Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Big A380 News From UPS In A Few Days Part 2  
User currently offlineBlasphemystic From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 213 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 15719 times:

Hope its OK we continue here with the original thread...

UPS threat to cancel A380 order

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6390269.stm

[Edited 2007-02-23 15:38:42]

[Edited 2007-02-23 15:39:48]


The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good. -- Samuel Johnson
101 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9376 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 15587 times:

Looking at this statement it really leaves all options open for both sides. Airbus mightr decide to cancel the 380F altogether for lack of customers and future potential and UPS says, fine, we can live with that. The same goes for UPS who would have made some nice deals, getting out of A300F contracts by ordering the 380F and walk away without penalties from the latter. Besides, getting a good deal on 767Fs from Boeing who needed to keep that line open for the military tanker version.

It is nice to be big and have that purchasing power.

Make your SEC mandated statement and all bases are covered.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineAirMailer From United States of America, joined May 2006, 465 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15548 times:

From the WSJ:

UPS Revises Order Agreement
With Airbus for A380 Freighter
By JOSEE ROSE
February 23, 2007 9:46 a.m.

United Parcel Service Inc. signed an agreement with Airbus setting out a schedule regarding UPS's order for the freighter version of the airplane manufacturer's A380 jet.

The Atlanta package-delivery company said Friday that the agreement with Airbus specifies changed delivery dates for the A380F and provides for possible cancellation of the original purchase agreement by either company later in this year.


User currently offlineJayinKitsap From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 769 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15482 times:

Well this statement allows this issue to get out of the headlines. Neither party really wants regular press on this kind of issue, in particular Airbus right now. Airbus probably had some nicely wrapped presents for UPS that cleared the more pressing issues.

The press release indicated changed delivery dates but not whether they moved up or back. One consideration for UPS might be that the contract price + operating economics are good enough that they do want to keep that price but may not need the plane right away.


User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3509 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15422 times:

Quoting AirMailer (Reply 2):
United Parcel Service Inc. signed an agreement with Airbus setting out a schedule regarding UPS's order for the freighter version of the airplane manufacturer's A380 jet.



Quoting BBC:

United Parcel Service (UPS) has signed a new agreement with Airbus that changes the delivery dates for the ten A380 aircraft it has ordered.
The new agreement allows UPS to cancel its order if there are any more delays.

It basically means UPS decided NOT TO CANCEL their order. In return they received right to free cancellation if there is any additional delay. Considering that last week some were cheering cancelation already it is very good news for Airbus. A380F program continues.

[Edited 2007-02-23 16:25:56]

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15315 times:

Quoting AirMailer (Reply 2):
From the WSJ:

UPS Revises Order Agreement
With Airbus for A380 Freighter

Well theres our big annoucemment. Airbus must be confident of more A380F orders if they are continuing with the programe. Was it the head of Fedex that predicted 200 A380F's would be flying around in two decades.


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15292 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 4):
It basically means UPS decided NOT TO CANCEL their order.

Not yet.

Quote:
The Atlanta package-delivery company said Friday that the agreement with Airbus specifies changed delivery dates for the A380F and provides for possible cancellation of the original purchase agreement by either company later in this year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1172...18215717263.html?mod=moj_companies


User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 966 posts, RR: 37
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15274 times:

I disagree... I think it means that Airbus convinced UPS not to announce the cancellation of the order and to defer the announcement until later. UPS no longer needs a reason to cancel.

It is clear from the news that UPS is not longer committed to buy the A380F. They may decide to buy but they are no longer on the hook to buy. UPS is now in control of the order.


User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3509 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15244 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 7):
Quoting Danny (Reply 4):
It basically means UPS decided NOT TO CANCEL their order.

Not yet.

Quote:
The Atlanta package-delivery company said Friday that the agreement with Airbus specifies changed delivery dates for the A380F and provides for possible cancellation of the original purchase agreement by either company later in this year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1172...anies

You can spin it as much as you can.

