Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on January 13, 2005, 12:43:05 AM
-
Airbus again bests Boeing in orders
By JAMES WALLACE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER AEROSPACE REPORTER
As expected, Airbus delivered more jets than The Boeing Co. last year and won the annual order battle for the fourth consecutive year.
At a news conference in Paris, Airbus Chief Executive Noel Forgeard said the European company will continue to outperform its U.S. rival in 2005.
"I am virtually certain that in 2005 we will again exceed deliveries of the competition," Forgeard told reporters.
Airbus won 370 firm orders in 2004, of which four were canceled, for a net total of 366. Boeing had 272 net orders last year.
Airbus said it expects to receive from 300 to 350 orders this year. Boeing does not forecast its annual order expectations. Boeing has not beaten Airbus in orders since 2000.
Baseler also noted that Airbus sold 10 A380s last year, the same number of sales Boeing had for its 747. But all those 747 orders were for freighters.
For the second straight year, Airbus delivered more jets in 2004 than Boeing, and could deliver more for the next several years.
Airbus said it delivered 320 planes last year. Boeing delivered 285.
Forgeard said Airbus expects to deliver between 350 and 360 planes this year. Boeing has said it will deliver about 320 jets in 2005.
Airbus posted a profit margin before interest and taxes of 9.6 percent for the first nine months of 2004.
"Airbus is almost twice as profitable as its competitor," Forgeard said, based on what he said were Boeing's own financial numbers.
In a related story garage carpet sales were down sharply in the Seattle area.
-
rpm, are you happy about that or something? Luckily Boeing doesn't just make airliners :rolleyes:
-
Just noting a news story. Boeing ain't going.
-
Along with its greatest achievements, Boeing deserves every failure it achieves. Every success Airbus experiences is due entirely to Boeings self inflicted failures. Airbus has achieved nothing without the expressed permission of Boeing.
**** Phil Conduit, the pansy bellybutton mother****er!
-
GWS , a styrofoam RC plane manufacturer, had to cancel the plans for P-38 and 747 planes. The planes were already ready to make and deliver, but this stupid copyright stuff hit them hard.
Now its gonna be Airbus model...
There goes the last good publicity for Boeing in RCworld..
Wondering when ´Lockeed/boeing are going to stop HTC..
-
In the quarter ending Sept '04, Boeing had revenue of $13.219 billion a gross profit of $2.055 billion.
Not bad for a failing company.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Yipee!
-
i dont see boing a "failing" company, they doin good,
but other on the horizon maybe doing even better, i call this competition
and thats what turns the world.
R
Gh0stFT
-
They will both be fading memories in 5 years time when the Moller Air Car has taken over all significant manufacturing sectors of the transportation markets.
-
I don't see Boeing as a failing company either. (SMD Grun) I do see them as a company falling behind the competition much like US automakers did in the 70's. Perhaps it's time to reevaluate just like those automakers did and adapt to the new market.
-
Competition is good for consumers..mmm k?
-
I don't see Boeing as a failing company either. (SMD Grun) I do see them as a company falling behind the competition much like US automakers did in the 70's. Perhaps it's time to reevaluate just like those automakers did and adapt to the new market.
Pssst.... think 7E7
-
As an layed off Boeing worker, this is bad news. Boeing should been in recovery by now. 9/11 hit them hard. But it's all managements fault. But then they have old McDounald Ex's now running the company. They could care less about the commuerional bussiness. Space and Defense is all they see.
Don't think I'll get my job back. Now DOD is talking of cutting back on orders for the F-22 and F35. And there hasn't been any new orders for F-16s for awhile now. Lockheed is going to give out 200 layoff notices in a few days. I'm now starting to worry a bit more about my job out look for next year.
-
Yep it does seem Boeing has a different attitude wrt to commercial avation, heck they even moved HQ away from Seattle in part to emphasize the change...
-
folks, just wait and see the M400 (millitary version of A380)! :aok
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
heck they even moved HQ away from Seattle in part to emphasize the change...
outsourced to india ? :D
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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?
-
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 .
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.
-
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
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
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
-
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.
-
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
-
Hey gixer if you think Boeing having multiple lines of business is some form of subsidy scheme then, well what is there to say...
-
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!!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
(http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/07/25/psychic.lawsuit/story.miss.cleo.jpg)
-
Call me now!
-
You are so misunderstood rpm. it's horrible.
-
Tell me Mini... what am I thinking now?
a) You are pretentious.
b) You are self-rightious.
c) You are a jerk.
d) You have deep rooted emotional issues.
e) All of the above.
-
I'm sure you're thinking all of the above rpm. Of course you are, because it just can't be you. It can't be.
-
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! Wrong, the answer is C.
(http://www.ragtagfilm.com/archives/images/jerk.jpg)
-
I couldn't help but notice... one of the options wasn't:
F) You're wrong
Call me whatever you need to make you feel better about yourself. I'll just continue pointing to your posts... as if I needed anything else.
