Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
Topic Author
Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:10 pm

Randy Tinseth has posted on his Journal about the first 100 days of the MAX, a few interesting points;

Boeng have almost 800 commitments
These are from 12 customers, up from 9 which was the last number acknowkedged publicly by a Boeing official
They still expect to firm their first order for the model this year.

Also, in true marketing style, a comparision is made against the Neo and where it was at 100 days, in terms of sales and commitments.

I thought it would be interesting to take a look at how initial reaction to the 737 MAX compared to the introduction of the A320neo. During the same amount of time that we’ve seen nearly 800 commitments, our competitor had reached just 300 commitments and orders.

The IAM agreement is definately good news for the program and with the MAX team now based at the Renton site hopefully we'll receive more guidance over the next 100 days.

Be interesting to see who books the first order

Boeing
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2557
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:50 pm

Interesting read.
Gotta take it with a grain or two of salt.
There is no doubt however, that his words will annoy many of this forum.

But, from a PR stand point, I do not expect anything less from Randy.
Leahy has made similar comparisons and statements before.
So, before we all go on the offensive and defensive regarding this latest blog, bear that in mind
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
AA737-823
Posts: 5553
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:51 pm

I love all things Boeing, but Randy's attitude wears me out very quickly.
It started when he tried to tell us that what we REALLY wanted was a loud cabin on the 787, because on the A380, you can hear people... farting! So, in order to prevent that (nevermind the airplane is overweight) we're just gonna nip a little insulation here, tuck a little sound deadening material there, and voila! No more fart noises!
It amazes me that he can be quite cocky with sales of the 737MAX.... The 787 also sold very, very well, and look where that program is currently sitting- four years later, and only two planes delivered.
Someone should ask him about that: yeah, you've got 800 commitments for the MAX, but how many planes do you actually plan to DELIVER between now and, say, 2020? ANY?
 
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:56 pm

I kind of expected this after JL spoke about boeing re-considering the NSA due to a luke warm response for the MAX...I am a fan of the old randy , although RT is also good...There is plenty of space for this type of back and forth between JL and Boeing PR...Keeps everything interesting...provided the reader takes it in the right stride..
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:11 pm

I think Randy should wait to blow his own horn once he actually has orders for the blasted things. He's committing a faux pas most salespeople never make... talking about a deal before it's signed, sealed, and delivered. It jinxes the sale otherwise.

Perhaps he should figure out what sized engines they're going to offer, the required changes, and thus, the cost of said aircraft, so an appropriate selling price can be determined. For now all he has a "yes, we'll come if you build it".
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:29 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
Perhaps he should figure out what sized engines they're going to offer, the required changes, and thus, the cost of said aircraft, so an appropriate selling price can be determined. For now all he has a "yes, we'll come if you build it".

Although i agree partly , however the MAX is now at a point where you can safely say that those that have PAID and committed themselves know enough to put money down. I think in the next few days we will see the first order and next year a lot of the committed airlines will firm up as everyone races to get favorable slots..The timing of this post suggests that a launch order should follow shortly , thereby granting him the opportunity to talk about how great the MAX is AGAIN  ... The SALES and Airlines acceptance of the MAX is in no doubt , only how far boieng can deliver upon promises.

[Edited 2011-12-10 06:31:56]

[Edited 2011-12-10 06:32:55]
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:33 pm

I would doubt customers have paid deposits when there isn't any firm specs yet on the plane. They no doubt have signed MOUs, but that's it. Otherwise, Randy would call them orders not "commitments".
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:38 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 6):
I would doubt customers have paid deposits when there isn't any firm specs yet on the plane.

Boeing is on record of claiming that airlines have paid commitments for the MAX , which will soon be converted into orders..I think basically as the product matures both the parties (Airline and manufacturer) have to find a comfort level before contractual guarantees can be worked up and contracts signed..There is indication from Boeing as well as from analysts that one of the committed customers might place an order before year end..which leaves few working days left....

[Edited 2011-12-10 06:46:37]
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:49 pm

Quoting bringiton (Reply 7):

Really? Any links to that per chance? I'd be curious to read the context. It seems counterintuitive to me.
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:04 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):
Really? Any links to that per chance? I'd be curious to read the context. It seems counterintuitive to me.

