SelseyBill wrote:

; the WTO is sure gonna be interested.......

Doubt they'll give two hoots

I have to wonder if we will see these frames in BA livery.

BA are facing a firestorm of 'home' low-cost competition from easyJet and Norwegian at LGW. Once you sever the ability to transfer frames between LGW and LHR, I can see the sense in transferring short-haul operations to a completely separate business unit. Not necessarily Level or Vueling, but a new vehicle - call it 'xyz' by BA, facilitating lower costs than the mainline operation.

by738 wrote:

SelseyBill wrote:

; the WTO is sure gonna be interested.......

Doubt they'll give two hoots

....depends on who complains/ if anyone complains.......

IPFreely wrote:

bond787 wrote:

par13del wrote:

Still waiting to hear about the pressure that Trump placed on IAG to buy American....

Please provide evidence that IAG was pressured by Trump.

I’m curious about this also. Especially since neither the President or the press have publicized this or made any victorious claims. Will we see the evidence soon?

So based on A.Net wisdom, you actually believe that a Blue Chip customer like IAG purchased an obsolete 40 year old a/c that does not have FBW, is cramped and is long past the ability to have another revision, over the modern FBW, more comfortable Airbus because it best met the needs of the customer?
Say it ain't so.....
Its A versus B, honestly, after all the bashing of the 737, how could we resist?

musman9853 wrote:

really surprised at any max orders right now. honestly expected them to be announced after the grounding is over and it's out of the public eye

Did ANYBODY think Boeing wouldn't figure out what they screwed up, where and When they screwed it up, and NOT fix it? They Know they screwed up!
And knowing is half the battle! The fix is already In as we speak. It's now a matter of dotting the I's and crossing the T's Boeing will take a hit for this in the form of not making the profits per airplane they might have sought, and EVEN selling them at Cost for a while. But they'll be back and in FORCE. On THAT? you can make BOOK on. Especially now that Airbus is knee deep in the A321XLR? .All Boeing needs is to Lay back. Then formally announce the B797 on their Terms. When Airbus is up to their Hips in developing the XLR and can't readily change any designs to counter any Boeing, Moves as I think Boeing will have a damn surprise for them!

strfyr51 wrote:

musman9853 wrote:

really surprised at any max orders right now. honestly expected them to be announced after the grounding is over and it's out of the public eye

Did ANYBODY think Boeing wouldn't figure out what they screwed up, where and When they screwed it up, and NOT fix it? They Know they screwed up!
And knowing is half the battle! The fix is already In as we speak. It's now a matter of dotting the I's and crossing the T's Boeing will take a hit for this in the form of not making the profits per airplane they might have sought, and EVEN selling them at Cost for a while. But they'll be back and in FORCE. On THAT? you can make BOOK on. Especially now that Airbus is knee deep in the A321XLR? .All Boeing needs is to Lay back. Then formally announce the B797 on their Terms. When Airbus is up to their Hips in developing the XLR and can't readily change any designs to counter any Boeing, Moves as I think Boeing will have a damn surprise for them!

Eh? The A321XLR is a minimum change development, I doubt it'll take up much development effort, almost certainly less than making the MAX 10.

SelseyBill wrote:

BrianDromey wrote:

Have Boeing pulled another United-Style order here?

....mmmmmm, interesting thought.

Its gonna be sure interesting to find out what IAG paid per unit for these MAX's. If Boeing have priced this deal at rates under production cost; the WTO is sure gonna be interested....... Boeing might be able to pull a stunt like the United one for a domestic deal, but for an 'export' deal to a European carrier; well thats a whole different bag of onions..........

It’s not dumping to sell below cost. Razor manufacturers sell razors below cost all the time to sell blades at ridiculous prices. Dumping is consistently selling in a foreign market for less than your home market price. This is to prevent abusing your domestic customers to subsidize your attempts to take over foreign markets. An example of dumping would be China selling steel for $500 per ton in China, and for $75 per ton in the U.S. in this way they would be illegally cornering the market in the U.S. There is no domestic large airliner manufacturing in Britain, therefore there is no British industry to damage. If IAG buys the planes in Britain and then assigns them to EU subsidiaries, then Boeing didn’t sell them in the EU. By the time Boeing begins delivery Britain will be out of the EU therefore the EU can’t make a dumping complaint for Airbus. If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

Please save your nonsense for when somebody actually makes a dumping complaint.

nikeherc wrote:

[
Please save your nonsense for when somebody actually makes a dumping complaint.

