Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers  
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9324 times:

Some people here on a.net already gave this order to Boeing but don't count your chicks just yet. Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=112822

105 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9280 times:

What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.


Boston, USA
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9232 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever?

Maybe some more whalejets. Don't forget SQ operates A340-500's so maybe Airbus figured they can sell SQ more of those instead of SQ buying 772LR's. I would think the A350 would also come into play here.


User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9211 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.

Well, they havent ordered the 787 yet, so they must be at least mildly interested in the A350 in order to consider tenders for it.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12717 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9186 times:

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Well, they havent ordered the 787 yet, so they must be at least mildly interested in the A350 in order to consider tenders for it.

That could be true, and it could also be true that SQ is faking interest in A350 to try to get Boeing to lower the price of the 787. Lots of things are possible.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9175 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.

The A350/787 order, IMO, could still go either way. It very may well be the best deal that wins.

The economics of the 777, however, are a shoe-in. The 772LR fits in perfectly with the 777 fleet and kills the A345 on B/C-routes.


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9128 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.


I don't think its funny at all becuase there is some merit.

IMHO, Airbus did not take the 787 program seriously, as they should. Maybe hindsight is 20/20... but I think the Toulouse execs are re-evaluating the A350 as we speak. You can drop the price so far... but at the end of the day, its the product that count.

You have almost 30 airlines adopting the 787. Look at the impressive customer list...

http://www.newairplane.com/en-US/787Dreamliner/Customers.htm

Airbus has a lot to lose if it does not sign Singapore. So you bet they are going to low ball the A350.

But Boeing stirred the pot once more... This time they announced the 787-10 is a sure bet in the future, and as soon as 2012. The A350 is now old news and their numbers are not competitive any longer.

Cheers,

Ric

[Edited 2005-12-28 21:46:44]


Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6938 posts, RR: 63
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9072 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320...

I don't know if you've noticed but SQ only fly widebodies. Their last narrowbodies were 757s which they also "got rid of" quite quickly. But they do have a narrowbody subsidiary - Silkair - which flies or has on order 16 A319s and A320s with which they seem to be rather happy. So to argue that SQ aren't interested in the A320 seems to be a somewhat questionable statement on two counts.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25413 posts, RR: 86
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9071 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 6):
Airbus has a lot to lose if it does not sign Singapore. So you bet they are going to low ball the A350.

If the rumors are true and ANA got their 787's for $60 million each, Airbus would have to discount phenomenally to beat that. Well, I suppose they might.

But SQ isn't cheap. At the end of the day, they have shown they want aircraft that do the job.

You say the A350 is old news. If that's true, Airbus is wasting their time at SQ no matter how low they go.

That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9025 times:

The most plausible scenario I've seen floated for an Airbus "win" at SQ in the upcoming months is that Airbus would buy back SQ's 5 A340-500s and then lease to SQ 10 A340-500s. At the same time, SQ would order 10 B777-200LRs for delivery in 2007-08 to replace the Airbii. That would give Airbus plenty of time to find a new buyer or lessor for the A340s on a predictable schedule. It would give SQ the capacity they need now and the aircraft they want when it becomes available.

User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8983 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 8):
That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

One can also argue that if by SQ engaging in talks with Airbus about the A350 leads to Boeing slashing their prices for the dreamliner, SQ isn't really wasting their time. Unfortunately, none of us here will probably ever know  biggrin 


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8955 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.

Never let facts come in the way of a good story line? I think JAL, ANA, NWA and QF showed a different light on reality.

IMO it is a kind a save fall back argumentation. If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 9):
The most plausible scenario I've seen floated for an Airbus "win" at SQ in the upcoming months is that Airbus would buy back SQ's 5 A340-500s and then lease to SQ 10 A340-500s. At the same time, SQ would order 10 B777-200LRs for delivery in 2007-08 to replace the Airbii.

This a new modification of the "rumor" I guess. In the one I saw the 345 just would stay, no date for any 772LR & A330´s would soon come in too..


User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8914 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 6):
I don't think its funny at all becuase there is some merit.

