Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26946
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 12:28 am

cnbc.com interviewed JAL managing executive officer of finance & accounting Norikazu Saito who noted that in the RFP between Boeing and Airbus, the Airbus product was just 'better'.

He noted that while there would be issues with operating a mixed fleet of A350s and 787s, the increased economic efficiency of adding the A350 to the fleet was the deciding factor.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101454387

[Edited 2014-03-08 16:31:07]
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:32 am

Good article. As the CFO says, "business is business"

The days of those so-called "gentlemen's agreements" are long over, IMHO

Also, I shouldn't HAVE to say this, but what works for one airline doesn't work for the next. If the 350 works for JAL, so be it
“They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 10:29 am

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 1):
Good article. As the CFO says, "business is business"

The days of those so-called "gentlemen's agreements" are long over, IMHO

Indeed, and we have seen many examples of that already. And not only recently, but also a decade or more ago. Which is a very good thing imho.

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 1):
but what works for one airline doesn't work for the next. If the 350 works for JAL, so be it

And these are the merits on which a selection of an aircraft should be based. And more and more airlines are making their decisions that way.  
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 1:42 pm

This is probably like a foreign concept to half the people here.
 
lhrnue
Posts: 353
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 2:05 pm

Have I heard that right, that Norikazu Saito said in the video that there was another issue with the battery which is under investigation? But it was less an issue due to the 3 levels of safety introduced after the battery fire. Or was this poorly translated. The CNBC is dated 2 March 2014.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2060
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 2:37 pm

Quoting lhrnue (Reply 4):

Yup they had another one let go a month or so ago..

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
cnbc.com interviewed JAL managing executive officer of finance & accounting Norikazu Saito who noted that in the RFP between Boeing and Airbus, the Airbus product was just 'better'.

That should shave another couple of % off of Boeings ANA 777X asking price.. 
BV
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26946
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:23 pm

Quoting lhrnue (Reply 4):
Have I heard that right, that Norikazu Saito said in the video that there was another issue with the battery which is under investigation?

Yes, a single cell failed in the Ship's (Main) Battery on JA834J on 14 January while parked at NRT. The pressure relief valve opened on the cell and it safely vented. Since the event only happened in one cell and the battery itself is mostly undamaged, it should help the investigation into why the battery and charging system is encountering these issues.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:26 pm

Another deciding factor may have been delivery times. It will be 6-7 years before a 777X is delivered and the A350 is scheduled to enter service later this year.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:48 pm

"Better" in this context is a relative term. That is: better in doing the particular job that JAL want it to do. Other airlines might have slightly or significantly different jobs to be done by the frames that they ask fore.
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 4:20 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 8):
"Better" in this context is a relative term. That is: better in doing the particular job that JAL want it to do. Other airlines might have slightly or significantly different jobs to be done by the frames that they ask fore.

Exactly. It was "better for us at this moment in time," not necessarily "better categorically and across the board for everyone."

[Edited 2014-03-09 09:20:15]
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26946
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 5:44 pm

I continue to find the idea that JAL bought the A350 in whole or in part over the 777X because they wanted to "send a message" to Boeing to be specious. And the idea that they did so knowing the 777X was a better fit for them is, to me, ridiculous.

JAL's marketshare is shrinking and they are downsizing their fleet size and adjusting their plane size to reflect that.

They don't need a 747-size airframe, which eliminated not only the A380-800 and 747-8, but also the 777-9. They don't operate 16-hour segments, so they didn't need the 777-8. And the best replacement for a 9-abreast 777-300ER is the A350-1000.

Like many carriers, JAL has gone 10-abreast on their three-class long-haul 777-200ERs so they need a plane larger than the 787-9. The A350-900 has the extra size to carry the seats and it has range for VLH missions that the 787-10 does not.
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 6:33 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 7):

When is the A350 scheduled to be delivered to JAL? Definitely not next year, and I doubt the reason for JAL to go for Airbus is the 787's teething trouble. All new aircraft suffer from such problems during their introductory years, and the Dreamliner is another one in a long line of new revolutionary aircraft to suffer at first because it's virtually in its own league at the moment, but would be proven successful 10 years later.
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 6:44 pm

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 14):
the Dreamliner is another one in a long line of new revolutionary aircraft to suffer at first because it's virtually in its own league at the moment, but would be proven successful 10 years later.

Then let us wait 10 years - at which time the Dreamliner (for the moment turned into a true nightmare) isn't as revolutionary an aircraft as it is now....

