Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
PAL: To Acquire 6 A340s Or 777s  
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4217 posts, RR: 89
Posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8031 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

To update on PAL's plans;

They have decided to go all Airbus for their narrowbody fleet by 2009 and expect to make a decision to acquire 6 A340s or B777s early next year.

Oct. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Philippine Airlines Inc., the Southeast Asian nation's biggest carrier, said it plans to acquire six new wide-body airplanes by 2009 and will choose either Airbus SAS A340s or Boeing Co. 777s.
The airline will decide on the model by early next year, President Jaime Bautista said in an interview today. The company is switching to only Airbus planes for its narrow-body aircraft, he said.


Interesting given they still have 4 deferred B744 PAX models on order. I doubt they can afford to lose the deposits so perhaps Airbus for narrowbody fleet and Boeing for Long Haul. May be hard though given they already operate Airbus widebodies. Will be interesting to see the outcome of this RFP.

Regards, PanAm_DC10


Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7943 times:

Tough one to call as it depends on financing.

PAL have had problems in the past with funding aircraft acquisitions so it depends on who will want to do a deal with them or how they propose to finance an order. If they have some cash with Boeing then there might be mileage in converting 744 options to 772ER or 773ER orders if they think the 744 is too big for them.

Bottom line on the deal is that PR has had major money troubles and it won't be an easy deal to put together.


User currently offlineAirlineAddict From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7949 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

B777s? Wow! I would lean more towards a negotiating ploy with Airbus rather than seriously considering B777s. However, the 777-300ER would economically provide tremendous lift capabilities that are lacking on current A340-300 routes (namely MNL-YVR-LAS).

With that being said, the A340-600/A340-500s would give commonality with the A340s and A330s which cannot be downplayed.

Knowing PR, the current A340s are too young to be replaced. Therefore, they will probably be kept to develop new routes (i.e., Europe).

I hope PR is making enough money to support the new planes.


User currently offlineKL808 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7902 times:

As far as I know the remaining 4 B744 are still there but will probably never be taken up.

The deposits for those are probably long gone.

Delivery by the way of those widebodies will DEFINITELY start on or after 2009, because that's when PR will get out of its rehabilitation.

Expect an order for more A340's.

Drew



AMS-LAX-MNL
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7882 times:

This news was posted in another thread, before. I also read an article where they said that PR wants to have an all Airbus fleet by 2009.

So I expect them to buy A346s, maybe the HGW version. Perhaps even two or three A388. Would be great to see that.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7870 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 1):
Tough one to call as it depends on financing.

Sorry to disagree with you, but as I noted on another thread, I believe that this announcement is merely a ploy to get a bid from Boeing in order to try to "lowball" Airbus. PR is firmly wedded to Airbus and they have announced their intentions to be an all Airbus airline by 2009 (this was on another thread, too). I must ask (rhetorically), "Why would Boeing even bother to bid"? Didn't Scott Carson say that they wouldn't do "silly deals". In any negotiation, one's success is usually determined by one's bargaining position. If you bargain from a position of strength, i.e., "walk-away power", you can usually drive a better deal. I just don't see PR having this walk away power with Airbus, unless Boeing deludes themselves into thinking they actually have a chance on this one. This is one deal where the seller--most likely Airbus--will be in a very strong position to dictate the terms.

My two cents. Fire away....



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlinePlaneDane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7773 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 5):
Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 1):
Tough one to call as it depends on financing.

Sorry to disagree with you, but as I noted on another thread, I believe that this announcement is merely a ploy to get a bid from Boeing in order to try to "lowball" Airbus. PR is firmly wedded to Airbus and they have announced their intentions to be an all Airbus airline by 2009 (this was on another thread, too). I must ask (rhetorically), "Why would Boeing even bother to bid"? Didn't Scott Carson say that they wouldn't do "silly deals". In any negotiation, one's success is usually determined by one's bargaining position. If you bargain from a position of strength, i.e., "walk-away power", you can usually drive a better deal. I just don't see PR having this walk away power with Airbus, unless Boeing deludes themselves into thinking they actually have a chance on this one. This is one deal where the seller--most likely Airbus--will be in a very strong position to dictate the terms.

My two cents. Fire away....

First, I totally agree with you, Lumberton.

