But all the talking about the failure ("financial disaster") is not completely true in my opinion.
Airbus had no other choice the develop a 747 competitor, and in this regard Airbus was successful!
See the post of beaconinbound:
Now think of a world without the A380. Maybe Airbus would have done another program like a slightly bigger A350 along a new A330. That would have most probably made Emirates the biggest 747-8 customer of all time (also flying 77Ws) with Boeing forcing Airbus' hand on pricing of smaller widebodies - pretty much what they did when the 744 ruled global aviation. Airbus would most probably have found themselves in a less fortunate position.
... and DWD (by the way, welcome to the forum and thanks for your good contributions)!
DWC wrote:But mere profit is NOT the only criterion in business, contrary to what many US a-netters here think.
I am an economist, trained in France : many do not know that Jean Tirole - who also works in Toulouse, was awarded the Nobel prize in economics for all his pioneering research in "GAME THEORY". Strategy is core to business, specially in a duopoly where any project has infinite repercussions both in terms of line-up & sales down the road. The A330/340 program was essential but it is the A380 that made what Airbus is today, a game changer that convinced every airline still in doubt that Airbus was every bit just as big & good ( if not better ) than Boeing : while the 777 is a magnifiscent aircraft & a cash-cow for Boeing, the whale-jet is the new Queen of the Skies in everyone's mind from a communications point of view, however poor the sales compared to early projections, with many technological processes incorporated into the A350 ( or precisely, discontinued ).