AndyW35 wrote:

If Airbus and Boeing want to form a two company cartel to show who is boss they only need to use Ryanair as a whipping boy.

Ryanair cannot go airbus for their business plan, they copied Southwest. So Boeing, even in it's current predicament might think they should actually carry through with this for the long term.

Michael O'Leary has always been a vulture circling.

I'm guessing Boeing will fold though. I'd love them not to though ....

Didn't Ryanair help with the design of the C919? I wonder if that is still an option for them (doubt it) ?

Lootess wrote:

Ryanair has always been a shark when it comes to plane orders, smell blood and get good prices. But this time Boeing is hitting from a strength standpoint on the MAX10. With a constantly growing MAX order book, there is no need to sell the farm. If anything BA is going to recoup as much as profit as they can cause of the 787 idleness.

Name any airline who pays more for aircraft than they have to, and especially when an order is not for just 10 or 20?

Francoflier wrote:

The cost of production of the MAX 10 is irrelevant to price negotiations.

I do not doubt that BCA feel that way. But in a negotiation like that, BCA can only make an offer. FR is the decision maker here. So if MOL decides it is relevant, it is.

I do not think he is out to screw BCA, FWIW. He probably just will not settle for any deal for more that WN or IAG paid.

Francoflier wrote:

The only thing that matters is how much FR needs these airplanes vs. how much Boeing wants to sell them.

I think that is where this gets interesting. With an average fleet age of only 8 years, FR are in no rush to replace anything. Theoretically, MAX 10s add capacity. But they have already MAX8-200s on the way. While more is always better when an airline makes its money off ancillaries, the difference between those two will not be a show stopper for FR.

Francoflier wrote:

I understand that MOL does not want to overpay for anything, but when I need a carton of milk at 11pm, I'll pay what the local convenience store wants me to pay because it's the only place I can get it from at that time, regardless of whether it costs half the price at the local supermarket or what it cost the producer to make...
Not that I think Boeing is gouging prices here, but they have no interest to sell at zero cost or at a loss either. Their cash position may be trash, but there is a limit to how bad a 'loan' you can take to fix it before it just makes it worse.
The MAX may be a troubled program, but they still have around 4000 frames to deliver. It is likely that demand will pick up before they finish assembling them.

I do not disagree with that as a concept. The real question here is what is FR's actual need? This order is more WN style strategic top-up than AA panic ordering 400 planes because they just noticed how old their MD-80s were. They want the milk, but they are not thirsty enough to need it, and may decide they will deal with it later. BCA OTOH, have milk that's going to expire tomorrow.

I agree with you that they are not likely gouging, and as I have said, I also think they cannot afford to sell below cost. Your reference to that as a payday loan is quite apt.
But they cannot afford to do nothing either. I think they will make this deal, one way or the other.

Olddog wrote:

Some of you seem to think that BCA and AB are in the business to produce planes at a cost that works for Ryanair business model and not for them....

Some of you think FR are in the business of subsidizing poorly run OEMs.

Noshow wrote:

The more public this "drama" is celebrated by both sides in public the more likely I consider they will sign a deal soon.

Seems to be the way it goes...

JayinKitsap wrote:

Ryanair has a ton of 737 options at various prices based on prior deals. Boeing will honor those until they expire. Pro rating these option prices to the -10 size would be an OK deal for both parties IF economic conditions remain comparable.

Most likely outcome.

JayinKitsap wrote:

This last year has been anything but normal, Aluminum prices are crazy high and many alloys have become scarce. General construction costs in the US are like 30% more year to year. Composite materials are the same way. Will this continue? Seeing 1 year of this requires projecting out 2 to 3 years, quite tricky. It is surely back to strong material cost index adjustments in the contracts.

Yep. And BCA will just have to absorb those costs if they become an issue. Which probably explains why they have a hesitancy to make a deal they otherwise need. The wrong move could hurt them very badly.

Vicenza wrote:

Name any airline who pays more for aircraft than they have to, and especially when an order is not for just 10 or 20?