""Speaking at the Assn. of Asia Pacific Airlines annual meeting in Seoul, Randy Tinseth said a commitment means that an airline has paid a deposit to secure its order for the 737 Max""

http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engine...ng-max-commitments-exceed-600-1104

I think airlines most likely paid money down to reserve favorable slots , as Boeing works on further definition of the product before contracts could be sealed...I guess for one customer there is enough of performance info out their in order to sign a firm contract...Could be Southwest...although i think it would be ACG...

[Edited 2011-12-10 07:12:21]
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11227
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:49 pm

As I understand it, WN is to firm up a MAX (B-737-7MAX and/or B-737-8MAX) order this month. The only airlines I know who has ordered, or committed to the MAX is JT (B-737-9MAX) and AA (possibly B-737-8MAX). If Boeing says they have committments from 12 airlines for some 800 B-737MAX, who are the other 9 airlines? DL? UA? LH? AF? BA? B6? G3 (GOL)? TA?
 
BD338
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:00 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:31 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
As I understand it, WN is to firm up a MAX (B-737-7MAX and/or B-737-8MAX) order this month. The only airlines I know who has ordered, or committed to the MAX is JT (B-737-9MAX) and AA (possibly B-737-8MAX). If Boeing says they have committments from 12 airlines for some 800 B-737MAX, who are the other 9 airlines? DL? UA? LH? AF? BA? B6? G3 (GOL)? TA?

Delta, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group for sure have signed some sort of commmitment/intent to acquire 737MAX. I don't think any order can be confirmed until the Boeing board authorizes a formal offer to sell the aircraft, I believe this is expected next year sometime once the final performance specs are agreed. A bit of an odd one really, so many commitments for a design which barely exists on paper and the performance is not yet complete.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20063
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:39 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
LH? AF? BA?

LH has already ordered neos.

I can't see AF or BA switching to 737s (they're both still receiving outstanding A320 orders).
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
mffoda
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:56 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
If Boeing says they have committments from 12 airlines for some 800 B-737MAX, who are the other 9 airlines? DL? UA? LH? AF? BA? B6? G3 (GOL)? TA?

He said 12 "Customers", not airlines... I suspect several leasing companies are included in that number.
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 4220
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:57 pm

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 2):
I love all things Boeing, but Randy's attitude wears me out very quickly.

   Agreed. Randy B was far classier in his approach. He'd provide the interesting info without the overt cheerleading. The idea of the blog is a really good one, wish Airbus had something similar. But Randy T should back off on dissing Airbus. His A-340 good bye is a disgrace and I'm shocked that the big boys at Boeing let it be posted.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
If Boeing says they have committments from 12 airlines for some 800 B-737MAX, who are the other 9 airlines? DL? UA? LH? AF? BA? B6? G3 (GOL)? TA?

I'd expect that AS would be on that list as well.
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:27 am

Quoting BD338 (Reply 11):
Delta, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group for sure have signed some sort of commmitment/intent to acquire 737MAX.

What is your source on Delta?
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:56 am

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 6):
I would doubt customers have paid deposits when there isn't any firm specs yet on the plane. They no doubt have signed MOUs, but that's it. Otherwise, Randy would call them orders not "commitments".

There's nothing that says an MOU or commitment can't come with a deposit. Indeed, as other posters have already indicated, it appears that several customers have made commitments and deposits. The converse is also true...there's no technical reason you can't have an order without a deposit, although that would be pretty rare.

Tom.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9049
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:23 am

Seems a half hearted engineering effort by Boeing to this point.




Seriously, they are going to address the fan clearance issue by jacking up the nosewheel leg ?



Unbelievable, and they are keeping the old cockpit with the -60's era overhead !




Maybe it is too early to do a clean sheet design but they could do a lot better, what a joke.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:25 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
As I understand it, WN is to firm up a MAX (B-737-7MAX and/or B-737-8MAX) order this month. The only airlines I know who has ordered, or committed to the MAX is JT (B-737-9MAX) and AA (possibly B-737-8MAX). If Boeing says they have committments from 12 airlines for some 800 B-737MAX, who are the other 9 airlines? DL? UA? LH? AF? BA? B6? G3 (GOL)? TA?

There are reports which suggest that WN may place the order in December... Among others its AA,ACG,Lion Air that come to mind..I guess over the course of the next year many of the commitments secured should be converted in addition to new orders .
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:46 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Seems a half hearted engineering effort by Boeing to this point.

