Author Topic: Boeing Loses Again (Read 1471 times)

lada · « **Reply #15 on:** January 13, 2005, 02:14:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
heck they even moved HQ away from Seattle in part to emphasize the change...

outsourced to india ?

Rude · « **Reply #16 on:** January 13, 2005, 04:52:34 PM »

Boeing products last....Airbus sales will continue to rise due to the replacement of the crap their selling.

Where you from rpm? Europe or are ya just a liberal delighting in the downturn of an American company and the loss of the jobs men and women count on to raise their families?

mars01 · « **Reply #17 on:** January 13, 2005, 05:07:04 PM »

Yeah for a plane that hasn't even flown yet there are some people really hanging it out for the 380.

Plus it is much harder for boeing since it isnt subsidised.

Out of the showroom the big boeing costs 160mil, A380 120mil mostly cause of European subsidies. Yeah thats fair.

Nashwan · « **Reply #18 on:** January 13, 2005, 05:40:24 PM »

Quote

Plus it is much harder for boeing since it isnt subsidised.

Boeing recieves lots of subsidies.

Around $4 billion from various US states as incentives to build parts of the aircraft there, and another $1.5 billion from the Japanese government because several Japanese companies are partners in the 7E7 program.

Airbus has recieved significantly less than that for the A380, and all in the form of low rate loans that have to be paid back.

Boeing also gets part of their R&D work done by NASA, courtesy of the US taxpayers, another subsidy.

Gixer · « **Reply #19 on:** January 13, 2005, 06:00:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mars01
Yeah for a plane that hasn't even flown yet there are some people really hanging it out for the 380.

Plus it is much harder for boeing since it isnt subsidised.

Out of the showroom the big boeing costs 160mil, A380 120mil mostly cause of European subsidies. Yeah thats fair.

I was waiting for someone to post the Boo Hoo Boeing dosn't get subsidies like Airbus which isn't fair. What do you think all those military contracts are? Worth far more then any direct government subsidies of a few million evey year.

~~...-Gixer~~

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #20 on:** January 13, 2005, 06:04:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gixer
I was waiting for someone to post the Boo Hoo Boeing dosn't get subsidies like Airbus which isn't fair. What do you think all those military contracts are? Worth far more then any direct government subsidies of a few million evey year.

~~...-Gixer~~

~~Legitimte military product orders are now more eggregious than deliberate anti-competitive subsidies?~~

mars01 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 13, 2005, 06:55:18 PM »

Quote

I was waiting for someone to post the Boo Hoo Boeing dosn't get subsidies like Airbus which isn't fair. What do you think all those military contracts are? Worth far more then any direct government subsidies of a few million evey year.

So what your saying is you are against fair trade. AirBus Vs Boeing is not fair trade. Just because Boeing is somewhat diversified doesn't mean AirBus should be subsidised. Poor justification Gix .

Quote
Around $4 billion from various US states as incentives to build parts of the aircraft there, and another $1.5 billion from the Japanese government because several Japanese companies are partners in the 7E7 program.
Care to back some of those numbers up. I'd be interested in seeing that.

Nashwan · « **Reply #22 on:** January 13, 2005, 07:08:09 PM »

Quote

Planned subsidies for Boeing’s 7E7 programme from Washington State ($3.2bn), Kansas ($0.5bn), Oklahoma ($0.35bn). Washington State 7E7 subsidies alone are about as high as European launch investment for A380. The only difference is that A380 launch investment is paid back and is compatible with the 1992, while Washington support is not. In addition, Washington 7E7 production subsidies are illegal under the 1992 Agreement. To this must be added the planned 7E7 subsidies of around US$1.6 billion from Japan.

http://www.aerospacemedia.com/aerospace/pr_read.asp?id=989

Quote

Lastly, for all the tough talking from Messrs Mulally and Stonecipher, Boeing is hardly squeaky clean when it comes to state aid. It is reckoned to have secured around $3.5 billion in tax breaks from Washington state, where its commercial-aircraft division is based. And its Japanese suppliers on the 7E7 are thought to be getting around $3 billion in subsidies from their government, which is keen to nurture a home-grown airline business. If Boeing went all-out for a trade war, it could soon find itself open to accusations of rank hypocrisy.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=2940057

Quote

Boeing and Airbus each get government aid and each has accused the other of violating trade rules.

Boeing secured state tax breaks worth an estimated USD$3.2 billion over 20 years to assemble a new mid-sized jet, the 7E7, in Washington. Japan, where major 7E7 parts will be built, reportedly plans to help fund development.

http://news.airwise.com/stories/2004/07/1090614727.html

mars01 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 13, 2005, 07:18:15 PM »

OK so can you really call Tax breaks Subsidies. They are not giving Boeing money. They reducing taxes. As far as the loans getting paid back, I'll believe that when I see it.

Gixer · « **Reply #24 on:** January 13, 2005, 07:19:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mars01
So what your saying is you are against fair trade. AirBus Vs Boeing is not fair trade. Just because Boeing is somewhat diversified doesn't mean AirBus should be subsidised. Poor justification Gix .

Care to back some of those numbers up. I'd be interested in seeing that.

Where on earth do I say that I'm against fair trade? Seems the US is always preaching fair trade to others while boosting subsidies at home

I was just saying that Boeing get's subsidies as well but it's called military contracts instead. Where would Boering be if it wasn't for the high paying military deals?

And as for Boerings military contracts being legite aren't there are a few people in prision at the moment that would probably say that's not always the case?

~~...-Gixer~~

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #25 on:** January 13, 2005, 07:25:29 PM »

Hey gixer if you think Boeing having multiple lines of business is some form of subsidy scheme then, well what is there to say...

rpm · « **Reply #26 on:** January 13, 2005, 08:29:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rude
Boeing products last....Airbus sales will continue to rise due to the replacement of the crap their selling.

Where you from rpm? Europe or are ya just a liberal delighting in the downturn of an American company and the loss of the jobs men and women count on to raise their families?

I'm sorry Rude. Forgive me for posting a story about major aircraft manufacturers on an aircraft related BBS. It should have been buried and never, ever discussed by anyone. Here, I'll follow your guidance by sticking my fingers in my ears and pretending I can't hear what's happening in the outside world...LALALALALALALALALALAL ALALALALALALALALALALALA!!

Mini D · « **Reply #27 on:** January 13, 2005, 08:39:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
I'm sorry Rude. Forgive me for posting a story about major aircraft manufacturers on an aircraft related BBS. It should have been buried and never, ever discussed by anyone. Here, I'll follow your guidance by sticking my fingers in my ears and pretending I can't hear what's happening in the outside world...LALALALALALALALALALAL ALALALALALALALALALALALA!!

You say that as if you haven't worked very hard to earn the stereotype that was brought up again in this thread. I do believe that if this had been two european companies battling it out, you wouldn't have cared. If it had been boeing winning the "battle", you also wouldn't have cared. But... this is an opportunity for you to break out the morton's salt and try to rub it into an imaginary wound.

Personally... very little of this matters to me. I just find you feigning ignorance of your intentions to be quite pathetic.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #28 on:** January 13, 2005, 08:43:05 PM »

LOL MiniD you need to do this for every thread. I know you have done it acfew times when I was acting like an arse and I thionk everyone needs some of that clarity you seem to bring.

rpm · « **Reply #29 on:** January 13, 2005, 08:43:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
I just find you feigning ignorance of your intentions to be quite pathetic.

I find people telling me what I am thinking to be very Miss Cleo.