However, an aircraft manufacturer can consider a loss to be a victory in certain cases. Through bidding down so low in price as to force Airbus to sell their aircraft at a loss, Boeing could still consider the sales campaign somewhat of a victory.

An example of this happening might be the Easyjet order from not so long ago. Airbus could do the same to a Boeing sale too, conceivably.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12868 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7559 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 6):
However, an aircraft manufacturer can consider a loss to be a victory in certain cases. Through bidding down so low in price as to force Airbus to sell their aircraft at a loss, Boeing could still consider the sales campaign somewhat of a victory.

An example of this happening might be the Easyjet order from not so long ago. Airbus could do the same to a Boeing sale too, conceivably.

A somewhat common belief here on a.net. If anyone can produce any evidence to support that either Airbus or Boeing has ever sold planes at a loss, I'd love to see it.

Boeing may well have been "raped" by FR, but I bet they still didn't sell at a loss.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7405 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 7):
A somewhat common belief here on a.net. If anyone can produce any evidence to support that either Airbus or Boeing has ever sold planes at a loss, I'd love to see it.

I believe JetBlue's CEO claimed that when they bought their initial A320s, they got them at below market value. It was widely perceived that he implied JetBlue bought them at loss-type prices, from Airbus. Since I doubt anyone here on a.net, nor anywhere else can produce the actual sales invoices, I doubt the evidence can be produced.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineAirlineaddict From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7325 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I must have missed the article regarding the all-Airbus fleet, can someone post a link? In any event, I doubt PR would replace the 744 with a A346HGW. It would likely be the A380 for the routes to SFO and LAX.

Here's something that's probably nonsense but fun to speculate about... any chance PR would change its deferred 744s to 747 Advanced?


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7270 times:

Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 8):
Since I doubt anyone here on a.net, nor anywhere else can produce the actual sales invoices, I doubt the evidence can be produced.

looking at B6's reporting statements, it doesn't seem as if they bought the A320's at a loss..maybe, just maybe the first few..but thats stretching it too..

they have been paying roughly between $32-$35 million per plane...

I've discussed this topic somewhere else, but I'm too lazy to find it..



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7209 times:

A380s as Thorben mentionned above is not unreasonnable , as the CEO of PR ,already said he is interested in it.But..........with PAL all is a question of money.How can you afford new planes , when you are short of money ?

I heard somewhere they have ordered A319s.Can someone confirm that.Thanks.


User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7133 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 5):
Sorry to disagree with you, but as I noted on another thread, I believe that this announcement is merely a ploy to get a bid from Boeing in order to try to "lowball" Airbus.

Your POV and mine are not mutually exclusive.

They may be trying to open a bidding war for aircraft but it's the financing which will be the stumbling block, getting a struggling carrier past any hurdles the banks and lessors might put up is going to be harder than merely quoting a price and discount.


User currently offlineLeamside From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 444 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7100 times:

FCKC,

Lease agreements for 2 PAL A-319s arriving in 2006 can be found in the 4th paragraph of:

http://money.inq7.net/topstories/vie....php?yyyy=2005&mon=10&dd=21&file=6


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31387 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7041 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

FR got almost half-off for each plane, but I have to believe Boeing still made a profit on each one and considering the size of the deal, the volume alone was probably a nice boost to the balance sheets.

I do not believe B6 received sub-cost pricing, but instead Airbus back-loaded the leases so the first few years were very cheap and then the rates sharply increase over time.

If this is true, too bad for B6 fuel prices are at historical highs just as their lease rates start to climb precipitously.


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7005 times:

Quoting Airlineaddict (Reply 9):
I must have missed the article regarding the all-Airbus fleet, can someone post a link?

http://money.inq7.net/topstories/vie....php?yyyy=2005&mon=10&dd=21&file=6

Seventh paragraph.


User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5051 posts, RR: 44
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6970 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 15):
Seventh paragraph.

I think that was about the narrowbody fleet. PAL has not said the long-haul feet will be all-Airbus.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6867 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 16):
PAL has not said the long-haul feet will be all-Airbus

Scorpio, that's not the way I'm reading this:

Quote:

PAL, which at present has 30 planes for domestic and overseas operations, including six Airbuses, plans to have an all-Airbus fleet by the end of 2009.
Bautista said having uniform aircraft would be more efficient and would give the company some savings.