"The new agreement allows UPS to cancel its order if there are any more delays"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6390269.stm


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15210 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):
Was it the head of Fedex that predicted 200 A380F's would be flying around in two decades.

Of course, that was before Fedex cancelled their order.  sarcastic 

Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):

Well theres our big annoucemment. Airbus must be confident of more A380F orders if they are continuing with the programe.

The WSJ story says the agreement "provides for possible cancellation of the original purchase agreement by either company later in this year".

I think Airbus is getting ready to bail on the A380F.


User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15208 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 4):
It basically means UPS decided NOT TO CANCEL their order.

Basicly Danny is right, UPS is not yet ready to cancel, but with this agreement secured themselves the right to do so without any further hassle. Good move if you ask me... Now they can play with both manufacturers and buy whatever they get a better deal on.



Peet7G
User currently offlineSangas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15161 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):
Was it the head of Fedex that predicted 200 A380F's would be flying around in two decades.

No, it was David Sutton, managing director of aircraft development acquisitions and sales in FedEx�s A380 programme office, back in 2005. See this Flight International article from the time: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...380f-fleet-expansion-strategy.html

Given FX's recent cancellation of its A380F order, and "rethink" of its business plan using 777Fs, his long-term assessment of the potential A380F fleet as well as FX's strategic thinking may well have changed?


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14981 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 10):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):
Was it the head of Fedex that predicted 200 A380F's would be flying around in two decades.

Of course, that was before Fedex cancelled their order.

Your ignoring the reason WHY Fedex canceled the order. It was not the aircraft itself. Fedex has indicated interest in returning to the A380 later but they need capacity sooner.

Quote:

FedEx Express expects to bolster its A380 fleet with a cargo version of the planned A380-900 stretch within 10 years, and converted passenger versions of the baseline model by 2020.

Speaking at last month’s Cargo Facts 2005 conference in Seattle, David Sutton, managing director of aircraft development acquisitions and sales in FedEx’s A380 programme office, said that while the package carrier would “love to have the -900 now”, he expected a cargo version of the larger model would be available around 2014/2015 – six to seven years after it is due to receive the baseline -800F.


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...380f-fleet-expansion-strategy.html

Personally I think Airbus should delay the A380F development until the passenger model enters service, proves itself and airline confidence is regained in the programme. It would also allow them to catch up on some of the passenger production slots. I cant see much renewed interest from package companys in the next 12-18 months. This would also allow more attention to be payed to the A350XWB.


User currently offlineUPS Pilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 871 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14916 times:

Sorry for misunderstanding the term "next Friday" last Thursday. Yes that was the announcement.

User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14805 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 13):
Your ignoring the reason WHY Fedex canceled the order. It was not the aircraft itself. Fedex has indicated interest in returning to the A380 later but they need capacity sooner.

Almost. YES FX needed capacity sooner, but you really think they get the A380F sooner if they cancel and then reorder at a later date? You know FX could have simply ordered the 77F parallel with the A380 order and later simply operate the 2 models side by side... FX simply got fed up with all the hassle around the A380, they went back to the drawing-board and decided to order the 77F for their slightly revised business plan. And if they will need the packaged freight capacity of the A380F, and the plane will prove itself (of course with an other guinea pig that Airbus can push around). Weather any side's cheerleaders like it or not FX is as close to getting A380Fs as any other cargo airline that never put down money on these birds.

However, UPS with this new development a bit secured their order. Of course this statement can be read either way, but if Airbus plays their cards good they just might keep this order.

[Edited 2007-02-23 17:44:08]


Peet7G
User currently offlineATCGOD From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 661 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14774 times:

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 8):
I disagree... I think it means that Airbus convinced UPS not to announce the cancellation of the order and to defer the announcement until later. UPS no longer needs a reason to cancel.

You hit the nail on the head. Instead of speculating, let's stick to the facts as they are presented.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 8):
UPS is now in control of the order.

I think they have been since delay number 2.


