Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A350: US Airways Order Firmed Up  
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10913 times:

http://today.reuters.fr/news/newsArt...OPE-AIRBUS-US-AIRWAYS-20051129.XML

Sorry in French.20 A350s for US AW for delivery between 2011 and 2013.

121 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10866 times:

I have translated it to English  Wink

PARIS (Reuters) - Airbus announces that the American airline company US Airways transformed into control firm an undertaking to buy of 20 Airbus A350, the planes being deliverable between 2011 and 2014. On the basis of price catalogues, purely codes, this contract represents some three billion dollars. In last May, the European airframe manufacturer, subsidiary of EADS and BAE Systems had agreed to support financially US Airways by granting to him a loan of 250 million dollars, in exchange of an engagement of the airline company relating to the purchase of 20 A350.

Thanks


Lee



Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5753 posts, RR: 47
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10828 times:

I think this is old news. I believe it's been on Airbus Orders and deliveries web site since last month.

http://www.airbus.com/odxml/orders_and_deliveries.xls

As of Oct. 31, 2005.

[Edited 2005-11-29 17:45:03]


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13561 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10792 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm not sure how much back-patting should be going on in Toulouse over this order - they've essentially bribed an airline into buying their product.

Put another way, if GM offers to pay my mortgage for a year in exchange for me buying one of their cars in five years, I'm not sure people would look at this as a ringing endorsement of GM quality - there was obviously other motivation to be considered.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5753 posts, RR: 47
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10779 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
there was obviously other motivation to be considered.

Very true. You hit it right on the head.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10651 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
- they've essentially bribed an airline into buying their product.

US was not bribed to do anything. Look, US signed a contract for planes with Airbus. Airbus was just simply nice enough to help them out during this rough patch.

US could have asked the court to throw out that contract - but didn't. Therefore, US was just as interested as Airbus in getting the A350 and a loan.

This is a win-win for Airbus and US.



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10564 times:

I don't know the details of the deal, however I doubt a loan of 250 million dollars could make or break such a big deal for such a big airline.

User currently offlineColumbia107 From Gibraltar, joined Aug 2004, 358 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10564 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 5):
This is a win-win for Airbus and US.

Provided US survives and prospects at the moment are that "the jury is out".



In God we trust
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25173 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10549 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
they've essentially bribed an airline into buying their product.

Boeing and Airtran doesn't count?

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10527 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
I'm not sure how much back-patting should be going on in Toulouse over this order - they've essentially bribed an airline into buying their product.

US could have rejected it, they were not forced to accept it. They could have raised the money elsewhere.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 5):
This is a win-win for Airbus and US.

Exactly. And it's not as if Airbus had talked them into an A380 order...


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11275 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10527 times:

Would Boeing have ponied up $250M in loans for US?


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10510 times:

I don't understand why Airbus requires government assistance for the A350, yet they can afford to lend money to their customers in return for orders. That seems a roundabout way of getting European subisidies for a US airline.

User currently offlineJumbojet From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10484 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 5):
Look, US signed a contract for planes with Airbus. Airbus was just simply nice enough to help them out during this rough patch.

which essentially spells out, BRIBE


User currently offlineJumbojet From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10463 times:

Airbus gives the impression that they will do AYTHING for a contract. Much like a little leauge team you may have been on that will do ANYTHING to win!  Big grin

User currently onlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5028 posts, RR: 44
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10462 times:

And the Sh*t hits the fan, yet again. Way to go boys!

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11275 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10455 times:

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 11):
That seems a roundabout way of getting European subisidies for a US airline.

Where's the outrage?! [edit:  Smile ]

Seriously, when you put it that way, it sounds like there should be more than a few Europeans pissed off about this money going to an American firm. But then again, Airbus does have suppliers outside of Europe. While there may be an argument made that these suppliers are receiving European subsidies, the primary effect is still to better the situation for Europeans.

(Other countries play this game too. No harm, no foul.)

[Edited 2005-11-29 18:55:07]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineCloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10433 times:

First aircraft isn't set to arrive until 2011, what will US do until the mean time? They need more aircraft now if they want to expand transatlantic service, and the 767s aren't getting any younger. Does US have a stop-gap plan until the 350s arrive?


Boston, USA
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10398 times:

Quoting Jumbojet (Reply 12):
which essentially spells out, BRIBE

LOL - a bribe is when someone has to act on something or suffer a negative consequence if not followed through. What negative consequence will US suffer? Getting the new efficient jet in 10 years???

