Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus:Gov. Influence Comes Back To Haunt Airbus  
User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5268 times:

Airbus's multi Government set-up , now set-up to spread the misery equally .

Is Airbus's attempt of being fair in this crisis situation there best move or is there Multi-Governemnt set up simply making things way too complicated to remedy there dire situation efficiently & timely ???


Hhhmmm scratchchin 

Halibut

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...oc=HealthNewsHome_R3_reutersEdge-1

Government influence comes back to haunt Airbus

By Noah Barkin

BERLIN (Reuters) - The European governments that created Airbus and funded ambitious jet programs that allowed it to soar past U.S. rival Boeing, are now hindering the firm's efforts to get over the worst crisis in its history.

It was Streiff's attempt to break down these structures and introduce cost cuts without regard to political sensitivities, that alienated his managers within EADS and the German government, ultimately making his position untenable.


"The organization and governance of EADS have as major objectives the preservation of a delicate balance between men, power and positions," Streiff told French daily Le Figaro on Tuesday. "This formula can work in normal times, but it is not appropriate for a firm that is going through a serious crisis."



http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ORT-EADS-CUTS.XML&rpc=66&type=qcna

Airbus says cost cuts to be spread equally
Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:58pm ET

FRANKFURT, Oct 11 (Reuters) - The head of troubled planemaker Airbus said cost cuts to be made partly as a result of delays to its A380 superjumbo would be spread equally between all four countries affected.

"I don't believe that one can demand, for example, that the Germans pay for the French or vice versa. One must find a good balance," Louis Gallois told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in an interview due to be published on Thursday.


62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCo7772wuh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5216 times:

Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
efficiently & timely

Judging by the last 4 months , no !


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5162 times:

Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
Airbus said cost cuts to be made partly as a result of delays to its A380 superjumbo would be spread equally between all four countries affected

If the fourth country is the UK, I'm not sure I believe this. With BAe selling out of EADS, what protection do they have? Germany, France and Spain all have direct government involvement, while the UK does not. I think some countries will prove more equal than others.



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5154 times:

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 2):
If the fourth country is the UK, I'm not sure I believe this. With BAe selling out of EADS, what protection do they have? Germany, France and Spain all have direct government involvement, while the UK does not. I think some countries will prove more equal than others.

In all fairness to EADS/Airbus, the only direct government ownership is that of the French. Officially the government's of Germany, Spain and the UK do not directly control shares of EADS. That being said, Germany and Spain are mulling buying some control. Socialism is not the answer for whats ailing Airbus, IMHO.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineHb88 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 816 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5153 times:

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 2):
Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
"Airbus said cost cuts to be made partly as a result of delays to its A380 superjumbo would be spread equally between all four countries affected"

If the fourth country is the UK, I'm not sure I believe this. With BAe selling out of EADS, what protection do they have? Germany, France and Spain all have direct government involvement, while the UK does not. I think some countries will prove more equal than others.

This concerns me too. The UK has vastly different employment laws with virtually no protection in the manner of DE/FR/ES. Given that the A380 contribution from the UK has been on track, it would seem extremely tough for the UK to be hit - and I suspect it will given that it is such a soft target for headcount reduction.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5110 times:

Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 3):
n all fairness to EADS/Airbus, the only direct government ownership is that of the French. Officially the government's of Germany, Spain and the UK do not directly control shares of EADS. That being said, Germany and Spain are mulling buying some control. Socialism is not the answer for whats ailing Airbus, IMHO.

That's not true. SEPI (5% of EADS) is a Spanish state organization.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5084 times:

Quoting Hb88 (Reply 4):
I suspect it will given that it is such a soft target for headcount reduction.

Fingers crossed for you guys, Hb88. But as I understand it, not only does the British end make most, if not all, of the wings; it designs them as well?

Wings are pretty fundamental to an aeroplane; and their design makes or breaks the performance of any new model. Seems to me that Airbus could easily switch assembly of the various models around Europe; but switching the most skilled area, wing design/construction, would be much more difficult?

In any case the attitude of the pollies surpasses understanding. They seem to think that just by using public money to buy some shares, they can magically transform the company's commercial prospects. The future of Airbus will eventually be decided by the marketplace, not by a few pollies sitting in a boardroom arguing the toss about who does what where.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5070 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 5):
That's not true. SEPI (5% of EADS) is a Spanish state organization.

