Where Would A380 programme be without EK order?

Beatyair · Wed May 11, 2016 2:40 am

Has anyone thought where the A380 program would be if not for the Emirates? Where would Airbus be without these orders. Does anyone know how many A380 Airbus had to sell to get there money back?

col · Wed May 11, 2016 3:17 am

There are many A380 topics which will answer your questions. But the easy one is that without Emirates the 380 would have 142 units less in their order book. Now the question is where would Emirates be without the 380.

thekorean · Wed May 11, 2016 3:25 am

Airbus would be fine. A380 is a different matter all together.

a320fan · Wed May 11, 2016 5:05 am

Either selling all those A380's to another hub carrier like EY or QR or selling them to the euro and asian airlines who would be capturing the majority of the EK traffic flows.

ap305 · Wed May 11, 2016 5:17 am

Quoting Beatyair (Thread starter):
Has anyone thought where the A380 program would be if not for the Emirates?

Yes I gave it a serious thought when I went to the bathroom today morning..... but hold on.... the aircraft in my thoughts had two engines and some weird shape shifting wingtips...The situation you describe however was almost identical...

intotheair · Wed May 11, 2016 6:51 am

The same though experiment could be said of Boeing. What would Boeing have done without all those 777 orders? The truth is that both A and B would still be around in any case, and EK traffic would likely still be in the hands of the European and Asian operators pre-EK, just as it was.

euroflyer · Wed May 11, 2016 8:16 am

The question could be broadened to "Where Airbus would be without ME4", it's more accurate.

B777LRF · Wed May 11, 2016 8:20 am

Quoting euroflyer (Reply 6):
The question could be broadened to "Where Airbus would be without ME4", it's more accurate.

In roughly the same place as Boeing, it could be argued. Which is to say, doing rather well thank you very much.

olle · Wed May 11, 2016 8:51 am

I consider that the question is more linked to business models.

Many carriers like BA did concentrate on business people and spend time complaining about Economy and Economy + travelers.

Other carriers like EK, Ryanair see that the growth is and will be with people who pays for their tickets themself or companies that demand travel expenses to be decreased.

TurnaroudUK · Wed May 11, 2016 12:14 pm

Quoting col (Reply 1):

777's galore and the 748 would be going strong.

airbazar · Wed May 11, 2016 12:43 pm

Quoting a320fan (Reply 3):
Either selling all those A380's to another hub carrier like EY or QR or selling them to the euro and asian airlines who would be capturing the majority of the EK traffic flows.

I suspect that the likes of QF/BA/SQ/LH would have far larger A380 fleets than they have today. TG and MH might still be in business too, and VS might have actually taken delivery of theirs.

Francoflier · Wed May 11, 2016 12:51 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Thread starter):
Has anyone thought where the A380 program would be if not for the Emirates?

You mean aside from the inexhaustible flow of threads on this very website that endlessly gravitate around the subject?

wingman · Wed May 11, 2016 3:00 pm

Quoting a320fan (Reply 3):
Either selling all those A380's to another hub carrier like EY or QR or selling them to the euro and asian airlines who would be capturing the majority of the EK traffic flows.

I think this is correct. Those 140 380s would be flying elsewhere and amongst another 10 carriers. Everything about EK was the perfect storm for everyone else (location, stability, vision, leadership, money and the right aircraft at the right time).

chiad · Wed May 11, 2016 3:19 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Thread starter):
Has anyone thought where the A380 program would be if not for the Emirates?

I think most of the orderbook would be with other current A380 carriers.
The B777X on the otherhand....

racercoup · Wed May 11, 2016 3:56 pm

More embarrassed than they are today. Even if other airlines had purchased 1/3 of the EK orders, the real order book would be under 200 frames. The program never would have gotten to production break even and would have been canceled years ago

IMHO

gatibosgru · Wed May 11, 2016 4:18 pm

Quoting racercoup (Reply 14):

More embarrassed than they are today.

You mean selling A32XCEOs+NEOs & A330CEOs like hot cakes?

racercoup · Wed May 11, 2016 4:30 pm

Quoting gatibosgru (Reply 15):
You mean selling A32XCEOs+NEOs & A330CEOs like hot cakes?

