WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

Shenzhen · Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:03 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 49):

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 48):
If Airbus had firm orders for the A330F, then they are now paying compensation on these delays as well. My guess would be that they didn't have firm orders, and at best a proposal that they cancelled, if it contained delivery slots that Airbus will now keep for themself (to lease to airlines such as SQ).

This seems a bit of a leap. We know very little about the A330F deal, including when they were/are scheduled for delivery, and yet you already have Airbus paying compensation for them. Interesting.

I don't have anyone paying anything. Just a little perspective on why a customer would accept a delay to their delivery so that Airbus could keep the frames to themselves.

Doesn't really hold water in my book, if I have a signed contract (which one would believe contained a delivery date [at least window] and price). I don't believe Airbus had a firm contract, nor do I believe that the frames for SQ will ever be listed on Airbus' orders page. (would selling to themselves past muster?)

Cheers

abrelosojos · Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:04 am

Congratualations to Airbus. In the end, consumers win.

Cheers,
A.

jdevora · Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:12 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 45):
Not really, A320 and 737 have been more or less competitive in recent years in terms of their sales

I went to their sites the last weekend for find out the orders since the 737NG launch. Those are the numbers and that's a good oportunity for show the them Smile

Year	Airbus A320 Family	Boeing 737 Family
1993	13	101
1994	95	67
1995	81	169
1996	235	438
1997	364	314
1998	437	353
1999	408	237
2000	388	373
2001	175	188
2002	235	162
2003	155	197
2004	279	152
2005	918	574
TOTAL:	3783	3325

PS: Does somebody know how to avoid that big space before the table?
Cheers
JD

supa7E7 · Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:31 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 42):
Gee, I guess I imagined that whole 787 thing...

Point well taken, but this thread is about A320 and B737, mainly. Those are 10 to 20 year old products any way you slice it. If DVD players were sold this way, they would cost $600, have 10 year old technology, and be made by only 2 companies. Wow! And people would still call them "best in the world."

PanAm_DC10 · Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:06 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 16):
Apparently, Sabenapilot doesn't stand around the same water cooler at Airbus as Mr. Leahy.

Since when has a water cooler have anything to do with this? ? Yeah sure

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 25):
Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 18):
Any links as to the expected total production from Boeing at around the same time, Leelaw?

Nope, and I'm not sure why you're launching an unnecessary and silly A v. B digression?

It's a valid question. Why? Because, put simply, Boeing remain guarded about their production rates and any increases. They provide guidance, yes. Not statements such as we've seen today. Fact is the WSJ reported that Airbus had approved a higher production rate than anticipated.

Airbus confirmed said article

The move would help it more quickly meet customer orders, said Barbara Kracht, a spokeswoman, today in a telephone interview.

Airbus, progressing through a difficult period, have become more transparent. Something, I believe, that many on this forum have called for. So, it appears we have just factual reporting, in which case...

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 25):
Only when I see water cooler gossip presented as if it were fact.

That's a redundant statement sir.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 18):
Hence the idea to increase production, Leelaw....

Which is -contrary to the A32F increase- not yet decided in principle

There's always a little information, not "water cooler talk" which appears in such threads. Whilst some are in a limited position with regards to what can be said, others, should be able to read something into Sabenapilots comment in reference to the A332F.

The A332F Industrial Launch was pushed to the right. We should hear more soon

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 49):
Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 48):
If Airbus had firm orders for the A330F, then they are now paying compensation on these delays as well.

This seems a bit of a leap. We know very little about the A330F deal, including when they were/are scheduled for delivery, and yet you already have Airbus paying compensation for them. Interesting.

As I stated above, the launch was pushed to the right. No compensation has been paid nor will it be, that said, Airbus is sitting on quite a few LoIs for the A332F so as to validate the launch as per my previous comment.

Thanks to those whom have posted in a positive and constructive manner, I very much appreciate it and your comments.

Regards, PanAm_DC10

scbriml · Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:16 pm

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 50):
nor do I believe that the frames for SQ will ever be listed on Airbus' orders page.

If Airbus builds them then someone has to pay for them and own them, even if it's a separate entity called "Airbus Leasing". How would this be any different to Boeing selling planes to Boeing Business Jet?

