Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors  
User currently offlineDreamcraft From Antigua and Barbuda, joined Nov 2003, 32 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 9054 times:

To my fellow forum colleagues,

How does the 777 compare with it's direct competitors cost-wise. Both in terms of acquisition and operating costs?

And why would an airline purchase an A330 or A340 over a B777 or even a B764?

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 8965 times:

I'll admit that I'm not 100% sure, but when compared to the A340, it's hard for me to see how a 4-engine aircraft is more efficient than a 2-engine aircraft. The A340's competition is more or less "split" between the 777 and the 747.

As far as the A330 is concerened, I don't really know. The 777 appears to be much more popular, so I would guess that it is a very economical aircraft. I've heard that the 777's engines -- the most powerful ever built -- are also among the most efficient.

As far as the 767-400 is concerned, I believe that aircraft was developed for more short-haul, high density routes. Plus, airlines with large 767 fleets (e.g. Delta) have the advantage of fleet commonality by using the 764. I think that explains its desirability for US airlines.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 8857 times:

Dreamcraft

The 330 seems to be geared more to the 767 market rather than the 777 hence the 7e7 programme.

The 764 was an aircraft built for CO and Delta as has been said numerous time on this forum. The 340 seems to me to be the real competition to the 777 we have to wait and see if the latest variants the 345 and 346 will but a dent into that market segment.



Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 8745 times:

The 773ER is Boeing’s most expensive jet. Last I heard, the 773ER was listed between $200-230 million while the direct competitor; the A340-600 was listed at around $180 million.

The 772LR sells around $200 million while the A345 is around 170 million. I don't have price infos on the 772ER and the 343.

With the recent rise of the Euro vs. $US, Airbus may have increased the price a little bit to compensated for the difference but it’s highly unlikely the price has increased more than a few million.



E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently offlineDutchflyer From Netherlands, joined Feb 2004, 169 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 8701 times:

List price isn't the main issue here. Political factor contribute much more. If French government want a particular airliner buying Airbuses then a lot of compensation (discount) is given. In other word Airbus is buying it's way to the top of the market.

Besides list price the operational costs are most important. I don't have any information on that. Anyone else?


User currently offlineMrwayne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 8621 times:

The cost differences betwwen a 777 and 747 are purely on runing costs, surely. As a 747 burns 10 tonnes of fuel an hour, compared to the 777 which only burns 6 tonnes an hour amd carries more cargo.





User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 8548 times:

List price isn't the main issue here. Political factor contribute much more

Dutchflyer, Political factors can only contribute for a fragment of negotiation concerning the price airlines actually pay. If the 773ER is listed 30 million more than the A346, it will be a long shot for Boeing even if it provides discounts on the listed price.

The A346 being 30 million cheaper than the 773ER should give Airbus an edge. That is why the listed price is still important. However,I agree with you that there may be considerable differences between listed and actual prices but the bottom line is, for airlines, operating costs and reliability are just as important as acquisition cost.




E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently offlineDutchflyer From Netherlands, joined Feb 2004, 169 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 8503 times:

@YUL332LX

I believe operating costs are more important than acquisition cost. In Europe governments still give low rates to the airline industry. So a few million more or less won't be the decisive factor. Using less fuel, lower maintenance cost, shorter turn-around times will be the decisive factor.


User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 8448 times:

The A346 being 30 million cheaper than the 773ER should give Airbus an edge. That is why the listed price is still important.

In Europe governments still give low rates to the airline industry.

All this is true to a certain degree, but the fact is that no airline pays the list price to Boeing or Airbus. Usually, for competitive negotiating reasons, the ultimate price paid by airlines for their aircraft are kept confidential.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 8387 times:

Wasn't the Ex Canadian prime minister paid a consultancy fee or commission by Airbus and thus the complete change of fleet by A/C?
Boeing is limited by US law on how business can be conducted after the Lockheed fiasco in Japan a couple of decades ago.
So it is not just the price of the equipment in question but other variable factors.



747SP
User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 8250 times:

Wasn't the Ex Canadian prime minister paid a consultancy fee or commission by Airbus and thus the complete change of fleet by A/C?

NO.

The PM you are refering to is Brian Mulroney. It was later determined that these accusations were erroneous.

Boeing is limited by US law on how business can be conducted after the Lockheed fiasco in Japan a couple of decades ago.

Oh yeah? What about the recent tanker deal that is now in jeopardy because of Sears and Druyun's discussions? Boeing can play that game just as well as Airbus...



E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently offlineAdria From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 8207 times:

Just remember the Singapore 777 deal, SAS change of order from MD-95 to B736......... this shows how dirty Boeing can play

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 8062 times:

this shows how dirty Boeing can play

Yes... shame on them for giving their customers fair and legal deals in order to secure their product over the competitor's...  Insane


User currently offlineAdria From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 7891 times:

˝Yes... shame on them for giving their customers fair and legal deals in order to secure their product over the competitor's... ˝............ fair? I would say that the A343 is a far better aircraft compared to the 772ER If Boeing is so desperate that buys the A343 just to sell their 772,legal?.......... well those tanker deals show If Boeing is legal or not

User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 7815 times:

Adria,

Your well-conceived arguments are always shining examples for us to follow. It is clear that you have studied these issues in detail. Thank you for contributing such intelligent opinions.

