Navion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1002 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3122 times:
Qatar was probably bottom fishing for prices and Boeing usually doesn't play that game. They tried it on the Iberia deal and Airbus simply matched them tit-for-tat. Qatar is not going to get a "deal" on the 777. Many of the 777 sales victories came despite the 777 having a higher price than the A340. My source is the Wall Street Journal.
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10047 posts, RR: 11 Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3077 times:
Navion, that might be right or not. One truth remains, Boeing lost too many battles. If they don´t like to play the game that´s on, it´ll stay that way. Could it be that Airbus simply can offer better prices because they produce at lower costs? A LH manager said so recently, that Boeings production process is simply inferior as a whole.
Wunderk From Canada, joined Jun 2003, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3030 times:
Speaking of Airbus vs Boeing, there's a very interesting article on this week's "Economist" magazine from Britain regarding some of the shady deals involved in airliner purchasing in the 1990s. The article gives an investigative insight into deals such as Kuwait Airways post-Gulf War deal in 1991, as well as numerous others.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3024 times:
Boeings production process has been slowly modified to a moving ssembly line system over the lasty five years so their production process is actually newer than most the competition. It is also extremely flexible.
Boeing can produce aircraft far more quickly than Airbus. Unfortunately, and this is the single biggest kicker---they can not produce them for less cost.
When it comes down to it---that is what's going to make the sale: PRICE
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7860 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3019 times:
That's actually not a surprise given QR already flies an all-Airbus fleet. Airbus probably threw in a nice maintainance package for the entire QR fleet so the airline could buy the A330-200 on the cheap.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2993 times:
I don't think the trouble is with Boeing's management. They should not sell products at a loss. Boeing and Airbus live by different sets of rules. Has Qatar been trying to get into CDG? Does it want to sell prawns to Europe?
Brons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2981 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2967 times:
A LH manager said so recently, that Boeings production process is simply inferior as a whole.
This is the same Boeing that wind tunnel tested the 777 for 5000 hours versus the 2500 hours put in on the A380 by Airbus, leaving the Airbus engineers to make excuses why they didn't test it as much? The same Airbus that produced the underperforming A343 and the overweight (read: fat) 345/346? The same LH that is the flag carrier of one of the original Airbus consortium nations?
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2957 times:
Why? Because you don't like hearing it? It is a fair question given the history. The Economist has documented this apparent quid pro quo at CDG: it looks like Air Mauritius got the same deal as did Malaysia. This is a way of doing business. But I suppose we have to respect it merely because it is different and after all we must respect foreign cultures.
I don't necessarily believe that Qatar was bribed into a deal but I think it would be self-deceiving to dismiss the possibility. I think Navion provided the best explanation.
Navion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1002 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2936 times:
Regarding Gigneil's comment that Airbus makes a profit, I don't believe you know that. You need to state a source because as it stands now, almost NO ONE has been able to identify what they truly do or don't make. I have striven for a few years to determine what money has gone where and it has been an impossible task so far. And don't forget, Airbus "going public" with a clean slate after years of up front costs have been "taken care of" by God knows who or what (and no Gigneil, while you do seem bright, you don't know either because almost no one does) makes for a much more competitive stance. Airbus costs may be lower due to a lack of burden of past years billions spent getting it up and running. It's very tough to say what Airbus has actually paid back and what it has been forgiven. It's much like when people say the Concorde actually could produce a profit, but didn't count the billions of development cost that (in the case of Concorde) was written off and thus not "counted" in the determination of whether Concorde operations were profitiable or not. I realize it's an extreme example, but it highlights the "creative" accounting possible. Another example is the almost impossible task of determining whether Embraer, Bombardier, or both are transgressing WTO fair trade rules and engaging in unfair subsidies. There is a lot of evidence on both sides and yet clear consensus has been difficult. With Airbus multi-country, multi-company, multi-structure history, I think it's impossible. I do believe Airbus has a more competitive cost advantage, namely that they can go wherever they need to go to get a deal they want. It's good for them and bad for Boeing.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2854 times:
How is defamation relevant to this discussion? Who was defamed? Except for my remarks, I don't think anyone has said anything even mildly desultory about Airbus.
The opaque financial structure of Airbus makes it very difficult to ascertain to actual financial performance. Also, if you read the Economist special report, I think you will find Airbus is exceedingly creative when it comes to business 'arrangments.' What about Credit Lyonnais?
