CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 5 Posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
WASHINGTON (AFX) - Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said the U.S. may launch proceedings against certain EU trade practices, notably subsidies to Airbus Industrie for its A3XX super jumbo project.
In documents filed with the Congress, she termed the subsidies as "alarming practices", adding that the government may launch proceedings soon.
She said that actual public funding and promised subsidies to different industries, and notably Airbus, "raise serious concern" regarding the respect by European governments' multi- and bi-lateral
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Sndp From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 553 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1066 times:
Although I do not want to start a EU-US or Boeing-Airbus war, God prevent us from that and give us a serious discussion, I would like to comment on this message. As we all know, Airbus will indeed receive money from EU-governements but this money will be returned once the first aircraft is produced and delivered. Countries like England have gained already a lot of money, for every 1$ they have put in the A320 program they now have received already 3. So, Airbus will give this money back.
Boeing is also sponsored although here it goes via the military aircraft production. Boeing uses a lot of studies for military aircraft or space projects financed by the governement to produce its civil aircraft. Why is America not fair on this subject. Should we all be treated in the same way? They fear the A3XX and they never thought this project would come of the ground. Now that Emirates has committed itself to buy some A3XX's and others will do this soon, this seems to be the only thing the Americans want to and can do to protect their own market. I hope it won't work! And if it happens the EU certainly must go through with the ban on hushkitted B737's, 707 and 727.
A student From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1059 times:
Excuse me, but what do hushkitted aircraft have to do with unfair subsidies to the A3XX????
Basically, this would mean a trade war like the Bananacrisis. (US put taxes on European luxury products). If the EU should react in any way at all, it would be to protest against the Americans spending money on scientific research that benefits Boeing.
But on the other hand, scientific progress is needed. The A3XX does not bring any significant progress, and it is built purely for economic reasons, i.e. to make money with it. If it is a project that is good investment, Airbus could try financing it with loans from banks. It is not. So it needs government money. This could turn out to be a moneyeater like the Eurofighter, the Transrapid, the Eurotunnel or other such prestige projects that are built purely for prestige reasons. Airbus, the entire company, is basically one big such prestige project, and by sheer luck, it seems, it turned out to be successful. (Hmmm, if you want to make millions, start byt putting billions into Airbus, wait for ten years, and maybe you'll get millions, huh?)
What's the bottom line? It is okay for the US to protest. Can they stop it? No. Are they doing anything at all at the moment? From this post it looks like one representative complained. That's all. No need to panic and start trade wars. So why worry? Life is not fair. Boeing and Airbus both complain, pointing fingers at each other, but they will manage. I'm on the Boeing side, myself. Sndp is on the Airbus side. Who cares?
777x From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1046 times:
I don't have a problem in principle with Airbus receiving subsidies, after all, it was created by the goverments of the EU with some political reasons backing it's creation. At the end of the day it's a EU project and therefor they can do what they like (This doesn't mean that others won't complain about it)
However, I don't buy the argument that Boeing also receives subsidies from it's military projects. That's complete BS because the consortium members of Airbus receive the same sort of deals (which I don't think amounts to subsidies in either case). Of course defense research benifits commercial products, that happens across many fields, but perhaps it is most obvious in aerospace. But again, while Boeing has learned from it's defense contracts, so have the Airbus consortium members (where do you think they developed the skills to build the first Airbus & Concorde?)
LBSteve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1046 times:
Subsidies are a tricky issue. We in the US really can’t say too much given our own record of subsidizing industry. Type in ‘Corporate Welfare’ in any search engine and you’ll see what I mean. Right or wrong, I just don’t see how we in the US can complain?
Udo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1039 times:
Oh, after Emirates has launched the A3XX the US evaluate to act against Airbus...what will they do?
1. Ground all US-registered Airbusses?
2. Stop importing any Airbusses?
3. Declare a new trade war?
4. Close all embassies in Europe?
5. Send the USS Enterprise into the Channel, or into the North Sea, to show up?
I can't wait for any actions...
And I can't wait see the first A3XX in proud Emirates colors taking off!
Oh, by the way, thanks for all bloody posts, I will enjoy reading them!
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10794 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1001 times:
So, when you go to McDonald's and buy a cheeseburger, are you subsidizing McDonald's? Of course not. It's a fee for service.
