A380

No Cool Hand, YOU are missing the point. Airbus is not 'given' money to sell aircraft more cheaply, it borrows it and pays it back plus agreed interest. What then is the benefit of using this money in order to sell aircraft more cheaply? The loans are for the development capital needed to develop such a projectThere is no dounbt that all sorts of incentives and deals are offered to customers to induce them to buy a particular type, that is exactly what ALL aircraft manufacturers on the planet do, Boeing is only crying now because it is losing the battle for sales, funnily enough when Boeing was well in front it didn't care, do you see the hypocrisy in this?

Yet again you ask what the interest rates are despite there being several links to the article posted now, ITS THERE! However, assuming you can't find it I will quote it for you.

interest rate equal to the cost of government borrowing plus 0.25%

This means the rate varies but is always at least 0.25% higher than the equivalent government borrowing.

Also have you ever heard the saying those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?

"If this is the path the US has chosen, we accept the challenge," Pascal Lamy, the EU's trade commissioner, said.

"Not least because it is high time to put an end to massive illegal subsidies to Boeing which damage Airbus, in particular those for Boeing's new 7E7 programme."

Also why should Airbus publish what will happen if they default? That is up to the lender. Does anyone go around telling all and sundry what will happen to them if they default on their loans? Do you?

Originally posted by COOL HAND
You people are missing the point. By the US gov't giving a tax break to Boeing they are saying that it is better to get some money from you than none at all if you go bankrupt.

We arent missing the point. The 1992 accord covered EXACTLY this, hence the allowing of corporate-government loans. Subsidies, no matter the financial condition of the company, are unfair and banned under the agreement. After 9/11 the US government spent *MORE* in subsidies to airlines and aircraft manufacturers than it would have taken to BUY said companies OUTRIGHT. If the US had nationalised the companies, IT WOULD HAVE SAVED MONEY. (The final aid package was $30billion, which was sufficient to buy, at pre 911 share prices, controlling share options in most of hte major airlines at the same time).

Compare that to the EU who have given Airbus money in order to allow Airbus to sell their planes at a lower cost.

In essense Airbus can charge less and make a greater profit percent because they are given money from the European government to offset any loss that may occur.

Again, covered under the terms of the agreement. If the US wasnt going to abide by the terms when they ceased to be favourable, then WHAT WAS IT DOING SIGNING THE DAMN AGREEMENT?!

Why won't Airbus release the terms of the "loan?" I am curious as to what percent the loan was offered at. Was it a fixed percent? What happens if Airbus defaults on the loan? etc.

Are the terms for loans you take out publically available? General terms are, but anything done for you are confidential. Pretty much the same is here. With a couple of notable exceptions.

If you want the terms of the loans, EVERYTHING you should need will be in Airbusses annual financial report, or the reports of its constituent companies. Go digging, its all there, especially for EADS as its a UK company and needs to file annual reports with Companies House.

Airbus is technically a private company so it doesnt have to disclose stuff a publically traded company does. This includes most financial aspects.

Couple of pages you might want to look at:

EADS repays Airbus loan - UK government makes 100% profit

Airbus turns down EU loan, commercial loans have better terms

And from this source:

For each and every Airbus model, BAE SYSTEMS (and now Airbus UK) from its own resources, has invested very substantial sums in the launch and on-going development costs, as well as in tooling and work in progress. In addition, for the A320, the A330/A340, the A340-500/600 and recently for the A380, the UK Government is providing fully repayable loans which are "designed to yield a return in real terms on the government's investment" to supplement Airbus UK's financial commitment. Repayment of capital and interest on the UK government's �250 million loan for the A320 (announced in March 1984) has been completed; royalty payments continue - the investment yielding �2 for every �1 invested. The loan for the A330/A340 programme announced in May 1987 was �450 million, repayments are in progress and are expected to yield the UK Treasury �3 for every �1 invested. The loan announced for the A340-500/-600 in February 1998 was �123 million and in March 2000 the UK government announced it would make available �530 million repayable launch investment for the A380. In the UK, current Airbus programmes secure 62,000 jobs in over 400 companies through the UK?s involvement in Airbus. Other UK companies involved include Rolls-Royce Aero-engines who supply power-plants for an increasing number of Airbus models.

