Dutchy wrote:

neomax wrote:

Trump can definitely block Boeing but I would be very surprised if the EU doesn't support Airbus.

American components can probably be blocked.

persiangulf93 wrote:

Please read - Broad article with facts regarding the matter!

https://financialtribune.com/articles/e ... ates-jcpoa

lightsaber wrote:

persiangulf93 wrote:

Please read - Broad article with facts regarding the matter!

https://financialtribune.com/articles/e ... ates-jcpoa

That link assumes Iran is in compliance. Aircraft cannot be banned as long as Iran complies. So the aircraft can be banned unless Iran proves they are in compliance (last I looked, if access is difficult, that was proof of non-compliance).

However, I think this is mid-term election fluff.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

neomax wrote:

Trump can definitely block Boeing but I would be very surprised if the EU doesn't support Airbus.

American components can probably be blocked.

I'd like to know how any engine could be delivered without turbine blades. Last I looked, all three engine vendors either made the blades in the USA or outsourced to US vendors.
Note:. CFM turbine high blades are made by GE.

Eyad89 wrote:

Iran could still get their planes even if US wouldn't export any of the Airbus parts. Couldn't they buy/lease frames registered under other airlines? Something similar to how QR took in a few LATAM A350s? I am pretty sure a few airlines or leasing companies could give away a few frames if Iran Air is willing to pay. US can't block that.

jupiter2 wrote:

persiangulf93 wrote:

The Airbus deal between IR and Airbus may be financed by Airbus themselves.
https://en.mehrnews.com/news/130336/Air ... -purchases

Do you think Airbus would do this if they weren't confident the deal going through?

More likely an indication that they are finding it hard to get a financial institution to finance the deal and being exposed to a potential embargo on delivery.

Not unheard of for a manufacturer to finance a deal, Boeing do it as well, but not sure they would expose themselves to a large order.

lightsaber wrote:

jupiter2 wrote:

persiangulf93 wrote:

The Airbus deal between IR and Airbus may be financed by Airbus themselves.
https://en.mehrnews.com/news/130336/Air ... -purchases

Do you think Airbus would do this if they weren't confident the deal going through?

More likely an indication that they are finding it hard to get a financial institution to finance the deal and being exposed to a potential embargo on delivery.

Not unheard of for a manufacturer to finance a deal, Boeing do it as well, but not sure they would expose themselves to a large order.

Vendor financing is rarely a good sign. In this era of faster loss of aircraft value, it is only profitable to vendor finance popular models.

Now Boeing or Airbus financing say 1 of 5 aircraft is a profit center. But look at Boeing having to do contortions to transfer WN 717s to DL. I'm convinced that deal was done so everyone was better of every month (WN didn't have to do a huge one time charge, Boeing didn't have to write off instantly hundreds of millions of 717 value, and DL received planes at a low monthly fee). WN even had to pay for the cabin and paint conversion... Yeah... Vendor financing of a whole order isn't a good sign...

Lightsaber

persiangulf93 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

jupiter2 wrote:

More likely an indication that they are finding it hard to get a financial institution to finance the deal and being exposed to a potential embargo on delivery.

Not unheard of for a manufacturer to finance a deal, Boeing do it as well, but not sure they would expose themselves to a large order.

Vendor financing is rarely a good sign. In this era of faster loss of aircraft value, it is only profitable to vendor finance popular models.

Now Boeing or Airbus financing say 1 of 5 aircraft is a profit center. But look at Boeing having to do contortions to transfer WN 717s to DL. I'm convinced that deal was done so everyone was better of every month (WN didn't have to do a huge one time charge, Boeing didn't have to write off instantly hundreds of millions of 717 value, and DL received planes at a low monthly fee). WN even had to pay for the cabin and paint conversion... Yeah... Vendor financing of a whole order isn't a good sign...

