Posted on 01/17/2006 12:11:57 PM PST by Turbopilot
There is some question as to what Airbus calls a "firm order" as opposed to a commitment, and whether they use the same standards as Boeing. For example, Airbus counted their sale of 150 A32x aircraft to China as a firm order for December, but Boeing did not count their deal to sell 70 737s to China, made at the same time, as a firm 2005 order. John Leahy, Airbus' top salesman, also has some credibility issues with regards to some of his public statements.
Nevertheless, 1,111 airplanes is an enormous number, especially given that Boeing also sold over 1,000. Each manufacturer roughly tripled their 2004 sales and blew away their respective prior sales records.
Considering Airbus is consortium subsidized by nation states...I take it as a win by BOEING.
Plus, as you postulate, Airbus's numbers are probably bogus.
Doesn't some analyst have an apples-to-apples comparison?
Boeing has a lock on the large, growing, lucrative Asian market.
Everytime I see an airbus announcement, it's for some country or company saying they really sorta kinda are definately going to buy an airbus sometime in the next five years.
When I see boeing announcements, they are firm planned sales.
And of both companies' sales, which will actually deilver the most planes on time?
Boeing, which had expected to outsell Airbus by the number of units for the first time since 2000, gained large consolation by selling more aircraft by value, as it won the battle for new orders for the most lucrative wide-body long-haul aircraft.
Eight paragraphs down....
These are claimed to be firm, signed, definite sales, and Airbus has claimed to have taken a down payment on each of those airplanes. However, the amount of any such down payment is not public, and it's entirely possible, especially from all the hopeful startups (some of which don't yet even have an operating certificate), that the deposit in some cases was 1 Euro or some other token amount. Airbus has long said (and I agree) that deliveries, not even firm orders, is what counts, since some portion of even firm orders always get cancelled, and that portion is higher with startups that have yet even to start operating.
I believe that there is a definition of "order" under which Airbus sold 1,111 airplanes in 2005, and I believe that there is a definition of "order" under which Boeing sold 1,002 airplanes in 2005. I can't say for sure, but prior history leads me to speculate that the problem is those definitions may not be the same.
Sounds like the way Democrats count votes.
An analyst could probably sort at least some of this out, unless some of the contracts are secret.
Another consideration barely touched on is that Airbus may be outselling Boeing with some of its older models, but Boeing is doing better with models that will be sold in the future.
Finally, Airbus has a political advantage, selling to the countries in its own consortium, countries who don't dare offend the French, and countries who hate or envy the U.S.
plus the Thailand situation where they flat out blackmailed them into buying Airbus
It is important to remember that following WWII, France set out to assert itself as a leader in the field of aviation again. It did this by building the largest, most impressive flying boats ever built for passenger service.
That spirit lives on with the Airbus 380. The only question remains is if Airbus will survive the 380.
No, that sounds like the way they take polls. Then, when election day comes around, we find out what the "real" numbers are!
I wonder whether Airbus has to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley. If only Boeing does, I trust their numbers more.
But when it comes to the profit makers (the bigger twin isles) Boeing far outpaces Airbus for the year.
What would you consider to be the more important number, if you were to invest your hard-earned money into a company's stock? The number of units sold or the total value of those units sold?
This paragraph pretty much sums it up: Boeing has more potential revenue on the table than Airbus, period. I mean, who cares how many airplanes were sold; what I want to know is how much money are you going to make on your product.
That's because a large fraction of these sales are the planes that are the lucrative moneymakers: the 777 and 787. These two planes will replace a large number of older widebody jets in long-range service; is it small wonder why Airbus is scrambling to catch up with the A350 program?
Well, a European corporation certainly doesn't have to comply with U.S. accounting rules, and in fact the EU rules are different. I don't know whether it makes a difference in the reporting of the number of units sold, although I've been reading things that indicate Airbus is counting as "orders" certain contracts that, were the contract with Boeing, Boeing would not count as a firm order.
European taxpayers have already covered the A380. The company funds development of new types with loans from EADS member governments. If the aircraft does not turn a profit, the loan is forgiven.
Airbus claims that these subsidized loans, which don't have to be repaid unless a profit is turned (and I have to wonder who does the accounting to determine profit or loss), are the same as Boeing getting government funds to build military aircraft, and then using some military technology in its civilian products. It remains to be seen whether the WTO agrees with that argument, although I do not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.