I have disagreed with Mike Busch on many minor points and a few major ones and I believe one reason is that he fails to remain objective when he writes about matters from which he personally profits.
His writings (quoted above) are self-contradictory, in that he recommends a "pre-buy" because it does not look for "airworthiness".
What the heck are you doing when buying an airplane if you don't care about it's relative airworthiness? (This comment of mine does not apply to the buyer who's considering a derelict/project, because if you are looking at that kind of project you likely already have sufficient knowledge/experience to determine for yourself the merits of the plane.)
The non-professional who looks to buy an airplane most likely intends to strap it on and fly it! In such cases the subject airplane is almost always marketed as "airworthy"...(Isn't that what is implied by "flies great"/"runs perfect"/ etc). Why would such a buyer not be primarily interested in the airworthiness of the object he's about to put himself and family in?
The current airworthiness status of the airplane, and the time/money required to PUT it airworthy is exactly what I'm interested in when I look at a prospective purchase. I don't need someone else to tell me if the paint is pretty or not and how much a paint job costs, those are tasks that even a cave-man can determine without hiring anyone.
Busch also fails to understand the nature of the "annual inspection" used as a "pre-buy" activity when he states that an annual must be carried all the way through to completion. An annual inspection may be stopped at any time. I know. I've done it!* The appropriate logbook entry will state that the inspection was begun and not completed, the areas completed to be recorded, that uninspected areas be listed, and that unairworthy items be listed and that list provided to the owner (and of course, the buyer whom the inspector is working for.) This prevents the seller from removing the plane from the transaction and attempting to market it elsewhere without repairing it or obtaining a ferry-permit (which becomes part of the mx record.)
* In 1998 when I was considering a pretty B model I ran across in McAllen, TX, I hired the FBO (McCreery Aviation) to perform an annual inspection. They began the inspection and I arrived about 3 hours into the inspection. I looked into the opened-wings and fairings and saw rusted hardware, silver-painted wing interiors (indicating painted-over filiform corrosion), and old, rusted control cables....
They had not yet looked at the engine, landing gear, etc., and were looking thru the logs. That particular airplane had once been used as a floatplane and the floats had been used for fuel tanks to establish an endurance record. Improper log entries abounded.
About four mechanics were working on the airframe while the IA was researching the logs when I STOPPED their progress and instructed them to call the seller and tell him they were putting his inspection covers/fairings back on and telling him he could come pick it back up. They calculated that I owed them $200 for their time so-far. It was a good investment, and there was no problem in stopping that inspection. (Their flat-rate annual insp., fee only, was quoted at $750.) They logged an "uncompleted annual inspection, aircraft returned to service with discrepancies noted."
The previous annual inspector was contacted and he opined it to be a great airplane. I told him it was junk and he admitted that he had been using students at the local vocational high school to inspect his sign off on his "friend's" airplane for years.
Also, any time an annual is started and not completed (presumably for mutually-agreed reasons.... then the activity is recorded as an "incomplete" annual and the airplane is either not approved for return to service or the record reflects that portion of the work accomplished and, if the current inspection status of the aircraft is still within the calendar, then the owner can still fly it home if the items discovered are not airworthiness issues. (Example: At the same place MetalMaster mentioned, Air Impressions-Waco, TX, I observed those folks performing a "pre-buy" using annual inspection forms. They wrote up the airconditioner as "INOP" which P-O'd the seller because it would require $5K to fix.
When Air Impressions was angrily confronted by the seller because the seller did not consider air conditioning to be an airworthiness-issue.... then the Inspector merely asked to see the seller/operators MEL! (Approved Minimum Equipt List... If an MEL allows operation with INOP equipment then the airplane is not grounded....but.... now the buyer knew that the airplane had a $5K repair item and was better informed about what he was buying.) Air Impressions did a fine job for both the buyer and the seller, both of whom rec'd an education about that airplane.
A "pre-buy" inspection does not require the inspector to check to see if air conditioning actually WORKS. But if an annual inspection is used ...then any installed equipment must be operational or must be deferred under an MEL and the mx record must reflect that!
Mr. Busch says that his "pre-buy" only looks for the big-ticket items. Using Mr. Busch's services then, it is possible that a completely UN-airworthy airplane might receive his glorious blessings.
I can tell you from personal experience that a lot of small items ARE big ticket items when they are added up, and there is nothing more frustrating than to get your new purchase home and find that UN-discovered/over-looked items will really spoil your day and can wreck both your budget and the pleasure of your purchase.
He implies that corrosion which can be value-destroying may be overlooked "even if it's not an airworthiness issue yet" item in an annual inspection. Not correct. ALL corrosion is an airworthiness consideration UNLESS there is no legal definition of the inspection such as "pre-buy" where it can be totally unmentioned. The FARs specify that the inspection activity requires cleaning for the inspection process. By definition corrosion will not likely exist in structural areas that have been cleaned for inspection.
However, a "pre-buy" has no legal definition! It requires no certification. It requires no liability/responsibility on the part of the inspector. It is merely up to the "pre-buy inspector" to decide what to look for and what to report. In fact, technically speaking, since a "pre-buy inspector" is not required to be certificated or even qualified to determine airworthiness.... he may not even have the legal authority to return the aircraft to service after the inspection! He is not even required to possess mechanical ability or experience of any type, and the inspection report may not have any standing in the record.
Failure to require an "annual" inspection removes most liability from the "inspector" (who is not req'd to rely upon his certificates) and transfers any/all right back to the buyer.
The point of using an annual inspection is to set the performance-standards to be used that have legal standing and definition both in court, and in intent. it also requires the seller to, ...up front.... agree that the airplane is being sought for use in an intended purpose that the seller represents the aircraft to meet.
Mike Busch is a businessman/author for-profits. In this case, He promotes what he can sell with minimum liability/responsibility to the customer. In my opinion, that removes him from the "disinterested third party" category with regard to this topic.
May there always be and Angel flying with you.