I see no reason why they wouldn't be listed as orders.

slz396 · Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:05 pm

First:

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 15):
the launch of the A330F had to be postponed at the very last minute at Farnborough to make room for SQ's pax A330s and the fact that in the mean time some more silent commitments to the A330F have come in (sorry can't say more) makes us confident the output needs to be increased to make it possible to launch the A330F first half next year.

Then:

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 54):
The A332F Industrial Launch was pushed to the right. Airbus is sitting on quite a few LoIs for the A332F so as to validate the launch. We should hear more soon.

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 54):
Whilst some are in a limited position with regards to what can be said, others, should be able to read something into Sabenapilots comment in reference to the A332F.

Not only into his, but also yours, so I'll do my best:
That's the second time now we get a confirmation from somebody generally well informed on Airbus' whereabouts the A330F launch had to be pushed to the right due to capacity limitations, not due to lack of interest, and will happen soon with some good orders from the start...
We already know from the press release posted in error there is a LoI for 30 A330F from a lessor, I wonder what's more up the sleeves... Guess you don't just want to tell us, right? Big grin

Anyhow, since it also matches Mr. John Leahy's remark he believes to be able to launch the A330F next year, I think we can stop this part of the discussion and accept it as a fact you and sabena-pilot have unveiled. Thanks for sharing!

Shenzhen · Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:36 pm

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 55):

If Airbus builds them then someone has to pay for them and own them, even if it's a separate entity called "Airbus Leasing". How would this be any different to Boeing selling planes to Boeing Business Jet?

Nothing, except a purchase agreement/deposit from a customer.

Cheers

[Edited 2006-11-21 10:37:44]

scbriml · Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:08 pm

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 57):
Nothing, except a purchase agreement/deposit from a customer.

My prediction is that Airbus will form an entity called something like "Airbus Leasing" and it will place an order and pay deposits for 19 A330s. Airbus will then book these orders just like any other order from a leasing company.

Let's see what happens. wink

leelaw · Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:14 pm

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 58):
My prediction is that Airbus will form an entity called something like "Airbus Leasing" and it will place an order and pay deposits for 19 A330s. Airbus will then book these orders just like any other order from a leasing company.

If the transaction is indeed structured in such a manner, any associated inter-company sales revenues would likely be "eliminated" in the process of financial statement consolidation. One wonders if the same principle shouldn't be applied to order tallies.

scbriml · Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:34 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 59):
If the transaction is indeed structured in such a manner, any associated inter-company sales revenues would likely be "eliminated" in the process of financial statement consolidation. One wonders if the same principle shouldn't be applied to order tallies.

Presumably:
1) if Airbus builds the planes they're entitled to count them
2) if they're built, someone has to own them (if for no other reason than insurance liability)

Say Airbus partners with a bank to form a separate "Airbus Leasing" company, that company would order, pay for, and own the A330s, leasing them to SQ to operate. At the end of SQ service, Airbus Leasing can either sell them or lease them on to someone else.

How does this work with Boeing and Boeing Business Jet (the company, not the planes)? Does the order and payment come from BBJ, or from BBJ's anonymous customers?

PanAm_DC10 · Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:11 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 59):
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 58):
My prediction is that Airbus will form an entity called something like "Airbus Leasing" and it will place an order and pay deposits for 19 A330s. Airbus will then book these orders just like any other order from a leasing company.

If the transaction is indeed structured in such a manner, any associated inter-company sales revenues would likely be "eliminated" in the process of financial statement consolidation.

So that would not be any different to what Boeing did with Hawaiian Airlines and their order for 9 x 763ER in 2001 or their 717 order, even though HA is listed on Boeings site as the customer, Boeing Capital Corp financed them.

The company is financing the acquisitions through long-term lease financing arranged through Boeing Capital Corporation and Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services.

http://investor.hawaiianairlines.com...l-newsArticle&ID=231183&highlight=

Boeing Capital currently has 13 Boeing 717-200s and three Boeing 767-300ERs on lease to Hawaiian Airlines. An additional 767-300ER is scheduled for delivery to Hawaiian in April. As of March 31, the airline represented $546.3 million of Boeing Capital's portfolio.

http://www.boeing.com/bcc/sitemap/news/2003/q2/nr_030401v.html

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 59):
One wonders if the same principle shouldn't be applied to order tallies.