My apologies. I've read otherwise. The "ownership" of EADS can be a bit confusing. But doesn't that provide even more ammunition to those of us advocating less government control of EADS?



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8227 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5054 times:

Solving this problem is going to be more difficult than delivering the 380.

The simple fact is that the governments invested in Airbus (in one manner or another) in order to develop well paying jobs in their countries. The approach worked well enough for Airbus to pass Boeing and these same governments are not going to be pleased to hear about job cuts.

Add unions to the equation. They are going to be right in the middle of it and are not going to give up well paying jobs for their either, especially when the problems around the 380 and various versions of the 350 were caused by management decisions. Airbus may well need to factor in a string of strikes when calculating delivery slots for the 380.

Rough times ahead for Airbus and I'm now doubting that they will be able to achieve the reorganization they want. Best bet is that there can be some much needed management reorganization, but very little cuts in non-management employment levels.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5029 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 2):
If the fourth country is the UK, I'm not sure I believe this. With BAe selling out of EADS, what protection do they have? Germany, France and Spain all have direct government involvement, while the UK does not. I think some countries will prove more equal than others.

One of the other threads on Airbus' possible re-organization noted that some UK MPs are calling for the government to help protect Airbus-related jobs in the UK.


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5028 times:

Well, government involvement in anything is always a good and a bad. Just like anything else. Sometimes a lack of government involvement can also be a bad thing.


One Nation Under God
User currently offlineHb88 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 816 posts, RR: 31
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5006 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 6):
Quoting Hb88 (Reply 4):
"I suspect it will given that it is such a soft target for headcount reduction."

Fingers crossed for you guys, Hb88. But as I understand it, not only does the British end make most, if not all, of the wings; it designs them as well?

Yes, you're correct. The UK does most of the flight physics in terms of wing design etc with the wing boxes being built in Broughton (the high-lift devices are physically made in germany).

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 6):
Quoting Hb88 (Reply 4):Wings are pretty fundamental to an aeroplane; and their design makes or breaks the performance of any new model. Seems to me that Airbus could easily switch assembly of the various models around Europe; but switching the most skilled area, wing design/construction, would be much more difficult?

Yep, without the wings, the product is a high-speed bus. I think it would be very difficult to relocate this capability given the specific skill set involved. The UK also does fuel systems and landing gear (and integration) - possibly more portable. However, despite the impression you might get from reading a.net its very difficult to physically move resources around as some people propose. It is easier where there are duplicate manufacturing capabilities (ie FAL activities), but additionally the R&D activity is often tied to the geographical manufacturing location. As usual the true picture is more complicated than people might suppose (but, I hasten to add, not adversely so - historically, the distribution and location of the manufacturing has never been a particular problem in the past - or even now for that matter in the context of the actual wiring harness problem itself).


User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4835 times:

Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 3):
Socialism is not the answer for whats ailing Airbus, IMHO.

Sal,
It looks as though Airbus may have even more political intervention !

Halibut

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...German+premiers+lay+out+their.html

DATE:13/10/06
SOURCE:Flightglobal.com
UK finally quits Airbus as French and German premiers lay out their positions
By Kieran Daly

Speaking during a media briefing following the meeting, Chirac said: “There has been a crisis and a problem, that’s true, which is more of a problem of organisation than a problem of competence. This organisational problem has been regulated.”

Chirac and Merkel stressed their ongoing confidence in the manufacturer and complimented parent firm EADS’ quick response to the difficulties. Merkel adds that the two countries have shown their backing for a speedy resolution, which will enable Airbus to re-focus on its future.

Merkel says German firm Daimler Chrysler, which owns 22.5% of EADS, intends to continue with strategic responsibilities towards EADS. But she adds that Germany is looking at all options to maintain an equal weight in the shareholder structure between Germany and France.

She says: “If there were to be a share transfer, I have said clearly to the French president that, for us, it is essential that we find shareholders which feel fully responsible for EADS and Airbus. To avoid any ambiguity, no decision has been taken.

“Moreover, we cannot get involved in some processes, even in the name of the Federal Government. There is a close co-operation between the ministries for economy and finance and the Chancellery, which will result in decisions concerning the German involvement in Airbus remaining current, as in the past.”


User currently offlineDeltaDAWG From United States of America, joined May 2006, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4783 times:

Come on Spain, come on Germany, come on even Italy, buy all of Airbus and see what happens! Governments do not belong in business! If Airbus want to survive and prosper then make the cuts where the most inefficiencies lie and keep government ownership and involvement out of the company.

