United777
Topic Author
Posts: 2196
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 8:04 am

Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 5:14 pm

This was published in today's edition of the Seattle PI. Doesn't look like 7E7 orders will be announced. There could be a 777 order.

What a surprise, VS is expected to order more Airbus A340-600's. I wonder if anybody actually thought they would order the 777-300ER.

Story link: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/181957_air14.html
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 5:38 pm

What a surprise, VS is expected to order more Airbus A340-600's.

Don't be so sure....they could even order both!

It's definitely a possibility, and would be just like Branson to squeeze both sides to get a deal on both aircraft types.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:58 pm

So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE  Laugh out loud


Sources say Virgin Atlantic has decided to buy more A340-600s from Airbus rather than Boeing's 777-300ER. Branson raised industry eyebrows in 2002, especially those at Boeing and with the engine makers, by saying Virgin's passengers felt safer on the four-engine A340 than on Boeing's two-engine 777.

Oh well it says B. might be able to sell some B777 too...

Boeing, on the other hand, may announce an order for about a half dozen 777s. And that's about it.


Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Another possible Airbus order with Boeing implications could come from Cebu Pacific, the Philippine carrier that has been looking to replace its fleet of old DC-9s. In a blow to Boeing's struggling 717, Cebu Pacific has reportedly decided on the Airbus A319. Boeing badly needs new orders to keep the 717 program going.

Exit B717 so it seems...


And just like a frustrated sour looser is supposed to do in that case...

Just before the Farnborough show, B.s CEO Stonecipher told the industry publication Flight International that Boeing might take unspecified action regarding Airbus subsidies.

Oh boy, is B. again going to waste time, money and energy over this pointless discussion? As if they have any chance for success....  Insane









 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:58 pm

Interesting in the latest Flight Int. mag, Stonecipher talks about `why I decided to merge with Boeing'. Who took over who? The guy is still walking and talking McDD!
Another interesting comment: `we have lots of cash...just need a program to put it into.'
For all intents and purposes, Boeing is now McDD!
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Crew
Posts: 3795
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:03 pm

Well Boeing let's their customer's announce their orders when it suits the customer. Boeing has stopped saving orders for Airshows. I thought that with the launch of the 7E7 we may have seen a slight change this year. It doesn't look so.

As for B777 order maybe Boeing will confirm Air NZ's commitment for 8.

Anyway, we don't have to wait until next week. Etihad Airways will announce an Airbus, maybe Boeing order on Saturday according to Bloomberg.

By James Cordahi
July 14 (Bloomberg) -- Etihad Airways, Abu Dhabi's first
national airline, will buy as many as 38 aircraft worth about $6
billion from Airbus SAS and possibly Boeing Co. as the carrier
seeks to more than quadruple its fleet by 2009.
The government-owned airline, which started in November, will
acquire Airbus A330-model planes as well as either Airbus A340
models or Boeing 777s, Kevin Steele, the carrier's head of sales,
said in an interview in Abu Dhabi.
``Our objective is to be a 50 aircraft company by 2009, so
that's a significant step from where are now with six aircraft,''
Steele said. The order will be announced Saturday by company's
chairman, Sheikh Ahmed bin Saif al-Nayhan, Steele said.

Looks to be quite a large order!!!!
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 10:12 pm

I would be very surprised if not "1" 7E7 order was announced. I like the part the Cebu could/may announce an order for the 717, now that would be nice.


NO URLS in signature
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 10:24 pm

What part of the Cebu order announcement did you like then, MidnightMike?

I suppose you misread it....

Another Airbus order with Boeing implications could come from Cebu Pacific, the Philippine carrier that has been looking to replace its fleet of old DC-9s. In a blow to Boeing's struggling 717, Cebu Pacific has reportedly decided on the Airbus A319.
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 10:34 pm

Yep, Boeing said that it was not "playing games" at airshows any more.

The government-owned airline, which started in November, will
acquire Airbus A330-model planes as well as either Airbus A340
models or Boeing 777s

Okay, this is a no-brainer. The airline is going to order 330s and either 340s or 777s. This is not that I do not want to see Boeing get an order, but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?  Nuts

On a side note, I really love this line, "With Branson surrounded by the kind of lovely ladies usually found on Page Three of the British tabloids".  Laugh out loud

-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 10:56 pm

This is not that I do not want to see Boeing get an order, but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?

The 777 is a great airplane. Especially when you compare the 772ER to the A343, the Boeing aircraft has a solid advantage in terms of payload, range, and economics. And many airlines opperate the A330 and 777 side by side.

Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Interesting that you give credit to Airbus for destroying the 717. Airbus was likely the second to last factor for the 717's demise, largely due to the fact that Airbus does not have an aircraft in this segement. If the A319 is destroying the 717 then the 73G is equal to blame.

So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE

Given that it's Boeing's practice to put the emphasis on the customer, they announce orders when they see fit. If the customer wants the order to be announced at an airshow, so be it, but note that it is likely SQ will sign the 7E7 a few weeks after the airshow.