It's a fair question, however, on 25 September, 2001 an undisclosed customer ordered 3 x 763ER, the same day AWAS signed their commitment for Hawaiian. I believe you'll find those frames were Boeing Capital for HA so it does appear that the principle has been applied to order tallies already.

What's to stop Airbus from a similar transaction or using their Airbus Asset Management subsidiary from doing the same for SQ.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 56):
you don't just want to tell us, right?

Slz396 perhaps can not tell you would be a better way to put it, though, I could well be wrong Wink

Regards, PanAm_DC10

sabenapilot · Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:27 pm

Thank you PanAm_DC10 for bringing this discussion back to its factual basis.

You once again show you have a clear understanding of the aviation business and can distinguish between the plain gossip spread all too wildly on this site, unimportant events of the day which won't chance much in the long term and (hints to) structurally important decisions which will shape the future and give a clear view on who will be leading and who following... It is something not given to all on this site I must say.

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 59):
If the transaction is indeed structured in such a manner, any associated inter-company sales revenues would likely be "eliminated" in the process of financial statement consolidation. One wonders if the same principle shouldn't be applied to order tallies.

Why would you want to eliminate production planes from an order tally?

If your aim is purely to be able to compare the annual production from both A and B in a transparent and easy way, I'd suppose you'd have an even greater interest in the answer to the most holistic question of all, one which has been answered by the European airplane maker just recently: "How many planes does Boeing plan to produce per annum at the end of the decade?", since it gives us the opportunity to forget about all these individual orders and their specific details which lead to pointless discussions like the one you are having now, yet apparently this very relevant question is of no interest at all to you...

leelaw · Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:36 pm

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 60):
How does this work with Boeing and Boeing Business Jet (the company, not the planes)? Does the order and payment come from BBJ, or from BBJ's anonymous customers?

Presumably, the inter-company transaction between BCA and BBJ is "eliminated" for consolidated financial statement purposes. However, in the case BBJ, there is ultimately a "sale" as once an aircraft is delivered to a customer, title (ownership) is transferred to a non-Boeing entity.

leelaw · Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:48 pm

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 61):
So that would not be any different to what Boeing did with Hawaiian Airlines and their order for 9 x 763ER in 2001 or their 717 order, even though HA is listed on Boeings site as the customer, Boeing Capital Corp financed them.

The company is financing the acquisitions through long-term lease financing arranged through Boeing Capital Corporation and Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services.

http://investor.hawaiianairlines.com...l-newsArticle&ID=231183&highlight=

Boeing Capital currently has 13 Boeing 717-200s and three Boeing 767-300ERs on lease to Hawaiian Airlines. An additional 767-300ER is scheduled for delivery to Hawaiian in April. As of March 31, the airline represented $546.3 million of Boeing Capital's portfoli

Are these capital or operating leases?

slz396 · Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:38 pm

In short, seems like all accusations made to Airbus are sticking... to Boeing.

Anybody still remember these?

they announce their orders twice:
see Boeing and MX's 787....

they count them before an end user is known:
see BBJs...

they count planes built for lease:
see PanAm_DC10s latest reply....

Seems like as long as it is Boeing which is doing it, it is all okay to do, yet as soon as Airbus does it, it becomes highly questionable...

Anybody has an answer to the question Sabena-pilot asked already twice?
How much planes does Boeing count on producing at the end of this decade?
A simple number with a link to the source could provide a great opportunity to put 9 out of 10 discussions on this site to rest. Somehow I have a strong feeling Airbus will remain the biggest civil aircraft manufacturer throughout the entire decade (and beyond) or we would have had the number by now.

scbriml · Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:34 am

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 63):
However, in the case BBJ, there is ultimately a "sale" as once an aircraft is delivered to a customer, title (ownership) is transferred to a non-Boeing entity.

The sell-on of a completed BBJ to the end customer is irrelevant from BCA's perspective as the plane was purchased by Boeing Business Jet. Boeing lists Boeing Business Jet as the customer for 71 planes dating back to January 2000.

So BCA is selling planes to a Boeing JV (50-50 with GE) and lists them in its order book as such. I fail to see any difference if Airbus does the same, but leases the planes to SQ instead of selling them.

brendows · Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:06 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 65):
they announce their orders twice:
see Boeing and MX's 787....