The government says "We want 100 F-3000 jets for [whatever reason]." Boeing says, "We can do that. We'll charge $X per plane," and the government says "OK." How is that subsidy? It too is a fee for a product.
I guess the US taxpayer is also subsidizing McDonalds when a gov't employer on TDY uses his per diem to buy lunch, huh?
WorldTraveller From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 624 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 995 times:
I can't understand your behaviour.
The US government and the EU agreed in '92 that the kind of loans Airbus will get to develop the A3XX is legal and O.K. !!!
So what are you screaming about?
Please stick to your agreements...
But I know the real reason why you call the loans unfair:
The A3XX will break Boeings (or America's) monopoly in the 400+ seat market.
And it was exactly this market which gave Boeing the big $$$'s so that there was no need to make profit with the other models (especially the 737), since the narrowbodies had to compete with the highly succesful A320 family (and don't you remember that Boeing said there was no market and no need for these a/c, too??).
Boeing tries to bring the A3XX project down ( that's ok from their point of view), and that's why they don't want the loans for Airbus.
Sndp From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 553 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 984 times:
Boeing does not only receive money from the governement for the service they give but also to develop new systems and so on. These experiments and projects are also used for civil aircraft. And the 747 was for example initially a project to build a large aircraft for military use. What they learned from this development was used to make the 747 civil aircraft.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 977 times:
I had concerns about posting this information. Suprise, suprise it has begun to deteriorate already. When Boeing builds JSF or parts for the F-22 it is not the same as Airbus and the A3XX. The U.S. military sees the need and demand for a new fighter and ask several companies to build prototypes and designs. Finally it comes down to the best design and the company is paid by the U.S. Government for each aircraft it produces. When the French or other nations subsidize they do NOT receive a good in return. The French taxpayer does not have a new F-22 to protect its skies. All they have done is made it possible for Cathay Pacific to afford an A3XX. That is why France's taxes are so high. The citizens of that country pay for Airbus aircraft. They do not receive anything in return. Well they may receive employement but they are paying for their own employement because their own taxes pay for Airbus aicraft. So, it is kinda like a dog chasing its tail.
Ab. 400- As for the F-22 it is indeed off the ground and performing as advertised. The JSF is to fly later this year also. And don't say there isn't a need for these aircraft because in 5-10 years these planes will be the ones fighting for freedom for YOU AND ME.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Sndp From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 553 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 974 times:
All right, maybe I'm doing what I hoped not to happen, adding myself some message in the EU-US war. What we have got here are some people fond of the A3XX, hoping to see the aircraft fly and some Boeing fans. And we are all using (correct?) arguments but we put them in another perspective just to convince the others. It is maybe wrong that Airbus receives money but let us be honest, Boeing also receives this. And the EU was allowed by the US to give money, as the US could do so as well.
What I do not understand, and I hope to get an answer on this question, is why some people here, aviation enthousiast, are against this new great aircraft, the A3XX. Wouldn't it be nice for them too to see this great bird fly?
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10794 posts, RR: 52 Reply 21, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 972 times:
Why is it that to be an "aviation enthusiast" you have to like every new design that comes off the drawing board?
I am an aviation enthusiast. And while I feel that it may be neat to see the 3XX fly, I would prefer that it not come at the expense of people's livelihoods.
We can argue all day about what is fair, and neither side will listen to the other, I'm sure. (Even though I'm right. ) But, I will not be a cheerleader when it hurts my countrymen, my friends, my family, etc.
LBSteve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 971 times:
I think Boeings CEO’s have done more to hurt the American worker than Airbus ever has. They layoff the most experienced for low skill labor just to save a few $$$ while simultaneously lining their own billfold, now that’s something to be mad about.
Avion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 8 Reply 23, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 960 times:
Its way off topic but the taxes in france are not low but they're not high(About the same level as in the US). And are people living with less living standard in the US? No. Everyone gets free healthcare (high class healthcare) and education.
The EU can do with their money what they want. They can throw it out of the window or just keep it on a bank account. But why would they want to throw money out of the window. Just like in the US there is no spare money to throw out of the window!
But bear in mind every euro airbus gets must be paid back! Is not a subsidy, its a loan.