Gosh, if this is a bribe... your on crack.



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10379 times:

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 11):
I don't understand why Airbus requires government assistance for the A350, yet they can afford to lend money to their customers in return for orders. That seems a roundabout way of getting European subisidies for a US airline.

Who said anything about Airbus requiring government assistance? If it's available, they'll take it - but, on several occasions, they've made it quite clear that they'd go ahead with the A350 one way or the other.

Quoting Jumbojet (Reply 12):
which essentially spells out, BRIBE

I'll just quote Mariner here: Boeing and Airtran doesn't count?

Quoting Jumbojet (Reply 13):
Airbus gives the impression that they will do AYTHING for a contract. Much like a little leauge team you may have been on that will do ANYTHING to win!

And again, I'll just quote Mariner: Boeing and Airtran doesn't count?

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 14):
And the Sh*t hits the fan, yet again. Way to go boys!

Well, I guess that you, just like me, were not surprised - right?

Quoting D L X (Reply 15):
Where's the outrage?!

What outrage? Why should there be outrage? In the end (if everything works out), Airbus will profit from the deal. And from that, Airbus' employees and, by that, Europe - or the countries where Airbus and its suppliers have plants - will profit (after all, Airbus Employees do pay income taxes).

So where's the reason for outrage?

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10356 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 15):
Seriously, when you put it that way, it sounds like there should be more than a few Europeans pissed off about this money going to an American firm.

Nobody is pissed off about a deal which may result in profits for Airbus in the end.

Germany just financed a third of some new submarines (one third = EUR 300+ million) destined for Israel - now that's questionable. Or the billions which are wasted for farm subsidies every year and every year.


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11275 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10351 times:

Quoting Leskova (Reply 18):
So where's the reason for outrage?

Oh, there isn't any. I was trying to be sarcastic. I'll edit for clarity.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25173 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10317 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
Would Boeing have ponied up $250M in loans for US?

Why not? They did it for Airtran:

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2001/05/14/daily43.html

There is nothing illegal about it, it isn't a bribe, it is just good business dealing.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineNW727251ADV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10293 times:

So where exactly does bankrupt US Airways intend on flying long-range, high capacity A350s on a limited international network??? From what I've read on A.net US can barely justify having a fleet of A330s.

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11275 posts, RR: 52
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10283 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 21):
Why not? They did it for Airtran:

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/s....html

Then I would agree that it's simply good business dealing, and characterizing it as a bribe is misplaced. Although, I imagine that Boeing may have had to offer more than $250M to convince US to ever buy Boeing again, even with the new management.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineNW727251ADV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10249 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 21):
it isn't a bribe, it is just good business dealing.

 spit  OMG I almost choked on my coffee. Good business dealing??? In what world? The Barg Spiral Galaxy of the Lacivious Drakos Border??? Airbus basically took advantage of someone who was down for their benefit. Did US Airways really have too many other options but to say "Yes"?  sarcastic 

