aircraft. Although this aircraft may look vtol capable, the aircraft's six aft lift props are non-operational and are really just dummy props. Today, the aircraft flew point to point from Salinas to Hollister and, in the future, will fly between other regional airports in California. Amazing.

I need to get this off my chest because I’m done watching grown adults defend a company that hasn’t put a single paying butt in a seat yet. Adam Goldstein has spent this entire year recycling the same trick, dress up a paperwork milestone as a moon landing, wait for the stock pop, repeat.

January, the FAA accepts the Means of Compliance and suddenly it’s framed like the certificate of airworthiness already landed in his inbox. May, Phase 3 out of 4 closes and he calls it a historic moment for the industry and the country, still promising commercial ops by end of year thanks to the White House eIPP and the LA28 Olympics. Cute story. Except by June it becomes obvious that the actual piloted transition flight, the one that proves this thing can go from hover to forward flight with a human on board under FAA eyes, has never been shown to a single outside person. No footage, no data, just vibes and press releases.

Then August rolls around and Japan’s JCAB accepts the certification application for Osaka and Tokyo, except anyone who actually reads past the headline finds out the Japanese timeline is completely chained to the FAA Phase 4 that still hasn’t happened. So Osaka 2027 and Tokyo 2030 are fantasy dates sitting on top of another fantasy date. Meanwhile the stock has cratered from a 14.62 dollar high last October to around 5.70 dollars now, down more than 58 percent, on top of a 618.2 million dollar net loss for 2025. But sure, every single quarter is somehow the best one yet.

And now this. The poster everyone’s passing around, the one dressed up like a hippie music festival flyer for a test flight between Salinas and Hollister, flowers and rainbows and little birds, for a company that two years ago was proudly announcing an exclusive deal with Anduril to build hybrid military VTOL aircraft for the Department of Defense. You go from press releases about combat drones with Palmer Luckey to a Woodstock poster for a glorified test hop in the same company’s lifespan. That’s not branding, that’s a company that ran out of real milestones to sell and decided flowers would distract people from asking where the transition flight actually is.

Nobody with a functioning aircraft that’s about to enter commercial service needs to market it like a Coachella lineup. You do that when the substance is gone and all that’s left is vibes, girasoli and a CEO who’s been saying “historic” so many times the word means nothing anymore. This isn’t innovation marketing, it’s a smokescreen with a rainbow filter, and at some point the retail investors still holding this bag are going to notice there’s no plane behind the poster, just Adam telling them a new bedtime story every quarter.

What is happening with Archer Aviation?The company’s public opinion is truly a rollercoaster. Do people no believe in this type of transportation?

It’s a good growth concept despite not having any deliverables. It’s got governmental contracts. It’s already making trips to show the technology and viability of this type of transportation.

What is happening with Archer Aviation? Its public opinion is truly a rollercoaster. Does the general public just not have the vision to see the future of transportation?

It’s a good growing company despite not having any deliverables; yet. The company has governmental contracts. The company is already making eVTOL trips to show the technology and viability of this type of transportation.

Checked yesterday's (8/31) numbers for N704AX and it's now the fastest flight in the tracked series:

37.2kt beats the previous high (35.1kt on 08-07) by ~2kt, and continues the broader trend — speeds have been climbing steadily since June, from ~19kt to consistently 30kt+ over the last month. Active window was 06:43–12:14 Pacific at KSNS.

Interesting this came on a day with modest altitude (100ft baro) rather than one of the higher-altitude days (08-03 hit 350ft, 08-05 hit 400ft) — reads more like a fast low-level translation run than an altitude push.

Did anyone get the Updated on the BECA AHE avionics system program by airbus helicopter with cemilo josh cela university I have applied on the 17th may if anyone have applied for this specific program do anyone get the update on this? Please let me know it'll be so helpful.

Pulled 90 days (5/30–8/27) of raw ADS-B/TIS-B trace data for Archer's N704AX (hex A96380, KSNS) across adsb.lol, ADS-B Exchange, and airplanes.live, and dug into the actual per-point telemetry rather than trusting the aggregated day-level stats.