Sincerely,
Nobody

-----------------

>Oh yeah? What about the recent tanker deal that is now in jeopardy because of Sears and Druyun's discussions? Boeing can play that game just as well as Airbus...

Oh, and forget the fact that Boeing fired people and did not try to cover it up. And the fact that Boeing is such a huge company, and people are bound to transgress appropriate ethical standards (only to be dealt with swiftly, but with a ton of media attention..).


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 7722 times:

perhaps you'd like to share with us exactly what was unfair and/or illegal about said transaction....?

User currently offlineAirxLiban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4518 posts, RR: 53
Reply 16, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 7704 times:

As far as the 767-400 is concerned, I believe that aircraft was developed for more short-haul, high density routes. Plus, airlines with large 767 fleets (e.g. Delta) have the advantage of fleet commonality by using the 764.

Fleet commonality aside, doesn't the 764 have the same cockpit as the 777?



PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 7698 times:

@ConcordeBoy

I agree with you, that at least the SQ trade-in deal was legal and fair. Nevertheless, it gives me a bit of a surprise to see that Boeing had to buy the A343's back (I don't know if anybody knows if there was some profit for SQ in this deal...) to "convince" SQ to get the 777. If the 777 is that much superior compared to any other plane flying these days, as you never stop to claim, one should think that that's reason enough for SQ to buy it, without being offered a trade in deal. Don't you think?

Cheers, Thomas

[Edited 2004-02-23 09:16:30]

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 7637 times:

considering that SQ just spent multiple billions on A340s, less than 15mo before Boeing offered the 772ER...... a *little* more of an incentive than the latter's optimal performance specs was needed

[Edited 2004-02-23 09:32:46]

User currently offlineMotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3337 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 7631 times:

Well from what little I know about supply, demand, brand marketing, business ethics versus business pratice, human nature, our ability to create (and destroy) etc, I know that both companies make magnificent aircraft and neither will leave a stone unturned in order to make that sale over the other...

And this includes enlisting governments in their marketing plans. We'd all be naive to believe that one or either of them played fair all of the time.

MH



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 7527 times:

@ConcordeBoy

"considering that SQ just spent multiple billions on A340s, less than 15mo before Boeing offered the 772ER...... a *little* more of an incentive than the latter's optimal performance specs was needed"

...Your answer just raises bigger questions.... I assume SQ was aware of the , what you call, "optimal performance specs" when they ordered the 343's correct? So in my opinion the *little* incentive you mention was quite a significant one...

Cheers, Thomas


User currently offlineAdria From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 7473 times:

. ¨If the 777 is that much superior compared to any other plane flying these days, as you never stop to claim, one should think that that's reason enough for SQ to buy it, without being offered a trade in deal. Don't you think¨....... that is exactly my point....

ConcordeBoy:

I don't remember to say the deal was illegal or unfair.

MITaero:
¨Oh, and forget the fact that Boeing fired people and did not try to cover it up¨...... Yes you are right, what a fantastic thing to do


User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 22, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 7395 times:

I would say that the A343 is a far better aircraft compared to the 772ER If Boeing is so desperate that buys the A343 just to sell their 772,legal?.......... well those tanker deals show If Boeing is legal or not

Far better product?The 343 failed to meet its performance requirements for SQ.The 772 hasn't.


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7290 times:

what's the problem taken in a trade on buying new equipment?
SQ are just very smart people they get to try to A340-300 (No Good). Now they get to play with the A345 for a while before they decide to trade up to B777LR.
Boeing sells equipment virtual alonge and the reverse can't be said true.
No Swiss Bank A/C. etc.



747SP
User currently offlineStefandotde From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7260 times:

I get bored when I hear that Boeing is fighting against an unfair competitor cause Airbus gets supports and supports.
I remember Saudia wanted to buy Airbus and US was spying, heared Airbus offer and told to Boeing. So they gave better offer (hmmmmm, that fair?)