User currently offlineDank From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 903 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14748 times:

Quoting Sangas (Reply 12):
Given FX's recent cancellation of its A380F order, and "rethink" of its business plan using 777Fs, his long-term assessment of the potential A380F fleet as well as FX's strategic thinking may well have changed?

As I and others have said, the reason for the FX cancellation has much more to do with the fact that Airbus was unable to deliver the 380F nearly soon enough and they did not preclude reordering it (much more due to the fact that they don't have the cash to stay committed at this point to both frames). So long as Airbus continues along with the 380F or conversions become available, I fully expect FX to add 380s to the fleet at some point in the future. FX needed airlift sooner rather than later, hence the 777 order.

As for this UPS announcement, I wouldn't be so surprised if part of these negotiations might be due to the fact that possibly UPS did not have the same "out" clause that other carriers did because their deposits were shifted from the 306F order, and that part of a continued commitment would give them that "out" clause.

cheers.


User currently offlineDank From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 903 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14727 times:

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 15):
And you are naive to the limit. YES FX needed capacity sooner, but you really think they get the A380F sooner if they cancel and then reorder at a later date? You know FX could have simply ordered the 77F parallel with the A380 order and later simply operate the 2 models side by side... FX simply got fed up with all the hassle around the A380, they went back to the drawing-board and decided to order the 77F for their slightly revised business plan. And if they will need the packaged freight capacity of the A380F, and the plane will prove itself (of course with an other guinea pig that Airbus can push around). Weather any side's cheerleaders like it or not FX is as close to getting A380Fs as any other cargo airline that never put down money on these birds.

It isn't that they can get the 380F sooner. It's that they get capacity, itself, sooner. They did not have the financial means now to have both orders going. Hence, the cancellation. And who knows whether there are some deals in place to keep some of the pricing, etc. should they reorder? And I still think the reorganized business plan is the effect not the cause of the change.

cheers.


User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14672 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):
Was it the head of Fedex that predicted 200 A380F's would be flying around in two decades.

Most of which were expected to be -800 conversions once the -900 comes into service, not original -F builds.


User currently offlineATCGOD From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 661 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14671 times:

Quoting Dank (Reply 17):
So long as Airbus continues along with the 380F or conversions become available, I fully expect FX to add 380s to the fleet at some point in the future.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but one thing is nagging at me when I think about this. Why, if they wanted A380F's down the road, did they not just defer this order and take compensation rather than cancel and re-order down the road? Seems to me the prudent thing to do would be to defer this order and take a large compensation package rather than cancel and buy the 380 later at a higher price. Can someone explain this? I know it makes the FX fleet more flexible but they could have kept their order and in addition added the 77F.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14614 times:

How much work is being done on the F at this time? Presumably wiring problems are lesser on the F, unless the parcels are to watch TV. The possible delivery date might be inferred if it is known where the first F is at!

User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14614 times:

Quoting Blasphemystic (Thread starter):
Hope its OK we continue here with the original thread...

 point In future, please post an announcement in the old thread to let people know...



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineUPS Pilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 871 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14569 times:

ATC,

From what some people at Fed Ex told me is they canceled the order itself but still have the options down the road. Fed Ex needed the lift and couldn't risk losing slots for the 777 due to the 380 delays. UPS bought 744 both new and used around the same time as the A380 announcement. This gave us additional lift along with the continued purchases of MD-11's. The first 744 will be on property June of 2007.


User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3863 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14568 times:

From the first thread: A direct quote from a HIGHLY placed source at UPS. "The A-380 is DEAD".

Not quite, but in life-support (no DNR order). Probably has the same chance as the PR 747s yet to be delivered.



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlineSangas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 14497 times:

Quoting Dank (Reply 18):
They did not have the financial means now to have both orders going.

How much money do you estimate FX had on deposit with Airbus at the time they cancelled their order? Was FX so desperate to recover these deposits to risk jeopardizing the future of a program which they once considered of strategic importance? Why not defer their order like VS and ILFC if FX seriously wants to promote the long-term viability of the A380F program?