PS and if you by "succesful" mean anything economical as far as ROI on the Boeing invenstment in the project is concerned you are certainly by any relevant standard a true optimist!
 
Johnwaynebobbet
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:25 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:08 pm

The notion that any airline would take a product it believed was inferior to spite another company due to issues the airline is having with a current aircraft is the work of a total fantasist.
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:20 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 15):
Then let us wait 10 years - at which time the Dreamliner (for the moment turned into a true nightmare) isn't as revolutionary an aircraft as it is now....

PS and if you by "succesful" mean anything economical as far as ROI on the Boeing invenstment in the project is concerned you are certainly by any relevant standard a true optimist!

I take it, Abba, you're not that fond of the Dreamliner :p. Sure, the plane isn't working like a "dream" at the moment, but neither was the 747. Such an enormous flying boat was ahead of its time in the late 60s - early 70s, especially in the wake of the 73 oil crisis. Boeing was struggling to find customers for it at the time. Same story with the A380 now, with experts doubting if the plane will ever break even.

But you can never tell how things could turn out. I think the Dreamliner would've had a better reputation had it not have been surrounded by all the media. The hype around it is big, and pilots are ridiculously cautious because of it, reporting the most insignificant of mishaps. But has it had a life-threatening fault so far since the batteries? No. So all is good so far.
 
JAL
Posts: 3876
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 12:37 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:59 pm

Although I think that the ongoing problems with the 787 also played some role.
Work Hard But Play Harder
 
goosebayguy
Posts: 705
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:12 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:17 pm

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 17):
Sure, the plane isn't working like a "dream" at the moment, but neither was the 747.

Most planes and engines have problems when entering the market. Rolls-Royce is having issues with the Trent1000 currently and it is costing them dearly but they will soon have the issue sorted and then many years with a good steady income stream. The 787 is the same no more no less.
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:28 pm

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 11):
All new aircraft suffer from such problems during their introductory years, and the Dreamliner is another one in a long line of new revolutionary aircraft to suffer at first because it's virtually in its own league at the moment, but would be proven successful 10 years later.

This is often overstated. Ironically, out of the multitudes of issues that have plagued the 787, the battery issue is actually the only one that can be linked to the 787s "revolutionary" abilities.

But not to drag this further, I wonder why it's so hard to accept that the A350 or any Airbus plane for that matter might be better in some situations? Pretty sure if ANA orders the 777X and tells us it was because it was better than the A350, all we'd hear is, "yess, the 777 still going strong after all these years", bla bla bla.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4758
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:35 pm

[quote=CrimsonChin,reply=3]This is probably like a foreign concept to half the people here.



No it isn'tt United wss the first to order both the 787 and the A350. if that was the case we wouldn't have ordered the A320/A319
now would we?? And How many are IN the USA?? Loads of 'em
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4758
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:39 pm

But let me add something else. No Matter what?? That airplane had BETTER be good from the Delivery.
Let it have any problems? and they'll Drag it in the MUD!!
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:54 pm

Quoting CrimsonChin (Reply 17):
But not to drag this further, I wonder why it's so hard to accept that the A350 or any Airbus plane for that matter might be better in some situations? Pretty sure if ANA orders the 777X and tells us it was because it was better than the A350, all we'd hear is, "yess, the 777 still going strong after all these years", bla bla bla.

Because this fact hasn't been proven yet, the A350 is still in its testing phase and waiting certification and delivery. Once a year or two of airline operation passes for the Airbus, then we can confidently compare it to others.

The other Airbuses may be better in certain things than Boeings (comfort being on of them, I guess), but one questionable aspect A seems to claim innovation in, or at least popularize, is fly-by-wire. I'm no expert in this, but I've read a few articles in which A's fly-by-wire and B's more conventional flying mechanics were compared. Some pilots welcome A's sidestick, others prefer B's and others' traditional centre stick. In Boeings the pilot in an emergency can disengage the autopilot, override and take full manual control of the plane, in Airbuses the pilot for some reason cannot override the computerized plane. Why can't you take full control of an Airbus?

So, again, only time will tell which is better.

[Edited 2014-03-09 14:57:18]
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 10:48 pm

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 20):

Neither has the 777X, but yet if it was the 777X ordered, there won't be as much debate if it's better and yes I know the 777X is a derivative, but not a simple, straightforward one. As for the rest of your post and the evils of Airbus' flight philosophy that's been argued(mostly ignorantly) ad nauseam on Anet if you want to search, I'm not quite sure what that has to do with anything in my post or the point I was trying to make, soooo okay. But just for the record, you can take full control of an Airbus.

