https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... yptr=yahoo

Airbus is counting A220 planes it did not sell or build in it's delivery total. Not good leadership.

Doesn't seem to be an issue to me, Airbus aren't hiding the fact that they're having problems with production.

From your article:

Airbus concedes that, even with this switch, the delivery target is becoming a “greater stretch”.

The A330neo engine supply issue, it says, adds further pressure to its own “internal industrial challenges” – reportedly centred on A321neo production – as the company continues to deal with the backlog of engineless A320neos.

“We still have a lot to do to meet our commitments,” says chief executive Tom Enders in a third-quarter results disclosure – the first quarter since consolidation of the A220.

Enders says commercial aircraft deliveries and A320neo-family ramp-up remain the “primary operational focus”.

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

MrHMSH wrote:

Doesn't seem to be an issue to me, Airbus aren't hiding the fact that they're having problems with production.

From your article:

Airbus concedes that, even with this switch, the delivery target is becoming a “greater stretch”.

The A330neo engine supply issue, it says, adds further pressure to its own “internal industrial challenges” – reportedly centred on A321neo production – as the company continues to deal with the backlog of engineless A320neos.

“We still have a lot to do to meet our commitments,” says chief executive Tom Enders in a third-quarter results disclosure – the first quarter since consolidation of the A220.

Enders says commercial aircraft deliveries and A320neo-family ramp-up remain the “primary operational focus”.

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

Of course it's not an issue. I forgot... Airbus invented an $8 billion order to Amedeo, what's the big deal with adding a dozen regional jets to the delivery total!! Boeing would be hung by the SEC for a lot less.

sibibom wrote:

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

They are including C Series jets BBD produced and sold. That is not the point of the delivery number which is used to give investors guidance on expected revenue.

Including aircraft they have no right to list is borderline market manipulation. The A220 was not part of the 800 delivery forecast. If they want to include the A220 numbers they should revise the forecast up.

The OP is right about something that a lot of folks will miss: smart investors will see that and it will cost Airbus's new management team credability with the big investment houses. Those guys like full transparancy.

I own a farm. You invest in my farm. i tell you "I will ship 50 tonnes of apples this year". You calculate that 50 tonnes of apples makes a good profit and buy more stock.

Late in the year i have only shipped 30 tonnes of apples. But i buy a farm next to me that has shipped 10 tonnes. Now that farm already recognized the revenue and profit from those apples and I drove up my costs buy the farm, but i tell you I have shipped 40 tonnes of apples.

Would you take issue with me?

MrHMSH wrote:

Doesn't seem to be an issue to me, Airbus aren't hiding the fact that they're having problems with production.

From your article:

Airbus concedes that, even with this switch, the delivery target is becoming a “greater stretch”.

The A330neo engine supply issue, it says, adds further pressure to its own “internal industrial challenges” – reportedly centred on A321neo production – as the company continues to deal with the backlog of engineless A320neos.

“We still have a lot to do to meet our commitments,” says chief executive Tom Enders in a third-quarter results disclosure – the first quarter since consolidation of the A220.

Enders says commercial aircraft deliveries and A320neo-family ramp-up remain the “primary operational focus”.

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

SC430 wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

Doesn't seem to be an issue to me, Airbus aren't hiding the fact that they're having problems with production.

From your article:

Airbus concedes that, even with this switch, the delivery target is becoming a “greater stretch”.

The A330neo engine supply issue, it says, adds further pressure to its own “internal industrial challenges” – reportedly centred on A321neo production – as the company continues to deal with the backlog of engineless A320neos.

“We still have a lot to do to meet our commitments,” says chief executive Tom Enders in a third-quarter results disclosure – the first quarter since consolidation of the A220.

Enders says commercial aircraft deliveries and A320neo-family ramp-up remain the “primary operational focus”.

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

Of course it's not an issue. I forgot... Airbus invented an $8 billion order to Amedeo, what's the big deal with adding a dozen regional jets to the delivery total!! Boeing would be hung by the SEC for a lot less.

So they did invent an order... that this is the only real example of 'trickery' you can resort to is probably an indication that it's not something worth getting knickers in a twist for. The plane is branded as the Airbus A220, seeing it included in the Airbus total is hardly a surprise, and as I noted, Airbus are under no illusions as to what challenges they face.

Though since you seem to take a very dim view of 'trickery' I would hope that this is applied to all 'trickery' you see. It'd be a bit awkward if a carbon-fibre product with creative accounting to massage incompetent management was flying around and wasn't getting scathing criticism for this 'trickery'.