Indeed, that would be the first of many milestones, such as the dumping trial, and then the many rounds of appeals, to then get to the end of the process and find it is no longer relevant since MAX is no longer in production, and/or the actual enforcement of any judgement is impossible.

TL;DR: WTO is a toothless institution.

strfyr51 wrote:

musman9853 wrote:

really surprised at any max orders right now. honestly expected them to be announced after the grounding is over and it's out of the public eye

Did ANYBODY think Boeing wouldn't figure out what they screwed up, where and When they screwed it up, and NOT fix it? They Know they screwed up!
And knowing is half the battle! The fix is already In as we speak. It's now a matter of dotting the I's and crossing the T's Boeing will take a hit for this in the form of not making the profits per airplane they might have sought, and EVEN selling them at Cost for a while. But they'll be back and in FORCE. On THAT? you can make BOOK on. Especially now that Airbus is knee deep in the A321XLR? .All Boeing needs is to Lay back. Then formally announce the B797 on their Terms. When Airbus is up to their Hips in developing the XLR and can't readily change any designs to counter any Boeing, Moves as I think Boeing will have a damn surprise for them!

I was more surprised that any airlines were willing to take the PR hit by ordering a plane that many of the public considers unsafe. you and I know better, but the average joe only sees the crashes.

musman9853 wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

musman9853 wrote:

really surprised at any max orders right now. honestly expected them to be announced after the grounding is over and it's out of the public eye

Did ANYBODY think Boeing wouldn't figure out what they screwed up, where and When they screwed it up, and NOT fix it? They Know they screwed up!
And knowing is half the battle! The fix is already In as we speak. It's now a matter of dotting the I's and crossing the T's Boeing will take a hit for this in the form of not making the profits per airplane they might have sought, and EVEN selling them at Cost for a while. But they'll be back and in FORCE. On THAT? you can make BOOK on. Especially now that Airbus is knee deep in the A321XLR? .All Boeing needs is to Lay back. Then formally announce the B797 on their Terms. When Airbus is up to their Hips in developing the XLR and can't readily change any designs to counter any Boeing, Moves as I think Boeing will have a damn surprise for them!

I was more surprised that any airlines were willing to take the PR hit by ordering a plane that many of the public considers unsafe. you and I know better, but the average joe only sees the crashes.

The average passenger can classify planes into two buckets
1. Is an a380
2. Is not an a380

Seriously, most people have no frickin clue what aircraft they are on. In a year, this will be forgotten.

Antarius wrote:

The average passenger can classify planes into two buckets
1. Is an a380
2. Is not an a380

Seriously, most people have no frickin clue what aircraft they are on. In a year, this will be forgotten.

I agree the public will forget about it soon, which is why I thought if there were any max orders they'd be unidentified for now.

speedbird52 wrote:

VV wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Someone clearly does not understand the Terminal 5 Baggage system. Good job getting angry about airplane suitcase boxes by the way.

If you can't go to terminal 5 then don't go there.

Do you know a single thing about the way Heathrow is set up?

No and I do not care nor do I want to know.

The only thing I've just heard is that IAG signed a letter of intent to acquire 200 737 even if the aircraft cannot take containers.

They obviously want to operate it either by not restricting luggage carried by passengers or they will avoid places where containers are mandatory.

That's it that's all.

This obsession about containers is just ridiculous.

Interesting sidenote: while the IAG press release mentions those aircraft at destined for Vueling, Level and British Airways' Gatwick ops, the Flightglobal order tracker has them split 50/50 between Vueling and Level.
Does Flightglobal know something we/I don't, or did they make a mistake here? I'm especially suspicious about Level, since their shorthaul ops seem to be going nowhere financially.

nikeherc wrote:

It’s not dumping to sell below cost.

Well, Boeing certainly disagreed with that notion as recently as a couple of months back when they tried to bring down Bombardier and instead ended up driving them into Airbus' arms like idiots.

Correction to the above.

They obviously want to operate it either by not allowing or restricting extra luggage carried by passengers or they will avoid places where containers are mandatory.

nikeherc wrote:

It’s not dumping to sell below cost.

