eurotrader85 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

^^ and with Willie Walsh going out (the MAX LOI was his idea after all), perhaps IAG will let the LOI lapse.

I thought it was Steve Gunning's idea.

It is...and I’m sure he will like to see it come through for the steal at which they’re getting those frames

fessor wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

^^ and with Willie Walsh going out (the MAX LOI was his idea after all), perhaps BA will let the LOI lapse.

There are a chance for that or at least most of this order never materialize

And there is a chance that his successors love the deal and ask for even more planes at the same price.

Revelation wrote:

fessor wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

^^ and with Willie Walsh going out (the MAX LOI was his idea after all), perhaps BA will let the LOI lapse.

There are a chance for that or at least most of this order never materialize

And there is a chance that his successors love the deal and ask for even more planes at the same price.

The latter more likely than the former, IMHO (though I think 200 more than covers the requirement).

What exactly are they replacing? Some of the current BA A320's are around 20, but couldn't they be ESG'd instead?

Even a 30 year old A320 is fuel efficient and state of the art, that's why they're hardly retired.

1989worstyear wrote:

What exactly are they replacing? Some of the current BA A320's are around 20, but couldn't they be ESG'd instead?

Even a 30 year old A320 is fuel efficient and state of the art, that's why they're hardly retired.

From the horse's mouth:

It is anticipated that the aircraft would be used by a number of the Group’s airlines including Vueling, LEVEL plus British Airways at London Gatwick airport.

Ref: https://www.iairgroup.com/en/newsroom/p ... and-737-10

I don’t think WWs retirement will change the LOI. It was made by a larger management team than just Willie. If it makes sense they will keep it, if Airbus offers a better deal they won’t. Airlines like AC, AA, UA, LO, BY and FR will all be flying the MAX, they are hardly two-bit, third world death trap airlines.

The MAX are currently set to replace BA’s A319/320 fleet at Gatwick, some of the Vueling and Level fleet. T5 at LHR is built around containerised baggage, so the MAX would be a challenge, LHR is likely to remain an A32x base. (Note I said a challenge. Not impossible, before someone gets upset).
I assume that the MAX will result in some reshuffling of the fleet. The A319s, G-MIDx and G-GATx A320s will likely leave while the G-EUxx A320s will head back to LHR. BA LHR, IB and EI will likely remain A32x ceo/neo operators.

f4f3a wrote:

I think we are getting off topic by spending too much time talking about the cert issues . There’s already a thread for that . If it doesn’t fly again ba will get a good deal on what replaces it anyway . They are in no hurry to get these planes . At the end of the day they are prob going to reap rewards of a cheap deal while others may have paid top dollar for airbuses . It will also get airbus being a bit leaner on pricing in the future

So in essence, BA have booked an order with Boeing. What they actually end up receiving remains to be seen. Is it similar to "max" loading a pre-pay credit card in effect ?

I'd this deal is going to be kicked well into the long grass for quite some time now, and given the climate, perhaps the ball may well never be retrieved.

Breathe wrote:

I'd this deal is going to be kicked well into the long grass for quite some time now, and given the climate, perhaps the ball may well never be retrieved.

I think it depends on how cheap the MAXs become after all the delays, and how much IAG can work delay compensation to their advantage. Sending older narrow bodies and engines through heavy maintenance visits is really expensive. If they can get the MAX cheap enough as a result of delay compensation, it might make way more sense to have a newer, more flexible, more efficient airplane instead of an older fleet with higher maintenance costs. But I agree that the COVID crisis gives both sides incentives to stretch things waaay out.

Delay compensations for a LoI?

Breathe wrote:

I'd this deal is going to be kicked well into the long grass for quite some time now, and given the climate, perhaps the ball may well never be retrieved.

I would think it's safe to say that whatever commitment deal this was, it going to lapse if it hasn't already.

seahawk wrote:

Delay compensations for a LoI?

That's what I was thinking too.

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

But will IAG need that many new planes anyway? Aviation is likely to remain in a slump long after the current C19 crisis is over, and there won't be a shortage of fairly new 737s and A32Xs out there...

AirbusA6 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

But will IAG need that many new planes anyway? Aviation is likely to remain in a slump long after the current C19 crisis is over, and there won't be a shortage of fairly new 737s and A32Xs out there...

That's what I was thinking also. All airlines are going to come out of this (well, the ones that survive) a lot smaller carriers. CapEx on new aircraft would be right at the bottom of the priority list, if at all over next few years.

Breathe wrote:

AirbusA6 wrote:

But will IAG need that many new planes anyway? Aviation is likely to remain in a slump long after the current C19 crisis is over, and there won't be a shortage of fairly new 737s and A32Xs out there...