IMHO, Airbus did not take the 787 program seriously, as they should. Maybe hindsight is 20/20... but I think the Toulouse execs are re-evaluating the A350 as we speak. You can drop the price so far... but at the end of the day, its the product that count.

You have almost 30 airlines adopting the 787. Look at the impressive customer list...

Good point .
The Boeing 787 may enable Boeing to capture primarily Airbus customers to go mostly Boeing or all Boeing .

Boeing - SQ Must Buy Boeing To Compete With QF? (by Halibut Dec 26 2005 in Civil Aviation)

Halibut


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25413 posts, RR: 86
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8912 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 10):
One can also argue that if by SQ engaging in talks with Airbus about the A350 leads to Boeing slashing their prices for the dreamliner, SQ isn't really wasting their time.

Well, yes, but there comes a point - I think - when a sale isn't worth it.

As I say, if it is true that the ANA price for the 787's was $60 million, then Airbus would be straining to match it.

And how much lower could Boeing go than $60 million?

If they did go lower, every customer in the world would get wind of it in a nanosecond. At the very least, the Indian Government would be demanding a renegotiation of the Air India price.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 46
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8871 times:

Quoting Halibut (Reply 12):
The Boeing 787 may enable Boeing to capture primarily Airbus customers to go mostly Boeing or all Boeing

Although NW and AC went 787, this was done at an early stage in the program when the A350 was not nearly as competitive as it is now.

Since then, TP, AY and TAM, all known to be addicted to Airbus (both narrow and wide bodies) have selected the A350 in a tender in which there was no talk of any serious competition from the 787.

It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

[Edited 2005-12-28 22:55:36]

User currently offlineCloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8826 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 2):
Maybe some more whalejets. Don't forget SQ operates A340-500's so maybe Airbus figured they can sell SQ more of those instead of SQ buying 772LR's. I would think the A350 would also come into play here.

If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Quoting PM (Reply 7):
I don't know if you've noticed but SQ only fly widebodies. Their last narrowbodies were 757s which they also "got rid of" quite quickly. But they do have a narrowbody subsidiary - Silkair - which flies or has on order 16 A319s and A320s with which they seem to be rather happy. So to argue that SQ aren't interested in the A320 seems to be a somewhat questionable statement on two counts.

I know SQ has widebodies only, I just listed the A320 to show that besides the A380, SQ has expressed no interest in any other Airbus model. As for SilkAir, unless there are plan afoots to expand it, I can't see SQ buying more A320s in the near future.



Boston, USA
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8824 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

Airbus has one aircraft that beats the Boeing competitor hands down: A330-200. That is about it. The rest of them either equal the Boeing (A320) or have been regarded as inferior by the broad marketplace. (A340)

With the exception of 787, it is common knowledge that Boeing aircraft have higher prices-- that is not something to brag about. A low price is a positive attribute in the eyes of consumers. Airlines such as Emirates have complained about Boeing prices openly. In contrast, Airbus is known for lower acquistion prices but pricey spare parts.

The 777-300ER is the most expensive Boeing airplane and it is no secret that A340-600 costs millions less. Yet the former is decimating the latter in the latest head-to-head sales battles. If the higher-priced product costs more and also sells more that is evidence of "better."


User currently offlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1987 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8802 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
IMO it is a kind a save fall back argumentation. If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

I agree with what you're saying, but I think you are guilty of exactly the same behavior.

Official Qantas Order Result - Boeing 115 787s (by PanAm_DC10 Dec 14 2005 in Civil Aviation)

see reply 199. Maybe I just misinterpret your suggestions.


User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8743 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Just for the heck of repeating it, maybe to get A to lower prices on the A345 and vice versa. It's a widely used tactic buy many airlines. Just ask Boeing as far as IB is concerned.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8717 times:

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them.

Reportedly, SQ tried to strike a 5 year leasing deal for the 5 A340-500s previously on option and none of the lessors wanted to be stuck with them after 5 years.