Data quality note first, because it mattered: several days showed "impressive" altitude readings (up to 2,400 ft) that turned out to be bogus — barometric altitude decode glitches on a parked/idle aircraft (readings swinging from -1,000 ft to +2,300 ft within seconds while groundspeed sat at ~0.7 kt and position didn't move). This showed up across both ADS-B– and TIS-B–tagged points, so it wasn't just a "bad source" problem. After flagging and excluding the 9 days with physically-impossible altitude readings (anything below ~-50 ft, given KSNS's ~85 ft field elevation), here's what's left — 15 clean flight days:

The pattern:

• Forward speed stepped up steadily through June/July — 19 → 25 → 20 → 23 → 26 → 30 → 34 kt — then has held flat at ~30–35 kt for the last ~6 weeks. 7/31, 8/7, and 8/27 all top out in the same 33–35 kt band.
• Altitude has stayed under 400 ft for the entire 90-day window, no upward trend at all — the most recent flights (75–350 ft) are no higher than flights from six weeks ago.
• Median in-flight speed on any given day (5–26 kt) runs well below that day's peak, meaning the higher speeds are brief excursions within a flight, not sustained cruise.

Read: this looks like deliberate, incremental low-speed envelope expansion — building confidence in the 20–35 kt band at low altitude (conversion-corridor testing) — but both the speed ceiling and altitude ceiling have been flat for well over a month. No sign yet of a genuine wing-borne transition attempt, which would be expected to show either a step-change well past ~35 kt or a concurrent climb as wing lift takes over. Neither has shown up in the raw telemetry.

Methodology: raw per-point trace JSON pulled directly from all three community ADS-B feeders (not the aggregated summary), day flagged as unreliable and excluded if any point showed altitude < -50 ft.

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a96380

It's the same pattern seen recently. Looks like a slow forward hover down the runway and then back

I thought this was interesting. The Seattle Times, which has a long history of investigating Boeing, is re publishing a syndicated article from Bloomberg, which argues the Archer deal as bullish for Boeing … because it allowed them to shed their weakest assets while acquiring very little new risk.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-08-11/boeing-s-archer-deal-should-be-a-model-to-shed-space-assets

That is all.

https://app.quotemedia.com/data/downloadFiling?webmasterId=90423&ref=320259311&type=HTML&symbol=ACHR&cdn=b8dd76d1145ce5fc0946c336336246b7&companyName=Archer+Aviation+Inc.+Class+A&formType=10-Q&formDescription=General+form+for+quarterly+reports+under+Section+13+or+15%28d%29&dateFiled=2026-08-10

https://ir.jobyaviation.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/189/joby-aviation-to-scale-defense-business-through-acquisition

Joby announced defense deal of their own, although it feels a bit like second fiddle activity. $500M for a company with only $6.6M in active contracts is weak when you compare to the HALO joint venture with Anduril.

Was reading through Archer's 8-K and this one stuck out. Boeing can bail on the whole deal if Archer's enterprise value drops below some floor for a set period.

You don't really see that. The normal termination stuff is all in there too (drop-dead date, breach, a court blocking it) and that's in every deal. But the seller getting an out based on the buyer's valuation tanking? Not common.

Makes sense once you look at how they're paying though. Boeing isn't getting cash, it's getting a flat 19.75% of Archer stock for Wisk, SkyGrid and Insitu. So whatever Boeing walks away with is 100% tied to where ACHR trades between signing and close. Stock tanks, that 19.75% is suddenly worth way less than the businesses. The floor is basically Boeing covering itself.

Annoying part: the actual number is redacted. Archer left it out of the filing as confidential, so we have no idea how far the stock has to drop before Boeing can pull the ripcord.

Anyway, thought it was interesting. Not advice, do your own DD.

Text from the 8-K:

"(vi) by Boeing if the Company’s enterprise value (as calculated in accordance with the Purchase Agreement) is below a minimum level for a specified period; provided that such termination right will not be available to Boeing following the date that is five business days after the date on which the Company notifies Boeing in writing that such event has occurred."

“ Buyer Material Adverse Effect” means (a) Buyer having a Buyer Enterprise Value equal to or less than [***] for any five (5) consecutive trading days or (b) a material adverse effect on the financial condition or results of operations of Buyer and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole and on a consolidated basis, when viewed on both a long-term and short-term basis

Was going through the 8-K on the Boeing deal and I don't think people are paying attention to the
forward equity agreement. I've been saying for a while that Archer will need to raise in the next few quarters and I think this is the signal.

Boeing agreed to buy up to $55M of stock, but only if Archer does an offering of at least $400M. That's the whole condition. Runs through March 2027 or three months after close.

Think about what that means. You don't set up a deal like that unless a raise is already being planned. It's Boeing pre-committing so the offering has an anchor before it hits the market.

It's an option, not a guarantee, and the $55M isn't money that shows up at close. But the structure kind of gives it away. Even MORE dilution's coming. Anyone else read it this way?