A380 takes off

[Ming]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I'm not seeing the subsidy and instead I see the American government trying to correct the imbalances created by the massive direct cash which European governments put into Airbus's pockets.

Sounds like a PR release from Boeing

You just aren't looking at the big picture... I worked on a major defense contractor account for over 17 years, and got to see what a distinct advantage they had on the commercial side thanks to their defense contracts... they would sit around and discuss it while laughing about it... If you truely think that defense contracts are soley awarded based on the value of the specific proposal, you are living in a fantasy world

[MikeH]

I thought they were based on which senator was having a close call for reelection, backhanders and other general corruption.

[MikeH]

That's how they work here anyway.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Ming
In 2004, Boeing got $2,468,121,000 in defense contracts. (Oh, and I was incorrect, Boeing has lost the number one spot in 2004 to Northrup)

That is a HUGE revenue stream and allows Boeing to better survive the ups and downs of the commercial aircraft business, and to invest in the future... And much of the research they do on military aircrafts can be moved to the commercial side of the business at very little additional cost... Alloys, avionics, design elements needed for their defense work is built into the commercial aircraft as relevent. This is a distinct advantage that Airbus doesn't have. Think about it... an almost guaranteed revenue stream of 2.6 billion dollars... while Airbus has to rely on non guaranteed orders from airlines for future possible delivery of aircraft. They need the loans and subsidies...

Government contracts do not have the same impact as subsidies -- it's like comparing apples and oranges. Adam Smith has gone through those differences several times here on Apolyton.

[Ming]

Originally posted by MikeH
I thought they were based on which senator was having a close call for reelection, backhanders and other general corruption.

Actually... you are totally correct and that it is an important factor.

On one HUGE defense contract, the key was setting up production and supplier support in as many congressional districts as possible... spreading the jobs out to as many "votes" as they could... so even if the contract came under fire, there was a built in base of law makers who had a vested interest in keeping the jobs in their districts

[DAVOUT]

In the same manner than the US is claiming that the Chinese currency is undervalued, the EU could claim that the USD is undervalued. With costs in Euros, and market prices in USD, the poor Airbus Industry can hardly make a living; it would be just fair to subsidize Airbus for the sake of solidarity.

[LDiCesare]

In the same manner than the US is claiming that the Chinese currency is undervalued, the EU could claim that the USD is undervalued. With costs in Euros, and market prices in USD, the poor Airbus Industry can hardly make a living; it would be just fair to subsidize Airbus for the sake of solidarity.

Except the Europeans claim that Chinese currency is undervalued too. And indeed, the fact that planes are sold in dollars actually hurts Airbus, since they may need 50 more planes than planned to turn out a profit.

Back to the number of seats: Even though it's capacity is a bit more than 800, and is sold for 515 seats, no company bought that configuration, only some 400+ size configs, so people should definitely have some room in these panes when they start flying.

[Ming]

Originally posted by DanS
Government contracts do not have the same impact as subsidies -- it's like comparing apples and oranges. Adam Smith has gone through those differences several times here on Apolyton.

Yep... apples and oranges, and I do not mean to imply that they are the same thing. However, if you are implying that HUGE government contracts have no impact and don't significantly aid the company in their other ventures, you are sadly mistaken

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Lancer
Yes I just read the thread in your link. Looks a bit complicated. Maybe I'll wait until it's further along. I'm not a comp whiz and lazy about such stuff. Will BETA 5 be easier?

hmm I'll try to include all past patches

[Ned]

If there is to be retaliation (after we win in the WTO), I would prefer to take it ALL out on French products. If there are not enough French products sold in the US, then add tarriffs to any products also sold into France.

The money raised from the retaliatory tarriffs could then be used to subsidized the next Boeing behemoth.

As to the plane itself, it looks good. I expect it will soon replace the aging 747 fleet worldwide.

[Krill]

If there is to be retaliation (after we win in the WTO), I would prefer to take it ALL out on French products. If there are not enough French products sold in the US, then add tarriffs to any products also sold into France.

Just about as feasible as having the EU confiscate all aircraft produced in America...

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Ned
If there is to be retaliation (after we win in the WTO), I would prefer to take it ALL out on French products. If there are not enough French products sold in the US, then add tarriffs to any products also sold into France.

The money raised from the retaliatory tarriffs could then be used to subsidized the next Boeing behemoth.

I am sorry if it desappoints you, but in the state of the world as it is, the US cannot retaliate on France, but only on the EU as a whole. I know that you prefer opponents much smaller that the US, as you already demonstrated with the preemptive war on Iraq, but it is not always possible.

[Ned]

Davout, bull. The thing that forced Bush's hand on the steel tarriffs was the EU's intention to target so-called "red state" products with the specific intention of unseating Bush in the last election.

We could figure out something similar for France.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Ned
Davout, bull. The thing that forced Bush's hand on the steel tarriffs was the EU's intention to target so-called "red state" products with the specific intention of unseating Bush in the last election.

We could figure out something similar for France.

I was not aware of this horrible plot, and I think that nobody in Europe was informed of it. In that case, it is sure that something similar could be organized against an unbearable country.

[Sandman]

Why just against France? The wings and engines are made in Britain.