I find it very interesting that this site routinely congratulates DL for doing literally the exact same thing as being a tightly run ship. But when it is FR, EK, QR, etc, all of a sudden it is 'dramatic.' FR have no obligation to ensure BCA's profit margins, and I do not get where on earth the idea came from that otherwise could ever somehow be true.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

I find it very interesting that this site routinely congratulates DL for doing literally the exact same thing as being a tightly run ship. But when it is FR, EK, QR, etc, all of a sudden it is 'dramatic.' FR have no obligation to ensure BCA's profit margins, and I do not get where on earth the idea came from that otherwise could ever somehow be true.

But what FR is doing here is more than literally the exact same thing that DL does. To the extent that it is the same thing - FR negotiating on price and getting the best deal possible - I don’t think there is any problem with FR doing that. Simply put, DL doesn’t publicly whine when they can’t get the deals they want on new aircraft. They make another plan. A good example of this is engine service contracts. You don’t hear DL whining that CFM not negotiating with DL on the right to perform LEAP overhauls for the engines in house, DL just made another plan, ordering PW GTF A321/A220 and used CFM56 powered 739 frames instead.

If anything I think the public whining by MOL made things worse. BCA executives are under pressure to make cash, and publicly holding their ground on price is a good way to show that they are concerned about profits and cash flow and not just sales volume.

So a question, we know that talks have ended on this subject, so should we close this thread and open a new one titled what FR will do now that Boeing talks are off?
A new thread would allow the same type speculation that we saw in the WN thread related to them looking at a/c other than Boeing, that thread was lively, especially as it was an all Boeing client getting non-Boeing a/c.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

The cost of production of the MAX 10 is irrelevant to price negotiations.

I do not doubt that BCA feel that way. But in a negotiation like that, BCA can only make an offer. FR is the decision maker here. So if MOL decides it is relevant, it is.

I do not think he is out to screw BCA, FWIW. He probably just will not settle for any deal for more that WN or IAG paid.

Francoflier wrote:

The only thing that matters is how much FR needs these airplanes vs. how much Boeing wants to sell them.

I think that is where this gets interesting. With an average fleet age of only 8 years, FR are in no rush to replace anything. Theoretically, MAX 10s add capacity. But they have already MAX8-200s on the way. While more is always better when an airline makes its money off ancillaries, the difference between those two will not be a show stopper for FR.

Francoflier wrote:

I understand that MOL does not want to overpay for anything, but when I need a carton of milk at 11pm, I'll pay what the local convenience store wants me to pay because it's the only place I can get it from at that time, regardless of whether it costs half the price at the local supermarket or what it cost the producer to make...
Not that I think Boeing is gouging prices here, but they have no interest to sell at zero cost or at a loss either. Their cash position may be trash, but there is a limit to how bad a 'loan' you can take to fix it before it just makes it worse.
The MAX may be a troubled program, but they still have around 4000 frames to deliver. It is likely that demand will pick up before they finish assembling them.

I do not disagree with that as a concept. The real question here is what is FR's actual need? This order is more WN style strategic top-up than AA panic ordering 400 planes because they just noticed how old their MD-80s were. They want the milk, but they are not thirsty enough to need it, and may decide they will deal with it later. BCA OTOH, have milk that's going to expire tomorrow.

I agree with you that they are not likely gouging, and as I have said, I also think they cannot afford to sell below cost. Your reference to that as a payday loan is quite apt.
But they cannot afford to do nothing either. I think they will make this deal, one way or the other.

Olddog wrote:

Some of you seem to think that BCA and AB are in the business to produce planes at a cost that works for Ryanair business model and not for them....

Some of you think FR are in the business of subsidizing poorly run OEMs.

Noshow wrote:

The more public this "drama" is celebrated by both sides in public the more likely I consider they will sign a deal soon.

Seems to be the way it goes...

JayinKitsap wrote:

Ryanair has a ton of 737 options at various prices based on prior deals. Boeing will honor those until they expire. Pro rating these option prices to the -10 size would be an OK deal for both parties IF economic conditions remain comparable.

Most likely outcome.

JayinKitsap wrote:

This last year has been anything but normal, Aluminum prices are crazy high and many alloys have become scarce. General construction costs in the US are like 30% more year to year. Composite materials are the same way. Will this continue? Seeing 1 year of this requires projecting out 2 to 3 years, quite tricky. It is surely back to strong material cost index adjustments in the contracts.