I think that the above quotes, taken in context with the entire article, point to PAL's goal of having an all Airbus fleet.

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 12):
Your POV and mine are not mutually exclusive

Point taken. Agree that the financing on this deal is the long pole in this here tent.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6846 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 17):
Quote:

PAL, which at present has 30 planes for domestic and overseas operations, including six Airbuses, plans to have an all-Airbus fleet by the end of 2009.
Bautista said having uniform aircraft would be more efficient and would give the company some savings.

I think that the above quotes, taken in context with the entire article, point to PAL's goal of having an all Airbus fleet.

I read it that the whole PAL (PR) is supposed to be all Airbus. The strange part in that sentence is that they say PR has only six currently, should be a lot more.


User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6828 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
If this is true, too bad for B6 fuel prices are at historical highs just as their lease rates start to climb precipitously.

But still better than high lease rates from the beginning...B6 is still better off than most rivals.


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6790 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):
The strange part in that sentence is that they say PR has only six currently, should be a lot more.

They fly 18 Airbus currently: 4 A340s, 8 A330s, and 6 A320s.

http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Philippine%20Airlines-fleet.htm

Getting more A340's for the long haul would appear to make good sense, for a lot of reasons that have been brought up on another thread. Also, there is a maintanence facility at NAIA that is currently maintaining Airbus WB's.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4847 posts, RR: 44
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6431 times:

Firstly I have noticed that PR has quite a few number of First class seats on its long haul aircraft.

Is there actually "revenue demand" for PR's F class seats?

PRs B 744s are all built between 1993-96 so theyre pretty ok for the time being and can last on easily till 2010.

Since they already have a large Airbus widebody fleet of A 333s + A 343s, I would recommend them replacing their B 744s with A 346s in a 2 class layout thus having a luxurious J class product.

There is absolutely no need for PR to get A 380s.


User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6409 times:

Referring to the link that Leamside sent above , it is very clear that PAL will be an all Airbus operator in 2009.
That means the end of the 747-400 at PAL , and probably (just my though) the purchase of some A380s and A340-600s.


User currently onlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3761 posts, RR: 29
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6285 times:

As many people already stated, deals like this usually include many variables. I guess neither B nor A give aircraft away for free. But sometimes it is a good idea to give them away for free, just to get money another way.

Look at mobile phone contracts. In Germany you used to get them pretty cheap, sometimes this is still done. Sometimes you got a cell phone for 0€, but you had to sign a contract with a phone company for 2 years. This had a monthly fee of 15€ that did not include SMS or speaking. So you, in fact, already paid 360€ for the phone even though you did not notice that.

Maybe A really gave away some Airliners very cheap, but maybe they charged higher fees for spare parts (speculation, I don't know that!). There are many scenarios about this, but one thing is for sure. Airliners are not thrown away after 5 years, so the spare part aftermarket is extremely lucrative as well. These deals are extremely complex, as nobody just goes to a bank and gets 40mio USD. Financing is complex, service is complex (nobody accepts an airliner that cannot fly due to faulty wirings), and other issues like crew training and so on are also very important.


User currently offlineAgill From Sweden, joined Feb 2004, 1012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5814 times:

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 23):

Look at mobile phone contracts. In Germany you used to get them pretty cheap, sometimes this is still done. Sometimes you got a cell phone for 0€, but you had to sign a contract with a phone company for 2 years. This had a monthly fee of 15€ that did not include SMS or speaking. So you, in fact, already paid 360€ for the phone even though you did not notice that.

THey can give away the planes for free and then make money by letting the airlines download customized engine sounds and stuff like that. Great idea actually  Smile


