Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TAM Buys 4 X 777-300ER  
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6965 times:

Just out on the newswire... I believe TAM has finalized the purchase of 4 x 777-300ER.

Interestingly eough 4 UFO 777s showed up this morning on Boeing's Order and Delivery web site so it might be them.

I'll try to post a link when I can.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline2travel2know From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6904 times:

Why JJ would buy B777 if they're supposedly happy with A330?


I don't work for COPA Airlines!
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6860 times:

They announced the order a few months ago. They needed a larger capacity airplane and the 77W won out over the A346. It seems they finalized it just recently.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8664 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6818 times:

Didnt they already order the 773ER. I believe these may be options.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineAA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3429 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6745 times:

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 3):
Didnt they already order the 773ER. I believe these may be options

I think they announced their intention, but I don't think it was ever signed. I believe this is the official finalization of the orders.

Great news for TAM- the 77W is an excellent a/c. Also great for Boeing who has had a relatively slow start to the year, hopefully sales for the 777 will gain some momentum after the BA (4), DJ (7) and TAM (4) orders.

Totally Tropical
AA1818



“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11418 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6578 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 1):
Why JJ would buy B777 if they're supposedly happy with A330?

Besides the fact they need a larger plane, Boeing approached Tam with a fantastic deal: Tam needs widebodies to run new flights to Paris (from GIG) and Milan and the market does not offer anything for immediate lease.

Boeing provided the M11 deal (3 M11 during 16 to 20 months in order that Tam could begin GIG-CDG and new MXP route by the end of march) with a very good price.

Also financing thru Eximbank, creating a new credit line in favor of Tam.

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineCO738 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6056 times:

I need to get into the airplane leasing business seems its a risk but the expected profit return is very nice way to go Boeing gotta love my stocks  Smile


If only you could install an air horn on a plane...
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6056 times:

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 5):
Boeing approached Tam with a fantastic deal

Source?


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6869 posts, RR: 63
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6056 times:

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 1):
Why JJ would buy B777 if they're supposedly happy with A330?

For the same reason that AF, KL, CX, KE and whoever else have bought the 777-300ER and A330s. Indeed, SQ just ordered A330s after buying 777-300ERs.

In what possible sense do the 777-300ER and the A330 (especially the A330-200 which TAM have) compete?  confused 


User currently offlineBoeingFever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6056 times:

Sounds good for Boeing and TAM... Congrats!

Looking good for Boeing long-haul.

TAM
Virgin Blue
ANZ
BA



Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11418 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 6058 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7):
Source?

TAM CEO and CFO while talking with investors one day after announce the deal with Boeing and at time of 3Q results has been announced. I took part on the conference call.

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2364 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 6033 times:

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 1):
Why JJ would buy B777 if they're supposedly happy with A330?

The 777-300ER is far far away from being a competitor of the A330. Largest A330 seats ~295 while 777-300ER seats ~360.

Quoting PM (Reply 8):
Indeed, SQ just ordered A330s after buying 777-300ERs.

SQ didn't order A330s. They leased them from Airbus.
Also, SQ's acquiring of A330s is only because they got a give away deal by Airbus in compensation to the A380 delays.


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6869 posts, RR: 63
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 5775 times:

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 11):
SQ didn't order A330s. They leased them from Airbus.

I'd didn't say they bought them. I said they ordered them - which they did. Hairs. Splitting.

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 11):
Also, SQ's acquiring of A330s is only because they got a give away deal by Airbus in compensation to the A380 delays.

"Only". Oh, so they aren't highly suitable planes for SQ's route network? Shame.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 5658 times:

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 10):
TAM CEO and CFO while talking with investors one day after announce the deal with Boeing and at time of 3Q results has been announced. I took part on the conference call.

Then we should quantify what constitutes a fantastic deal. The long-haul aircraft trade is a sellers market these days, especially when it comes to the 777. I have a healthy degree of skepticism when anyone claims they have secured a fantastic deal lately.

Quoting PM (Reply 12):
Oh, so they aren't highly suitable planes for SQ's route network? Shame.

What's the expression? Fourth time is the charm. If the A330 was quite the slam-dunk, I'm sure we would have seen them in SQ colors years ago. Let's be honest, and consider all the factors surrounding the lease arrangement for the A330....


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 4638 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 13):
What's the expression? Fourth time is the charm. If the A330 was quite the slam-dunk, I'm sure we would have seen them in SQ colors years ago. Let's be honest, and consider all the factors surrounding the lease arrangement for the A330....

 checkmark  AFAIK, it's unprecedented for an OEM to manufacture aircraft for delivery to an operating lessee on a short-term operating lease where the OEM also acts as lessor (i.e. OEMS have traditionally "leased" new-build aircraft to customers only via "capital leases"). Why was this transactional structure necessary in the case of the Airbus/SQ lease deal? Perhaps it has something to do with an unacceptably high residual value risk for SQ or a third-party lessor of the aircraft in question?


User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11418 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3282 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 13):
Then we should quantify what constitutes a fantastic deal. The long-haul aircraft trade is a sellers market these days, especially when it comes to the 777. I have a healthy degree of skepticism when anyone claims they have secured a fantastic deal lately.