Thats interesting, and probably worthy of a separate thread someplace.

nikeherc wrote:

If IAG buys the planes in Britain and then assigns them to EU subsidiaries, then Boeing didn’t sell them in the EU. By the time Boeing begins delivery Britain will be out of the EU therefore the EU can’t make a dumping complaint for Airbus.

Why would IAG buy these a/c in Britain, when they're based in Spain?

nikeherc wrote:

Please save your nonsense for when somebody actually makes a dumping complaint.

Nonsense? We'll see.......

aviationaware wrote:

Interesting sidenote: while the IAG press release mentions those aircraft at destined for Vueling, Level and British Airways' Gatwick ops, the Flightglobal order tracker has them split 50/50 between Vueling and Level.
Does Flightglobal know something we/I don't, or did they make a mistake here? I'm especially suspicious about Level, since their shorthaul ops seem to be going nowhere financially.

nikeherc wrote:

It’s not dumping to sell below cost.

Well, Boeing certainly disagreed with that notion as recently as a couple of months back when they tried to bring down Bombardier and instead ended up driving them into Airbus' arms like idiots.

Any chance BA's LGW operations could be rebranded as 'Level' or 'Level UK' in the near future ?

I doubt IAG has decided which airlines will receive the aircraft and will probably make them compete for them.

JannEejit wrote:

Any chance BA's LGW operations could be rebranded as 'Level' or 'Level UK' in the near future ?

I think it’s unlikely, but not impossible. Internet forums have mentioned it for years, but there is no real evidence of this happening. BA & IAG report to be happy with the performance of the operation and it’s cost structure. I suspect that they can leverage some benefit from the BA brand image, it’s not all about cost, can BA leverage a higher yield, for example.

I think a lot of posters don’t realise how separate LGW and LHR operations are, handling is outsourced, cabin crews are on different(cheaper) contracts, BA use low-capital aircraft or 2nd hand leases at Gatwick. It’s almost an airline within an airline.

Don’t know if this has been discussed yet, but here we go:

Airbus: did not get chance to bid for the MAX order IAG gave to Boeing

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/airbus--did-not-get-chance-to-bid-for-the-max-order-iag-gave-to-boeing-11645858

Bloomberg reporting the same. No rfp was issued.

The AB Gatwick A320 fleet s an old and tird mx of LHR cast offs and second hand frames (G_GATx series). Actually for LGW to get new frames has been the aspiration of local management, and the frustration of BA management for years. To keep that operation profitable and growing, it has not been able to justify the cost of capital of brand new frames.
Now I am simply saying that new frames at a decent discounted cost (at this moment in time) MIGHT have been too compelling for IAG as far as allocating say 30 frames specifically to LGW.
Sound business sense.
And MCAS issues will be a distant memory in a few years time.

AirwayBill wrote:

Don’t know if this has been discussed yet, but here we go:

Airbus: did not get chance to bid for the MAX order IAG gave to Boeing

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/airbus--did-not-get-chance-to-bid-for-the-max-order-iag-gave-to-boeing-11645858

Interesting... IAG being a publicly traded company, I wonder if some shareholders (maybe common to AIG & Airbus) are not going to bring this up to courts: how can you know you had the better deal when no RFP was issued and suppliers allowed to compete and provide their best offer?

Or, as some have suggested, is this "LOI-without-an-RFQ" just a PR stunt and will never be confirmed? Time will tell, but the LOI timing and no-RFQ information surely make for an interesting conspiracy-type theory...

A report in the Times is now claiming that the deal is the handy work of IAG's CFO. Perhaps BA is going back to its Boeing only days.

This is why I love a.net:

#227: This LOI is just posturing
#228: This LOI signals a move to a Boeing only fleet

Maybe it's just an opportunistic buy?

Nah, that'd deprive us of an opportunity to throw shade...

Revelation wrote:

This is why I love a.net:

#227: This LOI is just posturing
#228: This LOI signals a move to a Boeing only fleet

Maybe it's just an opportunistic buy?

Nah, that'd deprive us of an opportunity to throw shade...

I am sorry for seemingly copying your modus operandi on this forum- taking a article and adding spin to it.

xwb565 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

This is why I love a.net:

#227: This LOI is just posturing
#228: This LOI signals a move to a Boeing only fleet

Maybe it's just an opportunistic buy?

