Tweet
Originally posted by LordShiva
Didn't teh A380 sink Airbus?
Didn't teh A380 sink Airbus?
-
Nothing can sink Airbus. If something kills it financially it will just be given more risk free loans to develop new products and try again. If the effort fails to become profitable...no loss, Airbus won't have to repay the loan. -
Which doesn't change the fact that it would appear Airbus has lost it's tiny figleaf against accusations of receiving unfair anticompetitive subsidies.Originally posted by Asher
To be fair, Geronimo, the original purchase in 2002 for the tankers was for the KC-767 and it was nullified due to corruption in the government not giving Airbus a fair shake.Comment
-
Yes, but you called it a "ridiculous" assertion. Apparently it wasn't that ridiculous..."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
Hmmm... I guess bribing officials on government contracts doesn't go unnoticed after all.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
I agree.Originally posted by snoopy369
Plane will be built by Americans, and the military parts will be done by an American company. I don't see the issue... if Boeing wants to win the contract, they can play fair and make the better bid.
From what I understand Boeing has been very arrogant about this contract. Basically feeling so entitled since they were the only all domestic builder that they refused to come down on the price at all. A couple years ago Boeing even got in trouble on this very contract for bribing several officials before getting caught and having the old contract award thrown out.
I'm glad Northrop-Gruman, Airbus, and GE won. If more of the traditional insiders lose to outsiders then maybe they'll lower their prices and make a better effort.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
It seems GE will build the engines but most of the plane will be identical to the commercial A330 with a few parts custom built by Northrup Gruman. The entire thing will then be assembled in the US. When you consider the subcontractors I imagine the planes will have parts from all over the world just like normal Boeing or Airbus planes.Originally posted by Dauphin
My understanding is that most parts will be built in Europe, and assembled in America.
At the end of the day the contract is only 80 planes with an option for 100 more. It's a good sized contract but not a really big one unless the option is picked up. I'm sure Boeing will be working behind the scenes to make sure the option never gets exercised.
Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
Of course it was ridiculous. The EU was defending the airbus launch subsidies by saying the US government does not allow non US firms to compete for it's government contracts (irrelevant anyway since many EU members likewise require government contracts to go to domestic or EU firms). Now we see Boeing invest 1 billion dollars entirely of its own money into the KC-767 and the contract gets canceled by the US government because of concerns that Boeing may have unduly influenced the process and a couple years later the contract is awarded to an airbus airframe.Originally posted by Asher
Yes, but you called it a "ridiculous" assertion. Apparently it wasn't that ridiculous...
The EU accusations that the US government subsidizes Boeing through government contract bidding that Airbus was prohibited from participating in were obviously ridiculous or the US would have conveniently covered up the Boeing indiscretions to protect its policy.
The EU subsidizes Airbus. The US did not subsidize Boeing.
Boeing will now eat it's 1 billion dollar development investment in the KC-767. That could never happen to Airbus in any market. Now it's obvious that Boeing isn't even protected by the US in the arms procurement market.
The anticompetitive nature of the launch loans is more clear than ever, and the lame "government contracts as subsidies" retort looks more ridiculous than ever.
Subsidies to airbus aren't some sneaky little scandal that Airbus got away with or tried to get away with. Its bald faced stated government policy.Last edited by Geronimo; March 2, 2008, 19:56.Comment
-
That's an interesting way of putting it.Originally posted by Geronimo
because of concerns that Boeing may have unduly influenced the process
Agreed on the broader point though.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
I think 11-Sep-2001 put the Pentagon right off BoeingsPentagon says Airbus is preferable to Boeing?
Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda SmithComment
-
Yes, it is clearly ridiculous for Airbus to claim the US government was not allowing Airbus to compete for US government contracts even after several people (including executives at Boeing) have done jail time and are convicted for doing exactly that.Originally posted by Geronimo
Of course it was ridiculous.
You are aware that the original tanker deal resulted in convictions and jail time for corruption, right? Such corruption that prevented Airbus from landing US government contracts, right?"The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
I beat you to the tasteless 9/11 joke.Originally posted by Provost Harrison
I think 11-Sep-2001 put the Pentagon right off Boeings
Comment
-
Ah bugger
Speaking of Erith:
"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda SmithComment
-
You don't seem to have read my post.Originally posted by Asher
Yes, it is clearly ridiculous for Airbus to claim the US government was not allowing Airbus to compete for US government contracts even after several people (including executives at Boeing) have done jail time and are convicted for doing exactly that.
You are aware that the original tanker deal resulted in convictions and jail time for corruption, right? Such corruption that prevented Airbus from landing US government contracts, right?
Criminal activity by Boeing execs isn't a subsidy by any stretch of the imagination.
When are Airbus execs going to be jailed for receiving subsidies? oh, nm those actually got legislated.Comment
-
In any event other then Bush's cronyism with no bid contracts (and make no mistake that is corruption of the highest order) government contracts are open bids. Canada, the UK, Italy, and other foreigners all win big contracts all the time.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
Jesus Oerdin, can you at least pretend not to be a nutjob for two seconds so we can enjoy a thread?
In any case, there is nothing wrong with going overseas for arms when the product is superior and from allied/secure source.
The Coast Guard Dauphins, the Marine Corps Harriers, the Navy's FFG three inch deck gun, the standard service side arm, Furuno surface search radars, ALL from foriegn sources.
And it is not like this is anything more than a drop in the bucket for total spending, almost all of which happens inside the USA."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
Comment