Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NY Times:End Airbus Subsidies  
User currently offlineRjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4593 times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/08/opinion/08mon2.html?oref=login

Interesting Parts:

The United States has a good case, and it's way past time for Europe to get out of the subsidy business. Since Airbus was born back in the 1960's, it has received some $15 billion in launch aid from the governments of Spain, France, Britain and Germany. For years, they justified this by saying they had to help an infant industry compete against a mature one, Boeing. Well, the baby boomers have grown up and so has Airbus; it now sells more planes than Boeing.

The United States stood by when Airbus received a whopping $3.7 billion to develop its superjumbo A380. Then, last month, Noël Forgeard, chief executive of Airbus, told The Financial Times that Airbus planned to go back to the public trough to the tune of $1 billion for a new midsized plane to compete with Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner. In the blink of an eye, he added that Airbus actually didn't need the aid. Imagine a single welfare mother announcing something similar. Apparently, the cycle of corporate welfare dependency is harder to break.

It's time Airbus learned how to fly on its own wings.

61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1117 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4521 times:

Poor NYT, after selling their souls to the neocons, they are now entering the Airbus bashing business. What I say to the writers of this editorial: Go look for Japanese subsidies for the 7E7! And the timely order from ANA!

Talk about a one-sided view...

Somebody has finally realized that the A380 would reflect poorly on the new imperial America. Well, too bad...


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4502 times:

Poor NYT, after selling their souls to the neocons

Talk about a one-sided view...





Ah yes, the NYT... great bastion of Right-wing USA-centric propaganda  Nuts


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4475 times:

Go look for Japanese subsidies for the 7E7
Seems only fair that the Japanese get to build up their aviation industry with subsidies, if European countries got to do the same.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineJasepl From India, joined Jul 2004, 3582 posts, RR: 39
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4470 times:

Yes, but what aviation industry? Doors and windows? Wings & tails? Unless they're making the plane, it's not an industry.

User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4461 times:

Damn right! As they say in the aviation business "what's good for the A380 is good for the 7E7"!

I actually happen to agree with the NYT about this. Airbus is certainly not a "baby" anymore.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4442 times:

Yes, but what aviation industry? Doors and windows? Wings & tails? Unless they're making the plane, it's not an industry.
Given that no European country or company is making all of any Airbus aircraft, I guess no one should get subsidies.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineRmenon From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Jun 2001, 116 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

Unfortunately - if this progresses in the WTO - both companies are going to suffer penalties.

User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 49
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4298 times:

And dont forget the subsidies of the Canadian Government to Bombardier, otherwise Embraer would have been long ago the dominant leader in medium/small-size jets!

Rgs,
Hardi


User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24961 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4242 times:

Well, Airbus is the same size as Boeing now, so any subsidies should indeed stop


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 31
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4152 times:

A380900: ROFLMFAO!!!! That was a good one, really! Now if you call the NYT neo-con, I'd be interested to hear what you call GWB  Big grin Big grin

btw: Since you live in NY according to your profile it's probably not too hard to acquire an issue of the NYT and find out for yourself.


Subsidies...right..the USA as a great bastion of free trade and globalisation, totally subsidy-free...  Nuts  Nuts  Nuts



I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlineJoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4101 times:

Wasn't it the NYT itself who accused their readers for not beeing critical enough while the Iraq war?

I guess A380900's aspect with the neocons was referring to that.

Furtunately NYT is back in the free press league since long. Thanks for that.


User currently offlineTripple7 From Netherlands, joined Aug 1999, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4063 times:

Does someone have the complete article? Could you please post it here? I don't seem to have access to the NY Times.

User currently offlineKALB From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 573 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3836 times:

It's an editorial opinion, available in full by clicking on the link to the NYT.

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3803 times:

The NYT is free online access. You just have to sign up.