The thread is about the A380, my reply was about the A380. You are free to begin a new thread concerning the success of other models.

gatibosgru · Wed May 11, 2016 4:57 pm

Quoting racercoup (Reply 16):

The thread is about the A380, my reply was about the A380. You are free to begin a new thread concerning the success of other models.

The thread is about where Airbus would be without EK (notice no A380 on the thread title), which would still be a great place as they have plenty of other planes to sell. The thread isn't about how Airbus feels about the A380 nor about how we feel. So to address the topic of the thread once again, Airbus would not be embarrassed as you stated if there was no EK because the world would be a different place, with different opportunities and their product sheet has a lot more than just A380s.

[Edited 2016-05-11 09:58:40]

SB744 · Wed May 11, 2016 5:25 pm

Quoting chiad (Reply 13):
I think most of the orderbook would be with other current A380 carriers.

On what evidence are you basing this? Has there been a demand for 140 A380s by some carrier?

wingman · Wed May 11, 2016 5:51 pm

Quoting SB744 (Reply 18):
On what evidence are you basing this? Has there been a demand for 140 A380s by some carrier?

EK proved the demand is there so I agree that to an unknown extent, that slack would've been taken up by other carriers. Virgin, Chinese carriers, QR or EY, certainly another 10-20 each to BA, LH, AF, QF, SIA etc. They might not have taken the full 140 but we'll never know. In fact, the opposite issue may now arise where EK taking another 60-80 frames of the original plane could likely mean no significant orders elsewhere for a long time. The sense I get from all the threads is that most carriers looking at replacements or first time orders are waiting on the NEO. EK is about to push that decision back by another 5-10 years. I think SIA's decision on it's 5 frame return to DORIC will be a excellent indication of this. Will they replace with new copies or settle on the 351 or 777X? Next up will be Turkish.

Burkhard · Wed May 11, 2016 5:54 pm

Since the Passengers would not fly ia Dubai but via Singaore/Hongkong/Frankfurt I doubt it would make a large difference.

r2rho · Wed May 11, 2016 6:05 pm

Airbus would be in the same place. They don't sell aircraft to meet the ME3 demand, but to meet the global air traffic demand. A good chunk of that growth in demand over the past years has been Europe-Asia. If the ME3 hadn't captured those traffic flows, other EU or Asia carriers would have, and those 140 A380's would be flying elsewhere instead.

QANTAS077 · Wed May 11, 2016 6:52 pm

Quoting euroflyer (Reply 6):
The question could be broadened to "Where Airbus would be without ME4", it's more accurate.

or reversed..where would Emirates be without Airbus?

Burkhard · Wed May 11, 2016 7:01 pm

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 22):
or reversed..where would Emirates be without Airbus?

Flying 744 and 77W the hundreds.

KaiTak747 · Wed May 11, 2016 7:43 pm

It's easy to assume here that EK has taken growth at the expense of other carriers, and that without EK these 140 A380s would be with other carriers connecting Europe/NA to Asia/Aus.

I'm sure without EK some of the slack would have been taken up by the likes of BA, LH, AF, SQ, TG, MH, but the reality is that EK have created a lot of growth by being bold enough to order so many aircraft and providing capacity to cities previously underserved.

EK and FR are very much the same - they've opened up low cost travel to hundreds of millions of people, whom, without them, would not be able to afford to fly on legacies.

Back to the original topic, Airbus would be fine, the A380 programme would have been an even greater financial blackhole.