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Either to get a lower price on the Airbii or because SQ won't decide until they have the last set of offers.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31110 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8652 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

As Zvezda notes above, SQ wanted to sell their A345s and lease them back. Why? Well you could hypothesize that as with the A343 vs. the 772ER, SQ wanted the 777 model but needed something now. However, the leasing agencies willing to do it wanted too much money on the lease, so SQ just kept them and allowed their five orders to expire.

Latest rumor floated by an "SQ insider" on the other SQ Boeing thread is that SQ has accepted Airbus' offer to buy back the five, and then take them and five new ones on lease so they can launch SIN-JFK and SIN-SFO immediately.

I then hypothesized that leasing A345s allows SQ to service existing and new ULR markets now while they wait for the 772LRs to come. Since they don't own the A345s, they can just give them up one-for-one as the 772LR enters the fleet. And then Airbus can use the time SQ is operating them to try and place them with TG, SA, VS or whomever when they come off-lease at SQ.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8325 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8604 times:

As I recall, SQ was close to being one of the original launch customers for the 787 when Airbus basically said they were coming up with the 350 and SQ should wait to see it before deciding. I have no doubts that SQ will give the 350 a close look and that Airbus will be pushing the price down hard, but will it be enough? That's the hard part to guess, especially since SQ lost out on the original launch customer discounts AND delivery slots for the 787.

As for the 345s, SQ can always insist that they want to trade them in for picking up options on the 380 and I doubt that Airbus will complain too much after the problems of the last year. This would be especially true if SQ picks up a few 748is.

I wouldn't put money on this one until SQ makes an announcement as Airbus is under a lot of pressure to deliver and just might.


User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8564 times:

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 14):
It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

LOL, you should work for the democrat's, you have some spinning skill

Why don't you tell that to QF and AC, according to you they made a huge mistake then. You should open your own fleet consultant business, you would make millions educating the idiots that make decisions in airlines.

We all know that you despise anything that comes from Seattle Sabenapilot, so cut the crap.

Even with the added cost of a different fleet type, the better operating economics of the 787 beat the A350, no matter how you spin it.

JJ, TP, etc, dont have a single Boeing on the fleet and never plan to. They have sold their soul to AB so there really was no competition there.

At the end of the day, the A350 has lost every single battle in which it had the same chance of winning as the 787. Qatar has still not firmed up, EK has not made up its mind and is apperantly (rumors) leaning for Boeing. The only battle left in the future will be LH, AF, UA. If they fail to win at least one of those then it is certainly doomed.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8561 times:

The leasing periods for the A350´s would expire. 777LR are flying today.

Lets not forget Boeing has tried to sell ULH 777´s to SQ for nearly ten years now. http://airtransportbiz.free.fr/Aircraft/777X-2.html. Another "not good enough" from SQ is something Boeing will try to avoid fiercely.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
The economics of the 777, however, are a shoe-in. The 772LR fits in perfectly with the 777 fleet and kills the A345 on B/C-routes.

Ok let me help. Keywords:
- ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330)
- Belly tanks eating cargo space
- Cockpit cross qualification
- MTOW limitations
- Engine transport..
- Cabin noise level
- No middle seats in business


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8509 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 8):
That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

their "fleet deciding" employees are probably getting paid anyways, better to get maximum work out of them...

