I tend to agree with MrMorden in that the advertising for this aircraft does tend to minimize the notion that it is, in fact, an airplane and requires piloting skills and commitment. Let's remind ourselves that a seaplane is,in fact, a separate licensing endorsement. I remember how during the development of the Skycatcher, it was marketed as an airplane for the common man though, it was clear, it was also being lined up for pilot training. This suggests that pilot training was one of its paramount intentions. Like the Skycatcher did, the Icon presumably has over 1000 orders taken. Like the Skycatcher, as well, many of these orders will probably be cancelled. In the case of the Skycatcher, I doubt that it was necessarily the price increase or the fact that it was produced in China that was the total cause of cancellations (as it is a neat little airplane though load challenged), rather, it was the realization upon the potential buyers that this activity (flying) does indeed require commitment and that piloting an LSA may, in fact, be somewhat more nuanced and weather dependent than they expected. For example, I was one of those who discovered the Skycatcher required a little more tlc (particularly landing) than does a 172. At the price tag of nearly 400K these, one would think, should be a tough sell. If I were going to go that route, I would rather buy a Cub (or similar) with all terrain tires and make my non airport (or non paved) landings on the grass rather than in the water, but that's just me.