Sorry if this is a repeat...I posted once already but it vanished (and may reappear?)

I've B200 experience and was in on a company deciding to acquire a PC12 (but didn't fly it).

Briefly some pros and cons.

Check out insurance. Many insurance companies let 700 hour pilots fly these (with some initial safety pilot time, no way would they let a 700 hour pilot loose in a B200)

There are more Beech service centers and more people familar with working on the plane.

If its a turbo-prop twin might as well use the balanced field length performance...which puts you at at least 1500 ft more runway required at STD ISA.

People have been shocked with the initial depreciation of a new B200 or 350 is. (Plenty of used B200's out there...maybe you can find a gem with low time engines and save them some money and get yourself a raise)

Research SE flying engine shut-down rates and where you'll be flying it. And what the owner thinks of that, and you too.

The B200 is a really sweet flying plane. Its faster too, by about 25-30 knots. But this makes no real difference at all on a typical 300-500 NM trip, except you've burned 25% more fuel on that that trip with the B200. But the PC12, (earlier ones) traded a lot of payload for full fuel. Newer ones have higher gross weights. All but the latest PC-12 had heavy airlerons (I heard) but what does the owner care about that? Easier to carry a variety of stuff in the PC-12 - by far. (I wanted one so I could carry a bicycle on it for the lay-overs)

Nearly all twins cost more than twice as much to maintain and for engine reserves than a SE.

Here's the kicker: Another company I know of (and am very familiar with) sold their B200 and got a PC-12. Two years later got they got another PC-12. That pretty much says it all - except the pilot missed the B200. He said the engine out climb was always better.

Hope that's a start.