BTW, I would have preferred Air Train getting A320s.  bigthumbsup 


25 EA CO AS : To me, this is the key issue right here. Airbus is in need of high-profile orders for the A350 and counts US Airways among them. The idea is that by
26 Post contains images JetMaster : Since when have they been bankrupt? They were still in business last weekend and even yesterday when they flew me back to MUC... You better shouldn't
27 B707321C : Bribing is not legal in US or EU. I am sure Airbus just offered a better package than the competetion, plan and simple. It kind of naive to say that
28 Post contains images Mariner : Absolutely, they did, and still do. They have strict performance guarantees on the A350 compared to the 787. LCC (HP/US) can walk away if they are no
29 D L X : US is not bankrupt. In fact, it's stock has risen 50% in the last 3 months.
30 NW727251ADV : Maybe they're not bankrupt but they're certainly not SQ or EK. I mean, congrats to Airbus because honestly I think I like the A350 a little bit more
31 StuckInCA : Hasn't this exact conversation/argument been had multiple times already? Many of the posts look like they could have been cut and pasted from prior th
32 Post contains images Stitch : I believe GE is helping to finance UA's exit from C11, yet I don't see P&W engines being yanked off the wings and replaced with GE ones. Airbus offeri
33 Post contains images Mariner : Oh, you and me both. Every time it comes up, I assume it is over. But then it comes up again and I have to go to the archives again to find the links
34 RichardPrice : Yeah, because they are going to be in EXACTLY the same position in 7 years time when they get the aircraft and have to pay for them. Theres absolutel
35 Jumbojet : Accorind to websters dictionary, it is not a BRIBE but what A did was essentially leave them with no choice but to order A metal. Maybe they were coe
36 Starrion : All things considered, I don't have a problem with a European company paying a couple hundred million dollars to a struggling US airline. Keeps the ai
37 Cactus739 : US ain't bankrupt no more.... Don't believe 1/3 of the things you read on here.
38 Mariner : I know this is a shocking concept for some, but there is also the possibility that they actually wanted to order the A350. They do fly the A330, afte
39 NW727251ADV : All I have to say to this claptrap is don't quit your day job (if you have one) because acting together with sarcasm is not in your list of abilities
40 StuckInCA : I disagree. According to Webster's Dictionary, here's the definition of bribe: 1 : money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgmen
41 EA CO AS : It's all semantics, but they're essentially the same. US was given money to enable them to complete their merger...in exchange for orders of the A350
42 RichardPrice : I was actually being mostly serious. US may not have need for the aircraft in this climate, but what do you know about their plans for the next 15 ye
43 Post contains images Maersk737 : They were more or less destroyed from inside, they did not need any help from a stupid CEO
44 D L X : What does that have to do with anything? 1) is this really necessary? 2) US is an airline that was around during the tenure of all those you mention.
45 MEA330 : GE has been financing US and Canadian carriers out of bankrupty and no one has complained on this site(US, Air Canada and Delta). Air Canada recently
46 PanAm_DC10 : Who cares about the loans? Airbus is entitled to confirm, via the media, when an order is firmed, even if they have carried it on the books for a mont
47 A342 : Yes. 9 or 10 A332 arriving from 2007(?). So I somewhat doubt this statement: The A333s are quite young to be replaced, even in 2011. Maybe the last o
48 EA CO AS : Agreed. But... ...again, 20 of those 200 have a big red asterisk next to them. These weren't purchases made by a company thoroughly impressed with an
49 Dhefty : Boeing does this for Unidentified Orders, whereas Airbus repeatedly announces orders as new even after the orders have been posted and identified, as
50 Post contains images Cloud4000 : I thought this order was cancelled?
51 KYAir : No, they are still on order. And thanks A342, for setting JetMaster straight. The 332s will replace the 762s on international. The '62s will then no
52 PanAm_DC10 : Fair enough though I thought both Companies at the point that the agreement was made would have had a vested interest in seeing the transaction done.
53 AJet : It appears to me most of you talking of a bribe don't know what they're talking about. A bribe is money or a favor given to someone who acts on behalf
54 PlaneDane : Airbus also lent a significant portion of that $250M to US simply for the airline to use in paying penalties on cancellations and deferrals right bac
55 StuckInCA : I don't see how your definition agrees with the dictionary. Definition 2 (see following quote) seems tough to argue against in this case. Obviously t
56 Post contains images Stitch : Did US' creditors state that without an extra $250 million they would not allow US to leave C11? Or did HP demand this extra cash be on hand before t
57 JetMaster : That's what I meant. Of course others will be replaced first. No doubt? Eliminating that aging type from the fleet rather than operating it on the ov