-
That's OK Mini. Keep your ego self inflated. It really does'nt matter to me. I'm not the one with the desperate need to think he's infallible.
-
**** Boeing
they deserve it
I didn't get the job
:D
-
Originally posted by rpm
I find people telling me what I am thinking to be very Miss Cleo.
I think opinions of you are based on your history in here.
Either you were lying then, or you are lying now.
Your call.
Or have you changed your colors and will be lying in the future?
All up to you.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I think opinions of you are based on your history in here.
Either you were lying then, or you are lying now.
Your call.
Or have you changed your colors and will be lying in the future?
All up to you.
Yes, I was against the majority in here about and during the election. I believe the war in Iraq was illadvised and propagandised. The election is over, when will you begin to get a grip? Not everything posted has some secret agenda. Until Skuzzy tells me not to post anything but conservative views or what has been approved by the McCarthy Commission I'll keep posting what I feel like.
Here's what I see in the future of this forum:
(example)
POST:Water in New York Contaminated, Hundreds Ill
REPLY: You antiamerican piece of ****. You laugh at the misery of others!
All I did was post an interesting timely news story and suddenly I'm the target of antiamericanism. People start spinning the post into something completely opposite of what I said to pump their ego and personal agendas. Take your witchhunt elsewhere.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Yes, I was against the majority in here about and during the election. I believe the war in Iraq was illadvised and propagandised. The election is over, when will you begin to get a grip?
The grip is yours to get, nothing mentioned about any election from my end, or anyone else in this thread.
Not everything posted has some secret agenda. Until Skuzzy tells me not to post anything but conservative views or what has been approved by the McCarthy Commission I'll keep posting what I feel like.
I never suggested that you stop. I only stated that what you 'feel' like is what you are judged by.
McCarthy is another issue.
Blah Blah Blah
All I did was post an interesting timely news story and suddenly I'm the target of antiamericanism. People start spinning the post into something completely opposite of what I said to pump their ego and personal agendas. Take your witchhunt elsewhere.
In a related story garage carpet sales were down sharply in the Seattle area.
Just in case you didn't remember.
I'm sorry that your posts have led most that frequent this board to believe about you what they do. I think that you might take this as a sign to evaluate what you do believe and fill your posts with what you do believe.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
The grip is yours to get, nothing mentioned about any election from my end, or anyone else in this thread.
Originally posted by Rude
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?
As I said...take your witchhunt else where.
-
You keep refering to witches rpm.
You're the only one.
Got something to hide???
:D
How about just reply to what was posted. I think there are many that would respect you just for that.
And why you quoted me in your reply.....I just have no idea.
-
No. I'm not going to be your monkey.
(http://www.born-today.com/Today/pix/stewart_jon.jpg)
-
Darn, this thread was about aircraft, but now it is just some [lady dog]fest
-
Originally posted by bunch
Darn, this thread was about aircraft
Exactly.
-
I don't think it ever was at all.
In a related story garage carpet sales were down sharply in the Seattle area.[/B]
-
Oh, boo frickin' hoo. I made a joke about Ripsnort.
-
You made a typical rpm post.
-
Yep, boy howdy ya got me there. I posted a news story in the OC and like most of my threads and threw a 1 liner in. You turned it into a troll. I'm not going to be your monkey.
(http://www.born-today.com/Today/pix/stewart_jon.jpg)
-
I didn't turn it into anything.
If you will look, there are many that feel the way that I do about what you post.
I will remind you that you are the one refering to political posts and attaching political pictures.
You might, just might*** be propogating the image that you are arguing against.
-
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
We're discussing civilian aircraft pinhead...apples to apples please
-
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 can tell me it was innocent....I don't have to believe it do I?
BTW...where ya from?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Oh you poor victims! *sniff* The humanity! *sob*
Knew it wouldn't be long until you showed up here....so predictable.
-
Originally posted by Rude
We're discussing civilian aircraft pinhead...apples to apples please
apples to apples? BS, at the end its from the government,
imagine what the government could spent for the civilian part
if not focused mainly on the millitary part.
And now crying here: "the other (EU) government spend more helping Airbus, its not fair!" c'mon LOL !
-
I always find it highly amusing how almost every American has defended Boeing here. What is it about USA vs Europe? I couldn't care less whether Airbus sold more than Boeing or vice-versa. It's just a case of times changing and what comes around goes around. If all the figures are correct then congratulations to Airbus, they're doing something right. It doesn't mean that the USA have the right to always sell more than anyone else, and if they're not then the American's posting here have turned to calling the competition crap because they're selling more? Or Airbus are only selling more not because they might have better options/marketting but because Boeing have stumbled? Sour grapes because it isn't American?! If Boeing are interested in sales figures vs Airbus (which hasn't been confirmed here) then they need to change. Competition is good, adapting to change is even better and hopefully the end buyer receives better equipment.
-
Industrial competition is industrial competition is competition is... sassy internet forum armchair psychological warfare??
