A380 dropped for 777

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Nilsen
This is an intersting read: http://www.cei.org/gencon/004,04679.cfm

I have to agree 100% with this statement from the article:
The question of military contracts as subsidy points to fundamentally different mindsets on the two sides of the Atlantic

We see R&D contracts as something you bid on, with others bidding as well. You win the contract, and you are paid upon delivery of what it was you bid on.  That's called free enterprise.

Over in Europe, I'm not sure how their thinking process is...I mean, its not like Boeing was given money and told it was a sole contractor, no...we had to bid on it with others trying to win that bid as well.

Regarding money made off the contracts, well DUH!  If I sell computers and TV's and my computer sales make more money, and I decide to re-invest that money to make better TV's that will sell, that IS NOT subsidy! That's called good investment of money earned!

[Nilsen]

Well.. when The US government has a tradition of selecting american suppliers for lets say.. fighter jets. Then is it really free enterprise that reigns, or is that a form of subsidies?... When a US firm is guaranteed to get the contract? How many manufacturers of fighter jets are there in the US atm?

I can think of LM and Boeing.

Who will pick up the tab if any development on aircraft goes way over budget? LM/Boeing or the US government?

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Nilsen
Well.. when The US government has a tradition of selecting american suppliers for lets say.. fighter jets. Then is it really free enterprise that reigns, or is that a form of subsidies?... When a US firm is guaranteed to get the contract? How many manufacturers of fighter jets are there in the US atm?

For what its worth, Boeing does not have any jet fighter contracts other than what it picked up from other US companies that have gone under (McDonnel Douglas F-18 for example).  We are a subcontractor to others, but we've lost two bids in the past 10 years to companies who work statement is primarily 95% military contracts, where as our work is comprised of about 80% commercial.

Due to the proprietary nature of our technology vs Europe's technology when it comes to fighter aircraft, wouldn't you think that our Gov't would go to the company that provides superior technology? (I'm not talking strictly about aircraft design, but rather avionics and radar capabilities) Take a look at over the past 40 years of military aircraft sales around the free-world, pre-1989 USSR, and I'll bet you see that the sophisticated aircraft that sold best were US made. (Shrugs)

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Nilsen
Who will pick up the tab if any development on aircraft goes way over budget? LM/Boeing or the US government?

99% of R&D contracts with US companies and US Gov'ts regarding aircraft have a Cost plus fixed fee-type contract (or Incentive fee, but still a cost based contract) so if the winning company runs over budget, they don't get more money, they eat it.  The only the the taxpayer "eats it" is if a project is canceled, then the return for investment is passed off to the taxpayer, in other words money spend for R&D does not return a feasible product in use for national defense.

[Nilsen]

Well Ripsnort, you are half right.

US jet manufacturers have one HUGE benefit. When an american supplier deliver to let say the US Airforce then they deliver not 50 or a 100 jets of the same brand... but alot more. That gives that supplier a large production line and can drive cost per unit down compared to what a european (or other) can manage. That low cost is a huge sales pitch. Would the F16 for example have been an export success if it had not been guaranteed a huge order for the US govenmenent.. answer... NO.

Benefit of numbers.... nothing more.

[Hawco]

Originally posted by Yeager
http://www.komotv.com/news/4583192.html

Could be the start of some rough days ahead for Airbus.  Interesting to note that on the Boeing webpage doesn't even mention that the 777 orders are a result of A380 cancelations.  A classy move and an example of Boeing behaving respectfully in light of Airbus difficulty.  No need to gloat over the euro planemakers production problems.  Im sure if this were reversed, Airbus would be rubbing Boeings nose in it.

Just my opinion.

sounds like yer licking yer chops over this

[Saintaw]

Didn't you get the memo? yurop = bad bad baaaad!!!


Booo!

[Viking]

I think it is rather obvious that Airbus is receiving more government/state support than Boeing. The only question is: Is it wrong?

Europeans have always been willing to use subsidizing to strengthen/protect our industry. If we want to give out "free" airliners to the world is that not our prerogative?

[Yeager]

If we want to give out "free" airliners to the world is that not our prerogative?
====
You want to see Mustangs over Berlin, again?

[Viking]

Yes please! I love Mustangs!

[Debonair]

do Boeing employees get into the Boeing Field museum free?
that place owns

[Dowding]

Boeing is subsidized through the back door by the US government. It receives R&D grants, huge tax breaks and cheap finance.

China's purchase of airliners was subsidized through loan guarantees issued by the US tax payer funded Export-Import Bank.

At the end of the day Boeing and Airbus are huge employers in their respective countries, and both receive aid from their respective host countries. No objective (i.e. non-employee of Boeing since 1979) person could argue differently.

All is fair in love, war and business... except when US companies is on the receiving end of 'unfair' protective measures? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Dowding
Boeing is subsidized through the back door by the US government. It receives R&D grants, huge tax breaks and cheap finance.

China's purchase of airliners was subsidized through loan guarantees issued by the US tax payer funded Export-Import Bank.

At the end of the day Boeing and Airbus are huge employers in their respective countries, and both receive aid from their respective host countries. No objective (i.e. non-employee of Boeing since 1979) person could argue differently.

All is fair in love, war and business... except when US companies is on the receiving end of 'unfair' protective measures? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

The last "R&D grant we received was for $500,000 for a Flywheel Energy storage system in 1998!.

Sour grapes? No, we'll probably own Airbus at the rate they're running their business!

[soda72]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
The last "R&D grant we received was for $500,000 for a Flywheel Energy storage system in 1998!.

Sour grapes? No, we'll probably own Airbus at the rate they're running their business!

[RAIDER14]

Fedex T7