 Smile



"Up the Irons!"
25 Luisca : Just when you think you've heard the craziest pro Airbus spin, Keesje comes along and proves you wrong. SQ bought the A345 when their was no Boeing op
26 Keesje : Lets not get carried away. They are paper planes.
27 Post contains images Stitch : Yes, but the shrunk 777-100 would have had too high a seat-kilometer costs when it was offered in 1996 (though I wonder how it would have compared to
28 Sabenapilot : Well, the first jet I flew myself came from Seattle (B732) and I loved every minute of it, so I'll blame this silly comment of you on complete ignora
29 N79969 : Have gone from highly optimistic into delusional territory. The cockpit commonality cannot overcome better overall economics and does not extend much
30 Sabenapilot : US TP AY JJ Anybody has the address of their HQs, seems some people here need to URGENTLY write them a letter to protect them from making a bad choic
31 TinkerBelle : Would you be kind enough to name the 'handful'! All I can think of is maybe WN and Jetblue...Maybe Alaska too.
32 Post contains links B2707SST : Wow -- Keesje, you may be the biggest Airbus cheerleader on A.net, but you've really outdone yourself here. Other people have already made comments on
33 Post contains links Sabenapilot : Guess you've never heard of that infamous deal signed by CO, AA and DL a few years ago in which they committed to buy ONLY from Boeing for what was i
34 Dagell : Even if SQ preferred Boeing, would they be stupid enough to say it?! Of course not! I'm sure Airbus is going to make SQ a very attractive offer, SQ wi
35 BoeingBus : Oh, and there are no gentleman agreements when it comes to Airbus sales? Look, the fact remains that Airbus' largest customers are in the US. These A
36 DfwRevolution : A Boeing countermeasure to Airbus signing the first exclusive arrangement with US Airways. What were they going to ask for? CO ordered in December 04
37 Post contains images Lightsaber : As noted, contract is voided. As to US airlines not bidding Airbus, I assume you exclude B6, HP/US, F9, UA, and NW. As to AA, CO, or DL... I'm thinki
38 Post contains links and images Keesje : You can fly many routes with ETOPS 120. Question : is it the shortest route. LAX-SIN meaningfull cargo? any numbers? But they are getting the A380 an
39 Trex8 : that is highly unlikely given the significant capital costs that the major suppliers like, Alenia etc, will have to invest to ramp up production of ,
40 Kaitak744 : HAHAHA, there is always a disadvantage in getting 800+ orders in per year.
41 Alitalia744 : You answered your question - 777s obviously. Exactly how do bugs help make an airplane quieter?
42 Post contains images F4N : Sabenapilot: It would seem that QF missed that particularly simple fact. regards, F4N
43 Post contains images BoeingFever777 : I think Airbus has this one in the bag. More A380s, A350s... and maybe some more A345s since they love them so much and LAX needs to see all 3x daily
44 UAL747-600 : As did AC, KE, NW and CX. UAL747-600
45 Post contains links and images B2707SST : The 772LR will be at least ETOPS-207 compliant, as will the A350, so I'm not sure what relevance ETOPS-120 has. Please tell me which routes that SQ f
46 9V-SVC : My guess is that SQ is trying to use this tactic in hoping for Boeing to slash the prices of the aircrafts they are interested in as Airbus could have
47 DAYflyer : Perhaps the A-350's economics are viewed with perhaps a bit of skepticism by the market, or perhaps there are other problems ????? Or perhpas Boeing
48 N79969 : What a compelling list. USAirways? I am sure you know that as a condition of financing their merger, they are contractually bound to buy A350. That i
49 Manni : I think you're missing the point here. Sabenapilot clearly names smaller airlines with a nearly all Airbus fleet. Smaller airlines, can't afford as e
50 FlyABR : given that SQ has...or nearly has the worlds largest 777 fleet...and that boeing will be soon offering the 787-10...i can't imagine an airbus order un
51 N79969 : This is extreme wishful thinking and bogus rationalization. Plenty of airlines have look at the A350 after it has taken its latest form and still wen
52 DarthRandall : All it is now is a glint in an engineer's eye, and already it's being called old news! Well okay, that's an exaggeration, but my point is that we sho
53 N79969 : Whatever. All B777 are built on the same line and Boeing is not backed into a corner because of Qantas. There is no need to fiercely avoid anything.