25 Dank : I doubt that Airbus was ever going to just give out the compensation as straight cash (i.e. if it ends up being money and not discounts for other pro
26 Dank : Sorry, you posted while i was writing, so I missed yours. From what I gathered from info at the time that the press release was made, FX wasn't in a
27 BoomBoom : I don't think Airbus wants the expense of developing the A380F for just one customer. This announcement today is a way to save face for all concerned
28 Dank : One would assume that most of the money has already been spent, and IIRC sections for the 380F have already been produced. That said, it may be benef
29 Blasphemystic : "A withdrawal by UPS could be the last straw for the freight version of the Superjumbo after the only other customer, FedEx, pulled out last year." Wi
30 Sangas : I've seen this theory/speculation repeated in a couple of discussion forums, however, I don't remember these circumstances reported as being the case
31 SEPilot : As I see it UPS is not very enthusiastic about the A380 but doesn't want to lose the money they put down on the A306F's. Airbus still wants to build
32 JayinKitsap : That is it in a nutshell. By being in control I would suspect that they can: a) defer or cancel with no penalty, b) Either get their deposits back in
33 Post contains images Art : From the BBC article: "Airbus has now given UPS new estimates of when the aircraft will be ready, but the two have agreed not to make them public. Th
34 Laddb : I don't get it. Why does UPS care about saving face for Airbus? I would think that if they wanted to cancel, they would have. If UPS was serious about
35 AirTran717 : How do you qualify that remark? I thought the consumer was ALWAYS in control of whatever they buy. How would Airbus have ever had the upper hand? Whi
36 AirTran717 : The old thread was archived. You can't post anything more to it. 717
37 RichardPrice : It was archived when this thread was 20 or so posts old, people were still posting to the old thread while this one was active. On topic - for me thi
38 Ken777 : It's possible that UPS was ready to cancel the order, but Airbus asked them to hold off while both companies re-evaluated the situation. Airbus lookin
39 Post contains links AndesSMF : Revived for now! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/ap_on_bi_ge/ups_airbus
40 ATCGOD : Why not? Apparantly Thai is getting discounted planes AND a cash settlement.
41 Bbobbo : The issue is that UPS had non-refundable deposits for the A380F because of the conversion of an earlier A300F order. Airbus had some leverage because
42 SEPilot : Perhaps the terms of the contract did not allow UPS to get their money back; recall that the contract was converted from the A306F's that UPS didn't
43 WINGS : Can you provide a source for such a statement? It's the first time that I have come across a someone stating that the settlement between Airbus and T
44 Pygmalion : Once UPS put down deposits and signed a contract... they (and Airbus) were were bound by the terms. Airbus was in default as they were not meeting th
45 Post contains links BoomBoom : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1172...717263.html?mod=home_whats_news_us So Airbus will save $1.23 billion if they cancel? That's not chicken feed..
46 AndesSMF : That is interesting, but at least for now the speculation about the order can shift to later on the year.
47 Dank : I have yet to see that this is true. The airlines say that they got a great deal on 330s, because if they weren't due compensation, this would be tru
48 Coa747 : Why would Airbus continue to develop an aircraft that nobody wants. The 747-8F has destroyed the A380F in sales and I just don't see how Airbus can ju
49 EI321 : Canceling the A380 order may have had more to do with writing off liabilities or loans from their Balance sheet. Fedex could either 1) leave a two bi
50 EI321 : Why on earth would Fedex give a news organisation this information?
51 EI321 : Its the problem with the A380 design in general. Its two full decks deem the aircraft to be better suited to being a passenger aircraft, as special e
52 DAYflyer : UPS will continue with the order for the aircraft unless Airbus screws it up again. They bought themselves some RD time for the plane. It is well suit
53 HB88 : Excellent - the endless Airbus free cash/aircraft myth endures. Personaly, it may well be prudent for the 380F to be be cancelled or put on hold, but