NWAROOSTER · Wed May 11, 2016 8:45 pm

Emirates along with the other Middle East carriers, ME3 or 4, are uniquely situated in Dubai where they can use that location as a major hub for for transferring passengers from all over the world to their final destinations. They fly the A380 using cheep fuel from the Middle East at least in one direction. They can upgrade their A380s into flying hotels which other airlines can't do. Airbus would be loosing their shirt if it was not for Emirates as the A380 sales or more like it the number leased would be much lower. The other airlines would not have operated much more A380s than they currently have or have on order. British Airways has announced that they want to obtain several used A380s rather than take the two new ones they have on order, as they are too expensive. Depending on how the agreement with Airbus is, they may have to convert those to some other new build aircraft from Airbus. I do not know if other than Eremites if there are any new orders for the A380.
I do know that most of the current operators are not adding many if any new A380s. Some of them are having buyer's remorse and would prefer to dispose of the ones they currently have.
The big question is what is going to happen to the A380s when they start coming off lease? Will airlines have an interest in them, even in small numbers? The A380 is not suitable for conversion into freighters as the passenger models are not designed for that option. FedEx was the only operator that gave the aircraft any real interest as a new build freighter and lost interest due the problems that Airbus initially had with them amongst others which were never brought up. FedEx used that as an excuse to cancel their order and purchase 777 Freighters from Boeing.
Only time will tell if the A380 is a financial success for Airbus.

Jalap · Wed May 11, 2016 9:33 pm

Could it be the A380 would be more of a success if the ME4 wasn't there?

EK connects smaller cities in Asia and Europe through DXB. A direct connection between those cities would not be economically viable. So, without EK, the large European and Asian airlines would send those people through their own hubs, in addition to the direct demand between the hubs. Creating more hub-to-hub traffic and more use for A380's by more airlines.

r2rho · Wed May 11, 2016 9:52 pm

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 24):
I'm sure without EK some of the slack would have been taken up by the likes of BA, LH, AF, SQ, TG, MH, but the reality is that EK have created a lot of growth by being bold enough to order so many aircraft and providing capacity to cities previously underserved.

I admit that, even though I advocated earlier that the traffic would have been taken up by the legacies, EK's business model has shaken up the industry and served as a demand stimulator, just like FR in intra-EU. The EU legacies' thinking doesn't stimulate sh*t, and they would have never generated the traffic flows the ME3 have.

747megatop · Wed May 11, 2016 10:29 pm

Quoting col (Reply 1):
Now the question is where would Emirates be without the 380.

EK would have been fine. Boeing especially would have laughed it's way to the bank with a flurry of orders for the 747-8I perhaps and many more 777Xs.

RickNRoll · Wed May 11, 2016 11:15 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Thread starter):

Has anyone thought where the A380 program would be if not for the Emirates? Where would Airbus be without these orders. Does anyone know how many A380 Airbus had to sell to get there money back?

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 23):
Flying 744 and 77W the hundreds.

Would they. A large part of Emirates success has been the ability to (fairly) trample the opposition under the onslaught. The Big Bus helps this strategy in a way no other plane can. Not only does it do this with the capacity, it also keeps a civilised level of comfort.

Clipper101 · Wed May 11, 2016 11:16 pm

I would say: same place Boeing would be without PanAm

prebennorholm · Wed May 11, 2016 11:22 pm

Quoting Jalap (Reply 26):
Could it be the A380 would be more of a success if the ME4 wasn't there?

That could easily be true. With fewer carriers, those carriers would need a lot more planes than they have today, and certainly they would need bigger planes than they have today.

Similarly the other way around. Imagine that a new carrier jumps on the scene and eats half of EK's cake. Then EK will have to reduce - they will retire their A380's and buy A330 instead. And change their 777X order to 787.

col · Thu May 12, 2016 12:04 am

Quoting TurnaroudUK (Reply 9):
777's galore and the 748 would be going strong.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 23):
Flying 744 and 77W the hundreds.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 28):
EK would have been fine. Boeing especially would have laughed it's way to the bank with a flurry of orders for the 747-8I perhaps and many more 777Xs.

My question was where would Emirates be without the 380. All you have done is chosen the next biggest plane. That would be great if I had asked what would Emirates have had to purchase in its place. Would they have been able to grow as efficiently, offer the number of destinations with the correct frequency and make the profits they have. Without the 380 the costs would be a lot higher.

gatibosgru · Thu May 12, 2016 1:33 am

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 25):

Emirates along with the other Middle East carriers, ME3 or 4, are uniquely situated in Dubai

I believe only EK is in Dubai

BestWestern · Thu May 12, 2016 1:51 am

Where would airliners.net be without the A380 is a more important question.

racercoup · Thu May 12, 2016 2:27 am

Things are not so rosy at EK according to this quote from an article in Investor's Business Daily yesterday:

"The carrier — whose growth plans have been a headache for the U.S. carriers — said Tuesday that a measure of how full its seats were fell to 76.5% during its most recent fiscal year from 79.6%. The slide came amid a 13% jump in seating capacity and “lingering economic uncertainty and strong competition in many markets.”