Nah, that'd deprive us of an opportunity to throw shade...

I am sorry for seemingly copying your modus operandi on this forum- taking a article and adding spin to it.

I appreciate the imitation, it's a great form of flattery, but you might want to work on coming up with some more believable spin -- BA going all Boeing falls short of the mark, IMO.

Revelation wrote:

xwb565 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

This is why I love a.net:

#227: This LOI is just posturing
#228: This LOI signals a move to a Boeing only fleet

Maybe it's just an opportunistic buy?

Nah, that'd deprive us of an opportunity to throw shade...

I am sorry for seemingly copying your modus operandi on this forum- taking a article and adding spin to it.

I appreciate the imitation, it's a great form of flattery, but you might want to work on coming up with some more believable spin -- BA going all Boeing falls short of the mark, IMO.

I will do my best to learn from the master- your subtle way of throwing shade at Airbus is indeed worthy of imitation

xwb565 wrote:

I will do my best to learn from the master- your subtle way of throwing shade at Airbus is indeed worthy of imitation

For the record, I truly admire the A321 (especially with PW GTF) and the A330 -- what's your favorite Boeing product?

Revelation wrote:

xwb565 wrote:

I will do my best to learn from the master- your subtle way of throwing shade at Airbus is indeed worthy of imitation

For the record, I truly admire the A321 (especially with PW GTF) and the A330 -- what's your favorite Boeing product?

The 737max. I had 3 flights before the grounding and had nothing happen to me. I know its sounds silly but I can only talk safety from a personal perspective and I had no issues flying in the max.

Revelation wrote:

This is why I love a.net:

#227: This LOI is just posturing
#228: This LOI signals a move to a Boeing only fleet

Maybe it's just an opportunistic buy?

Nah, that'd deprive us of an opportunity to throw shade...

Do you have any real rebuttal to what I wrote?
It most likely is not what happened; but admit that the timing and the information available make people wonder.

nikeherc wrote:

SelseyBill wrote:

BrianDromey wrote:

Have Boeing pulled another United-Style order here?

....mmmmmm, interesting thought.

Its gonna be sure interesting to find out what IAG paid per unit for these MAX's. If Boeing have priced this deal at rates under production cost; the WTO is sure gonna be interested....... Boeing might be able to pull a stunt like the United one for a domestic deal, but for an 'export' deal to a European carrier; well thats a whole different bag of onions..........

It’s not dumping to sell below cost. Razor manufacturers sell razors below cost all the time to sell blades at ridiculous prices. Dumping is consistently selling in a foreign market for less than your home market price. This is to prevent abusing your domestic customers to subsidize your attempts to take over foreign markets. An example of dumping would be China selling steel for $500 per ton in China, and for $75 per ton in the U.S. in this way they would be illegally cornering the market in the U.S. There is no domestic large airliner manufacturing in Britain, therefore there is no British industry to damage. If IAG buys the planes in Britain and then assigns them to EU subsidiaries, then Boeing didn’t sell them in the EU. By the time Boeing begins delivery Britain will be out of the EU therefore the EU can’t make a dumping complaint for Airbus. If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

Please save your nonsense for when somebody actually makes a dumping complaint.

IAG’s registered office is in Madrid which of course is well into the EU so I’m not sure if it’s the registered or head office that counts in this case but nonetheless. What’s even fishier here is that the EU’s own industry wasn’t even given a chance to make an offer to IAG so it sounds damaging to me. And since when did delivery matter, it sure didn’t matter in Boeing vs Bombardier.

Interesting that Reuters is saying the bid wasn't even open to both OEMs. If that's true, how does that tally with wanting to keep both sides on their toes and honest about pricing? Yeah Boeing desperately needed the order, so that already assured BA of good pricing from the start, but that's still odd seeing as this isn't a Southwest or Ryanair scenario.

xwb565 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

xwb565 wrote:

I am sorry for seemingly copying your modus operandi on this forum- taking a article and adding spin to it.

I appreciate the imitation, it's a great form of flattery, but you might want to work on coming up with some more believable spin -- BA going all Boeing falls short of the mark, IMO.