N


User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 3007 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3726 times:

Poor NYT, after selling their souls to the neocons

Interesting...never heard that one before...  Big grin



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineNyc777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3681 times:

Poor NYT, after selling their souls to the neocons

This comment obviously coming from someone who doesn't live in the US. No matter who was in power (Kerry or Bush) there would have been some action to stop the subsidies.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNyc777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3627 times:

Here's the full text of the editorial:

European politicians and diplomats have been complaining that the Bush administration filed its mammoth trade case last month against European subsidies to Airbus for strictly political reasons. Pascal Lamy, the soon-to-retire European Union trade commissioner, went so far as to call the Boeing-Airbus fight a "Euro-bashing" attempt by President Bush to pry Washington State from Democratic hands and to inoculate himself from John Kerry's charges that the administration hadn't done enough to protect American workers.

At first glance, those charges have some merit, since Americans have been complaining about Airbus subsidies for as long as Airbus has existed. The current case stems from a 1992 bilateral agreement that allowed the European governments to provide Airbus with so-called launch aid of up to a third of the cost of developing a new plane. (Unlike the loans that normal people get from banks, Airbus has to pay back the money only if the new planes actually sell.) The deal was supposed to lead to an eventual elimination of Airbus subsidies and, in return, an agreement by the United States to drop an earlier trade complaint.

The United States dropped the case. The Europeans did not eliminate their subsidies. Even so, the Europeans accused the Americans of playing politics because they waited until 30 days before the presidential election to take action.

Big deal. The United States has a good case, and it's way past time for Europe to get out of the subsidy business. Since Airbus was born back in the 1960's, it has received some $15 billion in launch aid from the governments of Spain, France, Britain and Germany. For years, they justified this by saying they had to help an infant industry compete against a mature one, Boeing. Well, the baby boomers have grown up and so has Airbus; it now sells more planes than Boeing.

The United States stood by when Airbus received a whopping $3.7 billion to develop its superjumbo A380. Then, last month, Noël Forgeard, chief executive of Airbus, told The Financial Times that Airbus planned to go back to the public trough to the tune of $1 billion for a new midsized plane to compete with Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner. In the blink of an eye, he added that Airbus actually didn't need the aid. Imagine a single welfare mother announcing something similar. Apparently, the cycle of corporate welfare dependency is harder to break.

European negotiators said they expected the issue to disappear once the election was over. But even though President Bush didn't win Washington State, his negotiators say they plan to continue pushing the case - and a more aggressive Boeing management is backing them up. It's time Airbus learned how to fly on its own wings.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineLymanm From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 1140 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3584 times:

"And dont forget the subsidies of the Canadian Government to Bombardier, otherwise Embraer would have been long ago the dominant leader in medium/small-size jets!"

Yes, and Brazil NEVER funded Embraer? Get real.



buhh bye
User currently offlineTheGreatChecko From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1130 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3551 times:

"Poor NYT, after selling their souls to the neocons"

HA....that was good for a laugh  Laugh out loud

You know the NYT isnt the best at writing balanced pieces or really being very well informed before making an editorial.

This is one of those editorials I just ignore. Neither Boeing or Airbus is clean on this one. BRING ON THE WTO and may the free market reign!

GreatChecko



"A pilot's plane she is. She will love you if you deserve it, and try to kill you if you don't...She is the Mighty Q400"
User currently offlineAgill From Sweden, joined Feb 2004, 1012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3336 times:

Isn't it time to start cleaning up this thread. It has gone from bad to crap.

User currently offlineGlideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3289 times:


Last time I looked France was just a tad over the square miles of Texas?

Just a tad tiny to be so openly hostile.  Smile



To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2881 times:

This has nothing to do with subsidies and everything to do with persuading the US Congress to shovel out heaps of money for Boeing so it can send even more of its jobs to Japan and Asia.

Wake up guys. Boeing doesn't have time to win a long drawn out court case, or worse still,loose one, it needs CASH urgently, it only has two viable programs, the 777 and the 737 (which is loosing it big time at the moment ie Air Berlin and Nikki) and it is in deep shit.

If it gets CASH quick it can rapidly migrate the 7E7 technologies into urgently needed replacements for the 737 family and who knows, a replacement for the 747 and 'slightly' larger market.