What’s more, Emirates’ overall revenue fell 4% to $23.2 billion, with a tough currency exchange environment costing the company $1.6 billion. Passenger revenue fell by 3%. The stronger dollar also prompted a 10% decline in the carrier’s passenger yield — a measure of how much an airline gets from airfare as it relates to distance flown."

747megatop · Thu May 12, 2016 3:09 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 31):
Imagine that a new carrier jumps on the scene and eats half of EK's cake.

Not a new carrier; a hub busting super efficient plane that can do Europe - Australia (and maybe India - US) non-stop in half the time.

747megatop · Thu May 12, 2016 3:23 am

Quoting col (Reply 32):
Quoting 747megatop (Reply 28):
EK would have been fine. Boeing especially would have laughed it's way to the bank with a flurry of orders for the 747-8I perhaps and many more 777Xs.

My question was where would Emirates be without the 380. All you have done is chosen the next biggest plane. That would be great if I had asked what would Emirates have had to purchase in its place.

And i precisely answered your question. I stated that EK would have been fine and Boeing would have laughed it's way to the bank with a flurry of 777x and 747-8I orders (747-8I being the next biggest plane in the line up of either manufacturers that EK would have naturally chosen to do the job AND since Boeing had spent very little on development costs they would have made solid profits on the numerous 747-8I sales and laughed their way to the bank).

Quoting col (Reply 32):
Would they have been able to grow as efficiently, offer the number of destinations with the correct frequency

I don't see why not; in fact who knows, they may have had better frequency; for example; DXB-LAX is twice daily A-380 today; but in the hypothetical world without the A 380 they may have had 3 x daily with 1 of them flown by a 787-9 and the remaining 2 by 777s.

Lufthansa · Thu May 12, 2016 3:30 am

Quoting airbazar (Reply 10):
I suspect that the likes of QF/BA/SQ/LH would have far larger A380 fleets than they have today. TG and MH might still be in business too, and VS might have actually taken delivery of theirs.

We have a winner! I suspect you'd see a much bigger fleet particularly at SQ (their order was the reason QF ordered afterall) and LH and AF for Europe Asia traffic. I could easily see all three of those carriers operating 40 each so there is 120 frames right there.

mandala499 · Thu May 12, 2016 3:30 am

Quoting col (Reply 1):
Now the question is where would Emirates be without the 380.

Simple answer: 777... 777... 777... 777... and so on and so on... and so on...
Then the question would then be... Where would the 777 be without Emirates... and where would Emirates be without the 777...

and so the circle continues...

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 37):
but in the hypothetical world without the A 380 they may have had 3 x daily with 1 of them flown by a 787-9 and the remaining 2 by 777s.

If they can get 3 flights to LAX, they'd do 3 of whatever the largest plane they can get on the route...

747megatop · Thu May 12, 2016 3:46 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 39):
If they can get 3 flights to LAX, they'd do 3 of whatever the largest plane they can get on the route..

Well apparently they can't do 3 flights currently to LAX with the A-380

nor are they doing a mix of 2 A-380s and a 777. So, looks like they can do only 2 A-380 worth of seats to LAX at this point because of the demand; which goes back to my answer of that without the A-380 they would potentially have split those seats among 3 aircraft leading to a better frequency mix; now whether the higher costs of operating smaller aircraft (with a higher CASM) leading to lower demand due to higher ticket costs and hence reduced seats triggering a lower frequency is something I don't know and wouldn't want to get into.

Aither · Thu May 12, 2016 4:15 am

Quoting Jalap (Reply 26):

Could it be the A380 would be more of a success if the ME4 wasn't there?

I think it would have been. Current and news airlines would have ordered more A380s for the Asia to Europe market. Then It would have facilitated the use of A380s on other traffic flows.