Yep. And BCA will just have to absorb those costs if they become an issue. Which probably explains why they have a hesitancy to make a deal they otherwise need. The wrong move could hurt them very badly.

Vicenza wrote:

Name any airline who pays more for aircraft than they have to, and especially when an order is not for just 10 or 20?

I find it very interesting that this site routinely congratulates DL for doing literally the exact same thing as being a tightly run ship. But when it is FR, EK, QR, etc, all of a sudden it is 'dramatic.' FR have no obligation to ensure BCA's profit margins, and I do not get where on earth the idea came from that otherwise could ever somehow be true.

I think there i something inherently wrong with anyone coming to the conclusion that one of the biggest airlines in the world just panicked and noticed that they needed to replace a fleet that had entered into service with them in the 1980's.

Finally, FR has no obligation to guarantee BCA's profit margins no more than BCA has an obligation to sell this airline a jet at cost or at loss.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Finally, FR has no obligation to guarantee BCA's profit margins no more than BCA has an obligation to sell this airline a jet at cost or at loss.

Right. Ok. This has been covered though. Did you like to go round and round about it?

par13del wrote:

So a question, we know that talks have ended on this subject, so should we close this thread and open a new one titled what FR will do now that Boeing talks are off?
A new thread would allow the same type speculation that we saw in the WN thread related to them looking at a/c other than Boeing, that thread was lively, especially as it was an all Boeing client getting non-Boeing a/c.

No, thanks. We are all more or less on the same page and it seems like everyone knows where the replies are at.

A new thread would just be more work.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Finally, FR has no obligation to guarantee BCA's profit margins no more than BCA has an obligation to sell this airline a jet at cost or at loss.

Right. Ok. This has been covered though. Did you like to go round and round about it?

par13del wrote:

So a question, we know that talks have ended on this subject, so should we close this thread and open a new one titled what FR will do now that Boeing talks are off?
A new thread would allow the same type speculation that we saw in the WN thread related to them looking at a/c other than Boeing, that thread was lively, especially as it was an all Boeing client getting non-Boeing a/c.

No, thanks. We are all more or less on the same page and it seems like everyone knows where the replies are at.

A new thread would just be more work.

I did not think that it needed stating seeing that Boeing is a for profit organization. But here we are.

morrisond wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

texl1649 wrote:

I for one am just glad that this puts an end, forever, to the a.net myth that Boeing gives away at/under cost to big customers, especially on the MAX. Yay!

Actually there is a public record of what Boeing was willing to sell planes for- and the order wasn't that big. Research the Air India 787 sale and what came out when AI was required to publicly disclose how much they actually paid for the aircraft. However, I'm sure other manufacturers have done similar deals when required, so you do what you have to do at that given time.

Those 787's were very unique Aircraft. Google 787 Terrible teens. They were way overweight on no one wanted them.

They had very unique maintenance demands - but as Air India is renowned for maybe not doing so much maintenance anyways - it was a perfect fit.

Something was better than nothing.

Not quite right... AI ordered the 787 in 2006 and the first 787 aircraft flew in 2009 so the AI order was made way before the terrible teen issues were known.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

The cost of production of the MAX 10 is irrelevant to price negotiations.

I do not doubt that BCA feel that way. But in a negotiation like that, BCA can only make an offer. FR is the decision maker here. So if MOL decides it is relevant, it is.

I do not think he is out to screw BCA, FWIW. He probably just will not settle for any deal for more that WN or IAG paid.

Francoflier wrote:

The only thing that matters is how much FR needs these airplanes vs. how much Boeing wants to sell them.

I think that is where this gets interesting. With an average fleet age of only 8 years, FR are in no rush to replace anything. Theoretically, MAX 10s add capacity. But they have already MAX8-200s on the way. While more is always better when an airline makes its money off ancillaries, the difference between those two will not be a show stopper for FR.

Francoflier wrote:

I understand that MOL does not want to overpay for anything, but when I need a carton of milk at 11pm, I'll pay what the local convenience store wants me to pay because it's the only place I can get it from at that time, regardless of whether it costs half the price at the local supermarket or what it cost the producer to make...
Not that I think Boeing is gouging prices here, but they have no interest to sell at zero cost or at a loss either. Their cash position may be trash, but there is a limit to how bad a 'loan' you can take to fix it before it just makes it worse.
The MAX may be a troubled program, but they still have around 4000 frames to deliver. It is likely that demand will pick up before they finish assembling them.