You lost credibility in the title, but the article does suggest some playing with numbers. It states: "But this target now includes 18 A220s, whereas Airbus had previously intended to deliver 800 aircraft excluding the A220 contribution."

Regardless, sophisticated investors aren't fooled.

… and the real issue here is....???

trickery is allowed when asserting bragging rights - fishing, jumping, building planes, and other male games.

Doesn't Europe have even stricter regulations on companies? How is Airbus allowed to do this?

osiris30 wrote:

I own a farm. You invest in my farm. i tell you "I will ship 50 tonnes of apples this year". You calculate that 50 tonnes of apples makes a good profit and buy more stock.

Late in the year i have only shipped 30 tonnes of apples. But i buy a farm next to me that has shipped 10 tonnes. Now that farm already recognized the revenue and profit from those apples and I drove up my costs buy the farm, but i tell you I have shipped 40 tonnes of apples.

Would you take issue with me?

A closer analogy would be more like promising to ship 50 tonnes of apples, making it to 46 tonnes but using 2 tonnes from a farm which you own 50% of, acknowledging that there are issues and that they need to be worked on.

The author of the article saw this for what it is, a "jiggering" of the numbers.

cougar15 wrote:

… and the real issue here is....???

The issue would be letting an opportunity to slam Airbus go by.

osiris30 wrote:

I own a farm. You invest in my farm. i tell you "I will ship 50 tonnes of apples this year". You calculate that 50 tonnes of apples makes a good profit and buy more stock.

Late in the year i have only shipped 30 tonnes of apples. But i buy a farm next to me that has shipped 10 tonnes. Now that farm already recognized the revenue and profit from those apples and I drove up my costs buy the farm, but i tell you I have shipped 40 tonnes of apples.

Would you take issue with me?

MrHMSH wrote:

Doesn't seem to be an issue to me, Airbus aren't hiding the fact that they're having problems with production.

From your article:

Airbus concedes that, even with this switch, the delivery target is becoming a “greater stretch”.

The A330neo engine supply issue, it says, adds further pressure to its own “internal industrial challenges” – reportedly centred on A321neo production – as the company continues to deal with the backlog of engineless A320neos.

“We still have a lot to do to meet our commitments,” says chief executive Tom Enders in a third-quarter results disclosure – the first quarter since consolidation of the A220.

Enders says commercial aircraft deliveries and A320neo-family ramp-up remain the “primary operational focus”.

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

Is that really an apples to apples comparison

scbriml wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

… and the real issue here is....???

The issue would be letting an opportunity to slam Airbus go by.

After the deferred production cost thread (again) THAT is rich.

scbriml wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

… and the real issue here is....???

The issue would be letting an opportunity to slam Airbus go by.

Yup!

osiris30 wrote:

sibibom wrote:

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

They are including C Series jets BBD produced and sold. That is not the point of the delivery number which is used to give investors guidance on expected revenue.

Including aircraft they have no right to list is borderline market manipulation. The A220 was not part of the 800 delivery forecast. If they want to include the A220 numbers they should revise the forecast up.

The OP is right about something that a lot of folks will miss: smart investors will see that and it will cost Airbus's new management team credability with the big investment houses. Those guys like full transparancy.

Airbus owns the product now. Of course they can include the deliveries.

Slug71 wrote:

osiris30 wrote:

sibibom wrote:

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

They are including C Series jets BBD produced and sold. That is not the point of the delivery number which is used to give investors guidance on expected revenue.

Including aircraft they have no right to list is borderline market manipulation. The A220 was not part of the 800 delivery forecast. If they want to include the A220 numbers they should revise the forecast up.

The OP is right about something that a lot of folks will miss: smart investors will see that and it will cost Airbus's new management team credability with the big investment houses. Those guys like full transparancy.

Airbus owns the product now. Of course they can include the deliveries.

It doesn't work like that from a financial market perspective. I couldn't care less what Airbus claims or what they recognize where apart from potentially misleading statements that may have regulatory impact.

It DOES make me leary of how new leadership might try to "solve" problems. That is the opposite of the behavior Airbus needs right now. It hints at trying to hide problems which is the last thing I want to see from an airframer. That approach leads to bad things for corporate culture. Anyone who cares about a good competitive market wouldn't want to see Airbus backslide. Monopolies are bad for all. We have some great new aircraft (787, 350) as a result of two healthy partners.