I will do my best to learn from the master- your subtle way of throwing shade at Airbus is indeed worthy of imitation

And then turn around and call for objectivity. Which is laughable as someone who's been reading this forum since around 2006 and can clearly remember what he and some of the other American posters (when flags were still shown next to posts) used to post re: Airbus. If you're going to be a fanboy, be an out and out one and at least spare everyone the insult of acting otherwise.

crimsonchin wrote:

Interesting that Reuters is saying the bid wasn't even open to both OEMs. If that's true, how does that tally with wanting to keep both sides on their toes and honest about pricing?

Does seem to go totally against what was claimed to be the reason for the order in that press release.

crimsonchin wrote:

Which is laughable as someone who's been reading this forum since around 2006 and can clearly remember what he and some of the other American posters (when flags were still shown next to posts) used to post re: Airbus. If you're going to be a fanboy, be an out and out one and at least spare everyone the insult of acting otherwise.

It's kind of silly to argue that you know me better than I know me, but hey, whatever...

It seems strange that airbus did not even get a chance to bid on this contract. Maybe it’s a way of forcing some better pricing out of airbus . Either way the size of iag makes sense to have diff manufacturers as keeps airbus and Boeing in their toes !

xwb565 wrote:

Bloomberg reporting the same. No rfp was issued.

Bloomberg also reporting Airbus not giving up on this and intend to make a bid to win this back.

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:

xwb565 wrote:

Bloomberg reporting the same. No rfp was issued.

Bloomberg also reporting Airbus not giving up on this and intend to make a bid to win this back.

How do you do that without an RFP? Send in a unsolicited offer?

With their greater backlog, do we expect Airbus to undercut Boeing just to keep the client and make loss leaders out of the a/c sold in this deal?
Especially for an a/c that is presently grounded and need all the support it can get, we know Boeing's reasons for low balling, what would be Airbus reason, politics?

lightsaber wrote:

VV wrote:

dcajet wrote:

And one that knows how to get a very meaningful discount from Boeing...

You would be surprised by how expensive 737 MAX are.

In addition the guys in Seattle are quite disciplined managing the backlog thus protecting 737's value in the long run.

For this large an order at this time required a discount. IAG could easily wait until post the airshow and wouldn't have cared. Badic game theory says Boeing had to incentivise to stop the bad press.

I think the MAX is great and I'll fly on one in a heartbeat. I'll have my kids join. I'm also a test engineer who knows how to quantify risk and reduce it.

FWIW, I'm certain within 6 months of EIS Boeing will PIP the marketing to 737Ultimate or anything other than 737MAX. But we have another thread on that.

Lightsaber

It’s all about the discount, discount, discount. LH missed out big time on this. The next massive MAX deal won’t be getting as big a sweetener...

Congratulations to Boeing, very well done!


Faro

nikeherc wrote:

If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

.....and now the news that Airbus were not even given the opportunity to bid for this order. Wow.

If true; and it seems it is; an awful lot of questions arise, and no wonder shares dropped with the news. I would have thought there were requirements in IAG's management controls that would require multiple competitive bids to be secured before placing such a huge order.

No wonder it is just a letter of intention; I suspect this has a long way to go yet.

I don't honestly kn ow what Airbus can legally do; if anything; or even if they would be interested in bidding below $30M per unit to win the order.

SelseyBill wrote:

nikeherc wrote:

If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

.....and now the news that Airbus were not even given the opportunity to bid for this order. Wow.

If true; and it seems it is; an awful lot of questions arise, and no wonder shares dropped with the news. I would have thought there were requirements in IAG's management controls that would require multiple competitive bids to be secured before placing such a huge order.

No wonder it is just a letter of intention; I suspect this has a long way to go yet.

I don't honestly kn ow what Airbus can legally do; if anything; or even if they would be interested in bidding below $30M per unit to win the order.

Nobody placed any order yet.
The art of a good deal

And how do you know the price Boeing sold the planes at? Magic much?

SelseyBill wrote:

nikeherc wrote:

If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

.....and now the news that Airbus were not even given the opportunity to bid for this order. Wow.

If true; and it seems it is; an awful lot of questions arise, and no wonder shares dropped with the news. I would have thought there were requirements in IAG's management controls that would require multiple competitive bids to be secured before placing such a huge order.

No wonder it is just a letter of intention; I suspect this has a long way to go yet.

I don't honestly kn ow what Airbus can legally do; if anything; or even if they would be interested in bidding below $30M per unit to win the order.