I do not disagree with that as a concept. The real question here is what is FR's actual need? This order is more WN style strategic top-up than AA panic ordering 400 planes because they just noticed how old their MD-80s were. They want the milk, but they are not thirsty enough to need it, and may decide they will deal with it later. BCA OTOH, have milk that's going to expire tomorrow.

I agree with you that they are not likely gouging, and as I have said, I also think they cannot afford to sell below cost. Your reference to that as a payday loan is quite apt.
But they cannot afford to do nothing either. I think they will make this deal, one way or the other.

Olddog wrote:

Some of you seem to think that BCA and AB are in the business to produce planes at a cost that works for Ryanair business model and not for them....

Some of you think FR are in the business of subsidizing poorly run OEMs.

Noshow wrote:

The more public this "drama" is celebrated by both sides in public the more likely I consider they will sign a deal soon.

Seems to be the way it goes...

JayinKitsap wrote:

Ryanair has a ton of 737 options at various prices based on prior deals. Boeing will honor those until they expire. Pro rating these option prices to the -10 size would be an OK deal for both parties IF economic conditions remain comparable.

Most likely outcome.

JayinKitsap wrote:

This last year has been anything but normal, Aluminum prices are crazy high and many alloys have become scarce. General construction costs in the US are like 30% more year to year. Composite materials are the same way. Will this continue? Seeing 1 year of this requires projecting out 2 to 3 years, quite tricky. It is surely back to strong material cost index adjustments in the contracts.

Yep. And BCA will just have to absorb those costs if they become an issue. Which probably explains why they have a hesitancy to make a deal they otherwise need. The wrong move could hurt them very badly.

Vicenza wrote:

Name any airline who pays more for aircraft than they have to, and especially when an order is not for just 10 or 20?

I find it very interesting that this site routinely congratulates DL for doing literally the exact same thing as being a tightly run ship. But when it is FR, EK, QR, etc, all of a sudden it is 'dramatic.' FR have no obligation to ensure BCA's profit margins, and I do not get where on earth the idea came from that otherwise could ever somehow be true.

I agree with everything. MOL has the obligation of looking for the best deal possible, his style can be a bit aggressive but you not far from Al Baker and sometimes Tim Clark.

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

""But there is a chance that the China's COMAC could become a significant supplier to Ryanair in the medium term," he said."

A chance similar to winning the lottery?

COMAC will not happen. He needs mainstream aircraft to resell them easily.

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

Great, time to close this thread.

boerje wrote:

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

""But there is a chance that the China's COMAC could become a significant supplier to Ryanair in the medium term," he said."

A chance similar to winning the lottery?

The full quote provides some additional context:
"There is always a prospect that Airbus become a significant supplier. But there is a chance that the Chinese - COMAC - could become a significant supplier to Ryanair in the medium term," he said.

Noshow wrote:

COMAC will not happen. He needs mainstream aircraft to resell them easily.

Wait, you're taking what he said seriously?

Yes. He has mentioned the same before although in a similar situation. He is no fool or what you might want to imply but a master negotiator. It's a shame that John Leahy is retired right now. The heat must have been close to nuclear fusion when they negotiated the last time.

Noshow wrote:

Yes. He has mentioned the same before although in a similar situation. He is no fool or what you might want to imply but a master negotiator. It's a shame that John Leahy is retired right now. The heat must have been close to nuclear fusion when they negotiated the last time.

Oh, I'm not calling him a fool, but it would be foolish to believe he's serious when he talks about buying Airbus or COMAC planes when what he really wants is bargain basement 737s.

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

Some of us have long memories and remember approx. 10-12 years ago when Ryanair failed to reach an agreement with Boeing to order more 737's. This meant a lull in deliveries for a few years until such a time an order was eventually placed. I think by the time they got round the table the MAX was available and Boeing were probably looking to fill up the remaining NG production slots, so the terms might have been more favourable.