-
Originally posted by Replicant
I always find it highly amusing how almost every American has defended Boeing here.
What "side" did every european take? Amusing... isn't it?
It's also odd that I (an American) never defended boeing. I've lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and cannot remember a time when Boeing wasn't announcing layoffs. I've never liked their hire 'em and fire 'em tactics.
But then... this thread wasn't really about buisness tactics or products. It started out a pissing contest and stayed one all the way through. Just like RPM wanted.... oh... wait... I'm pretending like I know what he's thinking again.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Just like RPM wanted.... oh... wait... I'm pretending like I know what he's thinking again.
Why yes, yes you were.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
What "side" did every european take? Amusing... isn't it?
It's also odd that I (an American) never defended boeing. I've lived in the Pacific Northwest my whole life and cannot remember a time when Boeing wasn't announcing layoffs. I've never liked their hire 'em and fire 'em tactics.
But then... this thread wasn't really about buisness tactics or products. It started out a pissing contest and stayed one all the way through. Just like RPM wanted.... oh... wait... I'm pretending like I know what he's thinking again.
I didn't take either side. I like Boeing, they make good aircraft, but imo so do Airbus. I don't care which I fly in as long as it gets me from A to B. If one is better equipped or cheaper than the other then that is up to the buyers to decide which one to get. You can design an aircraft to specification or try to make it to expected requirements hoping that you'll fill that market. If the article is correct and Boeing are interested in eclipsing Airbus then quite simply they need to pull their finger out. People forget that Boeing virtually had the monopoly on supplying freight and airline aircraft for decades. I find it refreshing that a company competed with Boeing, it is competition that eventually drives prices down which is eventually then passed down to the consumer. Companies are free to buy whatever they want and there is no sentiment in staying with the same make/brand when $$$$ is involved.
I agree that this post has turned into a huge pissing contest and I don't know whether the original post was intended as that or not, but it obviously has been interpreted as that. The original post is just a quote from a newspaper so..... news is news, like it or not.
-
My opinion is the same as NEXX/replicant's on this. I travel on both, and have no particular preference. If anything, the Airbus models tend to be newer.
I've noticed the trend to Airbus lately, with easyJet now operating A319 in addition to its fleet of B737. Why is this happening? Is there some reason why fleet operators prefer the fly-by-wire planes? Just asking, as I'd be interested to find out.
-
IIRC transition for the pilots from one Airbus to another model is really fast compared to Boeings due the similar cockpit layouts etc and this saves money for the companies.
-
Originally posted by Replicant
I agree that this post has turned into a huge pissing contest and I don't know whether the original post was intended as that or not, but it obviously has been interpreted as that. The original post is just a quote from a newspaper so..... news is news, like it or not.
Let me help make it a bit clearer for you:
"Boeing loses again".
Of course, the author will tell you otherwise in an attempt to make hismelf look saintly, but there's not much room for discussion when the thread is started with an attack.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
...there's not much room for discussion when the thread is started with an attack.
(http://www.starfish.govt.nz/shared-graphics-for-download/trolling.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Rude
We're discussing civilian aircraft pinhead...apples to apples please
Try and actually read what I'm saying and understand before making a pinhead reply yourself.
....-Gixer
-
Ya... trolling... gotcha RPM. Somehow you think that's different than just being an bellybutton for the sake of it. As if it attaches some sort of cleverness to it.
But thanks for finally cracking and admitting I was right.
-
Actually, it was directed at your comment.
-
Rigggght. Because I just threw out a comment for the sake of reaction... that wasn't based on an expressed viewpoint in this thread... that wasn't supported by numerous other posts.
Yah... I was just messin with ya dude.
Riggggght.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Let me help make it a bit clearer for you:
"Boeing loses again".
Of course, the author will tell you otherwise in an attempt to make hismelf look saintly, but there's not much room for discussion when the thread is started with an attack.
When I first saw the thread title I immediately thought of Boeing losinig again, as in not getting the contract for the JSF.
$h1t happens, no need to cry, even the best lose.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
My opinion is the same as NEXX/replicant's on this. I travel on both, and have no particular preference. If anything, the Airbus models tend to be newer.
I've noticed the trend to Airbus lately, with easyJet now operating A319 in addition to its fleet of B737. Why is this happening? Is there some reason why fleet operators prefer the fly-by-wire planes? Just asking, as I'd be interested to find out.
I fly British Airways or Lufthansa (inc. British Midland) and they have a mixture of Boeing 737s or Airbus of varying sizes (for the route I fly). I prefer the Airbus because they're newer, but I don't mind 737s as long as it gets me to my destination.
Perhaps Airbus have increased sales due to political reasons? Some governments subsidise their national airlines or have other conditions where they must buy a certain percentage of home built aircraft. Since Europe consists of many countries that means the possibility of buying more European planes over other foreign manufacturers.
-
Oh... RPM... try using your own ID when registering at the FDB BBS. I know you don't think it's quite as clever, but I'm sure you'll get over it.
-
I thought you would enjoy that.:D