Not sure which shares you're talking about; but Airbus is slightly up right now, so I guess investors are not too worried about losing this potential order...

WayexTDI wrote:

Not sure which shares you're talking about; but Airbus is slightly up right now, so I guess investors are not too worried about losing this potential order...

IAG's shares dropped quite substantially after the LOI was announced. They have since recovered, but it is a sign that the markets were not bullish on the news.

As it's turning out there wasn't a competitive process involved in the planned order, then it is unsurprising that a lot of investors and traders are bearish on IAG.

But that being said, I'm hearing a lot of views that this isn't a real order to be taken seriously at this point, and that the competitive process with Airbus hasn't yet begun. If so, interesting positioning by IAG - it puts them in a very strong negotiating position. 'Beat these terms or we'll convert the LOI'.

PixelPilot wrote:

SelseyBill wrote:

nikeherc wrote:

If the question of aircraft pricing comes up, Airbus has as much to lose as Boeing.

.....and now the news that Airbus were not even given the opportunity to bid for this order. Wow.

If true; and it seems it is; an awful lot of questions arise, and no wonder shares dropped with the news. I would have thought there were requirements in IAG's management controls that would require multiple competitive bids to be secured before placing such a huge order.

No wonder it is just a letter of intention; I suspect this has a long way to go yet.

I don't honestly kn ow what Airbus can legally do; if anything; or even if they would be interested in bidding below $30M per unit to win the order.

Nobody placed any order yet.
The art of a good deal

And how do you know the price Boeing sold the planes at? Magic much?

No magic; no prejudice; no idea what IAG got offered in terms of price; just pure conjecture and comments from others knowing what discounts other carriers have gotten in the past from Boeing.

I was personally pleased IAG placed the MAX order, and folks up-thread took it to be a done deal. As you correctly say, now it seems far from a done deal, as it may break IAG's own purchase policies; and may contravene other legal requirements.

PlymSpotter wrote:

As it's turning out there wasn't a competitive process involved in the order, then it is unsurprising that a lot of investors and traders are bearish on IAG.

But that being said, because of this I'm hearing a lot of views that isn't a real order to be taken seriously at this point, and that the competitive process with Airbus hasn't yet begun. If so, interesting positioning by IAG - it puts them in a very strong negotiating position.

So you expect that once Airbus puts in their bid Boeing is going to tear up their LOI and commence negotiations?
I assume that a price is already in the LOI and IAG have agreed to it, based on past principle, IAG should be using this time to secure financing to convert the LOI to a contract.
If they wanted to play Boeing off against Airbus all they had to do was request a RFP or leak some news of their intent.
Now if the thought is that by not going RFP they keep the EU governments out of any influence peddling.........

The Airbus complaints about the lack of a competitive RFP are absurd. There weren’t RFPs for the prior rounds of A320neo orders at IAG. Investors in IAG also have no basis to be harmed. IAG has bought from Airbus and knows what appropriate pricing is.

nickllhill wrote:

Am I being silly in thinking.. These can’t go to BA at Heathrow as they can’t take containers?

That's how I see it. My bet is that these are for IAG low-cost groups, and if they are for BA it will be the Gatwick base. The BA terminal 5 operation at Heathrow was designed for all containerised baggage.

Can they just cancel the LOI for 200 MAX if they get a better offer from Airbus,despite the fact that, as many posters have said WW, has some preference to Boeing a/c? Are there no binding clauses that would incur penalties in case this happens?Or could they just "trade" this deal for other Boeing long-haul a/c and go back to Airbus for short-haul (again only if Airbus decides to fight back with an offer they can't refuse)?

It was certainly a surprise deal, I can't think of a BA/IAG order that came out of the blue like that before. Nobody even knew that IAG wanted to buy 200 narrowbodies!

It certainly would be interesting to know how IAG internally went about this deal, and who approached whom...

PlymSpotter wrote:

'Beat these terms or we'll convert the LOI'.

Easier said than done.

Boeing has the 200 order hole in its production calendar due to Jet Airways departing the scene and Airbus has customers scurrying for slots due to the value that the A321XLR offers.

Believe it or not, 737-8 and -10 also are very competitive and in some aspects superior aircraft, depending on what routes you intend to use them on.

Airbus simply might not be able to match schedule / price / performance.

It could be a short negotiation.

But for now a bit of FUD goes a long way.