This poll from an airline investor source ranked the 737-800 best overall, and ranked the 777-300ER number one in the categories of operational success and value for the money. Investors also gave the 737-800 top marks for investor appeal, remarketing potential, and residual value.

I know the source of the material might be a bit bias, but investors don't care about Boeing vs. Airbus, this is just straight capitalism.

http://www.boeing.com/randy/pdf/I_Opoll2005.pdf

Interesting read. Definitely adds a new insight on aircraft purchases that many on here (including myself) don't take into consideration.

BTW - I wouldn't worry too much on the source. It may be linked through the Boeing site, but IIRC, AirFinance Journal is an independent publication. Since Boeing did well this year, that is why they linked it. Kinda like car manufacturers showing reviews from publications like Consumer Reports when their vehicles do well.

Regards,

Hamlet69

Interesting report. To me it seemed like an anaology for the whole AvB war that rages in a.netters' cyber space.

It showed that investors valued different criteria to the operators. For instance in value for money the investors rated the 777-300ER top with a score of 8.4, while the operators rated the A330-300 higher with a score of 8.6. To me the best statistic was the one that rated Boeing and Airbus has having 0.1 difference between them in overall score.

It just goes to show that in the AvB war, there is no clear winner. Each company has its own plus and minus depending on how you look at it and the criteria used to judge it.

It's amazing how passionate people will get over such minor differences.

(Sigh, I need to get out more if I start seeing links between passion and statistics. Shoot me!!!)

Somebody forgot to tell this to LH, AF, BA or OZ.
Oh yah and they are profitable too.

Trolley Dolley..u're mostly correct, however, in terms of sales/announcements for 2005, Airbus has had only orders for 16-19 A340's while Boeing has had orders/announcements for more than while Boeing has had orders for 80   777's!! (thats according to justplanes.com)

and thats not including the AC order, which just might come back before the year is over.....

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4): Boeing has had orders for 80 777's!! (thats according to justplanes.com)

Forthcoming 777 orders could come from QF, SQ, and EK. Potential total of 100 777's in 2005?

Cheers

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3): Somebody forgot to tell this to LH, AF, BA or OZ. Oh yah and they are profitable too.

AF operates the 777-300ER, BA, and LH both operate 737s yet no NGs, and OZ, well I dont know. Nobody ever said that they werent profitable anyways.


Dan

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3): Somebody forgot to tell this to LH, AF, BA or OZ. Oh yah and they are profitable too.

Forget to tell them what?

Quoting Sq212 (Reply 5): Forthcoming 777 orders could come from QF, SQ, and EK. Potential total of 100 777's in 2005?

add CX....but lets not get ahead of ourselves here...100 777's would be phenom!

what I find interesting is that the past year, only 20 A380s have been sold, in fact, more 747's (22) have been sold this year than A380's, and thats not including potential 747 Advanced order by Cargolux (I'm not sure how may it is..maybe 10 or so).

My point is that the The WhaleJet has been on for sale for the past 5 years, yet it has only gained 159 orders while the 777 this year alone has gained 80 orders......It seems (at least superficially) that the so-called "point-to-point" model is the model which is the one to look at..

of course, The WhaleJet hasn't gone into service yet and certainly some carriers such as BA and CX (as well as other carriers) are looking to see how it performs, but it doesn't seem as if many of the large 747 operators are ordering this plane en masse (of course, some carriers such as AF/SQ/LH have ordered a bunch)....

there have been some very good "pros/cons" arguments about the financial viability of The WhaleJet, but the bottom line is the $$$$ (or Euro), and so far, it really hasn't cut the mustard (in terms of sales)-so to speak.

only time will tell if its a success or a failure...

data source: justplanes.com

No surprise the B77W is ranked on top, it's just a superb performer.

As for the B738. The article quotes an investor which says the A320 is hurt by the engine split. Operators however value both models the same (0.1 isn't really a big deal).
Very important to note both manufacturers are rated virtually the same, too.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8): My point is that the The WhaleJet has been on for sale for the past 5 years, yet it has only gained 159 orders while the 777 this year alone has gained 80 orders......It seems (at least superficially) that the so-called "point-to-point" model is the model which is the one to look at..

No doubt the A380 sales success was hurt by the delay of the project. I'm sure certain interested airlines simply wait and see. If the aircraft proves to perform as promised then I expect a bunch of new orders by various operators.
And no, I wouldn't compare A380 orders to B777 orders. It has always been clear "point-to-point" (which actually quite often means "hub-to-point/hub again") has a larger sales potential.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8): of course, The WhaleJet hasn't gone into service yet and certainly some carriers such as BA and CX (as well as other carriers) are looking to see how it performs, but it doesn't seem as if many of the large 747 operators are ordering this plane en masse (of course, some carriers such as AF/SQ/LH have ordered a bunch)....

Some large B747 operators have done so and I expect both repeat orders as well as new operators.


Regards,
JM

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8): add CX....but lets not get ahead of ourselves here...100 777's would be phenom!