Slug71 wrote:

osiris30 wrote:

sibibom wrote:

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

They are including C Series jets BBD produced and sold. That is not the point of the delivery number which is used to give investors guidance on expected revenue.

Including aircraft they have no right to list is borderline market manipulation. The A220 was not part of the 800 delivery forecast. If they want to include the A220 numbers they should revise the forecast up.

The OP is right about something that a lot of folks will miss: smart investors will see that and it will cost Airbus's new management team credability with the big investment houses. Those guys like full transparancy.

Airbus owns the product now. Of course they can include the deliveries.

Orders less deliveries = backlog. If the A220 were not in the order book (they were not) then they should not be counted in the deliveries. The author of the article saw this for what it is. It is weak to try and put lipstick on this pig. Shame on Airbus... This was done to mislead the general public on the severity of the on going delays.

SC430 wrote:

It hints at trying to hide problems which is the last thing I want to see from an airframer.

As evidenced by the CEO quite literally saying that they have problems and are working at them.

MrHMSH wrote:

SC430 wrote:

It hints at trying to hide problems which is the last thing I want to see from an airframer.

As evidenced by the CEO quite literally saying that they have problems and are working at them.

Yes, actually! I spend a lot of time studying managers and management styles so I know who I want to be for my team and how to be it. Saying I know I have problems while quietly trying to minimize the optics of the problems is a worse behavioral trait than just outright denial. It was a similar management style that led to the 380 problems early in the program.

Did Boeing do this when they acquired MD?

ACCS300 wrote:

Did Boeing do this when they acquired MD?

Not sure. But Boeing also bought MD. Airbus bought part of a program not all of BBD. Had they taken on BBDs debts and assets it might be a more reasonable approach.

ACCS300 wrote:

Did Boeing do this when they acquired MD?

I wasn't aware Airbus had "acquired" Bombardier?

In late 2017 Airbus announced to the world it would deliver 800 frames this year. Through out the year as problems arose they maintained this was still doable. Along comes October O&D reports and without a word they have added regional jets both sold and manufactured by Bombardier. If they had announced the move AND raised the guidance to correspond with these frames - that would be on the up and up.

This was done to mask the severity of the delivery problem, and that is not ok

oink, oink

NEWS FLASH : Airbus product contributes to Airbus deliveries!

SC430 wrote:

The author of the article saw this for what it is, a "jiggering" of the numbers.

Airbus has a history of dodginess when it comes to this kind of thing, such as the well known "5th quarter" bookings, Amedeo "orders", etc.

Slug71 wrote:

Airbus owns the product now. Of course they can include the deliveries.

Not exactly. Airbus owns 50.01% of the entity that makes the product, and they chose to brand it as an Airbus product for marketing purposes.

What's the problem? This is what Airbus said, they are not hiding anything. They downgrade delivery target and thats it.

Outlook

As the basis for its 2018 guidance, the Company expects the world economy and air traffic to grow in line with prevailing independent forecasts, which assume no major disruptions.

The 2018 earnings and guidance are prepared under IFRS 15.
The 2018 earnings and Free Cash Flow guidance is before M&A. It now includes the A220 integration.
• Airbus targets to deliver around 800 commercial aircraft in 2018, now including around 18 A220 aircraft and the updated commercial aircraft delivery schedule.
• On that basis: 
Before M&A, the Company maintains expected EBIT Adjusted of approximately € 5 billion in 2018. This includes a lower expected reduction in EBIT Adjusted from the A220 than estimated in H1 2018.  Airbus expects Free Cash Flow before M&A and Customer Financing to be lower than the 2017 level of € 2.95 billion. This also reflects an expected reduction of approximately € -0.3 billion from the A220. In 2018, the Company expects the net cash impact of the A220 integration to be largely covered by the funding arrangement as laid out in the terms of the C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership, meaning limited cash dilution.

SC430 wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-absorbs-a220s-to-maintain-800-jet-delivery-ta-453172/?yptr=yahoo

TFA also says:

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

Does anyone have any insights on that statement?

scbriml wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

… and the real issue here is....???

The issue would be letting an opportunity to slam Airbus go by.

It seems like fair game to me, but hopefully this is a one time gimmick. We do still have the quarterly delight of the BCA program accounting thread to savor.

SC430 wrote:

ACCS300 wrote:

Did Boeing do this when they acquired MD?

I wasn't aware Airbus had "acquired" Bombardier?

In late 2017 Airbus announced to the world it would deliver 800 frames this year. Through out the year as problems arose they maintained this was still doable. Along comes October O&D reports and without a word they have added regional jets both sold and manufactured by Bombardier. If they had announced the move AND raised the guidance to correspond with these frames - that would be on the up and up.