Doesnt exactly sound like the sort of investment a bank gets back from a commercial loan, now does it? Infact, sounds pretty much like the repayment amounts you get from a loanshark

Originally posted by NickS1004
i hope the A380 is successfull..... I also heard the engines are probably going to be built by GE.

Boeing might not want it to be successful, but many american companies that supply components will suffer if it isnt.

Both Boeing and Airbus choose two suppliers for the engines for each aircraft model they build. In the A380s case, its Royles-Royce and GE. The buyer of the aircraft gets to choose what engines he wants on the delivered aircraft, not the manufacturer (after the aircraft, its the most important decision to make - costing upto a massive 40% of the aircrafts cost). Royles-Royce do all major maintenance, servicing and overhauling on every engine they sell, throughout hte life of that engine, Im not sure where GE stand on doing the same.

Airbus spends approximately 40% of its total procurement budget in the U.S. 50% percent of the A380 is procured in the U.S. At over 5 billion dollars per year, Airbus is the largest export customer of commercial U.S. aerospace.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Well, checking that article, most of it is quoted out of context. Only when GE engines are purchased does US procurement (see below) make up 50% of the cost of the aircraft, without the engines it takes a massive dive down to 30%.

The items that the bloke says are procured from the US is slightly iffy as well, as he states avionics to be one of the items, and that is actually being delivered by Thales-Avionics, an European company which owns factories in the US. The landing gear is being delivered by Messier-Dowty, again having factories in the US but not a US company. Wingspars are produced onsite in Wales by BAE. I have no idea why the US Airbus representative would say such things tho, Im truely baffled. The items might be made in the US, but the US is going to see very little money from them.

[edit on 8/10/2004 by RichardPrice]

Way aboves for the excellent referencing work there guys.

Great work.

(kind of like a mini-version of the slapping I was referring to before! )



(tax-breaks = welfare for the already priviledged)

[edit on 8-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Guys lets not fight this war in this thread please?

O and I miscounted, my bad, I thought that 11 was a 10.

Shattered OUT...

Are the following airports:
Frankfurt
Munich
Duesseldorf
Paris CDG
Paris ORY
London LHR
able to handle A380s?

Originally posted by AtheiX
Are the following airports:
Frankfurt
Munich
Duesseldorf
Paris CDG
Paris ORY
London LHR
able to handle A380s?

All Hub class airports and many satalite airports are in the process of being upgraded and will be ready for 2006, when the first A380s are due for delivery. All of those in that list are classed as hubs.

Thought you all might enjoy this pic.

www.airliners.net...

[edit on 9-10-2004 by SHADOW266]

Originally posted by SHADOW266
Thought you all might enjoy this pic.

www.airliners.net...

- Er what pic Shadow?

I clicked on your link and just got a page header with an ancient old Boeing under the text of it.....is that what you meant? ......the ancient old Boeing?

Cooo.

He probably meant either of these photos:

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

Originally posted by RichardPrice
He probably meant either of these photos:

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

- awesome!

Originally posted by RichardPrice
He probably meant either of these photos:

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

Yeah those also. That's one big Boeing indeed, pal!

Originally posted by SHADOW266

Originally posted by RichardPrice
He probably meant either of these photos:

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

Yeah those also. That's one big Boeing indeed, pal!

... ?

Originally posted by SHADOW266

Originally posted by RichardPrice
He probably meant either of these photos:

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

Yeah those also. That's one big Boeing indeed, pal!

What boeing? That's the Airbus A380 in mid construction.

Shattered OUT...

Then I've got a request:
If you people have links to any Airbus pics I may enjoy please post these here; pics of Boeings would be cool as well as long as they would be civilian Boenigs

Here's one of my favourite Airbus, barring the A380.



Someone will probably reckon its a fake

[edit on 10-10-2004 by waynos]

One of my favourites is the one pictured on this page:

A-318

waynos this is one of the ugliest airplane pics I've ever seen
RichardPrice the pic provided by you is a lot better

[edit on 10-10-2004 by AtheiX]

I quite like the look of it. it's the a300-600st super transporter.

thanks,
drfunk

I think the discussion so far has been ... interesting.