Announce their orders twice? When?
On the 29th of June this summer Boeing published the following regarding the 788s for AM (and not MX):

Quote:
International Lease Finance Corp. (ILFC) and Aeromexico, Mexico's largest airline, today announced the carrier will operate three 787 Dreamliner airplanes, making it the first Latin American airline to incorporate the mostly composite airplane into its fleet.

Aeromexico will lease the three 787-8s from ILFC with deliveries scheduled to begin in early 2010. ILFC has 20 787 Dreamliners on order.

They do nothing else than state that a new carrier has chosen to operate the 788, by leasing these aircraft through ILFC. They haven't been counted as a new order. Later, on the 14th of November, Boeing released this:

Quote:
The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] and Aeroméxico, Mexico's largest airline, today announced the carrier ordered two more 787-8 Dreamliners and 10 more Next-Generation 737-700s.

This Dreamliner order brings to five the number of 787s Aeroméxico plans to acquire. In June the airline announced plans to lease three 787-8s from International Lease Finance Corp. (ILFC)

The last two are part of a direct order from Boeing. Yes, the first three was ordered through ILFC, but they have not been counted twice, Boeing stated that there was a new customer for the 788. What's wrong with announcing that an operator has chosen to operate a new type of aircraft?
I do not know why Boeing didn't do the same thing when ILFC announced that Seychelles would lease two 788s from them.

Shenzhen · Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:18 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 58):

My prediction is that Airbus will form an entity called something like "Airbus Leasing" and it will place an order and pay deposits for 19 A330s. Airbus will then book these orders just like any other order from a leasing company.

Let's see what happens. wink

I guess if I was running a company, and could list these as a 2 billion dollar sale, then I would do it also. Therefore, I don't doubt that you will be correct.... Smile

Cheers

trex8 · Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:37 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 45):
You might want to ask McDonnell Douglas about that. Their experience with a factory in China was not as optimistic as they had hoped. It will add to the A320 production, it won't completely change the game though.

the problem with the Shanghai assembly line was
1. the Chinese carriers didn't want MD80s, they almost had to be forced down their throats
2. the Chinese trunkliner program died, partly because of 1 and the demise of the MD90.
3. the Chinese government were totally messed up back then, at one point a trade delegation came to the US, went to Seattle and got some subcontracts, then went to Long Beach and asked MDC why they didn't do the same thing for China, not realizing there was an assembly line in China!

but you are right , asembly line in China will be just a small part of the whole game

leelaw · Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:47 pm

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 66):
I fail to see any difference if Airbus does the same, but leases the planes to SQ instead of selling them.

We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, if Airbus/EADS seeks to become a lessor of equipment its manufactured utilizing operating leases, then it can't recognize sales revenue from the transaction while simultaneously capitalizing the equipment manufactured in its financial statements on a consolidated basis, and remain in conformity with GAAP. If the substance of the transaction, and the intent of parties thereto is not to ultimately transfer title (ownership) of the aircraft in question to the "lessee" (as would be the case under a capital lease), then why should an "order" be tallied?

scbriml · Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:58 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 70):
We'll have to agree to disagree.

No problem, we'll see what happens. smile

PEK18R36L · Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:15 pm

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 45):
You might want to ask McDonnell Douglas about that. Their experience with a factory in China was not as optimistic as they had hoped. It will add to the A320 production, it won't completely change the game though.

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 69):
1. the Chinese carriers didn't want MD80s, they almost had to be forced down their throats

Hmm. Not all that much has changed. Chinese airlines take what the government allows ordered, not necessarily the best choice for the economical operation of an airline. I think it would be interesting to poll the airlines and find out who would prefer 73xs and who would want A320s.

Most airline executives at the group level at Air China, China Eastern, and China Southern realize that part of the reason they are in poor financial shape is the ridiculous number of different models each one is forced to fly.

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 69):
2. the Chinese trunkliner program died, partly because of 1 and the demise of the MD90.

And because it was yet another prestige-driven program that had more to do with accolade-seeking officials and less to do with commercial or operational considerations.

These sorts of projects continue.