58 PlaneDane : No. Not a chance. Had they just waited, other lenders came forward with more than enough money to lend with better terms. But, they didn't wait and t
59 Aerokiwi : What's the bet this order goes the way of Continental's A330/340 order and TWA's deal for A330s. They'll switch them to another model in about 5-6 yea
60 ZSOFN : You've just described blackmail, not bribery. What constantly amazes me on this site is that generally when Boeing announce an order, it's "congratul
61 Stitch : Yet people think they're supposedly ready to spend a lot more then $250 million to build the 787-10 to land just 2.5 times as many orders from EK, as
62 StuckInCA : I agree that it's sad how this happens, but don't kid yourself into thinking that it's not a two way street.
63 D L X : What constantly amazes me is that if an American ever says anything bad about Airbus, it's because they're biased Americans. Are we not allowed to gi
64 Brilondon : I agree. When the announced merger of US and AW happened I just about fell on the floor laughing. Neither airline are in any great shape financially
65 Mariner : Why should they wait? The money was there and there were time constraints concerning the exit from bk of US Airways. If they had not taken the $1.5 b
66 Post contains images ZSOFN : Didn't mean to offend, and whilst I know that there are plenty of Americans here who remain objective (in fact, the majority), there are many more Ai
67 Post contains images D L X : ZSOFN, don't worry. I'm just snippy because someone suggested I was biased in a couple threads this week. No worries, mate.
68 PlaneDane : Come on, Mariner. You know I don't want US to fail. This airline is based in my own hometown for heaven's sake.
69 Dougloid : You know, has it occurred to anyone that this order for 20 A350s is fallout from Chapter 11 that folks NOT in a position to know anything about are s
70 Post contains images Mariner : Then I'm really confused - sorry. You seem very against the deal yet you want the airline to survive and it is probable that the airline would not ha
71 Etops1 : we will just have to wait and see what happens with all this. this merger is at it's early stages . so far i have seen alot more good things happening
72 EA CO AS : First off, Boeing isn't in the position of trying to jump-start the 787 program. Airbus IS trying to jump-start what has so far proven to be a very a
73 Etops1 : US Airways firms up order for 20 A350s (from the airbus website) 29 November 2005 Following a commitment announced in May 2005 by US Airways and Ameri
74 Post contains images Stitch : Yet every order Airbus lands for the A350 "legitimizes" the program as a competitor to the 787, both in terms of providing monies to actually launch
75 FCYTravis : As was pointed out to me, the idea that US Airways' 762s are "aging" is not really true. They are fairly new, some even newer than United's 744s - hav
76 Stitch : Well US has painted one of their 762s in the new colors. I am guessing that they do this when they send the plane in for it's heavy maintenance check,
77 EA CO AS : Your mistake is in assuming that the combined US/HP was in dire need of new widebody lift within the next five to seven years, though. They weren't.
78 Mariner : By which time: (i) they wouldn't have got the launch customer discount, which we can assume to at least 40%. Given the rumors that Boeing gave ANA 50
79 NW727251ADV : But the differences here are worth saying. ANA operates A320 so it's not like you can call them biased towards one manufacturer. And JAL is a known a
80 Post contains images Mariner : I think so. But surely the point is - based on your parallel - just as ANA was a known Boeing customer, so US Airways was a known Airbus customer and
81 Post contains images Stitch : Actually, I have been saying the exact opposite. That Airbus launching the A346E program is a way for them to not concede the 777-sized market to Boe
82 TheRedBaron : In my view, Airbus is still quite aggresiv ein penetrating the American Market, even if its on a loyal Airbus customer. If HP and Us Airways had order
83 Post contains images Stitch : May I ask how you know US is not interested in expanding their service come the early 2010s? International is about the only area the American domest
84 Post contains images JayBird : Here's an image from airbus.com ..
85 Post contains images Stitch : Looks like Airbus didn't get the memo about the new colorscheme. The 762 looks really good in the new colors, so an A359 probably should look nice, as
86 Post contains images Lehpron : Just realize that opinions are not ever facts, no matter how much people are so sure about them. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but not when
87 MD90fan : So the A350's will repace A333's and the old 762's will still be flying?
88 EA CO AS : That was primarily because Frank Borman arranged a deal with Airbus where EA essentially got the planes for FREE during their trial period at EA - th
89 Etops1 : just to let you know we have 2 767's painted in the new livery .N650US & N656US. other a/c to be painted will be us/west 737-300,29 in 2006.A320,2 in
90 Post contains images EA CO AS : Who said they aren't? My question is CAN they - or at least COULD they without the generous support of our friends in Toulouse? Assume for a moment t
91 Etops1 : source for the painting sched was from "about us" usairways employee newsletter