This was done to mask the severity of the delivery problem, and that is not ok

oink, oink

Wasn't implying that Airbus bought BBD, simply citing a similar scenario.

SC430 wrote:

ACCS300 wrote:

Did Boeing do this when they acquired MD?

I wasn't aware Airbus had "acquired" Bombardier?

In late 2017 Airbus announced to the world it would deliver 800 frames this year. Through out the year as problems arose they maintained this was still doable. Along comes October O&D reports and without a word they have added regional jets both sold and manufactured by Bombardier. If they had announced the move AND raised the guidance to correspond with these frames - that would be on the up and up.

This was done to mask the severity of the delivery problem, and that is not ok

oink, oink

So you raised this thread without reading the Airbus statement......

Slug71 wrote:

osiris30 wrote:

sibibom wrote:

How dare they include Airbus A220 in their production list! Blasphemy I tell you!

They are including C Series jets BBD produced and sold. That is not the point of the delivery number which is used to give investors guidance on expected revenue.

Including aircraft they have no right to list is borderline market manipulation. The A220 was not part of the 800 delivery forecast. If they want to include the A220 numbers they should revise the forecast up.

The OP is right about something that a lot of folks will miss: smart investors will see that and it will cost Airbus's new management team credability with the big investment houses. Those guys like full transparancy.

Airbus owns the product now. Of course they can include the deliveries.

Yes, they own a majority stake of the C-series program from 1 July 2018 and they can include deliveries from that date.

What was creative of them was that they did not adjust their delivery forecast for the year.... but then forecasts are just forecasts. It can be any number and Airbus can either achieve the numbers or miss them.

Revelation wrote:

SC430 wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-absorbs-a220s-to-maintain-800-jet-delivery-ta-453172/?yptr=yahoo

TFA also says:

Airbus adds that it its working to resolve “certain commercial challenges” on the baseline A330 and A380 programmes, which it intends to complete by the end of this year.

Does anyone have any insights on that statement?

They will have to cut rate on the A330 if NEO orders don’t want delivery. They may have to make an overall decision on the A380 if the EK order is really falling apart. If they won’t take more it may be commercial beneficial to keep the line at the higher rate it runs at of 12 and simply finish out what is left then shut it down.

In the A330neo and A330 you have a backlog of 269 and 74. Less 36 you can’t deliver to Iran. Less whatever the lessors don’t want to take (assuming they are the ones wanting to defer delivery which seems likely) so another 46 that may not want any just yet. To me there is a deliverable backlog of 261. Air Asia X is basically going to take 12 a year for 9-10 years it sounds like. Delta could take 10-10-5 I suppose if they wanted to try and support rates.

Everyone else is buying pissant amount of airplanes so they don’t really support a rate but let’s say we can talk the other 136 frames of both types into supporting the rate 50. I need them to take 28 a year even if Delta will take 10. And then you are staring at rates dropping off a cliff post Delta delivery, particularly if the lessors bail out. I also am on pace if I do that to run out of non Air Asia X orders in less than 5 years.

Screams that a rate cut has to be coming to the A330 program to me.

It also makes the drive to build more A320neo’s more important and understandable as well as possibly not cutting A380 rates just yet. They want to grow revenue. They face an A330 deficit on the order of $1.5 to $3 billion in revenue depending on how many they can deliver next year. I don’t think they can support an A350 rate increase either.

Interesting times ahead.

SC430 wrote:

Airbus resorts to trickery on delivery goal

As I read the Flight Global article, I was wondering how long it would take for A.net to come out and put a negative headline spin to that. I just knew if would not be disappointed. It was not question of if, just a question of when, and by whom . . .

PW100 wrote:

SC430 wrote:

Airbus resorts to trickery on delivery goal

As I read the Flight Global article, I was wondering how long it would take for A.net to come out and put a negative headline spin to that. I just knew if would not be disappointed. It was not question of if, just a question of when, and by whom . . .

I don’t think it’s trickery, at least not that matters, I think discussion of it does serve to distract from more fundamental issues investors should be looking at and concerned about.

scbriml wrote:

cougar15 wrote:

… and the real issue here is....???

The issue would be letting an opportunity to slam Airbus go by.

Airbus bought the A220 program. As long as they are public, these are Airbus numbers to own.

Is anyone here uncertain?