That's what I was thinking also. All airlines are going to come out of this (well, the ones that survive) a lot smaller carriers. CapEx on new aircraft would be right at the bottom of the priority list, if at all over next few years.

As I wrote earlier, after 9/11/2001 we saw the DC10s, 747 classics, 727s and 737 jurassics go to the desert and never come back, even though they were paid for and fuel prices were cheap.

We did see MOL make a tremendous deal for NGs that let him change the efficiency profile of his airline since Boeing was desperate for a big deal to keep its production line moving.

We've already seen (unfortunately) a few IAG competitors fold so there will be opportunities once things rebound.

It could be that in the end IAG's deal for 737s and other new aircraft purchases put it on a new efficiency profile that its competitors can't match.

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

A more pressing question is, will IAG need those aircraft in the short/medium term? Probably not.

I think Airbus in a few years will offer IAG A321NEOs for a fair price. If they prefer the 737MAX they should order those, for their long term NB requirements.

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!



Source: https://www.businessinsider.co.za/comai ... nes-2019-3

keesje wrote:

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!

KL can also take on the MAX10. It'll be great to see the wonderful KL livery on a MAX10 and it'll help support the AMS labor market too!

Revelation wrote:

We did see MOL make a tremendous deal for NGs that let him change the efficiency profile of his airline since Boeing was desperate for a big deal to keep its production line moving.

The ensuing controversy ensured that could never happen again, so it can be classed as an outlying event.

Revelation wrote:

It could be that in the end IAG's deal for 737s and other new aircraft purchases put it on a new efficiency profile that its competitors can't match.

BCA could actually get some breathing room out of this, as before the C19, the MAX was more or less doomed. Although I am not impressed than even a three year production break will be able to solve enough of the design and regulatory issues to see the 3M8s placed back into service. It is not as though Airbus will be standing still. An A225 would easily be an attractive alternative, as well as adding familial flexibility that BCA functionally will not be able to match until they develop a proper NSA.

But yes, it is possible that not having the pressure -well, only less pressure in reality- of a running supply chain to manage could help somewhat on this.

Revelation wrote:

keesje wrote:

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!

KL can also take on the MAX10. It'll be great to see the wonderful KL livery on a MAX10 and it'll help support the AMS labor market too!

The Boeing MAX as a government supported job creation machine. Just what we need in these dark times.

keesje wrote:

Revelation wrote:

keesje wrote:

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!

KL can also take on the MAX10. It'll be great to see the wonderful KL livery on a MAX10 and it'll help support the AMS labor market too!

The Boeing MAX as a government supported job creation machine. Just what we need in these dark times.

Way not take the MAX-7 instead? It would require more planes to cover same capacity and might keep Boeing alive a little longer. Those 50 billion USD from the US government might after all not last long if Boeing keep messing everything up.

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

Airbus were, by all accounts, not invited to tender for this order originally. If it expires without being firmed, I think it might be some time before IAG need more planes.

scbriml wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

Airbus were, by all accounts, not invited to tender for this order originally. If it expires without being firmed, I think it might be some time before IAG need more planes.

We should ackowdge BA, Iberia and AirLingus ordered, took A320/A321s NEO's already and have many more on order..

keesje wrote:

scbriml wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Obviously, the current crisis will delay. We will see the purchase renegotiated later, the only question, is will Airbus negotiate seriously?

Airbus were, by all accounts, not invited to tender for this order originally. If it expires without being firmed, I think it might be some time before IAG need more planes.

We should ackowdge BA, Iberia and AirLingus ordered, took A320/A321s NEO's already and have many more on order..

Should we also acknowledge that IAG was so unhappy with Airbus's inability to deliver when promised that they were happy to sign a LOI with Boeing even knowing the MAX RTS date was not set so they could pressure Airbus to improve delivery performance?

Revelation wrote:

keesje wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Airbus were, by all accounts, not invited to tender for this order originally. If it expires without being firmed, I think it might be some time before IAG need more planes.

We should ackowdge BA, Iberia and AirLingus ordered, took A320/A321s NEO's already and have many more on order..

Should we also acknowledge that IAG was so unhappy with Airbus's inability to deliver when promised that they were happy to sign a LOI with Boeing even knowing the MAX RTS date was not set so they could pressure Airbus to improve delivery performance?

IAG's letter of intent to take 200 Boeing 737 Max jets will help prevent it from becoming a captive customer of Airbus's when it comes to the short-haul fleet, in the view of chief executive Willie Walsh.

During a webcasted panel session at the ACI Europe annual congress in the Cypriot city of Limassol on 26 June, Walsh noted that there had been "concern" within the airline group for some time that it was becoming too reliant on the European airframer.

