Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 Update From Boeing's 3rd Quarter Earnings Call  
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11625 times:

787 update:

+ strengthen program management (bringing in Shanahan) recoginized that they needed different strengths at this point in the program. Next update in early December.

+ Finalizing the master schedule for ff, first delivery and prod ramp up with suppliers

+ Placing additional Boeing employees throughout the supply chain to halp them catch up, this includes tier 1 and sub tier suppliers. Adding financial resources to meet the new schedule.

+ Interest in the 787 continues to be very strong. Despite increased R&D spending the business case continues to be very strong

+ Revenue impact in 2008 of about -$4bn in 2008 due to rescheduling of 787 deliveries from 2008 to 2009. Operating cashflows will be reduced due to rescheduling of deliveries to 2009 and increased 787 inventory costs in 2008.

+ Expect about 3 - 4 787 deliveries in 2008 and about 105 - 106 787 deliveries in 2009

[Edited 2007-10-24 08:34:50]


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
92 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30580 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11622 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
+ Revenue impact in 2008 of about -$4bn in 2008 due to rescheduling of 787 deliveries from 2008 to 2009. Operating cashflows will be reduced due to rescheduling of deliveries to 2009 and increased 787 inventory costs in 2008.

Just remember folks, like the $10 billion in deferred revenue from the A380 program, this is not a loss.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11598 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Just remember folks, like the $10 billion in deferred revenue from the A380 program, this is not a loss.

Exactly those revenues will be earned in 2009 instead of 2008.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineFlying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4160 posts, RR: 36
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11518 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 2):
Exactly those revenues will be earned in 2009 instead of 2008.

IF earned in 2009 - the current delivery schedule still appears to be over-ambitious and I seriously doubt that we will see all planned B787 in 2009. IMO we will see a good deal of them shifted into 2010.



Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9503 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11493 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
+ Placing additional Boeing employees throughout the supply chain to halp them catch up, this includes tier 1 and sub tier suppliers. Adding financial resources to meet the new schedule.

That one scares me. Commercial airplanes is getting stretched pretty thinly. The 737 and 777 programs have already loaned many of their engineers to the 787 and 748 programs. How much farther are they going to go and are we going to see them pulling more people out of Integrated Defense Systems to the commercial side. Boeing's a huge company, but it will be interesting to see what happens.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11446 times:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 3):

According to Boeig's guidance (and this is Boeing's guidance for 2008-2009) they are still planning to have a considerable bump up in revenues in 2009 due to increase BCA deliveries (mainly 787) that are being resequenced from 2008 to 2009. Whether that happens depends on the supply chain and how well they can manage the production ramp up.

But know this: the suppliers continue to produce their workshare (in fact a section of LN 4 was delievered into CHS today) thus as Boeing continues to work on LN 1, all the suppliers are continuing work on all the subsequent airplanes. Now hopefully they could resume deliveries into Everett soon so as to relieve the bottlenecks within the supply chain but assuming that they could get LN 1 completed soon and start moving out subsequent air frames then they could produce the numbers that they're talking about by 2009.

The key to all this is that the suppliers continue working on the subsequent airframes beyond the 6 test frames and the static and fatigue frames.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 11423 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 4):
That one scares me. Commercial airplanes is getting stretched pretty thinly. The 737 and 777 programs have already loaned many of their engineers to the 787 and 748 programs. How much farther are they going to go and are we going to see them pulling more people out of Integrated Defense Systems to the commercial side. Boeing's a huge company, but it will be interesting to see what happens.

I believe Boeing had done some hiring early this year for risk mitigation and so they could send some of those new hires to the supply chain.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineFlying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4160 posts, RR: 36
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11337 times:

NCY777: it isn´t the supply chain which worries me most - there are some dangers in. It is the flight testing that worries me most. IMO the schedule is far too compressed to allow for any real problems coming along. Big problem is: once you start rolling-out the airline frames during flight testing you will need to rework all of them when changes are needed. Going to be a) costly, b) time-consuming and c) they are draning much needed resources from the final assembly line to re-do frames, much as Airbus had to do. And we all know that in the end Airbus was forced to halt the A380 assembly line as they were no longer able to manage both tasks in parallel: assembly new frames and to re-do frames as needed.

As soon as Boeing needs to do a number of frames their delivery schedule is going out of the window - and that hangs completely on the flight testing.



Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11337 times:

A damnable situation with those fastners and the software at Honeywell.

