AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2485 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (12 years 5 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2586 times:
Well, I'm just relaying the statement. I do think he's probably right for the next 8-10 years but after that, assuming the 7E7 is as big a hit as Boeing hopes it will be, the pendulum could again swing the other way. I do expect Boeing to be an underdog for a while, how soon they change that depends on what they do right or wrong and by the amount of recovery in the jetliner market. But Boeing can't expect the 7E7 to accomplish such a turnaround by itself, it must have growth in its' other product lines as well. This will be a daunting task, given the vast inroads Airbus has made into all of their lines. They'll have to become more production-efficient across the board and also a much scrappier competitor when duking it out with Airbus for sales. Tell the shareholders you sometimes have to lose a bit of money one day in order to make a lot more later, seemingly a model that has worked well for Airbus.
Wingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2884 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2492 times:
Don't forget that EADS has significant government ownership and is able to forgo EPS considerations for long periods of time. Boeing does not have this luxury. But EADS should tread carefully because one thing is for certain, any steady gain of marketshare past 60% will most likely result in a government/industry solution here in the US that would mimic the 30 year gift the EU gave to Airbus. Boeing is a critical piece of this country's exporting muscle and allowing the EU to systematically destroy US commercial aviation is out of the question.
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 67
Reply 7, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2387 times:
"Significant government ownership" sounds as if it were 90% - it's much lower than that, although not quite as low as I'd like it to be: 30.1% are owned by Lagardère and SOGEPA, the latter being a French State Holding company, further 5.5% are owned by SEPI, the Spanish State Holding company, but that's it: further 30.1% are owned by DaimlerChrysler and the remaining 34.3% are freely floated.
By the way: no-one in Europe would complain about the US government giving Boeing the same help as Airbus has received at the beginning: Boeing would just have to shed just about all of it's knowledge, all of it's military and space business and all of their experience in building commercial airplanes - then the score would indeed be even...
And, just to remind you: as Mr. Herterich said in another part of the same press conference, Airbus has no interest in having a market share of more than 60%, because it would simply be more than they could handle - stating that it would (more or less free quote) "not be a stable situation".
According to him - OK, we'd have to see how this would look if the situation should ever arise - Airbus would raise prices until the market share would go back below 60%.
Ruscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1862 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2323 times:
You know that 30% or so Govt ownership is a larger enough share to be distorting.
In a normal public offering where all the shares are freely floated if you can hold 16%+ of the shares then you can effectively control the company.
But with the French Govt holding 30+, Spain holding 5+, and Daimler Chrysler which is a European takeover, not a merger, holding 30+ percent the whole shareholder base is distorted.
Boeing fans need not worry, unlesss the Europeans are prepared to freely float the rest, and allow normal market discipline, to mould EADS, it will get fat and inefficient over the years, as political considerations replace corporate necessities.