It's what the customers asked for...blame them, not Boeing. Boeing pretty clearly wanted to hang on with the current design and go straight to the cleansheet a few years down the road.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Seriously, they are going to address the fan clearance issue by jacking up the nosewheel leg ?

And change the strut. What would you prefer?

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Unbelievable, and they are keeping the old cockpit with the -60's era overhead !

The 777 has basically the same overhead (physically different knobs but same layout). They can't go to an EICAS design (which would alter some of the overhead panel indications) without breaking commonality and they customers *really* don't want that.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Maybe it is too early to do a clean sheet design but they could do a lot better, what a joke.

It's all a trade between cost, demand, and degree of change. They're giving the customers what they asked for...blame the airlines.

Tom.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9049
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:58 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):

It's what the customers asked for...blame them, not Boeing. Boeing pretty clearly wanted to hang on with the current design and go straight to the cleansheet a few years down the road.

Time for Boeing to consider other customers besides Southwest.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):

And change the strut. What would you prefer

Bite the bullet, redesign the main gear to provide as much ground clearance as necessary to allow whatever fan size is needed for the best and most efficient engine / airframe combination.




They are artificially constraining the design for no good reason other than wanting to limit the design and manufacturing budget. Make the investment now, it will pay off.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):

The 777 has basically the same overhead (physically different knobs but same layout). They can't go to an EICAS design (which would alter some of the overhead panel indications) without breaking commonality and they customers *really* don't want that.

The 777 overhead is not remotely the same design, just as one example, the generator breakers have to be placed manually on line, unlike any modern Aircraft (even the DC9 did this automatically) the pressurisation / pneumatics panel is a design mess and has indirectly led to numerous incidents and a fatal accident. It is nowhere near where a modern redundant design should be.



So commonality with the Jurassic jet is lost, so what, it is time to move on.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):
and they customers *really* don't want that.

As I said, there are other Customers than Southwest.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):

It's all a trade between cost, demand, and degree of change. They're giving the customers what they asked for...blame the airlines.

Except that, it's not what most Airlines really want, it's really about how cheaply Boeing wants to revamp this ancient design.



Airbus did something similar when they proposed responding to the 787 by merely re-engining the A330.



S E Hazy called them out on their weak response and in return they came back with the A350.



Time for someone to do the same with this very inadequate 'max' !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:04 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Time for Boeing to consider other customers besides Southwest.

11 customers would disagree with that statement..Clearly they thought that the MAX meets their requirments...

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Bite the bullet, redesign the main gear to provide as much ground clearance as necessary to allow whatever fan size is needed for the best and most efficient engine / airframe combination.

Their are so many options that need to be considered when going for an upgrade....At the end of the day , you have to balance capability with cost , demand constraints (time line - delivery dates)..Boeing clearly thinks it can maintain its position in the NB space , with the MAX ...and can sell it at good enough rates to keep the customers happy until the NSA is ready and WANTED..

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Airbus did something similar when they proposed responding to the 787 by merely re-engining the A330.

Its not like AIRBUS has said THE END to the 320 and gone in with a clean sheet design , like boeing did with the 787. Both A and B have gone in for upgrades..

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Time for someone to do the same with this very inadequate 'max' !

Inadequate for who?
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2745
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:22 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 6):
I would doubt customers have paid deposits when there isn't any firm specs yet on the plane

I would expect customers to be plenty willing to place deposits on 737 production slots. Its not like they are unlimited.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Time for Boeing to consider other customers besides Southwest.

Yes, clearly Boeing would be ahead by refusing to listen to thier #1 customer for narrowbodies. They should ignore the launch customer for 3 of the 737 models.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20063
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:55 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 23):
Yes, clearly Boeing would be ahead by refusing to listen to thier #1 customer for narrowbodies.

While Southwest is the largest buyer, it's also true that over 90% of all 737 sales have been to other customers.   
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 3077
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:44 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 23):
I would expect customers to be plenty willing to place deposits on 737 production slots. Its not like they are unlimited.

We don't know what these "commitments" really are. It may be that Boeing is allowing customers the option to flip NG orders beyond a certain date to MAX versions, or that any order placed can ultimately be delivered as an NG or MAX version. At best, these "commitments" are to the concept of an NG, after all not many airlines would turn away from the option of a better airframe when they know more.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22665
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:50 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Time for Boeing to consider other customers besides Southwest.