Did they get the Honeywell situation resolved yet? I wonder if Boeing could in fact produce thier own fastners to solve any potential problems.



One Nation Under God
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30580 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 7):
It is the flight testing that worries me most. IMO the schedule is far too compressed to allow for any real problems coming along.

This assumes there is some fundamental flaw in the 787 that will only become apparent once flight tests happen and will be so fundamental it will appear almost immediately. And yet, I think such a design or manufacturing process flaw would be found during testing on LN9997 and LN9998.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11257 times:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 7):
NCY777: it isn´t the supply chain which worries me most - there are some dangers in. It is the flight testing that worries me most. IMO the schedule is far too compressed to allow for any real problems coming along. Big problem is: once you start rolling-out the airline frames during flight testing you will need to rework all of them when changes are needed. Going to be a) costly, b) time-consuming and c) they are draning much needed resources from the final assembly line to re-do frames, much as Airbus had to do. And we all know that in the end Airbus was forced to halt the A380 assembly line as they were no longer able to manage both tasks in parallel: assembly new frames and to re-do frames as needed.

As soon as Boeing needs to do a number of frames their delivery schedule is going out of the window - and that hangs completely on the flight testing.

Sure it goes without saying that the production schedule as redone is very very aggressive...Boeing has admitted to that it is. If there is a major problem that crops up during flight testing it could threaten that new schedule. Now Boeing restored some flight test margin with the delay. Now from what I've heard on previous conference calls Boeing has a "change Incorporation PRogram" whereby if ther eare are issues that are revealed during flight testing then the required changes are incorporated on the completed air frames as well as planes in manufacture process (depending on where the particular air frame is in the manufacturing process). The point is that Boeing has a plan for any required changes to the built frames on the flight line. This will be pre-planned rework.

Now if there is something major then there might be a problem but they are back to the original flight test margin that was contemplated at the start of the program given the push out of the first flight.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11233 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Just remember folks, like the $10 billion in deferred revenue from the A380 program, this is not a loss.

Its a lost opportunity, as they will never be able to recoup that revenue in 2008 again, and any new revenue stream from the 787 is pushed futher to the right.

I would say it is a loss.....

Cheers


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30580 posts, RR: 84
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11233 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 11):
Its a lost opportunity, as they will never be able to recoup that revenue in 2008 again, and any new revenue stream from the 787 is pushed futher to the right.

Maybe they sell some more 777s in 2008 because of it. That's unplanned revenue right there.

Quote:
I would say it is a loss.....

Fortunately for Boeing and Airbus, the markets don't see it that way.  Smile


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11202 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 8):
Did they get the Honeywell situation resolved yet? I wonder if Boeing could in fact produce thier own fastners to solve any potential problems.

From what I heard on teh conference call Honeywell is no longer the long pole in the tent. They have enough time to mature the software to such point that they belive that when they fly next year they will have the final version of the FCS loaded up. They are using the latest finished version right now in the labs from what I understand and if there are any required changes to the programming Boeing and Honeywell have enough time to make them and incorporated in the on board systems.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11180 times:

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 11):
I would say it is a loss.....

Maybe a loss in opportunity cost yes but a loss on the program or a loss on the first few airplanes delivered I'd say no.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11152 times:

I think a few interesting points that need to be emphasized is that build rate is continuing and Boeing and the supply chain is not altering the build rate. The second thing is that ETOPS is not part of the flight test program (I believe it was for the 777 program) so that reduces the flight test program scope.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNycbjr From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 447 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11119 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 15):
The second thing is that ETOPS is not part of the flight test program (I believe it was for the 777 program) so that reduces the flight test program scope.

Thats interesting, no ETOPS "out of the box", does that mean that the early deliveries will have to fly around on transcon segments and then seek ETOPS certification on a one by one basis?


User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11117 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
Maybe they sell some more 777s in 2008 because of it. That's unplanned revenue right there.

I don't believe Boeing can sell slots for 2008 this late in 2007 (if any are available)..

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
Fortunately for Boeing and Airbus, the markets don't see it that way. Smile

94 doesn't equal 108 dollars, therefore the markets aren't buying up the shares. Unlike CAT, Boeing normally lags any big move in the market, so to say the entire market is down isn't a perfect excuse for the share price drop.
I don't think BAE would agree with you regarding what the market did to the value of Airbus after the A380 delays (not that Airbus has anything to do with the 787).