We might also conclude it is another attempt to stampede Congress into funding 200 767 tankers. The big obstacle to that, apart from common sense, and a series of illegal and unpatriotic acts in which it forgot its alleigance to the United States will be any firming up of the notion that Lockheed might do a deal with EADS to build all A330 tankers whether or the US or the rest of the market in the US under licence.


User currently offlineMissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2645 times:

Canada & Brazil are constantly in front of the WTO over subsidies of their respective airospace companies. They take turns as the villain, but I suspect Embraer gets a bigger handout than Bombardier. Just my $.02  Big grin
Surely Airbus & Boeing are big enough to be beyond needing such handouts.



Can you hear me now?
User currently offlineM27 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2559 times:

Wow Antares, that is quite some insight you have there. If it gets congress to
"shovel out heaps of money for Boeing", lets hope it works! Why they might even send some jobs to Australia! Has Airbus sent any money that way.

If Americans cant't have the jobs, I would just as soon Japan and Asia have them as the EU!

Another question, if Lockheed and Airbus team up and get the tanker contract, that will mean a lot of jobs for Americans you're saying? Will that cost European's any jobs? I guess since its Airbus though, they will do it in the correct way!

Thank you Antares for worrying about American jobs! "This has nothing to do with subsidies": I must admit, I'm still trying to figure that one out.

[Edited 2004-11-09 01:41:13]