Boeing didn't consider AA and it cost them a previously loyal customer. Fuel prices are killing the airlines. Prior to the MAX, Boeing was in danger of also losing LionAir.

Look at the momentum the A320NEO was showing prior to the 737MAX launch. Boeing was in serious danger of losing orders for 300 to 500 airframes to Airbus without a 'near term more fuel efficient offering.'

We're still waiting on orders from UA, eventually DL will 're-start' their narrow body upgrade (IIRC, 150 frames), etc. The MAX is to keep the cost of flying low enough to keep Boeing customers loyal.

Quoting bringiton (Reply 22):
11 customers would disagree with that statement..Clearly they thought that the MAX meets their requirments...

   Otherwise they would have just ordered the 737NG. Or worse, for Boeing, the A320NEO.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 25):
We don't know what these "commitments" really are. It may be that Boeing is allowing customers the option to flip NG orders beyond a certain date to MAX versions, or that any order placed can ultimately be delivered as an NG or MAX version.

We also know Boeing was able to secure some large orders by offering the MAX. It will be interesting to see who. If the max orders are nothing more than 'either 737NG or 737MAX options' Boeing is ahead.

Lightsaber
10 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1781
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:30 pm

The world would be a boring place without the Randys and JLs lightening up our days  Gotta love their viewpoints.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:50 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Bite the bullet, redesign the main gear to provide as much ground clearance as necessary to allow whatever fan size is needed for the best and most efficient engine / airframe combination.

Except redesigning the MLG would give you an design that isn't as efficient an engine/airframe combination. "Efficiency" in the context of commercial jets is all about total cost of ownership; myopic focus on fuel burn will kill you, especially if you try that trick on a derivative.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
They are artificially constraining the design for no good reason other than wanting to limit the design and manufacturing budget. Make the investment now, it will pay off.

Limiting the design and manufacturing budget is a *really* good reason. If you don't pay attention to that, you end up spending so much money that you nearly bankrupt the company (RB211, L-1011, 707, 747) or totally ruin the business case (787, A380).

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 19):
and they customers *really* don't want that.

As I said, there are other Customers than Southwest.

Yes, and at least 12 of them (representing several hundred aircraft) agree with Southwest. Ignoring your customers is never a good idea.

Tom.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:37 pm

Quoting bringiton (Reply 9):
""Speaking at the Assn. of Asia Pacific Airlines annual meeting in Seoul, Randy Tinseth said a commitment means that an airline has paid a deposit to secure its order for the 737 Max""

http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engine...-1104

So Boeing now only sign commitments with customers. They no longer do MOUs? The Boeing shift of yet another goalpost. I love those guys.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:58 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 28):

From a contract perspective there are many options for an airline to commit to buying an aircraft.

As stated MAX still has a way to go before firm configuration. Boeing are offering the aircraft for sale and subsequently airlines are lining up with deposits to secure production slots Thus the change of contract conditions is nothing more than a contract reflecting the terms in which an aircraft has been sold or committed to.

Nothing to scary in my opinion.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27639
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:10 pm

This place kills me sometimes.

The customers are signing checks and monies are being deposited in Boeing's bank account. Even if Boeing is only taking a token deposit on each of those 800 frames, that's going to be well north of a billion dollars. And yet this is some great failure on Boeing's part to read the market and respond competitively.

It must really stick in the craws of some folks to see Boeing pulling something out of their bums at the last minute and turning it into an eleven-to-twelve-figure windfall.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16308
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:17 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
The customers are signing checks and monies are being deposited in Boeing's bank account.

I think that is a stretch considering the small number of actual orders.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
Even if Boeing is only taking a token deposit on each of those 800 frames, that's going to be well north of a billion dollars.

Orders generally (not always) require a deposit, LOI or similar require nothing.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:41 pm

I think it is pretty pointless comparing how many orders the A320NEO vs 737MAX got in their first 100 days of being offered formally. The planes were at different stages of development and 6 years from EIS when they were announced publicly. The beginning of orders is rather arbitrary.

It's also pointless in my opinion arguing about whether airlines have placed deposits or not. I think it is pretty clear that Boeing has airlines that plan on acquiring 800 MAXs so far. It is a bit premature for firm configuration and deposits from larger established airlines are usually very small. United secured 10 Billion in orders with 5 Million in deposits when they ordered the 787 & A350.