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4966 posts, RR: 46 Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2786 times:
The main reason Airbus can undercut Boeing is production cost. Airbus can build an aircraft more efficiently than Boeing. There was a report about this about a year ago (I believe) which was discussed in detail on these forums. Airbus needs less employees to build an aircraft than Boeing, because of higher automation, and more efficient production methods. Take a look at the production: Airbus will deliver 300 planes this year, from 4 production lines (A300/310, A320, A318/319/321, A330/340). Boeing will deliver 280 planes from 8 (!) lines: 717, 737 (3 parallel lines at Renton), 747, 757, 767, 777. More lines for less planes, equals less efficiency. The same goes for design. There are only 2 fuselage cross-sections for all current Airbuses. There are 6 for Boeing. This adds to costs of development.
Your hatred of everything French is well-known on these forums, but do you have to bring it up every single time? It seems that for you Airbus is guilty until proven innocent. The opposite seems to be true about Boeing. As far as double standards go... (Just take a look at the discussion on the Economist article: Airbus is already guilty for you (willing to bet money, remember?) but if anyone DARES to suggest the same might be true for Boeing, you go ballistic). It hurts your credibility. There is nothing to suggest anything shady in this deal. Nothing. So don't spoil yet another thread with your insinuations, please.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4966 posts, RR: 46 Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2748 times:
In normal practice the subject of corruption is not discussed untill there are indications of it. YOU however bring it up for EVERY deal Airbus closes, whether there are indications or not, all because of your legendary dislike of everything french. That's simply not very fair. It's a witchhunt.
NDSchu777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 419 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2741 times:
First Emirates, now Qatar. Both airlines from the Arabian penninsula... both favoring Airbus rather than Boeing. Perhaps Boeing should blame Bush for that
I don't understand where bashing Bush comes into play here. Just trying to make the A vs. B debate even more controversial by randomly throwing politics in there.
And anyway, in regards to Emirates, they just announced that they'll be operating 26 new 777-300ERs, so it's not like they've refused to negotiate with Boeing and use their products since the war.
And as far as Qatar, they've always been an all-Airbus fleet. It was more surprising that they were negotiating with Boeing. My guess, is their intention was to stick with the A340 and talk to the competition in order to get a better deal from Airbus. It's something lots of airlines do and it works.
Flying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4136 posts, RR: 38 Reply 23, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2718 times:
Well, it was Mr. Bush who did something which isn´t exactly popular in the World outside the USA - he fought (better ordered to be fought) a war which could be described as illegeal taking under consideration the news which are currently leaking out of press reports all over Europe. The war wasn´t exactly necessary and people in the Gulf States are far from being happy about the presence of the USA there. Don´t you think that a government owned airline such as Qatar has to think twice which planes they order in the arguably most political business worldwide?
You can turn the Emirates which way you want - Boeing lost it, point. The leased 26 B777-300ER to them - but not a single one is a new order, all of them are already ordered by GECAS and ILFC, either directly as B777-300ERs or -200ERs which will be converted into -300ERs in due course. Airbus was the big winner, practiacally all orders they won are new orders.
Well, I can make up a provokative theorie, too: Boeing is only able to win a deal against Airbus when they have government help (read: spying) on their site. The Saudia deal prooves this (the CIA fished Airbus faxes to Saudia and in turn Boeing an MDD knew what Airbus was offering at what prices and were able to undercut the deals Airbus made)... now - can I say that after mentioning one airline customer that Boeing is always guilty of spying, even though there is no new evidence? I don´t think so... now think what I want to say with this last paragraph... innocent until prooven guilty.
Manni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23 Reply 24, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2697 times:
The comment I made is as much valuable as the comment made about Qatar trying to get into CDG or selling prawns to Europe. How come, you're not reacting to these?
As far as the 26 777's are concerned, only four of them are actually new orders for Boeing. Altough it's still 4 aircraft, it's peanuts compared to the 41 Airbusses Emirates ordered. Nevertheless, without Boeing's competition, Airbusses' wouldn't have been as good as they are today. So Airbus, just give Boeing a break from time to time...