The employees of Airbus should try to put together a private ownership group to buy the controlling interest, if they want to keep there jobs for a long time to come.

The future of Airbus is in question all because of a grandiose desire by politicians to have the biggest, best jet on the block instead of designing what is needed for airlines and company profitability. This is not to say that there is not a need or desire for the 380 just that the program has put the future of Airbus in jeopardy.

Does this mean that if Airbus were to fail that Boeing would be by itself inthe commercial market - NO. Companies like Lockheed could & would step up to produce competitive products. In fact I believe if Airbus were to fail it would be Embraer that would pose the biggest threat to Boeing.

Just keep politicians, governments, egos and political correctness out of the business of Airbus - it's what is best for Airbus and the industry as a whole.

Just my $.02



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4747 times:

Quoting DeltaDAWG (Reply 13):
Just keep politicians, governments, egos and political correctness out of the business of Airbus - it's what is best for Airbus and the industry as a whole.

Agreed DeltaDAWG,
But do you think you could get this passed Chirac ?

 no 

Halibut


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14004 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4713 times:

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 2):
Germany, France and Spain all have direct government involvement, while the UK does not. I think some countries will prove more equal than others.

Over the last few years the German government has been pulling out of commercial enterprises. Germany at the moment does NOT own any Airbus shares, unlike France, Spain and Russia.
Since it now looks that for political reasons the cuts are planned to be carried out in Germany as not to offend French and Spanish voters, the German government and the state of Hamburg (which has invested several million Euros in infrastructure to build the Hamburg maintenance facility and will have to pay for the unemployed in case of closure) are considering to buy the packet of shares currently owned by Daimler-Chrysler so that they can take part in the decision about which places will have to be closed. Airbus needs an overhaul, but not on the expenses of Germany.

Jan


User currently offlineGmcc From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4676 times:

Quoting DeltaDAWG (Reply 13):
just that the program has put the future of Airbus in jeopardy.

As did the 707, 747 and possible the 787 for Boeing, I think human beings tend to want to make things bigger, better and faster than what already exists regardless of if government is involved or not. The 707 and 747 paid off for Boeing. The A380 and 787 may or may not pay off for Airbus and Boeing.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4643 times:

Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
is there Multi-Governemnt set up simply making things way too complicated to remedy there dire situation efficiently & timely



Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 3):
Socialism is not the answer for whats ailing Airbus, IMHO

Don´t fool yourself. Airline industry has always been highly political. e.g. 45% of Boeing income is US tax money, big recent 777/787 (AC, AI, EK) deals are financed by the US government & hundreds of strong lines go between Boeing & the US government. And no, EADS doesn´t come close.

Prove? google "Ex-Im Bank", "Darpa", "NASA", "Patty Murray"


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4578 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Don´t fool yourself. Airline industry has always been highly political. e.g. 45% of Boeing income is US tax money, big recent 777/787 (AC, AI, EK) deals are financed by the US government & hundreds of strong lines go between Boeing & the US government. And no, EADS doesn´t come close.

I see capitalism at work here, Keesje, not socialism. The fact that the US Goverment works with a business (Boeing as example) does not imply control over that business. The government can provide incentives by virtue of the vast sums of money involved, but in the end they cannot prevent Boeing from making independent business decisions. For example, Boeing can and does layoff workers pretty much at will (there are union concerns, of course) and does not need Patty Murray's permission to do so.



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4564 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Don´t fool yourself.

 boggled 

Tell that to Forgeard !  sarcastic 

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Airline industry has always been highly political

Yah ,
No $h*t ! However , you do not see the political intervention & decision making by Politicians in the US commercial aviation sector that takes place in Europe . The making of the A380 , was made by Politcians not by legitimate Aviation's executive/CEOs !

Halibut


User currently offlineSpartanmjf From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 500 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4558 times:

From US President Ronald Reagan: "The ten most frightening words in the English language are 'Hello, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

Perhaps EADS should take a lesson from the Gipper.....



"Nuts to the man in 21D!"
User currently offlineMham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3621 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Don´t fool yourself. Airline industry has always been highly political. e.g. 45% of Boeing income is US tax money,

Actually, don't let Keesje fool you. That 45% of Boeing income is defense realated, little or nothing to do with the airline industry.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4539 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Don´t fool yourself. Airline industry has always been highly political. e.g. 45% of Boeing income is US tax money, big recent 777/787 (AC, AI, EK) deals are financed by the US government & hundreds of strong lines go between Boeing & the US government. And no, EADS doesn´t come close.