If they could run the flights in the short term (GIG-CDG and GRU-MXP) with planes with the same CASK/CASM as the planes they should receive only in 18 months, with a good price (otherwise i doubt Tam would change from Airbus), a good long-term financing option, and considering it all Tam is not an investment grade company but it's now generating revenue on a route with very good and healthy yields, i should describe as a fantastic deal.
Just to remember, there are a MHRO closer to it's hub able to deal with M11 also.

The Deal could be fantastic for one airline and terrible for another. In this case i agree with you that a 777 deal nowadays is very good for Boeing, but Tam use to be Airbus customer only.

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineNW727251ADV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3268 times:

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 1):
Why JJ would buy B777 if they're supposedly happy with A330?

You must be the ONE person on Earth who can't decipher the considerable size difference between an A330 and a 77W.  Yeah sure


User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2940 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 13):
Then we should quantify what constitutes a fantastic deal. The long-haul aircraft trade is a sellers market these days, especially when it comes to the 777

Lipe is correct. Boeing approached TAM with a very good deal. It was a win-win deal.

By ensuring TAM as a customer, Boeing would make the biggest airline in the region (TAM) become its customer - note that until then TAM was an Airbus customer. The deal has a major significance for Boeing. The second biggest airline in the region (GOL) is already an all-Boeing operator.

The deal with TAM was a breakthrough for Boeing, and it has major significance, especially taking into account the downfall of the previous main Boeing operator (RG).

Rgs,


User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2529 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 13):
Then we should quantify what constitutes a fantastic deal. The long-haul aircraft trade is a sellers market these days, especially when it comes to the 777. I have a healthy degree of skepticism when anyone claims they have secured a fantastic deal lately.

Doh...other's beat me to it, but yeah...the adjective is in the mouth of the beholder here. If TAM says it was a great deal for them, it was a great deal. United may have laughed at such an offer, but they're not TAM. It's like a regional fast food chain having someone offer to buy franchise rights for 20 stores when the whole chain is only 20 stores now. Fantastic deal for them...McDonalds wouldn't even notice.



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2156 times:

Ok TAM and Boeing has officially concluded the order for 4 x 77W and that was the UFO 777 order that was posted on Thursday on Boeing Weekly Order and Delivery web site.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070226/sfm094.html?.v=76



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11418 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2112 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 18):
United may have laughed at such an offer, but they're not TAM

Agree 100%. Tam can sell a US$ 1,200 R/T ticket as a deeply discount Y fare on a 10 hours flight, something that it's almost impossible for mostly routes operated by United. And during the day, can run a 3 hours flight for a US$ 350,00 O/W deep discount fare using the same planes.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 19):
Ok TAM and Boeing has officially concluded the order for 4 x 77W and that was the UFO 777 order that was posted on Thursday on Boeing Weekly Order and Delivery web site.

Thanks for the news, and IMO, TAM will confirm at least 2 of the 4 options they have if the market continues to grow like nowadays. And will be not a surprise if they decide to confirm all options.

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineTradewindL1011 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1905 times:

Here's the official Boeing press release including a photo release:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q1/070226a_nr.html

~Trades


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 5 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1731 times:

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 3):
Didnt they already order the 773ER. I believe these may be options.

To me it seems like that, too. That order has been finalized five times now. Does Boeing need that in order to pretend having a lot of orders?


User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1731 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 22):
To me it seems like that, too. That order has been finalized five times now. Does Boeing need that in order to pretend having a lot of orders?

Stop the bashing... Boeing never announced a firm order with TAM on these 77Ws... they only had a statement when TAM announced their INTENTION to order these planes... on an other note, it is quit clearly written in the news release that the finalized deal is for 4 orders and 4 options and that the 4 orders are already accounted for in the orders list as an unidentified customer... This is the first time they finalized the order, deal with it...  banghead 



Peet7G
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...
PIA 777-300ER Destinations posted Fri Feb 16 2007 18:58:54 by Planetime
EVA Air And 777-300ER Breaks World Record posted Mon Feb 12 2007 20:52:07 by Jimyvr
First AC 777-300ER In Final Body Join posted Thu Jan 25 2007 22:43:13 by Dekx
Am I Flying On A New Air Canada 777-300ER? posted Mon Jan 22 2007 11:41:31 by Gilesdavies
SQ 777-300ER In Action posted Sun Jan 7 2007 08:29:36 by WN230
AirAsia X Boeing 777-300ER Vs A330-300 Selection posted Sat Jan 6 2007 00:39:18 by Keesje
Pakistan Receive 1st 777-300ER posted Fri Dec 22 2006 20:59:41 by Jimyvr
NH Took 777-300ER Off NRT>SFO Route? Why? posted Mon Dec 18 2006 18:30:33 by SQ452
Will Any US Airline Order The 777-300ER? posted Fri Dec 15 2006 15:21:10 by RootsAir
Boeing Statement On Philippine Airlines 777-300ER posted Fri Dec 8 2006 20:19:34 by Werkur767