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
25 United01: With all these people throwing random political excuses around for each order, its quite funny i guess how people think Qatar ordered airbus because t
26 N79969: Flying-Tiger, The NSA did not intercept a bid proposal but an offer to bribe Saudi officials. There is a big difference. I am glad the US goverment bl
27 Sllevin: There's no doubt that Airbus has been taking on significant risk "off book" for more recent orders. Iberia is a prime example. How, you say? With thin
28 Eg777er: Airbus v. Boeing: Efficiency The Airbus partners' factories and manufacturing processes are more modern than Boeing's, says James Womack, president of
29 N79969: Eg777er, Thanks for posting the article. I don't question that Airbus has evolved into a world-class manufacturer. It clearly has without a doubt.
30 Aq737: According to Airliner World, Boeing is delivering more aircrafts per month than Airbus...Does this equal production inefficiency? To me, it looks like
31 Udo: ...Airbus just has found out that with bribery one can get every important order out there. They bribed Emirates, Qatar, Lufthansa, Qantas, SIA, Catha
32 Scorpio: According to Airliner World, Boeing is delivering more aircrafts per month than Airbus No, it delivered more aircraft in that particular month. This d
33 Brons2: You can turn the Emirates which way you want - Boeing lost it, point. The leased 26 B777-300ER to them - but not a single one is a new order, all of
34 Scorpio: To add to Brons2's post, GECAS said that 4 of the -300ERs for EK will be new orders by GECAS, while the other 10 will come from existing GECAS orders.
35 Jaysit: "same Airbus that produced the underperforming A343 and the overweight (read: fat) 345/346?" LOL. What a pile of gibberish. I'd say that if a major (R
36 Dalecary: Let's wait and see with this order. My spies certainly were expecting a significant 777 order and there may be 2 Qatar announcements- one from Airbus
37 Luisca: For those of you who say that boein has lost to many battles HOW many 777 Have been sold in total, including all family members? HOW many A340´s have
38 Spaceman: Perhaps when airlines choose A340 over the 777, they are thinking about the seating arrangements on the planes. The A340 holds an advantage of having
39 Brons2: he A340 holds an advantage of having no middle seats in the economy and business sections The A340 (and all Airbus 8 across tubes) do have middle seat
40 N754pr: As a passenger I would like at least three engines over lots of water or bad country. Now Qatar, please fly to Hong Kong
41 Jean Leloup: Everyone, watch your fingers with the ol' A vs. B rhetoric, or this'll soon get deleted/archived. Thanks! Jean Leloup
42 Rongotai: I don't sell aeroplanes but I do business in the Middle East. In the last few months there has been a significant sea change - even, in fact, especial
43 F4N: To all: Some interesting points being raised here despite the unfortunate tendencies for some to cling to the usual rhetorical positions. I doubt that
44 Kaitak: So, when it this long expected QR press conference to take place; I was expecting news by 11.30am. Any sign of white smoke yet?
45 N79969: I disagree with the blithe characterization of some remarks as "usual rhetoric." The usual rhetoric, as it is called, is merely describing business-as
46 Flying Belgian: Two days ago there was a very interesting "behind the scene" report on the french television France 2 about that QR market... QR's CEO said his compan
47 Dalecary: According to ATW Airbus has pinched the 300 seat component of this order with a last minute revised bid. Boeing, having being promised the order,after
48 Sabenapilot: Yes that's true! In the beginning pilots were a bit reluctant towards the side stick, but aviation got used very quickly.... nowadays you hear nothing
49 Airways1: QR, by the way, hasn't always been an all-Airbus operator. They started with the 727 and 747. airways1
50 Udo: FB, I remember a cockpit visit on one of CX's A343s some years ago when the pilot told me exactly the same about the nice table to eat...and the FO la
51 Mongu: Sllevin in post 27: The guaranteed values of the Iberia aeroplanes are a contingent liability of Airbus. Under most accounting standards (certainly, b
52 QatarAirways: I am somewhat dissapointed because everyone in the company was sure of the B777 order so the ATW article is very accurate when it said that this was a
53 ConcordeBoy: The A340 holds an advantage of having no middle seats in the economy and business sections Great thing from the pax's view of comfort. However, from a
54 ZSSNC: Brons2, LH is not the flag carrier of Germany (anymore)! That statement is simply incorrect. Flag carriers can only exist in non-deregulated markets.
55 N79969: Another article: http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030619/airshow_4.html