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 69):
3. the Chinese government were totally messed up back then, at one point a trade delegation came to the US, went to Seattle and got some subcontracts, then went to Long Beach and asked MDC why they didn't do the same thing for China, not realizing there was an assembly line in China!

Speaking as someone who has to deal with the Chinese government all too frequently, they are still messed up. Make no mistake - 3 decades after China began reforming and opening, there are more competing interests in and around the government than ever.

This is germane to the A320 project because there is a reason for the comparatively conservative production estimates released by Airbus. Despite the aircraft's arguably "antique" status, commercializing commercial aircraft production in China is going to be very, very tough and threatens to absorb production and engineering resources that are needed elsewhere in the company.

This will not be like adding another 787 or A350 line in terms of technical complexity, but I can assure you the operational challenges will by myriad and, collectively, just as tough.

David

Shenzhen · Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:04 am

Quoting PEK18R36L (Reply 72):
Hmm. Not all that much has changed. Chinese airlines take what the government allows ordered, not necessarily the best choice for the economical operation of an airline. I think it would be interesting to poll the airlines and find out who would prefer 73xs and who would want A320s.

I think the Chinese market has already spoken. The 150 Boeing airplanes were placed with the airlines quite quickly, whilst Airbus are (I believe) are still trying to place the first 150 ordered last year.

Cheers

scbriml · Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:30 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 73):
The 150 Boeing airplanes were placed with the airlines quite quickly, whilst Airbus are (I believe) are still trying to place the first 150 ordered last year.

Nice spin, but I think you'll find this is just a function of the different way that Airbus and Boeing handle their Chinese orders. wink

If you look at Airbus's press release for this year's order for 150 A32x, it already details which airlines will take the planes.
http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre...ases_items/05_05_12_CASGCA320.html

Quote:
The 150 aircraft will be delivered to six Chinese airlines, including Air China, China Eastern Airlines, China Southern Airlines, Sichuan Airlines, Shenzhen Airlines, and Hainan Airlines.

Hamlet69 · Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 74):
If you look at Airbus's press release for this year's order for 150 A32x, it already details which airlines will take the planes.
http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre....html

Should we tell you nice spin, too? Wink

That press release is from last year's GTA (notice date of 12/5/05). And it isn't accurate, as it fails to list Shanghai (who took 5 A321's). At the time, that statement was speculation on who the CASGC intended to allocate planes to, not who is actually under contract to take them.

I'm not saying Airbus isn't going to place these aircraft. All I'm saying is that the exact breakdown has not been confirmed even after the contract is signed.

Regards,

Hamlet69

Shenzhen · Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:57 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 74):
Nice spin, but I think you'll find this is just a function of the different way that Airbus and Boeing handle their Chinese orders.

Well, I worked with Chinese Airlines for over 7 years, so I have a pretty good idea on "how it all works".....

So, you are saying that all the 150 airplanes have been placed? I haven't really followed the Chinese market for the past few months, but still don't believe that all the frames have been placed with the airlines.

The press release form Airbus was basically listing the Airlines that they felt would sign for airplanes. I thought I saw a press release less then one month ago which stated Shanghai Airlines picked up 5 from the 150, and they aren't listed in the Airbus Press Release.

I found the release...

http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre..._10_31_shangai_airlines_A321s.html

Cheers

scbriml · Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:09 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 75):
Should we tell you nice spin, too?

Ha ha, yes! Hoisted on my own petard. I clicked on the wrong press release and didn't read the date. banghead

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 76):
So, you are saying that all the 150 airplanes have been placed?

No, I said that Airbus and Boeing process the orders differently. As of last month's O&D spreadsheet, Airbus now shows 180 orders for CASGC.

Shenzhen · Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:19 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 77):
No, I said that Airbus and Boeing process the orders differently. As of last month's O&D spreadsheet, Airbus now shows 180 orders for CASGC.

Quoting PEK18R36L (Reply 72):
I think it would be interesting to poll the airlines and find out who would prefer 73xs and who would want A320s.

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 73):
I think the Chinese market has already spoken. The 150 Boeing airplanes were placed with the airlines quite quickly, whilst Airbus are (I believe) are still trying to place the first 150 ordered last year.