This was published in today's edition of the Seattle PI. Doesn't look like 7E7 orders will be announced. There could be a 777 order.

I wouldn't be suprised if Boeing is playing down the possibility of a 7E7 order. Like I said, a 7E7 order is expected after the show, but if SQ wanted some PR (and they usually do) they might sign early.
 
sandiaman
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:53 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:15 pm

Any word on potential A380 orders to be announced at the show? Earlier this year, Airbus said they expected to add a new Asian customer this year.
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:20 pm

Boeing are right about airshows.

They are pointless for airliner sales. The deals are long and drawn-out, taking months to arrange financing and all the stuff that goes into the purchase.

Airshows like Farnborough and Paris are more for military and bizjet customers where CEOs and Generals can be wined and dined as they look at the products. Announcing airliner sales at a show doesn't generate any business at that show.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
transPac
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 12:59 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:35 pm

Eh, no news here. Typical Wallace over-dramatization if you ask me... *yawn*
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:30 am

Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Interesting that you give credit to Airbus for destroying the 717. Airbus was likely the second to last factor for the 717's demise, largely due to the fact that Airbus does not have an aircraft in this segement. If the A319 is destroying the 717 then the 73G is equal to blame.

DfwRevolution, either you meant to say "If the 318 is destroying...", or you forgot about the fact that Airbus has a plane below the 319...

Anyhow, I completely agree with you that the 73G and 318 are probably not the real factors responsible for the 717's demise - I'd say the larger regional jets are much more responsible for that.

Regards,
Frank
Smile - it confuses people!
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:47 am

While I agree that the day for the big Airshow deal is changing, I have to disagree about the 717, there is a market for the 110 seat short to medium range jet...Delta has 50 of them flyin right now (B732). The problem with adding more is the when you add the purchase expense of a new aircraft to the union pilot contracted payrates to the financial condition of the airlines you get the main reasons for the 717 not gaining customers beyond Air Tran and a few others to this point.

If Delta or American did not have to pay pilots of these 100 seat class the greater amounts then these two airliines would not be putting all the 40-70 seat jets out there with their affiliated regional carriers. Air Tran proved that with all other things equal the larger jet is better for most of their regional routes.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:59 am

This was absolutly fantastic reading for me............YEESSSS  Big thumbs up

I take it with a pinch of salt though, Boeing might have an ace up their sleve!

Mike//SE
*way to go, Rick*
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
hz747300
Posts: 1906
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 3:03 am

Larger regional jets are what are to blame. But the news from Boeing this morning by REUTERS, seems to indicate that the 7E7 is getting interest. I like the policy of leaving it up to customers to make the announcement, as anything else shows a sign of weakness.
Keep on truckin'...
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 3:07 am

but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?

...for the same reason CX, AF, KL, KE, EK, MH, CZ, MS, TG, etc all did, perhaps?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:51 am

My guess is EK order 772LR instead of 773ER....but that´s just my 50 öre Big grin

Mike
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
windshear
Posts: 2256
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:04 am

Sabenapilot

I am not going to comment what you said here, but I would like to say that you should rethink the way you post...

Let it be topics in the non aviation forum, or A. vs. B. it's always best to try and not shine through too much...

Boaz...
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:52 am

I take it with a pinch of salt though, Boeing might have an ace up their sleve!

Yes they announced a performance enhancing package for the 777 today that will enter service in 2005 and increase range of the 773ER by 2.2% and decrease fuel burn by 2.0%. Not an order, but a nice touch for Bastille Day.

DfwRevolution, either you meant to say "If the 318 is destroying...", or you forgot about the fact that Airbus has a plane below the 319.

No I meant the A319. Refer to Reply 2 and note that the 717 lost to the A319. The A318 is probably a closer competitor to the 717, so I'd tend to agree with you, but of all the causes of the 717's demise... the A319 is low on the list.
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:56 am

Sabenapilot, Windshear has a valid point about your posts. Now, Solnabo is being far more diplomatic, despite his bent (thanks, Michael). And it's a little early to gloat, there could be some surprises, despite predictions.

"So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE"

Nice that Airbus, unlike Boeing, sets aside orders specifically to announce at the show.

"Boeing, on the other hand, may announce an order for about a half dozen 777s. And that's about it."

As WhiteHatter said, don't count out a VS 777 order just yet, despite reports. Branson said this spring that it was a distinct possibility VS might order both.

"Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough..."

Hardly, Cebu really needed a larger airplane, even Boeing admitted that.

"Exit B717 so it seems..."

A premature assessment, there are other prospects, possibly even Northwest.

"And just like a frustrated sour looser is supposed to do in that case..."

Just before the Farnborough show, B.s CEO Stonecipher told the industry publication Flight International that Boeing might take unspecified action regarding Airbus subsidies.

"Oh boy, is B. again going to waste time, money and energy over this pointless discussion? As if they have any chance for success...."