I think the important factor is that the 737MAX is earning customers and they are committing to it. Regardless of what John Leahy says about it being suboptimal, Boeing rethinking it, or anything else, it appears that its projected performance is what many airlines are looking for and they do want it.

It seems like there are plenty of people pointing out some very legitimate compromises/trades that have been made in the design. However these are not stopping it from selling. Nose gear extension, cockpit commonality, engine fan diameter constraints, hybrid fly by wire, cabin width, range, capacity vs A320, aluminum vs composites, 1960s technology, 1990s wing, discounts, etc are repetitive discussion topics and legitimate design considerations, but Randy is talking about the airplane receiving orders and commitments in this article. Boeing seems to be working on designing around all of the design constraints and getting sales interest. It is never going to end that some people are going to say the 737 should be dead while others praise its strong points.

In the end sales matter and both the NEO and MAX have taken off with similar velocity. The A320NEO came out with some incredible sales figures and set some records, especially with some airlines planning incredible growth in the long run. It appears we are seeing similar orders with the MAX although customers tend to not be as public about it.

[Edited 2011-12-11 15:54:46]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2542
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:18 am

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
Interesting read.
Gotta take it with a grain or two of salt.

      On both counts.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 13):
He said 12 "Customers", not airlines... I suspect several leasing companies are included in that number.

   Indeed, one of the first 3 customers to go public is a leasing company.

Quoting BD338 (Reply 11):
Delta, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group for sure have signed some sort of commmitment/intent to acquire 737MAX.

American Airlines, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group are the three to go public so far. Delta has not. And I'd be willing to bet quite a few pints that they are not part of this group of 12.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 16):
There's nothing that says an MOU or commitment can't come with a deposit. Indeed, as other posters have already indicated, it appears that several customers have made commitments and deposits. The converse is also true...there's no technical reason you can't have an order without a deposit, although that would be pretty rare.

   Correct. As already demonstrated, the commitments customers are currently making to the MAX come with deposits. I'm not 100% on this, so anyone with better info please correct, but it's my understanding that, unlike a firm order, these deposits are refundable if the customer chooses not to go through with the order.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 23):
While Southwest is the largest buyer, it's also true that over 90% of all 737 sales have been to other customers.

   Haha. VERY good point!! Reinforces the fact Boeing has secured 800 commitments from 12 airlines this early, and NONE of them are Southwest.  
Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 24):
We don't know what these "commitments" really are.

Define "we". I assure you, there are definitely people out there who know exactly what these commitments are.


Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 24):
It may be that Boeing is allowing customers the option to flip NG orders beyond a certain date to MAX versions, or that any order placed can ultimately be delivered as an NG or MAX version.

While Boeing is not explicitly forbidding a few select customers from converting late NG orders to the MAX, to my knowledge that has not happened so far. So this "it may be" piece is just how it sounds - pure speculation on your part.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 28):
So Boeing now only sign commitments with customers. They no longer do MOUs?

If you want to think of them as MOU's, go ahead. From a legal standpoint, they have the same basic framework. They are non-binding, rough agreements pending final negotiation on price, delivery, specifications, etc. FWIW, Boeing used the same type of arrangements for the first few years of the 787, too. I'd estimate ~ 85% of those 'commitments' became firm orders.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 28):
The Boeing shift of yet another goalpost.

But aren't we talking about Boeing's own, internal goalpost, so what should it matter? I've seen orders go from 'commitment'/MOU, to LOI, to firm, all steps taking a VERY long time. I've also seen negotiations go very quickly, from nothing to firm order. What counts at the end of the day is Firm Orders, and no where have I seen Randy nor any other Boeing official try and masquerade any of these commitments as firm orders. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Quoting zeke (Reply 31):
Orders generally (not always) require a deposit, LOI or similar require nothing.

   However, as has been pointed out above, in this case Boeing is making prospective customers place deposits. These are minor payments, and I believe they are also refundable should the customer choose not to go through with a firm order.

In general (so keep that in mind), the deposit when signing a firm order is ~ 5% of the purchase price. Not taking into discounts, and safely assuming Boeing is charging a premium for the MAX, let's just say a 737-8 will cost $90million, list. I.e., the deposit would be ~ $4.5million.

Quoting zeke (Reply 31):
I think that is a stretch considering the small number of actual orders.

My guess on these commitments would be that Boeing is charging ~ $1-2million for a 'place-holder.' With "close to 800 commitments" that's going to be anywhere from ~ $700million to $1.6billion. Stitch is pretty close.