Cheers


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11082 times:

Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 16):
Thats interesting, no ETOPS "out of the box", does that mean that the early deliveries will have to fly around on transcon segments and then seek ETOPS certification on a one by one basis?

I think that the first few customers will be doing regional flying (like ANA and the Chinese carriers). I believe ETOPS will probably come a little later.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11082 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 14):
aybe a loss in opportunity cost yes but a loss on the program or a loss on the first few airplanes delivered I'd say no.

With lost revenue there would be lost profit, and if the program doesn't deliver but a few airplanes in 2008, then the program profitability has to be pushed to the right.

Cheers


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11013 times:

First flight in Spring 2008 and 2-3 aircraft by the year end, starting in December? Three words: cold-weather testing.

User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11012 times:

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 19):
With lost revenue there would be lost profit, and if the program doesn't deliver but a few airplanes in 2008, then the program profitability has to be pushed to the right.

No there aren't lost revenues. Revenues are pushed out to the right. Now Boeing restated its 2008 revenue forecast to take that into account. The revenues and the resulting profit will show up in 2009. Now there is a cost and that comes with increase inventories (of 787 piling up awaiting delivery). That is cost that they would have to take against 2008 earnings.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5732 posts, RR: 48
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 10984 times:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 20):
First flight in Spring 2008 and 2-3 aircraft by the year end, starting in December? Three words: cold-weather testing.

That's not an issue. It'll be cold somewhere in the world during flight testing. And they have to test out systems in the cold weather with alittle bit of flying that should be, what, a week worth of flight testing at the most?



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineFlysherwood From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 10986 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Just remember folks, like the $10 billion in deferred revenue from the A380 program, this is not a loss

No, however this costs them more in interest, added R&D costs and added personnel. The cost to build each 787 just went up by a few $$$.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30580 posts, RR: 84
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 10825 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 16):
Thats interesting, no ETOPS "out of the box", does that mean that the early deliveries will have to fly around on transcon segments and then seek ETOPS certification on a one by one basis?

The JAA will not grant NH an ETOPS-180 certificate on first delivery. I do not know what the plans are for the other initial releases.

The FAA has essentially abandoned ETOPS time limts - as long as a US-flag carrier can show they can safely operate a twin on one engine, they can fly as far as they want. So I am guessing NW will be able to fly the 787 wherever they want from first delivery.

Not sure where EASA falls on this.