Though Airbus says it complies with the 1992 accord, Boeing's point is that the accord, itself, is outdated, meant for when Airbus had a small marketshare. That is how the 33% refundable loan arrangement was justified to the US. Now that Airbus is dominant, Stonecipher says it no longer makes sense and he's willing to open Boeing's books to discuss military underwriting of BCA if EADS is willing to do the same, along with Washington state tax breaks and undoubtedly Japanese government funding to 7E7 subcontractors, there. I think BOTH makers will have to open their books and a new EU/US agreement on this issue will have to be negotiated. If the US government backs up Boeing with the WTO, there's indeed a chance to get this done; if not, a trade war may erupt, which really doesn't help anybody. If nothing is renegotiated, the US government may well begin giving BCA the same 33% refundable loan arrangement insomuch as EADS growing military business is underwriting Airbus in much the same way as Boeing military helps BCA. Perhaps you have a specific reason why Airbus should continue to receive startup launch aid when it is now the industry Goliath to Boeing's David; love to hear it.

 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:40 am

The Seattle P-I never ceases to entertain me.

Its like a little piece of Toulouse right there in Washington.

N
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:59 am

I wonder about this Stonecipher person. Is he trying to divert attention from the grotesque error in not going ahead with the latest 777s as originally planned.

I agree the 777-200LR is going to be a brilliant jet, but it hasn't even flown yet. It was supposed to have been in service in late 2003. What a joke. It is no good having outstanding designs if you don't build them.

Besides didn't an A340-500 fly Newark to Singapore via UK airspace and across Asia several times recently with every seat occupied, which looks to me like a 10,000 miles route although one that was chosen because of the benefit of forecast tailwinds giving it a better run than the nominal polar route?

By the time the -200LR is flying there will have been at least 30 months of A340-500 ops which started with Emirates in December 2003.

I just don't think Boeing is getting the executive direction it deserves.

Incidentally in terms of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer being a little bit of Toulouse in Seattle, how about it really being all about Seattle reacting to being sh*t upon from a great height by Boeing over the Chicago move, and continued threats to shift other parts of the operation to China or wherever, which is where Boeing's loyaties seem to lie.

What goes around comes around.




 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:10 pm

I agree the 777-200LR is going to be a brilliant jet, but it hasn't even flown yet. It was supposed to have been in service in late 2003. What a joke. It is no good having outstanding designs if you don't build them.

That would be because the airlines who ordered the 772LR didn't want it until 2006. It would have done no good to have it on the market any sooner, and if a customer comes along and does request it, Boeing can accelerate the program and deliver by Q2-Q3 of 2005.

Besides didn't an A340-500 fly Newark to Singapore via UK airspace and across Asia several times recently with every seat occupied, which looks to me like a 10,000 miles route although one that was chosen because of the benefit of forecast tailwinds giving it a better run than the nominal polar route?

And what's more fantastic is a 772LR could do said route with a significantly higher paylod.
 
Unicorn
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:57 am

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:55 pm

Don't believe all you read in the Seattle P-I.

Boeing is setting out to hose down expectations, particularly as it looks like Airbus will announce one, and possibly two new customers for the A380.

Thai has said they want the aircraft, while one of the Chinese majors (possibly China Southern) may also be announced as a 380 customer.

On the other hand, Singapore has stated they want the 7E7, so it is possible that Boeing and SQ could make the announcement at the show, particularly if they can steal any of the limelight from Airbus.

It will be an interesting week.

Unicorn
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI

Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:29 pm

Putting all the hints out there in investment community land together I'll make a prediction.

SQ will order the 777-200LR in modest numbers, perhaps converting unusued options from its original 77 unit order for the 777 family. It would replace all the current US A340-500 services and some more, like non-stops to Chicago and Toronto.

It may hold off a while yet on the 7E7, ready to pick some up from a 'friendly' leasing company if it can eliminate some doubts about what a 'plastic' jet involves in terms of risk as well as benefit.

It will not retire its A340-500s since they are performing well, and could be adapted to serve other routes in a higher seating configuration or used for routes like MEL-LAX or SYD-ORD if they win their campaign for transPac access out of Australia. For example MEL-LAX we have been told an A340-500 would carry more cargo and nearly as many passengers as a 744-ER which is still seriously load limited flying LAX-MEL. Or (I'm only guessing) they might do something startling, like Perth-LAX non stop with the jet.

I think the net result SQ is contemplating is large capacity, A380s and 777-300s, ultra long range, 777-200LR and A340-500s, and for low cost unit Tiger and Silkair regional, the A320 family.

The 7E7s will come in when SQ is fully convinced of their applicability for both long thin routes as a -9 or -8 and as a single class LCC format -3 for slot challenged routes into Japan and holiday operations to Queensland and Tasmania (which currently sees A310s during a limited summer season.)

No I don't have inside information. But I do listen awfully carefully to every inflection. SQ is a very demanding, very careful entity and it is under new 'leadership'.

Who is online