My view is that if Ryanair need more aircraft now/next few years, they can simply hold on to some of the existing -800's for longer instead of withdrawing them. MAX's are no doubt more efficient than NG's, but I've noted how in recent years Ryanair have stopped the practice of ditching aircraft that are less than 10 years old. Probably some merit in holding on to aircraft for longer to truly get their money's worth than churning the fleet regularly. I can see overall efficiencies taking a hit as more MAX's enter the fleet and operate alongside the NG's having been an all-800 (plus EI-SEV) airline for many years, though I note how Ryanair have been going against their past principles at times such as encouraging people to book hold luggage and easyJet, Southwest etc. seem to cope OK with large mixed fleets.

As for Airbus, I will be surprised. John Leahy was right when he was quoted by BBC's Panorama in 2009 saying that MOL/Ryanair's pricing expectations was short of what Airbus was prepared to sell them for. Given their large order book and given past form, I'm not surprised Airbus haven't made much of an effort ever since.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

I do not think he is out to screw BCA, FWIW. He probably just will not settle for any deal for more that WN or IAG paid.

I wasn't aware Willie Walsh's IAG public praise and letters of intent for MAX10 ever materialized into firm orders? WN hasn't purchased any MAX10.

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

That's interesting.

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Unless they ordered Airbus aircraft? But some people here said that Airbus is not going to do business with Ryanair.

So what's the truth?
Something is not right here.

VV wrote:

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

That's interesting.

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Unless they ordered Airbus aircraft? But some people here said that Airbus is not going to do business with Ryanair.

So what's the truth?
Something is not right here.

I think a lot of us have answered you many times over why Airbus prefers to keep Ryanair at arm's length. Airbus is in pretty comfortable position in terms of narrowbody market. All sold out until at least Q3, 2023.

VV wrote:

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

That's interesting.

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Unless they ordered Airbus aircraft? But some people here said that Airbus is not going to do business with Ryanair.

So what's the truth?
Something is not right here.

From the article

The Ryanair boss also downplayed the chance of a deal with rival Airbus

Something is definitely not right here, but it isn't a matter of lies on either side.
I think the real issue is the economic uncertainty that surrounds future growth plans in the ongoing covid crisis, and future travel expectations of business/leisure mix. Traditional business carriers may have to throw their planes onto leisure routes. Airlines may have to merge. Overleveraged airlines may go bankrupt once all the aid money runs out.

Ryanair is going to have to sit around and wait to see how the fall and spring go.

Did I miss someone posting this quote from Michael O’Leary? This was in response to pulling out of negotiations with Boeing. Certainly seems like a few shots were fired over the bow.

We do not share Boeing’s optimistic pricing outlook, although this may explain why in recent weeks other large Boeing customers, such as Delta and Jet2, have been placing new orders with Airbus, rather than Boeing

source: https://www.barrons.com/articles/things-to-know-today-51631007794

estorilm wrote:

Did I miss someone posting this quote from Michael O’Leary? This was in response to pulling out of negotiations with Boeing. Certainly seems like a few shots were fired over the bow.

We do not share Boeing’s optimistic pricing outlook, although this may explain why in recent weeks other large Boeing customers, such as Delta and Jet2, have been placing new orders with Airbus, rather than Boeing

source: https://www.barrons.com/articles/things-to-know-today-51631007794

He is really an unpleasant person.

scbriml wrote:

Noshow wrote:

Yes. He has mentioned the same before although in a similar situation. He is no fool or what you might want to imply but a master negotiator. It's a shame that John Leahy is retired right now. The heat must have been close to nuclear fusion when they negotiated the last time.

Oh, I'm not calling him a fool, but it would be foolish to believe he's serious when he talks about buying Airbus or COMAC planes when what he really wants is bargain basement 737s.

MOL's problem is nobody cares too much what he wants. Airbus has plenty of Customers for their product as does Boeing, despite only having a revamped 60's model Jet with dubious production quality control to offer. Neither can increase production easily enough to warrant offering a substantial discount. Russia and China don't have a developed support network that could even hope to provide the after sales support a LCC the size of FR requires.

The cost of the fleet, although relevant, is nowhere near as important as the efficiency and reliability of the Aircraft. Expansion plans will also be analysed, most Business like to expand but the rate and cost of expansion is critical to doing so successfully.

