crazyguineapig From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 27 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
The past several weeks (from March to April) has been marked by controversy between Serbian carrier JU and Airbus over an unfulfilled order of 8 Airbus A319s made in 1998 during the time Milosevic's party "mentored" JU chiefs. On March 23, 2012, Airbus threatened to sue JU if a new round of negotiations about finalizing a heavily-reduced-and-changed version of the order were not begun by April. Subsequently, Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic sent a letter to Airbus apologizing for the problems with the air company and dismantled a corrupt makeshift government group that had been intentionally ignoring Airbus letters sent to JU allegedly on behalf of Wizzair interests (the Hungarian carrier operates a sole A320 at BEG).
The controversy as of today reaches a brand new level. Tango Six reports less than 2 hours ago, according to government sources, that JU is borrowing just under 10 million euros for capital reimbursment, of which just under 3 million will be allocated to lease 2 Boeing 737-800s. Terms have allegedly been already reached with the broker and the first of the two 738s, both currently located in Romania, is supposed to arrive at BEG on May 1, 2012. The same source also speculates a possible restarting of JU's BEG-DXB flight, a route that is already operated by FZ (which also uses a 738 on this route!).
Opinions? Will Airbus have a reaction to this? Has JU placed itself in further danger of Airbus lobby, from which JU's a/c have been held for safety inspections at CDG?
PIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1391 times:
I'm not sure of the language of the contract but I don't think airbus has any grounds for a law suit. The order was placed more then 13 years ago without a single delivery since then. second part is that the order was placed by a regime that was ousted a few years later and no longer exists. And i'm not sure if Jat put down any deposits but if they did and I was airbus I would be happy to take the deposit money and sell those slots to someone else. Is airbus that desperate to sell non NEO 320 that they will sue a company to get a sale. At the end of the day all its going to do is tick off the Jat management to newer buy airbus again. Airbus gets hundreds and sometimes thousands of yearly orders that I don't know why they would waste money on lawyers to pursue a sale of only 8. They should have known that this order had a good chance of newer being fulfilled.
crazyguineapig From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1360 times:
Spot on man. Jat in fact did pay a 23 million euro deposit several years ago. That was back in a time when dinar banknotes still had countless zeros on them. It was truly a different time than today.
I think the fact that Jat is choosing 738s as opposed to A319s is just the traditional Boeing preference within Jat. The pilots have been flying Boeing or McDonnel Douglas all their lives; they've never flown Airbuses before. Are used 737NGs currently much easier to find in the market than leasable A319s or A320s?
P.S. I misread a part of the Tango Six article. The two 737-800s are not located in Romania, they were apparently offered a 733 which was located in Romania but JU declined and sent a broker a request for 2 738s regardless of their current location.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 27 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