This is the same ridiculous argument people put up all the time to defend Airbus' government subsidies. The reason that this argument falls flat, of course, is that comparing U.S. government contracts with Boeing to European government subsidies to Airbus is a critical difference.

When the U.S. government gives billions each year to Boeing, they get something in return. They get fighter jets, satellites, communication systems, rockets, etc. When France, Germany, et al give billions of dollars of "research and development" aid to Airbus, they get nothing in return except pissed off and disaffected taxpayers and poorly-concieved projects like the A380.

Also critical to this entire debate is a key point that needs to be made -- Airbus must be seperated from EADS. If European governments want to sink billions into researching new military technology -- a bit laughable given the general state of many of Europe's militaries -- I don't think anyone in the U.S. or anywhere else would say a word about it. However, giving billions upon billions of dollars to a commercial aircraft manufacturer and getting no tangible assets delivered to the government (and thus the taxpayers) in return is a completely different story.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
google

What does the federal government have to do with Google?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
Darpa

DARPA is a federal government agency, not a company, and again, the U.S. government doesn't just sink money into DARPA and get nothing back. They spend billions developing tangible systems, weapons and technology. And, furthermore, military does not equal commercial. Governments are expected to subsidize and invest in their homegrown military technology industries as a matter of national defense.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 17):
NASA

NASA is a federal government agency, not a company.


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4514 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 22):
What does the federal government have to do with Google?

I think Keesje was using "Google" as a verb.



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4492 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Commavia (Reply 22):
This is the same ridiculous argument people put up all the time to defend Airbus' government subsidies. The reason that this argument falls flat, of course, is that comparing U.S. government contracts with Boeing to European government subsidies to Airbus is a critical difference.

 thumbsup 

Not to mention when this argument is made, there is never any mention about the A400M program for OCCAR or the A330T tanker program for the UK, amongst others, as if this is something unique to Boeing and the US DoD.

And since Airbus has as much access to NASA research as Boeing does, one could go so far as to say such research benefits Airbus more, as the cost to provide it was funded, in part, by Boeing taxes.