25 Post contains images DfwRevolution : Wake up guys. Boeing doesn't have time to win a long drawn out court case, or worse still,loose one, it needs CASH urgently, it only has two viable pr
26 CRPilot : Folks at the end of the day is all about economics!!!! Demand and Supply!!! As well as, keeping investors (which include the respective Federal Govern
27 M27 : A competitive price? Define competitive price. Are you talking about when a government gives a company money to develope a commercial aircraft, or are
28 CRPilot : M27 How exactly do you know the margin of influence that the subsidies play on Airbus pricing? I mean I constantly see people complaining about it, bu
29 M27 : You know CRPilot, if the A400m fails as a military transport, you want hear one objection from me if Airbus wants to turn it into an Airliner!
30 CRPilot : Boeing is an outstanding company, with the capacity to develop great aircraft just like Airbus. And if it takes the hand of uncle Sam to give them a b
31 M27 : It is the cause of Boeing's trouble, so lets see that hand from Uncle Sam. I'm glad that you won't complain! Maybe no one else will either!!!!
32 Areopagus : This has nothing to do with subsidies and everything to do with persuading the US Congress to shovel out heaps of money for Boeing so it can send even
33 Irishjohn : Maybe the arguments, both sides, would be better served if there were more fact and less fiction!! Airbus has had 'hand outs' and for the most part t
34 CRPilot : As I said before...this is not news folks!!! This practices have been going on for decades. Irishjohn brings good observations to the table. One thing
35 Dayflyer : It's time Airbus learned how to fly on its own wings. Period. Are they afraid Airbus can't make it without it? What are they soooo scared of? Are the
36 CRPilot : You're going to find it very hard to adjust to the future of commerce if you don't open your eyes Dayflyer. Perhaps you still see our industry in the
37 ReguPilot : Maybe this comes better here: I am not very instructed on the subject, and its the reason why I post here ( to find out) but, why is Boeing scared of
38 Gdjet16 : Irishjohn... When was the last time Boeing offered a "knocked down" version of a military aircraft as a commercial jet liner? The 707 is the only Boei
39 CRPilot : Wrong...The 747 was designed as a military transport, but when MD got the contract, Boeing turn it into the great bird it is today.
40 Gdjet16 : I thought that the military transport proposal your speaking of was the C5, built by Lockheed.... But in any case, the 747 was not based on a military
41 CRPilot : My mistake, you're right it was the C5. I've got a DVD on the subject, it's pretty interesting, but indeed it was designed originaly as a transport.
42 Atmx2000 : 4. Perhaps Airbus has taken advantage of the rules? And perhaps it continues to receive 'unfair' hand outs? But it does develop 'new' state of the art
43 Gigneil : Is this truly the case? Yes, Airbus Mixed Fleet Flying and Cross Crew Qualification allow easy transfer between fleet type. Austrian's A330/340 pilots
44 Flybyguy : Perhaps everyone is forgetting one important thing in this matter... JOBS. Not that they are being sling-shot overseas, but that they remain opened to
45 Irishjohn : Have to be up early to keep up with you lot!!!!!! Dayflyer Have not yet worked out yet if you are anti Airbus or anti France/French!!!!! (aren't you g
46 Irishjohn : FLYBYGUY Many thanks for that!! Didn't want hurt to anyone's feelings by stating the obvious!! Which is why i asked DAYFLYER to consider the whole pic
47 Atmx2000 : Perhaps I should have trimmed more. I was taking issue with: Airbus is still the only producer to recognise the power of compatibility I'm arguing tha
48 Irishjohn : ATMX2000 I can't disagree with what you say! I think I was pointing out that Airbus came up with the idea of compatibility and not Boeing! Airbus coul
49 Trex8 : Dayflyer A tax credit is free money in the bank, it is also totally different from a tax deduction (reduce your taxable income, not the actual taxes o
50 Antares : Hi M27, I'm not suggesting for a second that lots of public money for Boeing wouldn't be a bad thing, although let's hope it works a bit better than t
51 A380900 : Ok guys. It looks like there is some education to do over here. Ever heard of Judith Miller? She has been feeding NYT's readers with WMD's phony stori
52 Bahadir : Boeing is under investigation because of a 100 bil. USD contract fraud.. That's more than US government claims that AI received. http://yahoo.reuters.
53 Irishjohn : Way to go TREX8!!! Pity you won't be believed - guess your knowledge will not fit with the current Boeing view!! Say, why don't we all write to W and
54 Trex8 : George W Bush going to bat and kicking up a potential trade war where there will be no winners for a company 1. HQ'd in a state with a democratic gove
55 Post contains images Adria : poor americans they are not no.1 in civil aviation industrie anymore and now bashing seem to be the only thing left to do funny
56 ConcordeBoy : Yes, Airbus Mixed Fleet Flying and Cross Crew Qualification allow easy transfer between fleet type. Austrian's A330/340 pilots fly a certain number of
57 Atmx2000 : I think you are missing something if you look at the issue purely in terms of the dollars/euros of aid given. Timing and risk mitigation are very crit
58 Atmx2000 : Trex8, I fail to see why you think election results for states with Boeing HQ or operations are going to effect whether the US president is going to f
59 Trex8 : Pres Bush didn't impose the steel tariffs on imports because Ohio and Pennsylvania etc were states he already had in his pocket and this was payback,
60 Adria : "Yes, Airbus Mixed Fleet Flying and Cross Crew Qualification allow easy transfer between fleet type. Austrian's A330/340 pilots fly a certain number o
61 Atmx2000 : Trex8, If you think politics is the only thing that will drive trade disputes, then you should remember there are important elected Republicans in tho
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...
NY Times Article On EAS Subsidies posted Fri Oct 6 2006 06:41:11 by FATFlyer
Moscow Times: End Of Tax On Foreign A/c posted Mon Sep 4 2006 20:53:05 by Scbriml
NY Times Reviews DL's New Biz Class posted Wed Jun 7 2006 20:42:00 by ArtieFufkin
787 Pressurization And The NY Times posted Mon May 8 2006 00:47:12 by Wjcandee
NY Times: SIN-SYD 1st SQ A380 Route posted Tue Mar 28 2006 20:41:10 by Ctbarnes
NY Times Article On Airplane Lavatories posted Tue Dec 6 2005 21:25:25 by Dartland
EU Says Airbus Subsidies Must Be "curbed" posted Sun Sep 25 2005 15:47:05 by Kellmark
NY Times: AA To Fly To Africa (oops!) posted Tue Aug 23 2005 21:02:40 by FoxBravo
CO 777-200LR Order Speculation From NY Times posted Wed Aug 3 2005 04:30:42 by STT757
NY Times To UAL, Drop Dead III posted Sun May 15 2005 13:48:10 by Dtwclipper