Boeing lands order for $5.8 billion in new planes

Reuters ^ | June 2, 2006

[ConservativeStatement]

That should help the stock a bit.

[tomnbeverly]

It's all Bush's fault.... He secured the skies after 911... blame him..

[MonroeDNA]

Probably Airbust.

[FormerACLUmember]

Airbus makes cr*ppy, dangerous Euro-trash planes.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

The unknown buyer only wanted one seat installed and charts in the glovebox to all major metro cities in the U.S.

[Gay State Conservative]

Looks like the 777 and the 787 will be ruling the skies for the next 20+ years,just as the 747 did for many years.

[Spktyr]

All bad-taste jokes aside, the buyer is probably a European carrier, where the host state has a vested interest in Airbus - and therefore they really don't want to be seen as buying Boeing.

My guess is Lufthansa.

[Spktyr]

Er, "at least one of the buyers," rather.

[pissant]

Big Boeing bump

[jdm]

"unnamed buyers had ordered $5.8 billion worth of single-aisle planes and wide-body aircraft this week"

??????

[GarySpFc]

All bad-taste jokes aside, the buyer is probably a European carrier, where the host state has a vested interest in Airbus - and therefore they really don't want to be seen as buying Boeing.

I would bet it's Dubai. They don't want the publicity after the ports deal fell though, but they still are sold on Boeing.

[Jameison]

"Airbus makes cr*ppy, dangerous Euro-trash planes"

You nailed it.
Couldn't have put it better meself.

[Proud_USA_Republican]

Your probably right. Either that or Air France! Even they know the A380 is a pile of garbage.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

Boeing versus Dow Jones Industrials, over the past year

[pissant]

Yep. My retirement plan thanks you. ;o)

[Proud_USA_Republican]

Buyers ordered 20 wide-body 777s, nine single-aisle 737s and three 747s, the company said

Sounds like a single buyer with a order like that. My guess, its a middle-eastern or european buyer who for political reasons, doesn't want to be named.

Interesting that they are buying 747's, but I wish it had been an order for the newer 747-8, but its probably for the older model.

The Airbust CEO says that not a single 747-8 will be sold this year. I want that asswipe to eat more crow.

[Heavyrunner]

Airbus planes aren't necessarily any worse than Boeing planes, and indeed have a strong overall safety record, and can often be operated for less cost than similar class Boeing aircraft.

The fact that the Airbus fabs are heavily (illegally) subsidized also allows Airbus to in many cases offer more plane for the buck. Many airlines correctly identify the Airbus as better for their bottom line.

Airbus' sole screw up to date has been their decision to go with the A380 and marry themselves to the hub-and-spoke passenger distribution philosophy, while Boeing cleverly identified the real market trend and jumped on it..

Either way, I'm patriotic enough that if I had to choose which plane crash I'd rather die in, I'd rather go down in an American-made airframe. :)

[Spktyr]

Except for the whole "tail-falls-off-the-airliner" problem, sure... And unlike some of the (much older) Boeing product that had that problem, there's no way to fix it.

[Heavyrunner]

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

This site gives a fairly decent overview, but the 777 is missing from the table, which makes me wonder if it has ever had a fatal event.

All Airbus models are statistically safer than the 747, but tend to lag a bit behind Boeing's offerings on smaller airframes.

Interestingly, the Saab 340 is the safest aircraft reported here, though again I suspect it is only because the 777 hasn't had a fatal event yet.

The tail falling off was a one-time incident as far as I know...Boeing planes have had casualties due to structural failure in the past as well.

[JeffersonRepublic.com]

[All bad-taste jokes aside, the buyer is probably a European carrier, where the host state has a vested interest in Airbus - and therefore they really don't want to be seen as buying Boeing.]

My guess is one of the early buyers of the A380. It seems as if it's never going to make weight, and therefore won't be as efficient as promised.