54 F4N : No, I don't think anyone is missing a point. The quote was not: I believe he states "those airlines" flying A320 & A330. No modifiers here. The all-i
55 Manni : Sure, where did I say this didn't happen? However since the official launch of the A350 program on october 6th, atleast as many went for Airbus. Boei
56 Iwok : Sabenapilot, I believe that the cancellation of these orders was mandated by the EU when Boeing bought out MD (anti trust etc). The cancellation of t
57 Atmx2000 : I suspect a lot of non-European airlines are going to miss that fact.
58 PhilSquares : Unless I'm missing something, I'd say SIN-LAX-SIN and SIN-EWR-SIN fall pretty close.
59 DarthRandall : I'm not saying that it will kill the line. As the 787 draws closer and more variations are coming into being, I'm sure some airlines (Qantas?) are ex
60 Manni : Previous to that, the mentioned AY, TP and TAM. They all fit the profile of being a rather small airline with a fleet build around Airbusses, except
61 Post contains images B2707SST : As promised, here are the 772LR/A345 payload-range charts: These are based on the A345 payload-range chart posted above and Boeing's 772LR performance
62 Atmx2000 : I said: I count 4 European airline orders and 4 non European airline orders, and 4 leasing company orders. But that is irrelevent as the proper way t
63 Manni : I count 4 European airlines that have the 787 on order versus 4 that have the A350 on order. However I count twice as much US airlines (CO and NW) th
64 Joni : This is speculation, as is the view that SQ is faking interest in the 787 to get a better price on the A350.
65 Post contains images SK909 : Oh my God... Yet another A vs. B... Have you people no shame?! B wins... A. wins... Oh no, they both won and lost! Happy New Year
66 Alitalia744 : You might want to note ILFC also went for the 787. Nice spin buddy.
67 Post contains images Manni : I believe the ILFC order for the 787 was an unidentified order, that appeared on the Boeing website before the launch of the A350. I could be wrong,
68 Stitch : It would be a blow, as the 772LR fills in the final range-gaps the 772ER can't cover, but not a crippling blow. Much like QF not choosing it for SYD-
69 Zvezda : Like the "blow" to Boeing when QF ordered 45 B787s? If SQ were to sell their 5 A340-500s to Airbus and then lease back 10 A340-500s until they could
70 Post contains links NorCal : Well I think it is safe to assume that the 772LR program has paid for itself with 47 orders to date (772F and the 772LR). I'm sure Boeing would love
71 Post contains images Luisca : I am sure that if tomorrow AA or CO or DL was offered a Airbus with a more competitive price than a Boeing, they would take it. Boeing Commited to gi
72 Post contains links Halibut : Impressive Post Norcal . 4 more 777-200LR-Fs ! http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=18944 Dec. 29, 2005 Boeing sells more jets to Icelan
73 Zvezda : That brings B777 orders for 2005 up to 135. I'll bet Boeing never sell that many B777s again in a calendar year (excluding possible military orders).
74 TinkerBelle : Absolutely right. I doubt Boeing will even come close to that number again in the future, Thanx to the 787-9 and 10.
75 Post contains images Stitch : I fully agree if SQ orders a load of 787s - even if they decide to wait for ULR 787 models and forgo the 772LR entirely - Boeing will gladly take the
76 FlyABR : they may not sell that many passenger versions ever again...but i suspect the freighter version of the 777 will "take-off" in the near future when ca
77 Post contains images Stitch : That would be TinkerBelle you'd be quoting there, FlyABR. That being said, I happen to agree with you that the 777's future should remain secure and r
78 N79969 : But are they pressed up against the edge of the performance envelope like the LHR-SYD route? If they are, I did not know. What I was trying to say is
79 Zvezda : SYD-LHR is right up against the edge of the B777-200LR's performance envelope. NYC-SIN is right up against the edge of the A340-500's performance env
80 N79969 : A good a theory as any. Another possible use of 777LR is to fly them on existing 772ER routes with much greater payload. I read that one here. The vi
81 Zvezda : Yes!!! SQ are foregoing a lot of revenue both in cargo and in premium passengers due the A340-500's payload/range limitations. The B787 would have si
82 PanAm_DC10 : Hi Zvezda, small clarification, 777 sales year to date remain at 131 as Avion ooked these last week and were identified as the unidentified buyer of