25 Shenzhen : quote The results beat Wall Street expectations, but the company warned that delays in the launch of its new 787 "Dreamliner" plane would lower its 2
26 Nycbjr : Wow I had no idea! Makes sense with todays engines and proven reliability...
27 NYC777 : Revenues are realized once the customer takes delivery of the airplane so unless customers start canceling order than revenues aren't lost but in the
28 Post contains links and images Scbriml : I'm confused. In it's original announcement of the delay, Boeing said: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2007/q4/071010d_nr.html Now they're sayin
29 Post contains images Stitch : I guess Boeing now knows what those delays are going to cost in deferred revenues and other associated costs where they didn't two weeks ago. *shrug*
30 NYC777 : They're probably not booking the Costs of Goods Sold (ie the 787) until they book the revenue of each 787 when it is delivered. So they'll book the r
31 Shenzhen : I agree that is hard to lose something you never had, and did say "opportunity in my original post. Cheers
32 777236ER : Where exactly between Spring and December will have the sustained cold temperatures, freezing rain and snow required? Not if you want those '2-3 airc
33 NYC777 : Southern Hemisphere While I'm nolt familiar with the require flight hours or procedures, I'm sure Boeing in its original plan had allocated a certain
34 777236ER : EASA has ETOPS and LROPS, and are quite stringent. FAA went for their 1x105/flt hr IFSD rate in February this year, that's more stringent than ETOPS
35 777236ER : Yes. Where? Boeing's original plan was tight, and would have had the flight tests at somewhere like Glasgow, Montana - somewhere with the sustained w
36 777236ER : Boeing's original plan was tight, and would have had the flight tests at somewhere like Glasgow, Montana - somewhere with the sustained weather they
37 NYC777 : Dude that's not for me to decide...it's for Boeing to find one but if it's summer in one place it has to be winter in another place. That's how it is
38 NYC777 : Just to put the test flight program in to perspective. Originally Boeing's plan was to have first flight at the end of August (let's say Begining of S
39 777236ER : Seriously, where is there that's not in the middle of nowhere, has the sustained cold weather and is accessible to an experimental widebody aircraft
40 Post contains images Flysherwood : Siberia? The Southern Hemisphere? Northern-most Canada?
41 Lotsamiles : This has already been happening for months. The example I know of has nothing to do with fasteners or software, either.
42 NYC777 : Ok so if Boeing did cold weather testing in Oct.-Nov. 2008 (this time of year) they could do it in Anchorage Alaska. It's below freezing there. Again
43 Stitch : There has to be some place, even if it is in the middle of nowhere. It will cost more, sure, but a lot less then just sitting on their production cap
44 NYC777 : Anchorage Alaska in the middle of November looks good, high is about 27 F and low is about 15 F. SOunds liek the place to be. Are the temps low enoug
45 Moo : Siberia can go from -15C average in January to around +20C average in July, on average. Its not the frozen wasteland year round that people expect. C
46 777236ER : Specifics? Siberia and northern-most Canada aren't particularly accessible to an experimental widebody aircraft and test crew. Or you can reduce the
47 NYC777 : Well if that's the case then they can got to ANC or Fairbanks Alaska in January-February 2009 as it is pretty cold there at that time of year. BTW, do
48 SirOmega : This is what I dont get - isn't Boeing going to have a ton of 787s done by EIS? They talk about increased inventory during 08, I assume they should h
49 777236ER : Jan-Feb 2009 means Boeing has to accept that the aircraft will have cold-weather problems. It all depends on what promises Boeing made to the airline
50 Klkla : They are saying that SALES will be down but PROFIT will be the same because of productivity increases/cost reductions (likely as a result of higher p
51 NYC777 : It's probably because the other frames wold be undergoing rework (part of the Change incorporation program) as well as manufacturers test flights (to
52 777236ER : Yes, I meant 2008. Are Boeing transparent with the press? Not by a long way.
53 Flysherwood : You might want to consider that there is a large difference between, $ 2 Billion in late penalties plus $ 4 Billion in lost profit and $ 4 Billion de
54 Rheinbote : My gut feeling is that Pat Shanahan will announce a rescheduled production ramp-up at the next 787 program update in early December. No stains on his
55 Stitch : Or Boeing might be able to just perform the tests in a "cold soak hangar" somewhere, as I suggested in the "787 Cold Weather Testing" thread we had l
56 777236ER : More expensive than biting the bullet and delaying delivery by another 2 months, or accepting the OI hit.
57 Stitch : Two months, yes. But some people claim that Boeing can't deliver LN0007 until May 2009 without a CWT.
58 ER757 : I've yet to see those "some people" provide any specifics as to the requirements for cold-soak tests. I think you may be on to something with the tem
59 Post contains images Iwok : Hear it coming???? Whoosh. The can-o-worms just got opened. This "deferred income" just added to the cost of the 787 program, no ifs and or buts. iwo
60 NYC777 : Well the US Air Force has cold soak hangers that are large enough to fit a B-52 (I've seen pics of a B-52 in a cold soak hangar covered with ice) so
61 StoutAirLines : Why couldn't some portion of cold weather testing be conducted in places such as Chile or Peru? I fail to see the huge problem here.
62 Shenzhen : Most everything on the airplane will be tested piece meal in extreme conditions. I saw the video of the passenger door tests on a test article where