25 NorCal : Or how about give them the airplane for free with a certain number of free flight hours that they get each month......and then slam them with extra c
26 Redneckslim : Corruption and gross mismanagement rule at PAL. No other flag carrier has suffered the indignity of having the U.S. Marshals seize a 747-400 on live T
27 TheSonntag : As long as they don't advertise on MTV, I don't care. But if they do, I would personally revoke the manfacturing license for Airbus!
28 BoogyJay : You have a point here. To remain in the aeronautic industry: When I worked for SNECMA, spare parts were a big part of their business and it was very
29 Dalecary : I have a sneaking suspicion the 773ER has a far greater chance for this order than a lot of other posters believe. I don't think it's that clear cut a
30 WhiteHatter : Been done already! Laker bought their first two DC-10 aircraft on a pay-as-you-fly deal from the banks left holding them after the All Nippon bribe s
31 AirlineAddict : Somewhere there is an error in the article, either there's a missing reference to SIX A320s which was the main point of the article or there's a wron
32 Post contains images Lumberton : Exactly! This also came up on another thread. However, it's now out in the public domain. How do they do "damage control" if they are serious about 7
33 KL808 : I totally agree with you. PR should go towards a 2 class layout on all its aircraft. Though the B773ER has GE engines which is the current engine of
34 Dalecary : Who is to say they will have to pay top dollar for 773ERs??? The new aggressive Boeing are discounting very aggressively. I don't believe the money f
35 KL808 : Well its no secret that Boeing has been selling them pretty well this year, so whats to expect them to match Airbuses offer on the A346. Like I said
36 Dalecary : And the Boeing price could well be less, if the 744 deposits are taken into account. It could also be well argued that the 773ER would be a cheaper a
37 Sq212 : PR current plan is to replace all single aisle aircraft with all Airbus second hand A320's. A319 will go to Air Philippines. Hard to tell whether the
38 Kahala777 : In most cases PR long term fleet will look like: A320 A330-300, A330-200 A340-300, A340-600 PR has much to much invested in simplifying its fleet. Th
39 Post contains images VS772LR : Couln't agree more. As with all of the other 777 fans, of course we would like to see one in Philippines colors. Reality is we would be seeing the A3
40 Trex8 : if you want to talk about cut priced marketing, some of GE's competitors would consider their pricing for engines predatory and they are clearly plan
41 Behramjee : I find it astounding that PR doesnt serve DXB when there is so much money to be made by them in that market. A daily A 333 nonstop can easily be fille
42 Sammyk : Gone? Gone where?
43 Lumberton : Good point. If expansion is required (is it?), they could always divert the A380 flights to the former Clark AB in Pampanga. However, that's a long c
44 Shenzhen : My guess is that this is Airbus' order to lose. Boeing will provide a proposal, like they would to any airline. Will they offer 40 percent off list, i
45 DFORCE1 : I'm still not understanding the whole nature of the Air Philippines-PAL relationship. Why would PAL be giving A319's to Air Philippines? Is Air Phili
46 A342 : MNL´s 3737x60 meter runway is enough for the A380 if there are shoulders 7,50 meters wide on each side. However, taxiways and terminals are another
47 6thfreedom : 10 flights per week M*W*FS* 3:20a DXB 1 3:30p MNL I1 EK 332 Non-stop 332 8:10 *TWTFSS 8:20a DXB 1 8:20p MNL I1 EK 334 Non-stop 77W 8:00 M*W*FS* 7:05p
48 Sq212 : The owner of PR acquired Air Philippines from Gutchalian group not long ago. The aircrafts composition are mainly the aging 732 serving secondary rou
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...
Cathay To Acquire Up To Eight A300 Or 757 posted Wed Apr 17 2002 13:21:07 by James768
JAL RFP To Order 10 To 15 CRJ Or E-JETS posted Fri Nov 17 2006 13:12:45 by PanAm_DC10
FI: Alenia Wants To Acquire ATR, Link With RRJ posted Wed Nov 15 2006 07:15:46 by N328KF
WSJ: Iraqi Airways To Acquire 5×737-400 posted Sun Nov 12 2006 23:59:29 by N328KF
Port Of Seattle To Acquire BFI? posted Thu Oct 26 2006 07:26:16 by Gunsontheroof
Phillipine Airlines To Order A346 Or B773ER posted Sat Oct 21 2006 07:45:26 by Kevin
Delta To Acquire Ex-TW 757s From AA posted Tue Oct 17 2006 21:53:07 by FLALEFTY
Rumored Delay Of The A350 To Late 2013 Or 2014 posted Tue Oct 17 2006 01:29:24 by Atmx2000
Malev To Acquire 3 B767-300s To Expand Network posted Thu Sep 28 2006 17:58:02 by IADguy73
Qatar To Buy 20 *more* 777s? posted Sun Sep 24 2006 06:27:10 by Tak