But more important it would have changed the perception and residual values with more airlines ordering A380s every 6 months rather than one airline ordering every 4 years. The A380 is still the most profitable aircraft if you have the traffic : it has great economics and make our airline attracts more premium passengers. But people doubt about it because of this sales pattern. You don't want to take the risk to propose this aircraft to your management while nobody is ordering it. Perception is everything as long as humans are ordering aircraft and not artificial intelligence.

[Edited 2016-05-11 21:16:56]

TWA772LR · Thu May 12, 2016 4:43 am

Quoting Beatyair (Thread starter):
Where Would Airbus Be Without The Emirates

A lot less A380s. On the flip side, Boeing would be building the 757-1000XneoLRultramegaMAX-SP with EK as the sole operator.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 34):
Where would airliners.net be without the A380 is a more important question.

That's on the same level as "What's the meaning of life?" and "Why are we here?".

col · Thu May 12, 2016 5:03 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 37):
And i precisely answered your question. I stated that EK would have been fine and Boeing would have laughed it's way to the bank with a flurry of 777x and 747-8I orders (747-8I being the next biggest plane in the line up of either manufacturers that EK would have naturally chosen to do the job AND since Boeing had spent very little on development costs they would have made solid profits on the numerous 747-8I sales and laughed their way to the bank).

No you just repeated what was on offer if they did not have the 380. But you have answered it below:

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 37):
I don't see why not; in fact who knows, they may have had better frequency; for example; DXB-LAX is twice daily A-380 today; but in the hypothetical world without the A 380 they may have had 3 x daily with 1 of them flown by a 787-9 and the remaining 2 by 777s.

So to answer my question you are saying that EK would need a fleet at least 1/3 larger than it is today, with 1/3 extra crews, greater fuel costs, extra landing fees, 1/3 more parking gates at DXB, another wave of arrivals and departures and its associated cost, additional maintenance costs and have to purchase additional expensive slots at busy airports.

Emirates would definitely be OK without the 380, not sure why they bought them

scbriml · Thu May 12, 2016 8:24 am

Quoting racercoup (Reply 35):
a measure of how full its seats were fell to 76.5% during its most recent fiscal year from 79.6%. The slide came amid a 13% jump in seating capacity

So seating capacity went up by 13% and load factor dropped by 3%? In other words, they carried a lot more passengers.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 36):
Not a new carrier; a hub busting super efficient plane that can do Europe - Australia (and maybe India - US) non-stop in half the time.

Yeah, such a plane should be available around 2200. I bet EK are worried.

hilram · Thu May 12, 2016 10:03 am

Where would Boeing be without PanAm?

Flyingsottsman · Thu May 12, 2016 12:37 pm

I think Airbus would still be ok, the A330 is very widely used all over the world and is a very successful wide body for Airbus
and will be in production for years to come. Airbus was doing ok before EK came about. and before the A380 was even thought about.

racercoup · Thu May 12, 2016 1:59 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 44):
So seating capacity went up by 13% and load factor dropped by 3%? In other words, they carried a lot more passengers.

Don't be so quick to put your foot in your mouth. Seating capacity being up means more seats available to fill. It is a contributing factor to load factors being down. Another words more seats chasing less asses.

hilram · Thu May 12, 2016 2:14 pm

Quoting racercoup (Reply 47):
Quoting scbriml (Reply 44):
So seating capacity went up by 13% and load factor dropped by 3%? In other words, they carried a lot more passengers.

Don't be so quick to put your foot in your mouth. Seating capacity being up means more seats available to fill. It is a contributing factor to load factors being down. Another words more seats chasing less asses.

Er no, that would be more seats chasing and catching more asses in absolute numbers, while from a percentage view, a slightly larger percentage of seats (because of the increased available capacity) are unfilled.
Try not to fit both feet into your mouth - not even my baby girl does that.

goosebayguy · Thu May 12, 2016 3:43 pm

Basically all ther passengers flying with EK would be on other airlines who would have larger fleets of 380's. The reason some carriers are regrettign buyign the 380 is because EK is outgunning them and robbing them of their passengers.
I'm still waiting for BA to upgauge all their NYC flights to 380's. Now that would be fun and the American airlines would struggle.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net