92 Etops1 : also let me make a correction on the us/east 757's. 3 will be painted in 2005 and 4 in 2006 with a total of 7 in 2006.
93 Etops1 : one other thing. no a/b aircraft at us/east xcept for N109UW.will be painted in the new livery in 2006 since they already say usairways and sport the
94 Toulouse : Of course... I'm in business and would do just about anything to get business. Normal! Now, I only read as far as this post on the thread as I saw ho
95 DistantHorizon : Very wrong. You completely missed the point. Was it deliberate? You must know that choosing a planes goes well beyond picking the one that best suits
96 Post contains images Stitch : I see one of two things happening (though this is just my opinion): Airbus agreed to an order from US for 20 A350s with no deposits. They then loaned
97 Thegooddoctor : Ahhh, I remember those days of freshman economics... I think I still have my notes from the day that the professor talked about corporate philanthrop
98 Thegooddoctor : EA - right on - somehow I think this point will get lost/is lost in this thread.
99 FCYTravis : It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why they selected Airbus. Neither airline has bought a Boeing aircraft in a decade. Their "modern" f
100 JetMaster : No. My point was to show that the A350 will provide (most likely required) capacity growth over the B762 when the latter will be replaced. Regards, J
101 Post contains images Mariner : Who is claiming it as a "win"? It is difficult, however, to see it as a "loss". cheers mariner
102 BoomBoom : I'm not sure Airbus would appreciate the comparison. You are correct, Boeing did the same thing for Airtran with the 717 deal. Why? Because the 717 w
103 Mariner : So you are saying that Boeing "bought" the sales of a dog of an aircraft? Does this apply to the Midwest 717 deal, too? cheers mariner
104 Post contains links BoomBoom : It was a dog of a seller. That's why the final 717 airplane is in preliminary production right now.
105 Mariner : We come from different worlds. I was around when the Super VC10 wasn't selling. It doesn't mean it was a "bad" aircraft. cheers mariner
106 BoomBoom : I didn't say it was a bad aircraft. I said it was a dog of a seller. Quit trying to put words in my mouth.
107 Mariner : Well, sorry, but I am really confused as to what you are saying. cheers mariner
108 BoomBoom : The plain fact is that the 717 wasn't selling. Not necessarily because it was a bad aircraft but for some reason the airlines didn't want it. Perhaps
109 Mariner : Okay. I agree with that. See post #8. cheers mariner
110 Leskova : While it's wonderfully off topic, I'll just remind you of ANA's B737 order, the intent being to replace the A320s. I would, indeed, call that biased
111 PM : What catches my eye in the Airbus press release is that USAir hasn't selected an engine yet. I'd assumed all along that this was a GE order. Can anyon
112 Post contains images Art : It's a loan, not a gift as in your GM parallel. It does not.
113 Post contains images LifelinerOne : What I'm missing here is that Airbus is one of the parties who doesn't want to see US fail. No one is mentioning the fact that US is operating a rathe
114 Post contains images LifelinerOne : They just read this thread: Cheers!
115 Post contains images Stitch : I did note in Reply #98 I thought some or all of that $250 million might have been to make payments on upcoming A33x/A32x orders, and you have just a
116 Post contains images EA CO AS : Fine. Then, how about this: You've got horrible credit, no bank will qualify you for ANY sort of loan, and you're desperate for cash. GMAC comes to y
117 Post contains images LifelinerOne : Just pure speculation here, because nobody really knows what kind of talks are going on. I think Airbus did approach UA for a likewise agreement, but
118 Post contains images A330323X : You know, the Airbus-US Airways term sheet is out there. I've posted it myself a half-dozen times. It describes in great detail all of the aircraft o
119 Gigneil : By a VERY long shot. N
120 D L X : Are you sure it's not because Boeing tried to blame the Pittsburgh crash on US? [stirs pot] You know, it's funny considering that it was US forcing B
121 Soylentgreen : Consider this order dead in the water. Financials released last week of the merged America West-US Airways shows worse far financials than expected. S
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...
Could US Airways Be Picking Up EK's A346s? posted Sat Nov 4 2006 23:22:29 by FWAERJ
A Dozen Reasons For US Airways To Pick Up 747SP's posted Tue Jun 27 2006 07:50:00 by Thegooddoctor
Why The 737-400 Of US Airways Were Broken Up? posted Sun Jan 18 2004 07:45:55 by 747SPA330MD11
I Didn't Realize US Airways' 767s Were Up For Sale posted Tue Oct 1 2002 04:36:18 by John
Will US Airways Order A321s? posted Thu May 20 1999 21:12:52 by NYC Int'l
FT:Airbus A350 Delay Could Affect US Airways posted Fri Oct 27 2006 12:53:32 by UALMMFlyer
US Airways Alternative To The A350? posted Fri Oct 6 2006 07:49:18 by Vega
US Airways Original Airbus Order - Pre 9/11. posted Mon Aug 28 2006 01:51:20 by Gilesdavies
US Airways Indifferent To Airbus's A350 Dilemma posted Mon Jun 5 2006 10:04:08 by Leelaw
Why US Airways Ordered A350? posted Wed May 24 2006 18:58:18 by Scoljet