63 Stitch : As I understand it, the plane needs to "overnight" in -20 degree C weather for 12 hours with the batteries removed (and stored someplace warmer becau
64 Post contains links Stitch : 787 delay could wind up costing Boeing $1 billion A good bit of info is in the article. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2003973238_bo
65 Post contains images Texfly101 : I would say that this definitely means that you aren't an accountant... Gotta agree with this one, all this sounds like an accountant's mumble jumble
66 777236ER : So you're accepting that the lack of cold weather testing will likely push the delivery of the first 787 into 2009? Only Boeing knows the true extent
67 Shenzhen : Why does this testing need to be completed before Dec 2008? Does that include fatigue testing also? If not, why not? So, lets say that the fatigue te
68 Trex8 : Quoting NYC777 (Reply 33): Southern Hemisphere Yes. Where? Dude that's not for me to decide...it's for Boeing to find one but if it's summer in one pl
69 Stitch : Not at all. I'm not familiar enough with commercial aircraft certification programs to say with certainty what happens if Boeing doesn't get the CWT
70 WingedMigrator : I would tend to concur. The recent delay was just kicking the can down the road (runway?) and recovering the short-term schedule at the expense of co
71 Tdscanuck : Not getting money you don't have isn't a loss. You reduce expected revenue and profit, obviously, and it will increase the cost of the program, but i
72 Stitch : Scott Hamilton claimed it was a possibility, and he's considered credible by many (Airbus Aficionados).
73 Trex8 : Tom, you can't mean Christchurch, NZ, it hardly ever gets below freezing there! And Tasmania is even warmer! Forget Chile too. Iceland doesn't get ve
74 Tdscanuck : I retract my statement...I don't know what the heck I was thinking when I wrote that. Not sure about that...permanent snow line is down to 2,200' at
75 WAH64D : Of course its a loss. I'm not going to go into "world's end drama" mode and say its a big deal because I don't think it is. 1. Its a loss (of managea
76 Post contains links SpeedyGonzales : See my suggestion about Yakutsk in another thread: Leeham:787 Delay May Affect 777F, Concern Over 748 (by 797charter Oct 26 2007 in Civil Aviation)
77 Rheinbote : There's a nice new 13,100ft blue-ice runway at Wilkins, Antarctica, near the Australia's Casey research center. An A319LR will operate to there from T
78 Pygmalion : So Boeing delay causes a shift of a billion in revenue to the right by 6 months... thats not a billion lost... its billion defered. The only loss is
79 Ken777 : In terms of coping with the current problems Boeing is in a better position than Airbus was in when the 380 problems hit for 2 reasons - The first is
80 Moo : I swore to myself I wouldn't get involved in this, but I've sat through one too many people saying 'there's little to no cost to this'. There are oth
81 WAH64D : Of course you are correct Pygmallion, it is a deferral and not an outright loss of business. Many seem to be having trouble coming to terms with call
82 WingedMigrator : Fuselage sections for LN5 were recently delivered from Italy and Japan to CHS. Does anyone know how that matches with the original production schedul
83 Tdscanuck : If my lottery tickets win next week, I'll have several million more than I do currently. If my tickets don't win, nobody considers that a loss. In or
84 WAH64D : Tom, Read your post again and tell me you see sense in it. I didn't think your reasoning was so flawed as your posts are usually rich in content and
85 WAH64D : double post removed ***filler***[Edited 2007-10-28 13:57:05]
86 Stitch : In the interests of expediency, we'll just call that ~$7 billion in revenue deferment on the A380 program a "loss" as well, and add it to the total A
87 Post contains links WingedMigrator : I don't know where you got that figure. The revenue deferment due to slow ramp-up was 2.0 billion euros. Accounting details are in this EADS presenta
88 Stitch : From EADS. The €2 billion in the presentation you link to only covers the first delay. There was also an additional €2.8 billion in deferments re
89 Tdscanuck : Yeah, I thought of that objection to this particular argument and decided to press ahead with the analogy anyway...probably a mistake. The odds on th
90 Keesje : Recently I've seen many people here on a.net and in the press become more moderate, nuanced and understanding on huge revenue deferment's then they we
91 WingedMigrator : Did you even bother to read through it? The presentation I linked covers all the delays-- in fact, it was the Airbus CFO's briefing immediately follo
92 Post contains images Stitch : Oh, split hairs why don't you. And yes, I did read it last year. Okay. So it's €2 billion in delivery volume shortfall and €2.8 billion in gross
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...
Boeing 3rd Quarter Deliveries posted Thu Oct 5 2006 16:55:02 by NYC777
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update, Part 2 posted Tue Sep 4 2007 22:20:56 by IAD787
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update posted Wed Aug 29 2007 18:41:49 by Zvezda
EK Seeks Guarantee From Boeing For 787-10 posted Thu Jul 19 2007 06:08:09 by UAEflyer
Boeing's Carson & Bair 787 Update @ 10am ET Monday posted Mon Mar 19 2007 11:38:39 by Sangas
Boeing's Saddler Gives 787 Update posted Fri Sep 8 2006 16:46:22 by NYC777
Pics Of Qantas 787 From Boeing! posted Wed Dec 14 2005 07:08:41 by USAir330
Boeing 787 Update - Where Are The Pics? posted Tue Aug 2 2005 11:32:41 by Emirates2005
Boeing Suffers 3rd Quarter Drop In Revenue posted Fri Oct 31 2003 00:01:06 by AvObserver
Double-Decker From Boeing - Why Not 787? posted Thu Oct 14 1999 21:09:37 by Ilyushin96M