83 Manni : Not at all. I was talking about number of customers not airframes. I would not dare to say that the A350 has outsold the 787 since its launch in nove
84 DAYflyer : Wake me up when they place the order.
85 Elvis777 : Hello Manni, I think you are right only two new customers since the revised^2 A350 introduction. Are you trying to be subtle and say that Revision 2 o
86 PhilSquares : Yes, the SIN-EWR-SIN is certainly up against the limit of the 345. Why do you think the aircraft is configured the way it is? If the "normal" configu
87 N79969 : Actually I was referring to the performance limits of the 777LR (and not the A345) which Qantas wants to stretch out even more. I should have been mo
88 PhilSquares : Sorry, I must have mis-read it then. But to answer your question, no the SIN-EWR-SIN is well within the capability of the 772LR.
89 Manni : This should answer your question. The sales of the 787 have certainly slowed down. In nearly 3 months, 2 customers. Whetter it is because of the unav
90 Post contains links DfwRevolution : Are you joking? One of those customers has been for 60 aircraft + 60 options. The 787 has sold 198 firm this year without counting QF or AI. It's the
91 Post contains links Manni : I count 19 customers this year, since september the 17th only 2 more have signed up. No, I'm not joking, these numbers show clearly that sales have s
92 NorCal : You really are missing the big picture here......... 198 (not including QF, CR, or AI) versus 64 or if you want 164 "Airbus orders" Of course if Boei
93 Zvezda : Your data set is not statistically significant and insufficient to draw the conclusion you wish to reach.
94 Manni : Interesting comment. I do realise that no foregone conclusion can be drawn yet, but it's factually correct that the 787 sales have slowed down in the
95 N328KF : Or it's just that everyone who could order the 787 so far, has.
96 Glom : Damn right. It's total grasping at straws. Given that the A350 was a force to be reckoned with by Paris, the datum chosen is irrelevant. The industri
97 Zvezda : There is a big difference in the quantity of data needed between an existance proof and the establishment of a trend.
98 Post contains images Manni : You keep contradicting yourself Zvezda, or does this quote not come from you... Here you're talking about a five week period. There are many ways to
99 Post contains links NorCal : I have always maintained that the A350 will be successful, just in my opinion the 787 is going to be more successful than the A350. Even if Airbus wo
100 Stitch : According to Boeing: Q1 Orders: 8 frames from 2 customers Q2 Orders: 79 frames from 6 customers Q3 Orders: 31 frames from 3 customers Q4 Orders: 67 f
101 Post contains images Manni : That's when the deals were firmed up. I was talking about the announcements. But you already knew that, not? Airbus does not win orders for the A350,
102 Post contains images Stitch : Fair enough. But the 45-unit (65 if you count the "firm options") QF announcement in Q4 is nothing to sneeze at.
103 Post contains images Startknob : Just wondering... How often the utmost majority of fellow a.netters (including me! ) failed to estimate what number and model an airline would order t
104 NorCal : Just like Boeing wins for more reasons than just delivery slots..... I'm just responding to your negatively toned statement about Boeing losing 13 cu
105 Zvezda : No, I'm not. To prove the existance of something requires only a single data point. To prove a trend requires many data points. To suggest that airli
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...
SQ Invited Tender From Boeing And Airbus posted Thu Feb 24 2000 13:25:14 by SQ777
Planes Most Profitable To Boeing And Airbus? posted Wed Sep 13 2006 21:29:14 by JAM747
How Does Boeing And Airbus Decide How Much Range? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 01:20:03 by AirCanada014
Boeing And Airbus Post Huge Profits posted Wed Apr 26 2006 15:14:59 by MrComet
Boeing And Airbus Aircraft Model Numbers posted Sat Apr 1 2006 00:22:53 by MaxQ2351
Why Do Boeing And Airbus Need So Many Planes? posted Tue Mar 21 2006 15:59:59 by Wdleiser
Pricing Boeing And Airbus posted Fri Feb 17 2006 23:11:40 by BoomBoom
Theoretical: If Boeing And Airbus Worked Together posted Thu Feb 2 2006 02:42:25 by Airlinelover
Production Capacity At Boeing And Airbus posted Wed Dec 28 2005 05:24:07 by Dandy_don
The Truth About Boeing And Airbus Aid. posted Sat Sep 17 2005 16:41:04 by Ibhayi