enzo011 wrote:lightsaber wrote:Scottron12:
We know he is pushing back on RR deliveries per the quotes. It happens to be all Airbus short term
We know EK has not signed the 779 delivery contract due to uncertainty. So it is also impacted on GE engines and spectacular descriptions of a cargo door opening on a proof test.
I believe EK is in cash preserving mode and negotiating in the media for better deals such as the aircraft/engine deal ANZ received that links were provided earlier (RR complained they wouldn't meet GE's offer).
So tons of speculation. But what we know is EK asked more of RR than they were willing to put in writing.
The flowing contracts are unsigned for final delivery:. A339, A359, and 779. Note:. It is too early to discuss/sign for 778.
I interpret prior STC comments that EK is trying to slow/stop A380 deliveries by any means possible. Due to T900 issues (sand errosion, fuel burn miss), it is probable he has some legal ground.
Until the 779 issues are fixed, EK is only receive Airbus aircraft powered by RR. Hence why so much discussion on those two.
I believe both the A380 and 77W fleet need to be reduced.l and I don't mean all with 779s either.
I agree with you, if I haven't got your point wrong, that EK is using all they have at their disposal to try and readjust their order book to change their strategy going forward. I will once again take issue with your assertion that it is only Airbus in the firing line with his quotes. Yes the article in the OP certainly focuses on Airbus but if you look around you can see Boeing and GE is in the spotlight as well.With 115 777-9s and 35 -8s on order since November 2013 the delay is something Clark is not happy with: “First flight should have been by October last year and in June we were told it won’t be flying until Q1 next year. That, of course, affects deliveries to us. We were due to receive the first aircraft in June next year, we had 6 or 9 coming on delivery after that but all is now set back. Let’s assume that Boeing has a 13-16 months certification-program, that means we can’t be sure when we will get these airplanes. We are keen to get them, but they should be reliable.”
And then this,“There is no stability in the Rolls-Royce program at the moment as we see it. Until such time we have definitive guarantees that if we power our aircraft with their engines that will be fit-for-purpose from day one without any restrictions, we are not prepared to make those commitments at this stage”, says Clark. “I am a little bit irritated that over the years we as an airline and I think the industry has been subjected to the requirements of engine manufacturers and take whatever consequences when they don’t work. We are not in a business where aircraft don’t function properly. I need a 99.5 percent dispatch reliability to make it work”.
So it is clear he is focusing on RR and it looks like he wants to use this as a way to get leverage, but his position isn't consistent at all. He is very down on the RR engines but he was supposed to get his first 779 in June. He also wants a 99.5% reliability, I doubt he will get it on the 777X so again if we are consistent and take him at his word on the Airbus and RR criticisms, on the 777X we can assume that this means that he will delay deliveries to 2024 or 2025, when they reach 99.5% dispatch reliability. Seeing that the 787 only got to 99.4% in January 2018, good luck to him getting any new aircraft with new engines.
So what position can we take on this? I don't know what his plans are with these statements, whether to get out of the Airbus contract and RR contract or to downsize, but we can acknowledge that there is a inconsistency in his statements that will make him a hypocrite either way.
Quotes from this article, Sir Tim Clark: I only take delivery of reliable aircraft and engines (update)
As I noted, the 779 delivery contract hasn't been signed. Without clearer delivery definition, Boeing losses payments. At this time I speculate EK has less leverage on Boeing/GE as payments must be too low to be worthy of discussion.
Airbus has A380s and soon A339s that will be held up until STC is satisfied. In other words, scheduled payments won't happen on the A359 and A339 until resolved and I speculate STC is working to delay A388 deliveries to preserve cash.
So I noted both are impacted, but as the pause button was hit by GE/Boeing, no leverage for STC. No significant change in cash flow. But for Airbus/RR, an immediate hit on cash flow.