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 76):
The press release form Airbus was basically listing the Airlines that they felt would sign for airplanes. I thought I saw a press release less then one month ago which stated Shanghai Airlines picked up 5 from the 150, and they aren't listed in the Airbus Press Release.

I found the release...

http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre....html

I don't see how I tried to spin anything. Airbus are still placing the original 150 orders. With that being said, airlines will need to take all the airplanes, as there probably won't be an alterantive until the slots are taken (meaing if an airline goes to the CAAC, State Planning Commitee and such, and try to order a 737, they may be allowed to, if they sign for some A320s as well).

Cheers

[Edited 2006-11-22 20:29:24]

Oykie · Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:45 am

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 28):
IIRC Streiff would like to move final assembly on the A320 to Germany as part of the restructuring of Airbus company. Would this still be possible with the increase in production rate?

Does nobody have any information about this?

Could Airbus move all the final assembly to Germany and still increase the production rate, or should this be started as a new thread?

Shenzhen · Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:34 am

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 61):
So that would not be any different to what Boeing did with Hawaiian Airlines and their order for 9 x 763ER in 2001 or their 717 order, even though HA is listed on Boeings site as the customer, Boeing Capital Corp financed them.

The company is financing the acquisitions through long-term lease financing arranged through Boeing Capital Corporation and Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services.

http://investor.hawaiianairlines.com...l-newsArticle&ID=231183&highlight=

Boeing Capital currently has 13 Boeing 717-200s and three Boeing 767-300ERs on lease to Hawaiian Airlines. An additional 767-300ER is scheduled for delivery to Hawaiian in April. As of March 31, the airline represented $546.3 million of Boeing Capital's portfolio.

http://www.boeing.com/bcc/sitemap/news/2003/q2/nr_030401v.html

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 59):
One wonders if the same principle shouldn't be applied to order tallies.

It's a fair question, however, on 25 September, 2001 an undisclosed customer ordered 3 x 763ER, the same day AWAS signed their commitment for Hawaiian. I believe you'll find those frames were Boeing Capital for HA so it does appear that the principle has been applied to order tallies already.

Would appear that AWAS owns the HA 767 airplanes... see below......

Hawaiian Airlines Buying 3 Boeing Planes It Currently Leases

quote
HONOLULU (AP) -- Hawaiian Airlines said it is buying three planes and amending the leases on four other aircraft.

The purchases, which are subject to financing, are expected to close in December, the carrier said Thursday. Terms weren't disclosed.

ADVERTISEMENT
Hawaiian said it has signed a letter of intent to purchase three of the seven Boeing 767-300ER aircraft it currently leases from an affiliate of AWAS Aviation Services Inc. The amended lease agreements are for the remaining four.

Cheers

PanAm_DC10 · Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:25 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 80):
Would appear that AWAS owns the HA 767 airplanes... see below......

Hi Shenzhen. They do now after the agreement reached between AWAS and HA which you refer to announced on November 30th. But that agreement is soley between AWAS and HA. That said, HA as of December this year, according to their site, have 15 767s

http://hawaiianair.com/about/corporate/factsheet.asp

So, with respect, the AWAS agreement has nothing to do with the following part of what you have quoted me on, which is;

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 61):
Boeing Capital currently has 13 Boeing 717-200s and three Boeing 767-300ERs on lease to Hawaiian Airlines. An additional 767-300ER is scheduled for delivery to Hawaiian in April. As of March 31, the airline represented $546.3 million of Boeing Capital's portfolio.

http://www.boeing.com/bcc/sitemap/ne....html

That is a fact. Boeing Capital bought and leased a minimum of 3 763ERs to HA and they did so as an undisclosed customer.

We're a little off topic here so to bring the thread back OT Airbus have since released their 2006 through 2025 Global Market Forecast which sheds some further information as to why they are looking to increase the A320 Production by so much. Some key points follow;

1: The largest change from their last forecast, in 2004, is in the NB category rising from 11,000 units to 15,300 units.

2: Of that rise Airbus upped their forecast for China by 1000 units

3: For the first time Airbus also included former Countries from the Soviet Union in their GMF. There is a new section for the Commonwealth of Independent States

4: Increased their forecast for Asian LCCs and the Indian market.

The full report can be found at the following link;

http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/gmf/index.html

Regards, PanAm_DC10

WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

RE: WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net