[Edited 2014-03-09 15:50:31]
 
trex8
Posts: 5521
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Sun Mar 09, 2014 10:58 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 19):
But let me add something else. No Matter what?? That airplane had BETTER be good from the Delivery.
Let it have any problems? and they'll Drag it in the MUD!!

Sorta like their 787 experience???
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3666
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:24 am

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 20):
So, again, only time will tell which is better.

As they're not direct competitors, better is going to be a very subjective and debatable notion. For each mission, route, airline, network will/should be the deciding factors to measure better against.

The A35J was the best 77W replacement for JL given their predictions for the future market and their current place in it.

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9552
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:14 am

Quoting Johnwaynebobbet (Reply 13):
The notion that any airline would take a product it believed was inferior to spite another company due to issues the airline is having with a current aircraft is the work of a total fantasist.

Inferior is relative. A plane can have a better CASM but if the OEM support is bad and dispatch reliability is bad, it might still be inferior. If you have 2 comparable products with little difference between them it often comes down to money. I believe Airbus was eager to get the order, while JAL most likely expected some extra discount for the the 777X due to their 787 problems. For many route profiles the difference between A350 and the Boeing products will be very small with each winning on some and losing on others, so it is not unlikely that current dissatisfaction with one OEM can lead to an order from the other.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:06 am

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 7):
Another deciding factor may have been delivery times.
Quoting Johnwaynebobbet (Reply 13):
it believed was inferior

Deals like these are not just about a better product, it's about prices, maintenance, crew training, support, spare parts, delivery times etc. The Airbus deal was better overall.

You need of course to have a good product to sell in the first place and I agree with Stitch that A350-900 and A350-1000 are very good candidates to replace the 777-200ER and 777-300ER 9-abreast.

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
He noted that while there would be issues with operating a mixed fleet of A350s and 787s, the increased economic efficiency of adding the A350 to the fleet was the deciding factor.

Interesting. When JAL announced the A350 order last year, people argued that adding another aircraft type would add lots of additional costs. This statement again proves it is not the case.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9552
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:32 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 25):
Interesting. When JAL announced the A350 order last year, people argued that adding another aircraft type would add lots of additional costs. This statement again proves it is not the case.

That is old knowledge. If the sub fleet is big enough the additional costs are not much of a factor.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4379
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:29 am

JAL was having some issues with the 737 a few years back. One of their top dogs told me that Boeing thinks JAL will always remain loyal to Boeing, but he said Boeing was mistaken. I of course never imagined JAL going with the A350, but I think it is a fine choice. I also admire the airline. The workforce at JAL is by far some of the finest I have ever met.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:37 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24):

So what is your definition of inferior in this case then that makes you think JAL chose the inferior product as you said?
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:37 am

I think the most telling matter is that it is the CFO saying this, and he clearly says "economic efficiency".

I bet he got an extraordinarily low price to get the 350 into the Japanese market.!

No this is not anti 350, just the way I see this deal.

Ruscoe
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9552
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:51 am

Quoting CrimsonChin (Reply 28):
So what is your definition of inferior in this case then that makes you think JAL chose the inferior product as you said?

It depends on your criteria. Overall I would say CASM operating with full payload at max range is a good indication for the overall efficiency of a plane, but it has little worth for an airline, as they might not need the full range and might have trouble filling the seats. Looking at range and capacity, I think the 777X is offering superior capabilities, but JAL might not need those either, so for their needs and given the different offers by the OEMs the A350 might have been the better option.
 
StTim
Posts: 3652
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:12 am

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 29):
I bet he got an extraordinarily low price to get the 350 into the Japanese market.!

Once again we have the opinion that airlines only ever buy Airbus because they get them so cheap they cannot be ignored.

Price is a factor in all buying decisions - but the upfront cost is only part of the decision.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10130
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:31 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 25):
Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):He noted that while there would be issues with operating a mixed fleet of A350s and 787s, the increased economic efficiency of adding the A350 to the fleet was the deciding factor.Interesting. When JAL announced the A350 order last year, people argued that adding another aircraft type would add lots of additional costs. This statement again proves it is not the case.