54 MCIGuy : What do I take away from all of this? First, FX does NOT, repeat not want the A380F. They may change their minds somwhere down the road but at this po
55 Sangas : FX probably wouldn't, but if it was being offered by others in the industry and/or industry observers as a reason why FX had cancelled its order it s
56 EBJ1248650 : Listening to the radio this morning, I understand UPS has said it will cancel the A380F order "if" the production schedule slips again. Very plain an
57 Post contains links Sangas : Les Echos reported in January that the potential savings from cancellation/suspension of the A380F development program could be quite significant: ht
58 EI321 : I think that is associated with a programme suspension. If canceling the Freighter programme altogether would save $1.3b then they would do it. If sus
59 Post contains images TeamAmerica : This true, but then again it was a year that saw a tremendous spike in fuel prices. Neither of the big birds is likely to sell well in such a circums
60 EI321 : Possibly. For me, there are two very strong potential airlines for the 748i in 2007, British Airways and Air China. Cathay seem to be in no particula
61 WingedMigrator : Building the A380F right now has ancillary benefits because the vast majority of the design has some form of reuse for follow-on versions of the A380
62 Post contains images MCIGuy : Exactly what I was thinking! The A380F in it's current form doesn't have enough advantages over the 748F to be really competitive with it (it also ha
63 XT6Wagon : versions which will likely never see the light of day. Airbus simply has too much to do and not enough time to do it in.... When they are done with t
64 XT6Wagon : The A350XWB alone will have killed off any huge desire for the A380, much less the A389. You are also talking about a market that will certainly know
65 MCIGuy : Exactly, 741 =1969, 748 (first stretch) = 2009. An A389 EIS in 2020 would be 13 years out from A388 EIS.
66 Post contains links Sangas : http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ingaerospace/2003586744_ups24.html
67 Post contains images Astuteman : That's the issue for me, MCIGuy. The pax A380 orders have survived completely intact (and in fact grown). One key reason for this IMO is that the pax
68 Post contains links and images Manni : Those who see in this new agreement a postponed6 cancellation pay attention to the last sentence of this article (I know, I'm not quoting an airlliner
69 XT6Wagon : Thats the question isn't it, what would it take to get the extra payload. they had a plan to get some extra MTOW out of the A380F, but not enough to
70 Astuteman : I don't think additional MTOW is necessarily the issue, or the solution. Even if you added 10 000 lb of additional structure (and thus OEW), you coul
71 XT6Wagon : Well, how do you get extra payload without extra MTOW? Also I wasn't clear but I was wondering what exact hardware changes past the already planned A
72 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Manni, with all respect, according to press accounts, NEITHER company is contractually-bound any longer:- "United Parcel Service, the world's largest
73 Glideslope : I doubt he is Superman. Airbus is do desperate, IMO, they will go to any length to give the appearance of stability. The 380F is on the shelf. It wil
74 EI321 : When are UPS due to have theirs delivered? I think the EADS saga has reached the bottom of the barrel. Whatever Putin does, does not, is, or is not a
75 Post contains images TeamAmerica : Airbus has to proceed from this point and decide what will make them the most money in the future. If additional investment in the A380 will produce
76 Post contains links Sangas : Here's another analyst assessment in an expanded version of the Bloomberg article I posted earlier: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/304975_airb
77 Post contains images BoomBoom : appeared to have been resolved? He doesn't know for sure?
78 Post contains images Ikramerica : Not sure the point though. Airlines are either going to choose the 748 or the A380 (or the 77W) to replace 744s. Since the 748 has been offered, the
79 XT6Wagon : The cargo density of the A380 at full volume untilization is far below industry norms. Its very close to what package freight is.
80 NoWorries : interesting ... if the analysis is valid, seems to indicate that UPS may be willing to wait, but rather it's Airbus looking for a way to defer the A3
