StarBlue From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1891 times:
I know this might have been hashed over and over, THIS IS NOT A AIRBUS VERSUS BOEING Thred either. I thought I had read somewhere that the EU required it member countries to only buy Airbus aircraft. Is this true, or does it only apply to state "owned" airlines, etc.
Scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 14270 posts, RR: 45
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1884 times:
Hmm, that's right.
That's how BA is dominantly Boeing, why AF is receiving brand new 773ERs, why LH is being strongly touted as a 7E7 customer, and why all the above operate 747s. In fact, off the top of my head, I can't think of a major European airline that doesn't operate Boeings.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
Bjg231 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1859 times:
Well although your statement isn't entirely correct, I did read something on cnn.com (a few months ago) that said that the EU would impose sanctions on certain US products (including Boeing airplanes) if the US didn't comply with some sort of trade dispute. Don't know how that played out though, anyone with more detailed info?
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
Boysteve From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 965 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1829 times:
Bjg231 is right, this all started when illegal steel tariffs wre imposed by the Bush administration. The World Trade Organistaion declared that the EU could introduce counter-tarifs on US products upto a certain value. Boeing aircraft have been discussed as one possible item.
As for the EU insisting that EU airlines buy airbus, that is rubbish, and the current weakness of the US Dollar is currently working in Boeing's favour anyway!
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1761 times:
And, Jwenting, to really be precise, the US imposed tariffs on steel (not just from the EU, by the way) quite a while after the EU actually stopped steel subsidies... and the EU commission members didn't just simply wake up one day and say "Hey, let's slap tariffs on American products" - it was actually a judgement by the WTO (oh, yes, I forgot - another one of those evil-empire-institutions... although it's not the EU this time, but it's almost as bad as them or the UN, isn't it?) after quite long and extensive proceedings to determine whether the US tariffs were justified or not.
The result was that they were not.
That judgement was accepted by the US delegation.
As for your perceived EU wet dream... jeez - what happened? Did a member of the EU commission kill someone from your family? I think I haven't seen any other member of a.net so consistently... or manically... argue against the EU on just about everything: even for you it might be time to realise that the EU is not the root of all evil...
As for the actual question - no, StarBlue, neither are EU airlines currently forced to buy Airbusses and not Boeings, nor is anyone actually planning something like that... it's one of those a.net-urban-legends that keep popping up.
Boysteve From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 965 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1734 times:
Thankyou both JGPH1A and Leskova, nice style!
I remember British Steel being heavily fined by the EU a few years ago because of anti-competitive behavoir. There are no wet dreams (on this issue, lol) in Paris and Brussels Jwenting
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14677 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
As far as I understand, back in the 70s agreements between the American steel worker´s unions and their companies made the companies pay huge pension payments for their retired workers. Now, esp. with China muscling into the world wide steel market, American steel can´t be sold profitable anymore, because thwe companies are stuck with those pension funds, giving them a huge overhead. Now to protect these companies, Bush introduced the steel tariffs to prevent te import of cheaper steel (cheaper, because even European steel companies don´t have that huge overhead). These tariffs were declared illegal by the WTO. The WTO gave the EU the right to fight them by in turn putting tariffs on American products unless the US government would withdraw their tariffs on steel. Since Boeing airplanes are a main export product of the US, the EU considerd taxing Boeing airplanes.
Magyar From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 599 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
I do not think that many is wet dreaming in Paris and Berlin about an
"Airbus" only policy in the EU. That would not be smart because of
the certain US retaliatory measures.
As far as the case of the US steal tariffs concerns it was challenged
by just about everybody who produces steal not just the EU. And
AFAIK, the Bush administration not only lost the WTO case but
has already retracted the tariffs, therefore, avoided EU (and Japanese,
South Korean, Brazilian, etc.) retaliation.
Ts-ior From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3646 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1646 times:
It's both political and economic !!! Why President CHIRAC took Airbus CEO with him when having visited China,although it was a "political" visit ? Why Tunisair has ordered and received seven (7) B736 when it has already ordered A319s ? TU,LH and AF could had an all Airbus fleet but...there is things that are out of our understanding !!!
I guess that airlines want to satisfy all major airplane manufacturers, Airbus and Boeing now, in order to have a special service or price in the case that one manufacturer comes with a "vital" type for their growth !!!
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1645 times:
Re: It's both political and economic !!!
Yes it is - Airbus has in the past, and continues to be, somewhat of a tool of foreign policy, very obviously in the case of France, slightly more subtle in the case of other European countries. SAA's original A320's were largely the result of the favour of Franz Josef Strauss, the long-time premier of Bavaria and diplomatic friend of the old SA government, and were ordered as part of a trade deal between Bavaria and SA, IIRC.
France blatantly uses Airbus sales as part of foreign trade policy, especially with China and India, where the airlines are state governed and can be pressured.