Lightsaber

It is a good sign when no one else is willing to finance it due to a certain bully. Airbus did this to get the financing issue resolved and deliver planes. In case of DL/WN - they had no international banking restrictions on them, Iran does. Cases differ and in this case there wasn't really another option, except for domestic financing - which most probably will be back-up.

LTU932 wrote:

Eyad89 wrote:

Iran could still get their planes even if US wouldn't export any of the Airbus parts. Couldn't they buy/lease frames registered under other airlines? Something similar to how QR took in a few LATAM A350s? I am pretty sure a few airlines or leasing companies could give away a few frames if Iran Air is willing to pay. US can't block that.

Actually, they can. Not just the engines, the avionics, IFE, etc. all have US components.

Wet leases however are on the edge of being a potential violation of an export block the US may impose (but not impossible, see e.g. TA wet leasing Irish registered A320s to CU). It could be therefore subject to interpretation. And I dunno with second hand aircraft, but if you suggest that an airline picks up those orders only to lease them back or immediately resell them to an Iranian airline in order to circumvent a ban, I don't think that would be worth the risk. If you lose business to the US as an international airline, you potentially lose a lot of money.

superjeff wrote:

The problem is the U.S. is saying that Iran has already breached the agreement. Based on that, the U.S. can walk. . .

DocLightning wrote:

There is *something* that Airbus could do, but it would take decades: adopt a policy of not using any US designed or manufactured parts in any future AIrbus types. However, for other products with shorter design cycles (like cars), this might be a project that would only take 5-10 years. That would reduce the impact that American political instability would have on trade in other countries. Our politicians should keep that in mind.

USAirKid wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised if Bombardier and Embrarer has US parts as well.

lightsaber wrote:

So the aircraft can be banned unless Iran proves they are in compliance.

DocLightning wrote:

There is *something* that Airbus could do, but it would take decades: adopt a policy of not using any US designed or manufactured parts in any future AIrbus types. However, for other products with shorter design cycles (like cars), this might be a project that would only take 5-10 years. That would reduce the impact that American political instability would have on trade in other countries. Our politicians should keep that in mind.

LTU932 wrote:

Eyad89 wrote:

Iran could still get their planes even if US wouldn't export any of the Airbus parts. Couldn't they buy/lease frames registered under other airlines? Something similar to how QR took in a few LATAM A350s? I am pretty sure a few airlines or leasing companies could give away a few frames if Iran Air is willing to pay. US can't block that.

Actually, they can. Not just the engines, the avionics, IFE, etc. all have US components.

Wet leases however are on the edge of being a potential violation of an export block the US may impose (but not impossible, see e.g. TA wet leasing Irish registered A320s to CU). It could be therefore subject to interpretation. And I dunno with second hand aircraft, but if you suggest that an airline picks up those orders only to lease them back or immediately resell them to an Iranian airline in order to circumvent a ban, I don't think that would be worth the risk. If you lose business to the US as an international airline, you potentially lose a lot of money.

Aesma wrote:

Peugeot has been building cars in Iran for decades.

Egerton wrote:

The result was that long standing UK business ties were cut off, and UK exports and thus UK jobs suffered on a substantial scale, leading to some factories closing for ever.

tommy1808 wrote:

superjeff wrote:

The problem is the U.S. is saying that Iran has already breached the agreement. Based on that, the U.S. can walk. . .

Does the US have jurisdiction to claim that?

Of course the U.S. can claim that. The U.S. is a party to the Agreement, as well as a sovereign country.

DocLightning wrote:

There is *something* that Airbus could do, but it would take decades: adopt a policy of not using any US designed or manufactured parts in any future AIrbus types. However, for other products with shorter design cycles (like cars), this might be a project that would only take 5-10 years. That would reduce the impact that American political instability would have on trade in other countries. Our politicians should keep that in mind.

Which is probably why such a ban won´t happen. Making it too risky to have US partners in the future, and the times that much technology was only available from US companies is long gone, is not a good policy. RR, MTU and such are probably rooting for that to happen.

best regards
Thomas