Lightsaber

Airbus press release speak about 330ceo issues, not NEO

Furthermore, Airbus is actively working to resolve certain commercial challenges on the A330ceo and A380 programmes that are targeted for completion by the year-end.

Maybe about HNA orders?

I have no problem with them including the A220s, but they should increase their goal to 818. In algebra, if you add something to one side of the equation, you have to add it to the other side.

nikeherc wrote:

I have no problem with them including the A220s, but they should increase their goal to 818. In algebra, if you add something to one side of the equation, you have to add it to the other side.

No they don't. They make pretty clear that they have challenges with deliveries and their current estimate is 800 including A220. Mean that they actually downgrade delivery target.

With regard to full-year deliveries, the A320neo ramp-up is ongoing but the level of disruption resulting from the late availability of engines in the first half of 2018 as well as some internal industrial challenges make the full-year 2018 target a greater stretch. A lot remains to be done before the end of the year to fulfill commitments. The A330neo delivery schedule has been adjusted to reflect the engine partner’s latest 2018 outlook. Furthermore, Airbus is actively working to resolve certain commercial challenges on the A330ceo and A380 programmes that are targeted for completion by the year-end.

I am not quite sure, but we’re talking about financial results here or not?

As Airbus owns more than 50% of the c series program, they are required to include it in their consolidated financial statement (if I’m not mistaken)

Edit: It is indeed the first quarter since consolidation of the a220. As this is a requirement of IFRS, I do not see any reason to be concerned.

Hey, it's Halloween. There was bound to be a trick or treat somewhere.

PW100 wrote:

SC430 wrote:

Airbus resorts to trickery on delivery goal

As I read the Flight Global article, I was wondering how long it would take for A.net to come out and put a negative headline spin to that. I just knew if would not be disappointed. It was not question of if, just a question of when, and by whom . . .

Happy I could oblige you

SC430 wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-absorbs-a220s-to-maintain-800-jet-delivery-ta-453172/?yptr=yahoo

Airbus is counting A220 planes it did not sell or build in it's delivery total. Not good leadership.

With that mindset, do you think it's OK for BCA (Boeing Commercial Airplanes) to count the P-8's & C-40's in deliveries? After all, they are military aircraft, so should be excluded; but they're not.

Airbus bought the CSeries (at least the majority of it), with its orders and undelivered aircraft. All this has a cost (that was figured out in the purchase price, or commitment in this case) that Airbus paid/committed to pay, so they owe the liabilities but also the assets.

Bottom line: yes, the BD-500 aircraft (f.k.a. CSeries, now a.k.a. A220's) delivered since July 1st are counted as Airbus deliveries.

Oh spare me all of the righteous indignation from all of you 100% objective commentators.

Good grief. Stop the US vs THEM rhetoric. Just be glad that Airbus, Boeing, Embraer and Bombardier are still building fine product and keeping us all entertained. (Unfortunately for the rest of us, all of this posturing and grandstanding is entertaining for some of you....)

<hmmm, Searches Forum / Thread Tools.... must be a way to permanently hide a thread...……>

A lot of you guys may make great airline CEOs, but you’ll never run Ernst&Young.

It's not an issue including A220 deliveries. What is the issue is not increasing the target by an equal amount. It's not being honest with the delivery target.

lightsaber wrote:

Airbus bought the A220 program. As long as they are public, these are Airbus numbers to own.

No they're not, at least if European public disclosure laws are anything like the US's (and they are).

I'm neither an A nor a B fanboy. I am a finance guy. Public companies take money from investors based on actual historical performance and management's projections of future performance. So management cannot just say anything they want to say. It misleads (a/k/a lies) to the public from which they are asking for money. Ask Elon Musk - "funding secured!".

Airbus will report revenue for A220 deliveries made after the program acquisition date. Deliveries made prior to that date will not be accounted for in their financial records and cannot be accounted for in their delivery records.

MSPNWA wrote:

It's not an issue including A220 deliveries. What is the issue is not increasing the target by an equal amount. It's not being honest with the delivery target.

That's really what it comes down to. I'm not a fan of the inflammatory thread title nor the OP's approach to A v B, but this is a fair issue to raise.

So according to the article, Airbus will be adding 18 A220 deliveries to their 2018 guidance.

Wikipedia says that 38 CSeries/A220 frames have been delivered by the end of September 2018. So Airbus is only claiming a subset of the total number of deliveries. Airbus took formal majority control of the program on 1 July, so how many frames were delivered and are scheduled to be delivered between 1 July and 31 December? If it is 18, I don't see an issue with them adding that to their guidance.