Boeing vs Airbus

[viper]

First of all before I write this post I do not want this thread deteriorating into a EU vs USA thread or I will ask for it to be deleted!

Since the late 1970\'s, both Boeing and Airbus have been subsidised by their respective governments to help boost profits due to the heavy cost of developing passenger airliners. Until recently, Boeing have been the un-disputed leaders in the airliner market with a greater than 50% share of the market compared to Airbus.

However, over the past 6 years, Airbus have grown in strength and market share and now, it is Boeing with the less than 50% share of the market and Airbus becoming the world leaders in the airliner market. With the advent of Boeings 787 and the new super Jumbo, the Airbus A380, this market lead is already growing larger (A380 has many more orders than the 787).

Boeing and the US government are now demanding that Airbus\'s government subsidies are ceased immediatly or trade sanctions would be put in place in order for Boeing to regain its market lead. While they are demanding Airbus\'s subsidies are ceased, they are refusing to cease the subsidies to Boeing, which the EU has responded with \"fairs fair, we cease and you cease aswell\". This has grown to boiling point at it is about to be taken to the WTO which would heavily damage each countries economy.

Analists in both countries have stated that these demands by Boeing and the US Government are illegal and completely against capitalism. One American business professor was interviewed and stated that because global capitalism is working an a non-american producer is making better and more succesful products forcing an American producer to loose money, the US government is now trying to force the balance of capitalism.

It is worth of note, this is also happening in the engine producers aswell, Pratt and Whitney are demanding that subsidies to Roll Royce aero engines are removed aswell (without their own being removed) as they cannot compete with the latest generation of ultra-powerful and efficient engines being produced by Rolls Royce and Snecma.

So, I open this to the floor, is it right that true capitalism should be stopped just to benefit a losing party who, like many companies were top of the rung but slowed their R&D, only to be overtaken by the competition? Discuss, maturely, not patriotically, and sensibly.....

Vips

A few pics:
A380 no.1 at rollout last month (first flight expected within 3 weeks of now)...

(if that doesnt come up: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/760641/M/)

787 Artists drawing (hasn\'t been built yet)

[=D.C.L.I=Everest]

"viper\ Wrote:"fairs fair, we cease and you cease aswell"

That about sums up what I think of it.

If you start a game and you\'re good at it, it\'s not fun to see someone who\'s getting better than you. But in no way does it give you the right to alter the rules just so you can get back on top. Altering the rules would defeat the purpose of the game altogether.

[Smithcraft]

Sorry Vips, this might take it where you don\'t want it to go, but it\'s the core of the issue.

Most people over here(Boeing town) don\'t mind the competition, it\'s the subsidies that irritate the hell out of us.

When American companies get subsidies the world complains that they can\'t compete. When American companies make the same claim, all of the sudden it\'s total bs!

Anyway, subsidies are a device to alter the rules of capitalism. They allow a company that can not compete against larger companies to compete. Most people feel that the should only be allowed for companies that are starting up.

If that is so, and Airbus has products in the market, why do they still need subsidies?

Why don\'t they cut the subsidies and compete?

So, that\'s the way we feel in Boeing town. Others may feel differently.

SC

[=D.C.L.I=Everest]

From what I\'ve read in what vips wrote, Boeing too receives government subsidies. Maybe they should both drop them; it\'s good money that could be used for better things.

I think a true capitalist wouldn\'t complain; he\'d immediately create more devious ways to make money. But I\'m damn glad it\'s not happening that way, though.

[tomcat ha]

I think they both can have theire subsidies.

[Smithcraft]

Actually the subsidies that Boeing receives are more of bribes to keep work in those two states, from those two states. They receive those subsidies from the states and not the Federal government.

I think that the other part of this thread is really a discussion about capitalism. Oh, and that the WTO is a crock of crap.

SC

@Vips - Don\'t you have something more important to be doing?

[viper]

@SC - Yes I have and as im doing 19hr shifts on uni work atm, I was taking a break when id got close to finishing last night when i wrote that, as I am doing now!

[izzybob7]

i think what he said about the aircraft market is a little off center, there are actually 3 main diff markets. north american, european, and asia, airbus has the european market in its pocket and some dip in the asian market. but here in the us its all boeing, and in the future i c boeing climbing a bit, i recently went to PIA for a personal tour and there i got to talk with a boeing engineer and something that will being let loose on the market is a new engine they have been working on for the past few years. its a quarter the size and weight of the modern commecial airliner engines and 2x in power, and on top of it all runs on a newer cheaper fule and runs cleaner. from what he says its supposed to set the standard for newer more modern aircraft. honestly all i c airbus having over boeing is the homeland advantage, being the closest and cheapest to asia.

[tomcat ha]

since when does boeing make engines?

[izzybob7]

Quote:since when does boeing make engines?

i asked the guy the same question and the way he told it to me is boeing is fairly new to making and designing engines, they have been making them in accordance with GE. prettymuch engineers working on both the GE and boeing payroll, and both companies splitting the profits from what they make.