So the media discuss the unit cost because it's interesting, MOL because it generates publicity which is always beneficial and both because they don't have anything better to do. Ultimately the order will be based on forecasts supplied by the bean counters at FR who factor in all known variables with respect to operating the Aircraft, and the Boeing bean counters who will similarly weigh up the pros and cons of selling FR the slots compared to whoever else may be interested.

Nothing special happening here, just normal Business horse trading.

VV wrote:

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Didn't they essentially over-order previously such that they knew the resale values of the planes they bought were high enough that they could recycle still young planes out to other carriers to enable the new planes to "replace them".

So then if the resale value of the of their 10 year old planes are now lower that it's not only purchase cost that matters, that delta has increased making new more expensive regardless of the cost of the actual new planes.

JibberJim wrote:

VV wrote:

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Didn't they essentially over-order previously such that they knew the resale values of the planes they bought were high enough that they could recycle still young planes out to other carriers to enable the new planes to "replace them".

So then if the resale value of the of their 10 year old planes are now lower that it's not only purchase cost that matters, that delta has increased making new more expensive regardless of the cost of the actual new planes.

So what's the point of discussing 737-10 order now?

In a high density configuration, Ryanair style, the 737-10 would have about 24 more seats than their 737--8-200.

So I guess MOL have done the math. Fuel and operational costs for the 737-8-200 compared with the 737-10, taking into account the lower yields per seat when you have more seats to fill etc., and the higher risk of buying a larger and more expensive aircraft etc.

The result is that Boeing is asking for such a high price that Ryanair is better off just flying the 737-8-200. Isn't it just that simple? If MOL would see a clear economic benefit at the price Boeing is offering, he would have ordered the aircraft.

reidar76 wrote:

In a high density configuration, Ryanair style, the 737-10 would have about 24 more seats than their 737--8-200.

168" of extra length and you think they'll just add 4 28" rows?

reidar76 wrote:

The result is that Boeing is asking for such a high price that Ryanair is better off just flying the 737-8-200. Isn't it just that simple?

We don't know if it's that simple, because we have no indication of what constitutes "such a high price" for a 737-10. All we know for sure is that Ryanair is apparently unwilling to pay whatever Boeing is currently asking for.

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

In a high density configuration, Ryanair style, the 737-10 would have about 24 more seats than their 737--8-200.

168" of extra length and you think they'll just add 4 28" rows?

The 737-8-200 have next to nothing galley space left, and that's an very important revenue stream on some routes. In other words, they can't fly the 737-8-200 to the Canary Islands etc. without loosing on board sales. At one point even Ryanair understands it needs to add fourth toilet as well. With a comparable cabin layout as on their standard -800, my guess is that Ryanair might have around 221 seats in the 737-10. That is tighter, and with less galley space, and with more seats per toilet than on their 737-800.

VV wrote:

ILNFlyer wrote:

Apparently Boeing wasn't willing to give away the farm.

If Boeing is playing hard ball, what is Ryanair going to do?
Order E190-E2? LOL.

No one said they are playing hard ball. Ryanair wants above average discounts...heck, they even bragged about how the "raped" Boeing on the last big deal they did. I'm sure Boeing is making certain that doesn't happen again.

The last big deal was the 8200. Far from rape but on friendly terms. A big 10 order is exactly what Boeing and FR need. So it WILL happen. This "grand finale of talks" right now is just a part of the show. It's like a theater break.

VV wrote:

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

That's interesting.

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Unless they ordered Airbus aircraft? But some people here said that Airbus is not going to do business with Ryanair.

So what's the truth?
Something is not right here.

Airbus wants to do business with Ryanair, but Ryanair don’t want to pay the price Airbus wants.

marcelh wrote:

VV wrote:

SIVB wrote:

In other news:

Ryanair ready to wait 'years' for Boeing to cut prices

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0 ... -airports/

That's interesting.

It may mean Ryanair is not going to grow any more and/or it is not going to replace any retired aircraft.

Unless they ordered Airbus aircraft? But some people here said that Airbus is not going to do business with Ryanair.

So what's the truth?
Something is not right here.

Airbus wants to do business with Ryanair, but Ryanair don’t want to pay the price Airbus wants.

And now Ryanair does not want to pay the price Boeing wants.

What are they going to do now??????

VV wrote:

What are they going to do now??????