"That's unhealthy," says Walsh.

https://www.flightglobal.com/strategy/7 ... 50.article

While the Paris letter of intent was quickly translated as an order and a huge sign of confidence and a boost for the 737 MAX program, it is what it is.

Probably Airbus was out of discounts & Walsh hated being in that position. I remember BA going after the 747-8i for the same reason.

Revelation wrote:

Should we also acknowledge that IAG was so unhappy with Airbus's inability to deliver when promised that they were happy to sign a LOI with Boeing even knowing the MAX RTS date was not set so they could pressure Airbus to improve delivery performance?

I think this is actually the most likely reason that occurred. From a fiduciary standpoint, it does not make sense to only speak to BCA when engaging both would have squeezed BCA even harder on price.

I think if the MAX could have somehow been made safe and the need still existed, they would have converted at least half to an order. But as it stands, it is an easy back-out for times like now. Otherwise, I suspect the order would have been a bit more firm in the first place; 100+/100, etc...

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.

The issue now is how many frames they will need going forward. Certainly fewer if the competitor landscape were to remain unchanged after COVID, but that will not happen because weaker airlines will fall away. That in turn will liberate cheap newish fire sale frames which IAG may scoop up, or they may take factory fresh at fire sale prices including this LoI.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

An A225 would easily be an attractive alternative

I think the Antonov An225 might be a little overkill, especially for the UK domestic network

nighthawk wrote:

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

An A225 would easily be an attractive alternative

I think the Antonov An225 might be a little overkill, especially for the UK domestic network

Well, it is well fitted for congested airport's let me LHR.
LHR is a slot constrained airport.

VV wrote:

nighthawk wrote:

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

An A225 would easily be an attractive alternative

I think the Antonov An225 might be a little overkill, especially for the UK domestic network

Well, it is well fitted for congested airport's let me LHR.
LHR is a slot constrained airport.

Ha, yep... And perhaps the Chinese may be looking for extra work now. They can get started finishing that second unit and converting for PAX use!


Anyway, I do think an A220-500 would work very well against the would-have-been 3M8s, lol. I should probably get a better shorthand for that one's inexorable development though, eh?

keesje wrote:

I think Airbus in a few years will offer IAG A321NEOs for a fair price. If they prefer the 737MAX they should order those, for their long term NB requirements.

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!



Source: https://www.businessinsider.co.za/comai ... nes-2019-3

Question: Is it possible/economical to install containerised baggage loading on a 73M? Years ago, the 707 on many airlines (TWA, PanAm) had containers without problems; the 73M is the essentially the same fuselage.

chiad wrote:

Breathe wrote:

I'd this deal is going to be kicked well into the long grass for quite some time now, and given the climate, perhaps the ball may well never be retrieved.

I would think it's safe to say that whatever commitment deal this was, it going to lapse if it hasn't already.

I don't think that this LoI was meant to be firmed before the MAX would have regained its certification. Once the MAX will be good to fly again, then it will be time to speculate about the outcome of this LoI.

superjeff wrote:

keesje wrote:

I think Airbus in a few years will offer IAG A321NEOs for a fair price. If they prefer the 737MAX they should order those, for their long term NB requirements.

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!



Source: https://www.businessinsider.co.za/comai ... nes-2019-3

Question: Is it possible/economical to install containerised baggage loading on a 73M? Years ago, the 707 on many airlines (TWA, PanAm) had containers without problems; the 73M is the essentially the same fuselage.

There is a containerised system available, but I honestly don't know if anyone's actually implemented it.

https://magazine.groundhandling.com/new ... boeing-737

This LOI was an opportunistic move by IAG:
- it was free advertisement for BA during the airshow (we still speack of it today)
- it was a warning to Airbus
- it was BA keeping good relations with Boeing by endorsing MAX (Boeing owe them one now)
- it was BA keeping it's options and ambitions open

But it was just an LOI which did not firmed before covid, so now it is not going to happen.

JerseyFlyer wrote:

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.
.

I thought that mindset only applied to carriers operating Boeing equipment?

One thing if they do convert the LOI to an order is that they may be able to get the a/c on premises in record time, the 400 plus a/c Boeing have sitting on the ground will have cancellations, if they do not have much customization, a quick paint job and good to go.

par13del wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.
.

I thought that mindset only applied to carriers operating Boeing equipment?

One thing if they do convert the LOI to an order is that they may be able to get the a/c on premises in record time, the 400 plus a/c Boeing have sitting on the ground will have cancellations, if they do not have much customization, a quick paint job and good to go.