So what exactly are the issues, or are we discounting them?
"Pilots need to have different licenses; you need to have spare parts for both manufacturers. But even taking all those things into account, Airbus was the better choice," he said.
Why is it difficult to believe that for some airlines this is a issue to be avoided, does it shed any light on Airbus family design from day one to limit type across frames, how can that be a good thing and then get discounted at the same time.
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:41 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 30):

Then maybe you should have said they ordered the less "capable" aircraft, not inferior? Obviously, the 777X due to its size can do things the A350 can't, but it seems like JAL for now didn't need those things, as the A350 for JAL's needs was better than the 777X, so not really "inferior" like you said.
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:50 am

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):

This was never going to turn out well...  
A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
 
Part147
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:13 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:19 pm

The fact remains that Airbus has now sold aircraft to a long-time, Boeing-exclusive customer.

Why? Obviously because in their opinion - Airbus IS quite simple 'better' than Boeing! Why should JAL buy an inferior product from Boeing instead? Surely it makes proper business sense to go with the product that will make you money/profit. Boeing was not able to do that, Airbus did!


For JAL - the A350 IS better than what Boeing could offer - end of discussion. Deal with it!


Time to close the thread on that positive note!
It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:22 pm

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 11):

When is the A350 scheduled to be delivered to JAL? Definitely not next year, and I doubt the reason for JAL to go for Airbus is the 787's teething trouble. All new aircraft suffer from such problems during their introductory years, and the Dreamliner is another one in a long line of new revolutionary aircraft to suffer at first because it's virtually in its own league at the moment, but would be proven successful 10 years later.

Manufacturers can and do create additional production slots if they have a need to do so--and they would for a customer like JAL. They also will trade slots with an exisiting customer. There has been speculation that it will eventually also be built at EADS new plant in Alabama which means faster deliveries.

The A350 has a strong relationship to the A330/340 series in many respects and I would not anticipate the levels to adjustment to this aircraft was was experienced by the 787
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9552
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:24 pm

Quoting CrimsonChin (Reply 33):
Then maybe you should have said they ordered the less "capable" aircraft, not inferior? Obviously, the 777X due to its size can do things the A350 can't, but it seems like JAL for now didn't need those things, as the A350 for JAL's needs was better than the 777X, so not really "inferior" like you said.

Sorry, language barrier, I know see that "inferior" is stronger than"less capable".

[Edited 2014-03-10 05:25:11]
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8138
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:27 pm

I think JL bought the A350XWB for one good reason: the plane can be delivered earlier to the airline. And the A359 and A35J are perfect for the type of short to long range route flying JL does nowadays. In short, expect JL to use the A35J on its routes from (likely) NRT to the USA, including JFK.
 
trex8
Posts: 5521
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:58 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 36):
There has been speculation that it will eventually also be built at EADS new plant in Alabama which means faster deliveries.

I don't see the mobile A320 FAL expanding to widebodies anytime soon ,even if the USAF backtrack and get the A330 tanker. And any widebody there will more likely be the A330neo than the A350.Though that may provide more room at Toulouse to crank out more A350s.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26946
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:23 pm

Quoting StTim (Reply 31):
Once again we have the opinion that airlines only ever buy Airbus because they get them so cheap they cannot be ignored.

And yet a number of posters have been saying that if Boeing had only cut JAL a larger discount on the 777X, they would have won the RFP... *shrug*
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4681
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:24 pm

Its all price. Many colleagues in Toulouse speak about achieving order due to aggressive pricing.
At end of the day does not say much about aircraft itself, as decision was economic one for JAL ultimately.
mercure f-wtcc
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26946
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:45 pm

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 41):
ts all price. Many colleagues in Toulouse speak about achieving order due to aggressive pricing.

At end of the day does not say much about aircraft itself, as decision was economic one for JAL ultimately.

Well Boeing's certainly been aggressive on pricing with the MAX, so maybe they're making up for a smaller BPR with a smaller ASP.


Seriously, JAL was going to incur new costs whether they bought the A350 or the 777X since the latter is going to have propulsion and structural/systems differences to their current 777 fleet. I've long-argued that with the shrinking marketshare JAL and ANA are facing, going smaller (A350) made far more sense than going bigger (777X).

If the 787-10 had the performance of the 777-200ER and 777-300ER, it probably would have been enough to win the RFP, but it doesn't so that meant the A350 was the most logical option.
 
StTim
Posts: 3652
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:00 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
And yet a number of posters have been saying that if Boeing had only cut JAL a larger discount on the 777X, they would have won the RFP... *shrug*

They both have to price to win - I don't doubt that. I also don't doubt that JAL got a good price BUT they would also have got a good price from Boeing on their offer.