1. Adding B737MAX8-200 to their fleet;
2. (Partially) postpone retirement of the B737-800;
3. Getting their act together and pay the price Boeing wants for the MAX10;
4. Or order the A321 and get scr.wed by Airbus.

Doing business is all about making choices.....

1+2 + toying with the C919. If the C919 gets a EASA certification, the toying could become serious.

C919? Never ever. For reasons mentioned above.

AndyW35 wrote:

If Airbus and Boeing want to form a two company cartel to show who is boss they only need to use Ryanair as a whipping boy.

Ryanair cannot go airbus for their business plan, they copied Southwest. So Boeing, even in it's current predicament might think they should actually carry through with this for the long term.

Michael O'Leary has always been a vulture circling.

I'm guessing Boeing will fold though. I'd love them not to though ....

Boeing share price still down after the announcement . They’re going to have to do something to keep FR happy …

seahawk wrote:

1+2 + toying with the C919. If the C919 gets a EASA certification, the toying could become serious.

A program that was launched in 2008 and in 13 years has produced SIX uncertified frames? Oh, and is also not big enough for Ryanair?

Thanks, I needed a laugh.

Galwayman wrote:

Boeing share price still down after the announcement . They’re going to have to do something to keep FR happy …

Why?

Galwayman wrote:

AndyW35 wrote:

If Airbus and Boeing want to form a two company cartel to show who is boss they only need to use Ryanair as a whipping boy.

Ryanair cannot go airbus for their business plan, they copied Southwest. So Boeing, even in it's current predicament might think they should actually carry through with this for the long term.

Michael O'Leary has always been a vulture circling.

I'm guessing Boeing will fold though. I'd love them not to though ....

Boeing share price still down after the announcement . They’re going to have to do something to keep FR happy …

The stock market is also down 5 days in a row. It may not be necessarily because of the announcement. You can't say it's because of that one thing.

Will they make some sort of last minute concession when Ryanair gets really serious - probably - just like they have many times in the past. However they don't need this order at the prices Ryanair says they are willing to pay.

With MAX delivering again the cash flow issue seems to be passing and they still have $21B in the bank. In any case a big Ryanair order at this point in time probably wouldn't materially impact cash anyways as I can't see them making a deposit of more than $1M per frame.

marcelh wrote:

VV wrote:

What are they going to do now??????

1. Adding B737MAX8-200 to their fleet;
2. (Partially) postpone retirement of the B737-800;
3. Getting their act together and pay the price Boeing wants for the MAX10;
4. Or order the A321 and get scr.wed by Airbus.

Doing business is all about making choices.....

Option no 4 is the best, that is get scr:wed by Airbus instead of getting scr:wed by Boeing. LOL

DartHerald wrote:

With MAX delivering again the cash flow issue seems to be passing and they still have $21B in the bank. In any case a big Ryanair order at this point in time probably wouldn't materially impact cash anyways as I can't see them making a deposit of more than $1M per frame.

For an order of 100 planes, which is what Ryanair say they want to order, that's $100M - nice to be in a position to not want that!

Selling planes at a descent margin is more important than cash in the bank now. Cutting prices too deep has long term implications on airplanes values.

G'day

seahawk wrote:

1+2 + toying with the C919. If the C919 gets a EASA certification, the toying could become serious.

Fascinating idea! So how many of those things can Comac deliver? 2 per year, or maybe 3 to make Ryanair happy. Every second unit would have to be cannibalized as spares supply to keep the others in the air. Not trying to be political, but with the ongoing relations between the West and China for how long do you expect they will be able to produce the C919 in its present form? Without the avionics, engines, hydraulics, landing gear etc. etc. all from western countries, what happens if that supply is cut off? Good luck on that one MOL Just my

Cheers

Peter

scbriml wrote:

seahawk wrote:

1+2 + toying with the C919. If the C919 gets a EASA certification, the toying could become serious.

A program that was launched in 2008 and in 13 years has produced SIX uncertified frames? Oh, and is also not big enough for Ryanair?

Thanks, I needed a laugh.

I am sure you will find the MS-21 more amusing as a proposition then?

If they have come all the way close to the finish line all basic problems will have been solved like price and deliveries. It might be more about details like a quiet period before they can resell those planes or similar now?