From what is becoming increasingly obvious, the aircraft that have already been built will be subject to extensive and probably lengthy modifications. It isn't too difficult to imagine that these will become unattractive, overweight and non-standard aircraft ala the early 787s and A380s. It won't just be a quick paintjob.

are they going to actually confirm the LOI or are they going to use this for lower prices on the A320 neo

Rossiya747 wrote:

are they going to actually confirm the LOI or are they going to use this for lower prices on the A320 neo

Hopefully the latter.... I for one don't particularly want to be seeing a MAX in EI livery.

Rossiya747 wrote:

are they going to actually confirm the LOI or are they going to use this for lower prices on the A320 neo

There will be loads of cheap narrow bodies over the next 5 years, IAG will probaby stick to the 320 format for the same reason.

par13del wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.
.

I thought that mindset only applied to carriers operating Boeing equipment?

Yep, unified fleet is great for Easyjet, unified fleet is terrible for Southwest.

VSMUT wrote:

From what is becoming increasingly obvious, the aircraft that have already been built will be subject to extensive and probably lengthy modifications. It isn't too difficult to imagine that these will become unattractive, overweight and non-standard aircraft ala the early 787s and A380s. It won't just be a quick paintjob.

So far all we know of is a different software load and an additional wiring bundle to bypass some wires that are too close together. These won't be "extensive and lengthy modifications". The rest of your characterizations are IMO outlandish.

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:

Rossiya747 wrote:

are they going to actually confirm the LOI or are they going to use this for lower prices on the A320 neo

Hopefully the latter.... I for one don't particularly want to be seeing a MAX in EI livery.

Speak for yourself

Revelation wrote:

Should we also acknowledge that IAG was so unhappy with Airbus's inability to deliver when promised that they were happy to sign a LOI with Boeing even knowing the MAX RTS date was not set so they could pressure Airbus to improve delivery performance?

Pressure? Airbus has 6,200 A320 family in the backlog. They could unilaterally cancel all IAG's orders and barely notice it. Like it or not, carriers such as BA and Iberia are small fry in terms of narrowbody orders these days.

All things taken into account, I think Boeing will get this deal firmed!

scbriml wrote:

superjeff wrote:

keesje wrote:

I think Airbus in a few years will offer IAG A321NEOs for a fair price. If they prefer the 737MAX they should order those, for their long term NB requirements.

BA can also take MAX -10s to replace old Airbus aircraft. They only have to switch back to bulk loading. On the flip side, that will create a lot of extra jobs!



Source: https://www.businessinsider.co.za/comai ... nes-2019-3

Question: Is it possible/economical to install containerised baggage loading on a 73M? Years ago, the 707 on many airlines (TWA, PanAm) had containers without problems; the 73M is the essentially the same fuselage.

There is a containerised system available, but I honestly don't know if anyone's actually implemented it.

https://magazine.groundhandling.com/new ... boeing-737

You are right that a containerized System is available on the 737 if IAG requires it. If not, the 737-10 has more cargo volume than the A321.

VSMUT wrote:

par13del wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.
.

I thought that mindset only applied to carriers operating Boeing equipment?

One thing if they do convert the LOI to an order is that they may be able to get the a/c on premises in record time, the 400 plus a/c Boeing have sitting on the ground will have cancellations, if they do not have much customization, a quick paint job and good to go.

From what is becoming increasingly obvious, the aircraft that have already been built will be subject to extensive and probably lengthy modifications. It isn't too difficult to imagine that these will become unattractive, overweight and non-standard aircraft ala the early 787s and A380s. It won't just be a quick paintjob.

So far the only modifications have been software based, where hardware is talked about it is separating wires ( not insulating them ) and adjustments to fix a gap in a nacelle, neither of those lead me to believe that there will be a thousand pound increase in weight and that the wiring will be totally changed.
It is possible that other things may come up, but until then, I can only go by what has already been reported.

Revelation wrote:

par13del wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

IAG decided that strategic diversification trumped competitive tendering - but no doubt would not have overpaid for the MAXes.
.

I thought that mindset only applied to carriers operating Boeing equipment?

Yep, unified fleet is great for Easyjet, unified fleet is terrible for Southwest.

Remind me again what percentage of Easyjet's fleet has spent the last year grounded due to being unairworthy?

eicvd wrote:

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:

Rossiya747 wrote:

are they going to actually confirm the LOI or are they going to use this for lower prices on the A320 neo

Hopefully the latter.... I for one don't particularly want to be seeing a MAX in EI livery.

Speak for yourself

Well it's a moot point since everything looks bloody awful in Aer Lingus' ghastly new livery.

zkojq wrote:

Remind me again what percentage of Easyjet's fleet has spent the last year grounded due to being unairworthy?

As they say in the investing world, past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

This thread is running in circles and will be locked. Feel free to open a new thread on that subject when there will be any news.