Jacobin777, PanAm_DC10 has an excellent thread on 777 orders for 2005. Per his tabulation, there are 34 firms orders and 59 pending orders. The 93 total does not include recent orders (total of 10) by Avion Group. If we look at the potential orders of AC, QF, SQ, EK, and LY, the total should exceed 100.

PanAm-DC10 orders thread:
Boeing 777 Orders For 2005 (Vol II) (by PanAm_DC10 Sep 16 2005 in Civil Aviation)

Cheers.

[Edited 2005-09-30 07:24:22]

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 9): No doubt the A380 sales success was hurt by the delay of the project. I'm sure certain interested airlines simply wait and see. If the aircraft proves to perform as promised then I expect a bunch of new orders by various operators. And no, I wouldn't compare A380 orders to B777 orders. It has always been clear "point-to-point" (which actually quite often means "hub-to-point/hub again") has a larger sales potential.

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 9): Some large B747 operators have done so and I expect both repeat orders as well as new operators.

even though they aren't direct competitors, an air carrier only has a finite amount of money to spend (and those 777's aren't cheap either)......of course, not every carrier needs The WhaleJet and The WhaleJet and the 777 have a different mission profile, however it still fits the bill (i.e. lower sales of the 747 since the A340 and 777's have come out) and this is still continuing even to this very day..

if CX and BA don't go with The WhaleJet, I think it will be a big blow to the program....IMHO...( BA/CX ordering The WhaleJet according to Leahy is "not a matter of if, but a matter of when")

Quoting Sq212 (Reply 10): Jacobin777, PanAm_DC10 has an excellent thread on 777 orders for 2005. Per his tabulation, there are 34 firms orders and 59 pending orders. The 93 total does not include recent orders (total of 10) by Avion Group. If we look at the potential orders of AC, QF, SQ, EK, and LY, the total should exceed 100.

merci... 

JM,

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 9): No doubt the A380 sales success was hurt by the delay of the project. I'm sure certain interested airlines simply wait and see

I'd guess it's actually more of the latter than the former. Whoever wanted it badly enough to take the risk of being launch customer, has already ordered it. Everybody else is sitting back and waiting to see how it really performs before they consider ordering it.

Tony

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 11): The WhaleJet according to Leahy is "not a matter of if, but a matter of when"

And I would certainly use him as a reliable source, just as much as the Boeing sales team.  

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 13): And I would certainly use him as a reliable source, just as much as the Boeing sales team.

and if you notice rest of my comments..it doesn't pay a rosy picture about The WhaleJet..  

  

Quoting AeroPiggot (Thread starter): I know the source of the material might be a bit bias, but investors don't care about Boeing vs. Airbus, this is just straight capitalism.

I don't see why the source is biased. Only problem is that everybody only quotes little pieces of information. I think the subtitle of the article "It was close competition between the big two major manufacturers for the 2005 Airfinance Journal Investos' and Operators' Poll, but this year Boeing is the victor." is a title that covers the contents much better. If anyone is biased, it's you!  

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3): Somebody forgot to tell this to LH, AF, BA or OZ. Oh yah and they are profitable too.

I did not read anywhere in the original thread topic or the article that said these airlines were not profitable.banghead}   

Quote: Bassie2010 : I don't see why the source is biased. Only problem is that everybody only quotes little pieces of information. I think the subtitle of the article "It was close competition between the big two major manufacturers for the 2005 Airfinance Journal Investos' and Operators' Poll, but this year Boeing is the victor." is a title that covers the contents much better. If anyone is biased, it's you!

Well this is the first time I have been called bias on the A.net, but that is OK. I have worked for Boeing in the past and I know they make a good product, but I am also an aviation/airplane nut first. I do respect and I am in awe of the accomplishments of Airbus with the advent of the A380, and I hope some day one or both manufacturers will build an economically viable supersonic passenger airplane. The bottom line is I just love airplanes period!

Now to address your claim that I choose a bias title, your titlewould have been extremely verbose, I just used a title that would raise the curiosity of A. netters. May be it is you who is a bit bias?

Quoting Aeropiggot (Reply 17): Now to address your claim that I choose a bias title, your titlewould have been extremely verbose, I just used a title that would raise the curiosity of A. netters. May be it is you who is a bit bias?

  You didn't quote the smiley. No flame, I was just making a joke, and the smiley was to make sure that that was they way to read it. Didn't work quite the way it should.

But you are right about the title: if you want A.net attention, just mention B is good (you don't even have to say A is bad) and you can start counting replies. Anyway, thanks for the article, didn't know it, liked reading it.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8): add CX....but lets not get ahead of ourselves here...100 777's would be phenom!

It will be closer to 150 when it's all said and done.

Quoting Meafly (Reply 19): It will be closer to 150 when it's all said and done.

I'm just trying to be a bit conservative...........the more the 777's out there, the merrier  

MyAviation.net photo: Photo © Jacobin777

MyAviation.net photo: Photo © Jacobin777

I'm being conservative, too.  

Quote: Bassie2010: You didn't quote the smiley. No flame, I was just making a joke, and the smiley was to make sure that that was they way to read it. Didn't work quite the way it should

yup!  missed the smiley.....Oh well glad to know that you enjoyed the article. As you said it is just information for us to discuss in the forum.