25 Commavia : Indeed. My mistake Keesje.
26 Aither : And many times overpriced from what i've heard. Boeing gets profits from these deals. EADS is not allowed to compete in the US while Boeing get many
27 Post contains links Kanebear : I suppose this isn't the same EADS then?? If EADS isn't allowed to compete here, why do they have a North American division??? The irony is profound.
28 Osiris30 : Right like Airbus isn't in the running (perhaps even favored) for the tanker deal... EADS hasn't had competitive products to offer vs. the products a
29 Osiris30 : Aither: Well let's see.. you got a bomber better than the B2.. how about the B1, or the prehistoric B-52? Got something better than a Raptor to sell i
30 CHIFLYGUY : The US DOD has in fact bought increasing amounts from European suppliers of late, including a contract for the Marine One helicopter replacement and a
31 Post contains links Halibut : Problem with many socialist countries is the fact that they are too anti-business ! Giving too many rights to the worker makes the company/corp weak &
32 Ha763 : And Eurocopter is an EADS company. In addition, Eurocopter was selected by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to provide the U.S. Customs and B
33 Post contains images TeamAmerica : Everybody seems to think this, and yet nobody offers a better deal. Virtually all Defense contracts require bids from multiple vendors and an extende
34 Post contains images EA CO AS : I thought Lockheed got the award for the Marine One replacement?
35 N328KF : That's the VH-71. Lockheed got the prime contract; However, the airframe is sourced from AgustaWestland, which builds it as th EH101 Merlin. I think
36 Halls120 : Perhaps. But only at Airbus do we see Chancellors and Presidents of sponsoring countries on the podium when a new product is rolled out.
37 ContnlEliteCMH : Oh, well, a crisis AND a problem! If only it were just a crisis. Or only a problem! Alas, NO! It is a crisis and a problem!
38 Post contains images Halibut : I doubt very much a US jet fighter pilot would be so willing to tell others he flys the Eurofighter . Halibut
39 Post contains images Osiris30 : Forget the name.. that's the least of that POS's troubles
40 Post contains links NAV20 : Confirmation that the German Government will in fact buy into EADS. It looks as if the format will be that it buys one-third of Daimlerr-Chrysler's cu
41 Post contains links NAV20 : PS Just to add to the bubbling witches' cauldron of government manoeuvring, the Russians are still buying EADS shares and still talking about Board re
42 Post contains images AutoThrust : Sorry, thats one of stupid post. You only want to flame or there will come something with sense? Airbus always get a L O A N wich they have to pay ba
43 Aither : The Eurocopter deal & a few other are the 2 trees hiding the forest... They also don't grow because there is no such anti liberal law like the "Small
44 CHIFLYGUY : Lockheed may technically be the prime contractor, but the helicopter frames are coming from a unit of Finnmeccanica. It is similar to how EADS had te
45 CHIFLYGUY : Engineering corporate champions through state orchestrated mergers and the like is living off the past. The question is, where are the new companies
46 Post contains images EbbUK : A shocking topic designed to incite hatred and promote ignorance and prejuidice, despite the efforts of the thread starter to ground it with some fact
47 Post contains images USAF336TFS : You were saying Keesje?
48 TeamAmerica : I disagree. Boeing was once a small company with many competitors. They achieved their size by making successful products and consolidation. This has
49 Post contains images Ken777 : While I've grown up in a business environment (my father worked for a large company and I won a one man company) I'm not one that believes that only t
50 Revelation : Confirmation? Remember, "no decision has been made"! Ah, French modesty. I can spot it a mile away.
51 Post contains images USAF336TFS : I found myself equally impressed by the statement... And we Americans have been fooling ourselves for so long...
52 Post contains links Kanebear : Actually the term I was looking for and didn't post above was Protectionism. France is the most protectionist state in the world. I understand why, i
53 Post contains images Halibut : You sound suprised ! Well ,sort of . I knew I was on Double Secret Probation & decided to push my luck since I was going on vacation to Phoenix AZ ,
54 Post contains links Halibut : Like the rest of the US main stream liberal biased media [80 % liberal by the way ] is known for high journalistic standards as well ! The main strea
55 Post contains links NAV20 : Outburst of commonsense from the Airbus co-CEO, Thomas Enders. "VIENNA (XFN-ASIA) - The co-chief executive of European aerospace giant EADS,Thomas End
56 Post contains links Halibut : NAV20, Why does Germany want in like France in EADS ? Simply to share the same amount of ownership as the French gov. ? This , in my oppinion , will o
57 NAV20 : My opinion only, Halibut, but I think it's because they (the politicians and union people, anyway) are very naive and inexperienced in business. They
58 Stitch : Same reason the Spanish and Russians want in. France has leveraged their stake to help mold Airbus "in their own image", so to speak. Daimler-Chrysle
59 Halibut : If the German gov. gets in , the meeting deciding what goes where & who will build this here/there may reasonable a WWF tag team wrestling match ! Ha
60 Osiris30 : I just solved Airbus's upcoming cash crunch.. broadcast board/government meetings on pay per view. Put them in a steel cage with folding chairs.. pre
61 Spartanmjf : THAT is the truly sad part of all of this - the potential destruction of a powerful competitor in civil aviation by government mismanagement.....
62 Kanebear : Which is all well and good except for the fact that I cited The Economist, which has precisely zero to do with the above assertions. Fox News? If you
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...
Can Airbus Send The A350 Back To Redesign? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 08:09:41 by MrComet
Swiss Back With Airbus In Brussels posted Sun Apr 14 2002 12:12:00 by Pressclub
Boeing Is Fighting Back With Airbus posted Fri Nov 19 1999 22:39:43 by DeltaAir
Back To The 727 Days posted Sun Nov 19 2006 20:26:43 by Magyarorszag
KL F100 Diverted Back To AMS Nov. 3 posted Fri Nov 3 2006 20:27:54 by EHHO
BA 777 Back To SEA posted Mon Oct 30 2006 03:41:45 by Suprazachair
Island Air Q400's Going Back To BBD? posted Sun Oct 22 2006 19:18:13 by Panther
TA Back To MSY In December posted Tue Oct 10 2006 21:38:06 by MSYtristar
Will KLM Come Back To MSP? posted Sun Oct 8 2006 05:28:14 by Af773atmsp
DL Adds Mainline Back To ICT posted Sun Oct 8 2006 00:29:30 by DL763DFW