Regards,

Hamlet69   
All gave some. Some gave all.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:11 am

Randy has no more credibility talking about Airbus than JL has about talking about Boeing.

They are both sales/PR guys and they will put every possible good spin on their stuff and slam, (usually cloaked in very diplomatic language), the other guy.

Who sold how much by what time is one of the most pointless statistics ever. These sales almost all go to the back of the line, which is most of a decade away. With the backlogs of both, what matters is how many are they producing right now, and how can they produce more.

More sales are always good but when they get those sales is entirely irrelevant, as long as it doesn't affect current production.
What the...?
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:18 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 28):
So Boeing now only sign commitments with customers. They no longer do MOUs?

They're similar but not the same thing. It doesn't really have anything to do with "goalposts".

Tom.
 
col
Posts: 1707
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:41 am

Both models have done extremely well, and I am sure more info from Boeing will come in the New Year. The 737MAX, should help Boeing to keep many of their existing customers.

The problem I do have with Randy is his crazy number game. Last time on the 345 he made a point of saying that the 345 only sold 40, but Boeing hold the record for the worse selling widebody pax derivatives with two projects - 744ER and 764.

Now he compares 100 days of 737MAX, but he has no orders, where Airbus did. We then had the typical Airbus Airshow routine, where they signed up hundreds at Paris, so after 150 days how will it look?. Then we can see what was lost, AA, QF, Transaero and GA, all Boeing NG or only Boeing users. That amounts to 400 to 500 units?

He should also remember that without the NEO, this latest blog would not even be written. Boeing were dragged kicking and screaming down the MAX route. He should buy AA and Airbus a nice dinner, now that would be a good blog, "Look what you made us do, and see how many potentials we have".
 
Max Q
Posts: 9049
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:17 am

It's all about a lack of vision.



It is time to throw away this old design away and start anew. The investment for Boeing will be significant but it will pay off.



Why not leapfrog AB with a new, or at least not artificially constrained design.



I don't believe in stop gap aircraft. You should build the very best, uncompromised design today because it may be in service a lot longer than you think.



Boeing themselves are a prime example of this, they developed the magnificent B747 as a 'stop gap' Aircraft that would satisfy the worlds international airlines until the 'inevitable' supersonic transports came along.



Well, that never happened, but it didn''t stop Boeings designers from building the finest jet transport ever made with no compromises.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:30 am

Quoting BD338 (Reply 11):
Delta, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group for sure have signed some sort of commmitment/intent to acquire 737MAX

I don't believe you on the Delta front. I will when I see it.

As to everything else - if there were 800 commitments, someone would have announced theirs beyond AA's maybe.

NS
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:13 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
It's all about a lack of vision.

It is time to throw away this old design away and start anew. The investment for Boeing will be significant but it will pay off.

Why not leapfrog AB with a new, or at least not artificially constrained design.

I don't believe in stop gap aircraft. You should build the very best, uncompromised design today because it may be in service a lot longer than you think.

Boeing themselves are a prime example of this, they developed the magnificent B747 as a 'stop gap' Aircraft that would satisfy the worlds international airlines until the 'inevitable' supersonic transports came along.

Well, that never happened, but it didn''t stop Boeings designers from building the finest jet transport ever made with no compromises.

I think you are speaking as a fan of aviation and as many of the designers at Boeing would. However, a good designer realizes that the greatest design is of no use if it is too expensive for anyone to buy. You can design the best aircraft possible and get totally beat by the competition if it is too expensive. The 747 was built in a different era where cost pressures weren't like they are now and the cost for a new design was far less.

The argument of low cost minimum change vs best possible design is a never ending one. It has had major casualties like the MD-90 and major successes like the 737 classics. Time will tell if you are right on this one.

However I trust the management at Boeing in that the improved efficiency of going all new was not enough to justify the cost of a new design. Airlines made their preference known that they do not want to wait longer and pay more for a new aircraft since in the long run a re-engine design had a better payback. It has many carryover parts, but the 737-800 is so efficient and so well refined and perfected that even Boeing engineers themselves are struggling to make a better all new design. One of the huge benefits of a refreshed design is that all the problems have been worked out and the airplane has been fully optimized. People like to believe that airplanes are very high tech, but in reality, while some parts are state of the art, many of the designs have barely changed since the dawn of the jet age.