There is just a general undercurrent of posting around any win that reflects the allegiance of the poster. The common one I see is that Airbus only win by giving away the plane. Mind you we also see the Airbus wouldn't sell to RyanAir at any price.

My view is that both frame makers produce quality products. Each airline has slightly different requirements and each manufacturer also has different pressures to win in that situation. This should make each order a properly competitive situation. The airlines will make their own value and costed judgement call.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:26 pm

That the chief financial officer made those remarks should give us plenty of evidence about what makes it "better". He's an accountant, a bean-counter, everything is about price to him. And there is nothing wrong with that. Our own anet analysts have not shown the case that the A350 will be significantly more efficient than the competition. Availability, size and a desire to test the waters also helped Airbus.
 
trex8
Posts: 5521
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:38 pm

Really don't see why people think JL are so beholden to a specific OEM. They ditched Pratt bigtime and went GE with their 744s, partly due to the surge issues with the PW 4000 and no doubt because they got a good deal from GE and its probably a better engine too. Probably same issues here with this deal. You've p.... us off with your latest product we got from you, your product isn't head and shoulders better than the other (and probably doesn't fit our network needs as well as the competition) and the other guys got a good price to boot.
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:43 pm

Quoting Part147 (Reply 35):
The fact remains that Airbus has now sold aircraft to a long-time, Boeing-exclusive customer.

Why? Obviously because in their opinion - Airbus IS quite simple 'better' than Boeing! Why should JAL buy an inferior product from Boeing instead? Surely it makes proper business sense to go with the product that will make you money/profit. Boeing was not able to do that, Airbus did!


For JAL - the A350 IS better than what Boeing could offer - end of discussion. Deal with it!

"Inferior" is a strong word, and whichever plane is better is a purely subjective thing, depending on the buyer's needs. JL's reason for going for the 350 could've been anything, and it wouldn't necessarily mean that Boeing have all of a sudden become "inferior". Because they're not.
 
Part147
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:13 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:33 pm

I think we are just arguing semantics now… but let's use logically correct statements to expand the points being made here...


1. If Airbus was considered just 'better', then Boeing (and all other aircraft manufacturers) can be logically considered 'worse'...

2. Airbus 'won' the order, therefore every other manufacturer 'lost' it…

3. If Airbus won the order 'cos they gave JAL a cheap/low price, then all other manufacturers were too expensive.

4. I would argue that Boeing's offered product was inferior to the A350, and where's the evidence - they didn't 'win' the order did they?

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 46):
and it wouldn't necessarily mean that Boeing have all of a sudden become "inferior"

No-one said Boeing, the organisation, was inferior - because they're not - this comment is a straw-man or 'contextomical' argument to try and deflect from the simple fact that Boeing has lost another customer to the A350, not because Boeing is inferior/bad/etc, but because the A350 is in JAL's view - 'better'!
It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:38 pm

Quoting Part147 (Reply 47):
I think we are just arguing semantics now… but let's use logically correct statements to expand the points being made here...


1. If Airbus was considered just 'better', then Boeing (and all other aircraft manufacturers) can be logically considered 'worse'...

2. Airbus 'won' the order, therefore every other manufacturer 'lost' it…

3. If Airbus won the order 'cos they gave JAL a cheap/low price, then all other manufacturers were too expensive.

4. I would argue that Boeing's offered product was inferior to the A350, and where's the evidence - they didn't 'win' the order did they?

Quoting wingbuff (Reply 46):
and it wouldn't necessarily mean that Boeing have all of a sudden become "inferior"

No-one said Boeing, the organisation, was inferior - because they're not - this comment is a straw-man or 'contextomical' argument to try and deflect from the simple fact that Boeing has lost another customer to the A350, not because Boeing is inferior/bad/etc, but because the A350 is in JAL's view - 'better'!

Again, in what way is Boeing's product "inferior"? That's purely your own SUBJECTIVE statement. JAL has not elaborated on what exactly was "better". Better could've been anything: deal, circumstances, better for airline and fleet redevelopment, etc. You for some reason are stubbornly insisting that the A350 is in JAL's view "better". Where did JAL say that? Show me.
 
Part147
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:13 pm

RE: JAL CFO On A350 Order: "It Was Just Better"

Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:56 pm

Check out the link in the OP...
It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!

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