81 Post contains images WingedMigrator : I strongly doubt that. No matter how much fragmentation occurs, there will always be a niche market for very large aircraft. Even Boeing predicts a t
82 XT6Wagon : which has shown to have minimal effect on payload. The A380 is good at the longer ranges on its range/payload chart. Pulling off fuel for cargo to br
83 PanHAM : That is rather a benefit, when charging "volumetric weight". Depending on the containers and paletts used, the chargeable weight in an A380F can be u
84 XT6Wagon : No, not really as for virtually all operators it means that you fly around with a structure enclosing volume that is never used because you hit your
85 Slz396 : So to summarize the situation after 2 threads and well over 300 posts: UPS has agreed to a new (postponed) delivery schedule for their 10 A380Fs and i
86 PanHAM : May be you don't understand the terms "density" and "volumetric weight", as used in air cargo. It is possible, when carrying loads of low density car
87 Post contains links and images BoomBoom : Where did you get that? UPS said it will decide later this year whether to move ahead with a plan to purchase 10 of the jets or cancel the order and
88 XT6Wagon : No, I do understand. What you fail to understand is that it ONLY is seen in markets with cargo densities far lower than the industry average. So yah
89 Post contains links Slz396 : Straight from the BBC really: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6390269.stm Note how the 2 sources you quote don't include the interesting restrict
90 Post contains links TeamAmerica : How about this one: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/304975_airbusups24.html Quote: "United Parcel Service Inc., the world's largest package sh
91 Post contains links and images BoomBoom : Although it's contradicted by the WSJ and Bloomberg Because you haven't looked United Parcel Service and Airbus agreed that either company can cancel
92 Slz396 : Another source which remains ambiguous as to the exact terms under which UPS can cancel the order really. 'UPS can cancel after getting new delivery
93 Slz396 : It's not contradicted by them, it simply isn't backed up. I have: I suggest do some very close reading of the precise wording by the UPS spokesman on
94 Post contains images BoomBoom : Of course, when you summarized it in Post #87 You only did it ONE way...
95 Post contains links Baron95 : Nope. Quite the oposite. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/4578652.html That is basically a cancellation with an option not to cancel. If
96 Baron95 : You are reading too much into this. Airbus and Fedex do a large amount of business with each other - when you buy/sell multi-year/multi-billion-dolla
97 Joni : The spin over here really makes your head spin, pun intended. Danny is right - the order was not cancelled, therefore there is no cancellation and th
98 Post contains images BoomBoom : Talk about SPIN! UPS, Airbus agree to let either party void jet order Who would have ever thought that a headline such as this would one day be haile
99 AndesSMF : Bingo! This should put any rumors to rest till the end of the year. UPS did say they will look at their requirements again at the end of the year, bu
100 EI321 : Sure is, and shes the best looking 757F to date in my opinion. They have over 50 A300-600s. 33 in the fleet, and they are constantly on the lookout f
101 Post contains links BoomBoom : http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpol...6/cm_rcp/brinksmanship_at_airbus_1
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...
Some A380 News From Todays Toulouse Press posted Tue Aug 9 2005 15:14:34 by Toulouse
Flying Lots Of LCCs In A Few Days posted Fri Nov 22 2002 23:38:32 by SegmentKing
Qantas To Announce Order In A Few Days. posted Sat May 27 2000 12:15:58 by Pandora
A380 To Visit Iqaluit In The Next Few Days posted Fri Feb 3 2006 18:43:57 by Crank
Big Ice Piece From Aircraft Falls In FAT! posted Thu Jan 18 2007 08:42:52 by QXatFAT
What Happened To The Big News From Bmi posted Fri May 6 2005 02:37:28 by Zkojh
Big News From Canada posted Fri Feb 25 2005 09:06:20 by Fiedman
Very Exciting Few Days In Adelaide posted Wed Feb 2 2005 23:49:00 by Ryan h
Video From The NYC Helicopter Crash A Few Days Ago posted Sun May 30 2004 20:14:04 by Leviticus
Big News From NW: SEA-KIX Suspended!? posted Fri May 11 2001 20:34:52 by Mason