But in the end as an engineer, I'd love to see a New Small Aircraft. Unfortunately it costs too much to design a new aircraft for the projected payback.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
BD338
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:00 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:14 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 38):
Quoting BD338 (Reply 11):
Delta, Lion Air and Aviation Capital Group for sure have signed some sort of commmitment/intent to acquire 737MAX

I don't believe you on the Delta front. I will when I see it.

As to everything else - if there were 800 commitments, someone would have announced theirs beyond AA's maybe.

My bad. I've no idea where i got DL from, they ordered the 739ER NG of course. AA has committed to 100 options.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:28 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
It is time to throw away this old design away and start anew. The investment for Boeing will be significant but it will pay off.

Why not leapfrog AB with a new, or at least not artificially constrained design.

Because they'd pay a significant investment, as you say, only to be kicked to the curb by Airbus's cleansheet about 10 years from now. All the OEMs are staring at what the next big change will be in a narrowbody market and they all came up with the same answer...they can't make a cleansheet narrowbody pay off with today's technology. Whoever blinked first and did a cleansheet would get out in front, only to be slaughtered by their competitors about a decade from now when they're still trying to pay back their significant investment and their competitors are sitting on fat bank accounts from running another 10 years of derivatives.

It is not a coincidence that Airbus, Embraer, and Boeing all ended up with the same conclusion. Bombardier is the only one who went clean-sheet and that's just because they didn't have anything in the C-Series size to derive from...if they could have stuck a GTF on a CRJ they would have.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
I don't believe in stop gap aircraft. You should build the very best, uncompromised design today because it may be in service a lot longer than you think.

That theory would have killed off the 737-300/400/500/NG, the 747-400 and -8, the 757-300, the 767-300, the 777-300, the A318/319/321, the A330-300, and the A340-500/600. None of the OEM's go for a cleansheet every time.

Tom.
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:49 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):

The thing is, is that Boeing customers had no faith that Boeing could actually deliver a NSA this decade in any significant numbers, given the 787 and 748 program disasters. Boeing customers preferred an almost certain 10% to 12% fuel reduction cost by 2018 vs a mythical higher increase in a program that might be 3 or 4 years late, and take until 2022 or 2023 before they would see any meaningful deliveries.

Don't blame Boeing customers for having no faith in their vendor who has consistently let them down. Blame Boeing for their well documented failures!
 
Max Q
Posts: 9049
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:54 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 39):

I think you are speaking as a fan of aviation and as many of the designers at Boeing would. However, a good designer realizes that the greatest design is of no use if it is too expensive for anyone to buy. You can design the best aircraft possible and get totally beat by the competition if it is too expensive. The 747 was built in a different era where cost pressures weren't like they are now and the cost for a new design was far less.

That's just not true, the design, engineering, manufacturing and production of the 747 just about finished Boeing off. They bet the company, and were rewarded with their foresight.


It's easy to think things were easier or less expensive 'back in the day' but that was not the case with the 747.



Boeing does not need to put everything 'on the line' to replace the 737 with something other than just a warmed up -NG.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):

That theory would have killed off the 737-300/400/500/NG, the 747-400 and -8, the 757-300, the 767-300, the 777-300, the A318/319/321, the A330-300, and the A340-500/600. None of the OEM's go for a cleansheet every time.

These were not 'stop gap Aircraft' but logical evolutions of existing airframes that were not outdated or obsolete.


There is no comparison.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2745
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:11 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 43):
That's just not true, the design, engineering, manufacturing and production of the 747 just about finished Boeing off. They bet the company, and were rewarded with their foresight.

No. Infact they didn't. Boeing might have been on the verge of bankrupcy when the 747 was delivered to customers... Its the media that fabricated the story that the 747 was the cause of the problems.

In fact its Boeing's continued work on the SST program after the government money dried up that caused the problems.

Its beyond the scope of understanding how the 3rd ranking commercial program that used leftover resources could remotely done even a dent to thier bottom like. The 737 which was the 2nd ranking program at the time had far more resources tossed at it. Yet I don't see anyone blaming it, despite all the money spent on it, and at that time dismal sales. Oh thats right its not a good story that this little plane is hurting the company while this huge plane is done on leftovers and scraps.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:41 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):
The 777 overhead is not remotely the same design, just as one example, the generator breakers have to be placed manually on line, unlike any modern Aircraft (even the DC9 did this automatically) the pressurisation / pneumatics panel is a design mess and has indirectly led to numerous incidents and a fatal accident. It is nowhere near where a modern redundant design should be.