25 Post contains images YUL332LX : Oh, and forget the fact that Boeing fired people and did not try to cover it up. Boeing only fired their Chef financial because the story was about to
26 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : Boeing only fired their Chef financial because the story was about to blow in the media. ... Boeing being a major company is an excuse for them to ha
27 Wingman : Stefandote, Your comment is ironic in that what the US "spying" revealed in Saudia case was patently illegal behavior by Airbus in providing huge brib
28 Post contains images YUL332LX : Since when has Boeing had a culinary operation? Since I had a brain cramp and forget the ˝i˝...
29 ConcordeBoy : I assume SQ was aware of the , what you call, "optimal performance specs" when they ordered the 343's correct? I'm sure they were... but after their M
30 Paddy : I remember Saudia wanted to buy Airbus and US was spying, heared Airbus offer and told to Boeing. So they gave better offer (hmmmmm, that fair?) The S
31 MITaero : >Boeing has no merit at all for the actions taken after wise. And Phil Condit stepping down to give Boeing a clean start was just a figment of my imag
32 PVD757 : People seem to forget how much of a capital intensive decision it is to go out and buy airplanes this big. SQ negotiated a good deal when they switche
33 YUL332LX : There is no excuse for such actions My point exactly... but clearly the matter was dealt with in an appropriate manner. ...so there was a matter. Even
34 MITaero : Of course there was a "matter," but only involving a few people (although still severe). It's just a false analogy to compare something like this to a
35 Post contains links Wingman : Some interesting information on Airbus from a leading European business publication. Note that when US companies are caught committing crimes there ar
36 Post contains images YUL332LX : MITaero, We finally agreed!
37 Warren747sp : Hi, Wingman Thanks for the most interesting link for our Airbus friends and supporters. I guess when you are trying to sell an inferior product even a
38 Scorpio : Warren747sp, I guess when you are trying to sell an inferior product even at a discount leaves Airbus with no choice but to...... No doubt you're now
39 Warren747sp : Hey, Scorpio So the Economist which is an respected European publication is just full of it, Right? and what is your IQ score?
40 Post contains images YUL332LX : I can not recall the last time Boeing was accused of giving bribery or kickback! Then, you have a bad memory
41 Post contains images Thrust : NOT TRYING TO START A BOEING VS. AIRBUS THREAD... As of late, I will admit it is true that Airbus has been able to sell their aircraft at lower prices
42 Cloudy : All this is true to a certain degree, but the fact is that no airline pays the list price to Boeing or Airbus. Usually, for competitive negotiating re
43 9V-SVC : Ohhh gosh , this thread is giving me a good laugh. For example 777 is much cheaper to operate then the A330 ? Don't get me wrong here I love both plan
44 707437 : Well then will anyone take a stab at why a state run airline AF bought the 777, 330 & 340 and happily operates them all? All aircraft a fine but in ce
45 Scorpio : Warren747sp, So the Economist which is an respected European publication is just full of it, Right? You claimed Airbuses are inferior to Boeings. You'
46 Warren747sp : To. scorpio I like to way you side step all issues by blowing off saying it is discussed to death and I will not discussing it anymore. Our company do
47 Scorpio : Warren747sp, I like to way you side step all issues by blowing off saying it is discussed to death and I will not discussing it anymore. All you have
48 Adria : Scorpio it is useless to argue with Warren747SP since his IQ can merely be higher then the number of A340-200 sold all together
49 Aaron747 : I thought this thread was about the 777's operation/acquisition costs as related to its competitors???
50 N6376m : Don't forget the impact of taxes on export sales. One of the largest beneficiaries of the now defunct (FSC) foreign sales corporation program was Boei
51 Warren747sp : To. Scorpio I don't blame you for not being worldly staying in Old Europe and using profanity without spelling it out. No body is attacking no body he
52 AMM744 : As usual this thread has digressed to a low level - so let's keep it there. From a neutral standpoint in the UK (Yes, I know we contribute to Airbus)
53 Scorpio : Warren747sp, I don't blame you for not being worldly staying in Old Europe and using profanity without spelling it out. This coming from someone livin
54 Warren747sp : Hi, Scorpio I am sorry that we are not ruled by Brussels with unelectable officials trying to preach regulations and thought control here. Thank you f
55 Scorpio : Warren747sp, I am sorry that we are not ruled by Brussels with unelectable officials trying to preach regulations and thought control here. What on EA
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Economics Of The 767-300ER Compared To The 787-8? posted Tue May 30 2006 15:35:07 by OyKIE
Is the A345 a rocked compared to the A343? posted Fri Oct 24 2003 06:57:17 by Dc863
Cost Of Fuel For A 747 To Cross The Atlantic posted Tue Jun 8 1999 15:07:21 by Cedarjet
Experience Of Flying International Compared To Dom posted Fri Oct 15 2004 04:09:18 by Flyboy80
Glide Ratio Of Airline Jets Compared To A Light Ac posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:23:52 by Jadedmonkeys
Early 777-200 To Be Broken-Up For The First Time posted Wed Nov 15 2006 10:35:03 by Leelaw
AA RDU-LGW Back To 777 At The End Of October posted Sun Sep 3 2006 23:13:12 by Dank
Is The 777 Going To Steal 787 Orders? posted Tue Nov 22 2005 14:59:30 by Kaneporta1
The 777th 777 To EK - Special Livery? posted Sun Nov 20 2005 20:10:50 by Adipasqu
The Price Of Cab/Parking/Lodge Compared To Airfare posted Thu Mar 24 2005 04:21:14 by Aviationhack