So commonality with the Jurassic jet is lost, so what, it is time to move on.

Couldn't agree more, in general all Boeing cockpits(except 777/787) look outdated. Commonality can't be always the excuse, though it has not be always a radical redesign necessary. A modest update a la 777 would make the 737 much better in terms of safety and ergonomy.
Flown on: DC-9, MD-80, Fokker 100, Bae 146 Avro, Boeing 737-300, 737-400, 747-200, 747-300,747-400, 787-9, Airbus A310, A319, A320, A321, A330-200,A330-300, A340-313, A380, Bombardier CSeries 100/300, CRJ700ER/CRJ900, Embraer 190.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2557
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:52 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 28):
So Boeing now only sign commitments with customers. They no longer do MOUs? The Boeing shift of yet another goalpost. I love those guys.

How can Boeing & Customer sign an MOU or LOI when there is nothing to sell yet?
The commitments are most likely a "We're interested, here is some cash to help you build it" type arrangement.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
It must really stick in the craws of some folks to see Boeing pulling something out of their bums at the last minute and turning it into an eleven-to-twelve-figure windfall.

Bingo!
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
Max Q
Posts: 9049
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:49 am

Boeing would have been better off persevering for a clean sheet design.



Since they have decided not to and gone for a 737 'warmup' it should be the best, and most advanced design they can roll out the door.




It will be around for a long time since, apparently the technology for a real new narrowbody is decades away.



I am no fan of AB, but they have the advantage here with a design that allows for a completely new generation new engine with no compromise when it come to fan size.



Boeing is shooting itself in the foot for a short term savings, they will regret it.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:37 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 31):
I think that is a stretch considering the small number of actual orders.

The orders will start trickling in starting from about a week or so...Boeing should convert most , if not all of the commitments by the end of 2012 , and most probably also pick up some new customers along the way...its not long way out...We shall see  
Quoting Max Q (Reply 47):
Boeing would have been better off persevering for a clean sheet design.

Boeing has to listen to its customers , and then respond , if the current interest in the MAX is any indication , (their point that the market wanted a more efficient aircraft and aren't willing to wait years down the line for a new product) is vindicated..

Quoting Max Q (Reply 47):
It will be around for a long time since, apparently the technology for a real new narrowbody is decades away.

That is what one can extrapolate from both A and B's decision and what the airlines want ..Yet you maintain that Boeing should have waited till decades out for real advances to show up and then start with a NSA development and continue to compete against the NEO with the NG..

Quoting Max Q (Reply 47):
Boeing is shooting itself in the foot for a short term savings, they will regret it.

I doubt it ... Most analysts and industry insiders are claiming that the status quo will remain..
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27639
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Randy Tinseth On 100 Days Of MAX

Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:17 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
It's all about a lack of vision.

A lack of vision by the airlines, not Boeing or Airbus.



Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
It is time to throw away this old design away and start anew. The investment for Boeing will be significant but it will pay off.

The key factor is, would it pay off in a time frame that Boeing could benefit from? (see below)



Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
Why not leapfrog AB with a new, or at least not artificially constrained design.

That was Boeing's goal with the NSA.



Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
I don't believe in stop gap aircraft. You should build the very best, uncompromised design today because it may be in service a lot longer than you think.

The A320neo is more of a "stop gap" aircraft than the 737MAX is, since it's just an A320 with wingtip modifiers (something the 737 has had for years) and new engines.

And it has well over 1000 orders.



Quoting Max Q (Reply 47):
Boeing would have been better off persevering for a clean sheet design.

Not if they lose a significant portion of their customer base in the interim. Next to WN and FR, AA was the airline with the biggest sunk investment in the 737 and they decided to switch to the A320, anyway. UA and DL, with extensive A320 fleets in house already, would have surely followed.



Quoting Max Q (Reply 47):
Since they have decided not to and gone for a 737 'warmup' it should be the best, and most advanced design they can roll out the door.

Boeing cannot afford to be as late to the party with the 737MAX as they would have been with the NSA. So they cannot afford "feature creep", lest those "unknown unknowns" rear their heads and bite them on the arse. That being said, they are going farther than Airbus with modifications and updates so they're willing to take some risk.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos