• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 14
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 508
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 1:47 am

Byron1976 wrote:
As I can see, the scene is very different on Bombardier and Embraer. While BBD and canadian gov were with near dry pockets due to the slow sales of the C-Series, Embraer enjoy of a good moment with their actual products, and their E2 program, goes with no surprises. Embraer isn't looking for help, neither is in financial trouble.


I read an opinion that it is simply a matter of Boeing/Airbus protecting themselves from China/Russia in the future. China might be interested in acquiring Embraer, as China was also negotiating to purchase the CSeries program before Bombardier inevitably went to Airbus because of the Canadian government (the Canadian government discouraged a sale to China).
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 508
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 1:57 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I am confused how any of this relates to Embraer and Boeing potentially increasing their current levels of partnership.

That is very fair comment. I can only direct you back to post #180 from PPVRA, where he poured cold custard over two existing MRJ orders, and then dissed the whole of Mitsubishi. If there is more than that, I confess I don't know who started it. My apologies for rambling on, trying to set the record straight, but that's because I believe in facts, not unfounded slander. Plus I'm learning stuff that I never knew before. And that's my final word on the matter. :wave:


There's a fairly significant "If it ain't Boeing, I'm ain't going" crowd on a.net. :lol:
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 2:04 am

Nean1 wrote:
Although the photos you posted seem striking the truly shocking issue is to understand how a company that has received a high magnitude government support and for so long can be so delayed in a regional jet program?


Simple - because they're rookies at managing and building a clean sheet aircraft like the MRJ. I am not dissing them (aside from their cars) it's just a fact of life, in fact it's great to see a company like Mitsubishi take on this endeavor. They must had known it was going to be difficult and they would learn a lot from it.

The absurdity is the position of certain posters on this website who seem to think Japanese reliability is a given, particularly in light of the MRJ's experience thus far.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
brindabella
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:16 am

Planesmart wrote:
brindabella wrote:
Planesmart wrote:

Boeing showed their hand during and after negotiations with Bombardier. The motivation was to neutralise competition, not to nurture a small jet family.

I always find the posts from Planesmart interesting and informative, but no, he very obviously does not love Boeing.

Many thanks.

I'm the product of the environment I've worked through. When start ups were denied access to finance, aircraft and support. Had to pay cash upfront for fuel and ground support. Look at the tactics used against Laker. And EK when they started. When anti-European/Boeing friendly engineers would ground an A300 at the gate with trivial defects (like galley, interior light and inflight video defects) but allow a 767, L1011 or DC10 to fly with the same defects.

Boeing is the most frustrating company. They were the global, dominant force in commercial aviation, and squandered it. They made extensive use of negative marketing - appropriate in those times. But the tactics didn't work, and are certainly not appropriate when you are more evenly matched.

The competition was from three European countries, communicating in three languages, building in three countries, with no track record. How hard is it not to retain your dominant position against that combination, even if only half listening to staff and customers, when you have a military safety net and sympathetic federal and state support?

But they haven't listened, reinvested or been innovative.

It's what happens when they ceased to be an aerospace company, and simply became a mega corporate. When senior management have scant regard for history, and more importantly living and recreating the history as a future vision, where innovators and engineers are placed on a pedestal.

I'm no engineer. My background is in finance and best practice.

Obviously, the new kid on the block has to be the innovator in engineering, solutions, customer responsiveness, finance, packaging....
And the old man on the street tends to be the opposite. But a point is reached, when the new rival, reaches say 30% market share, and the established business needs to re-invent themselves. Or even acquire some of the mojo from the new player.

But not at Boeing. They are still in negative marketing mode. We tried to acquire Bombardier. We missed out, so after all it's Embraer that has the superior business that fits our culture and ethics.

All Embraer needs is money, engineering assistance and marketing reach. They certainly don't need Boeing's top heavy, blinkered senior management influence. In fact it's the other way around - Boeing needs an injection of Embraer culture.

But read the posts here. Are posters saying E is brilliantly managed, running financially on the smell of an oily rag? Has a great product range, which could be even better with more technical assistance and dollars? Has brilliant people, who could re-energise Boeing? No. The old Boeing blinkered arrogance is alive and well on a.net.[/quote]


Well, all this is far too fascinating to let go, IMO.

How about you start a thread?

You will get a deluge of anti-American trolling, of course.

But that's life!

I'm hoping to get a better line on:

1) where Boeing went wrong in the past, and (*)

2) are the markets wrong where remarkable current bull-run in Boeing stock is concerned ... ? (**)


So ... a thread please!

cheers



(*) shortly before discovering a.net I read an excellent account of Boeing's strategic wobble in the 1990s. I'd like to bounce that off you for your take on it.
(**) (given your background in Finance and at Boeing).
Billy
 
WIederling
Posts: 6252
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:13 am

Nean1 wrote:
Ok, double standards is fine.


NULL answer. Try again.
Murphy is an optimist
 
VV
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:19 am

Two questions:
1. When (or if) will this happen?
2. If it happens, what do you think the form of the tie-up would be?

Thanks.
 
WIederling
Posts: 6252
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:19 am

Nean1 wrote:
Me too company. Not stellar in anything.


So you are just a "MAGA me too" poster :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 6252
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:25 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
MHI wants to be a Aircraft producer, not a component maker.

It appears you have ZERO idea what you are talking about.


hihi,
afaics your hints are passing unhindered from one ear to the other. <Garfield> Room to let. <>
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 6252
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:11 pm

PPVRA wrote:
The absurdity is the position of certain posters on this website who seem to think Japanese reliability is a given, particularly in light of the MRJ's experience thus far.


Industrial stuff from Japan actually is very good and reliable. ( and afaics Mitsubishi Cars/Vans/HGV and Busses are publicity wise "sleepers" in that vein.
At the top Japanese companies are much closer knit and wider scoped in their activities than is visible. ( What Edzard Reuter had planned for Mercedes Benz would have been similar )

One "special" thing to note is something a customer doing printing system ( A0++) integration ( obviously using Japanese Products ;-) explained once:
M. Customer wrote:
Japanese engineers expect to do perfect products. In 99% of cases they achieve that. They are that good.
But in 100% of cases they see their finished product as perfect.
If it is said to have broken down that must be wrong reporting, foreign damage, sabotage.
They have no viable process to work with failures.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 618
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:48 pm

Nean1 wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
<Mitsubishi>
Me too company. Not stellar in anything.

A most ironic choice of words by you, because some people might describe the Mitsubishi H-IIB rocket system as "stellar"Image

But if that's your idea of a "me too company", show me Embraer's space vehicle? All I could find was this....

I get that you are fiercely patriotic, but to dismiss the whole of Mitsubishi in the way you have is only just acceptable when you have a better product yourselves. Clearly you do not, so perhaps we could dispense with the mud-slinging?


The MRJ project has received direct government support and from a select group of companies since 2003. It was officially launched in 2007 with expectation of certification in 2012. No customer should receive the aircraft before 2020 but the museum is already in operation.

I follow aviation blogs and I notice that we have very critical participants. It would be interesting to read their positive comments if Embraer presented such a remarkable performance.

Although the photos you posted seem striking the truly shocking issue is to understand how a company that has received a high magnitude government support and for so long can be so delayed in a regional jet program?

I do not know the answer, but I suspect that Japan's aerospace producers have grown accustomed to a customer who is not demanding on performance and deadlines, given the priority of keeping jobs and technology in the country.

With regard to civil certification, the recent experience of Russians, Chinese and Japanese is not remarkable, which makes me believe that previous military technology experience can give a false impression of capability.

Finally, I do not believe there is room for more than 3 companies worldwide producing regional jets and I think Mitusubishi aims to be number 4.

So I wish good luck to them.


Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon. Embraer will have to fight for number 2 if Sukhoi comes in with the SSJ130, but they are already losing campaigns.
Need a regional jet with low operating costs? You pick the MRJ.
Need a regional jet with low capital costs? You pick the SSJ100.

Embraer's E2 order book also has big issues.
Lessors right and left but no takes for their orders.
Azul and another one are HNA subsidiaries and we know how well that venture is doing.
Skywest is taking end of the line Ejets because Embraer are probably giving them a more than "good deal".

The MRJ subsidised? Not more than any Embraer product. I doubt that the main stakeholder MHI and partner Toyota need any government money for this little project.
So yes, certifying new commercial aircraft is challenging but once they know what to do, they will do to Embraer what Embraer did to the CRJ. In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.
The Japanese took some time to build the Shinkansen too. But they got it right.

MHI is also the main contractor on the L0 and is building F-35's.
If the U.S. has GE and Lockheed Martin, Japan has MHI.
By the way, the Fukushima nuclear plants that went boom? GE technology. It wouldn't have happened if it were MHI technology.

Embraer better sell out fast to Boeing, while they still retain some value.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:21 pm

It's been said a million times before, but no one listens--

Embraer saw similar thin order books with the EJet E1 until after EIS. For that matter, they had very few large orders the entire life of the EJets. The EJets have sold in relatively small batches but to numerous different customers. A few have accumulated large fleets over time, but for the most part few customers took them in large batches.

This is nothing new to Embraer.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:56 pm

Waterbomber wrote:
Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon. Embraer will have to fight for number 2 if Sukhoi comes in with the SSJ130, but they are already losing campaigns.
Need a regional jet with low operating costs? You pick the MRJ.
Need a regional jet with low capital costs? You pick the SSJ100.


If you didn´t read my other post I write it again for you:
With no relax on the "scope clauses" we won´t see neither the MRJ90 nor the E175-E2 flying with regionals in US.

Source:
https://leehamnews.com/2017/01/18/regio ... e-clauses/
"The regional market and scope clauses"

MRJ90 orders:
TransState Holding: (-) 50
Skywest: (-) 100
Net orders: 73

E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263 (-) 100 E175-E2 for Skywest - Net orders: 163.
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets

Waterbomber wrote:

E2 order book also has big issues.
Lessors right and left but no takes for their orders.


Again:
E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets


Waterbomber wrote:

and another one are HNA subsidiaries and we know how well that venture is doing.


Wrong: Azul it is not a susidiaries of HNA Group:
Source: http://www.mro-network.com/airlines/chi ... l-airlines
China’s HNA Group Buys 23.7% Stake In Azul Airlines

Waterbomber wrote:

Skywest is taking end of the line Ejets because Embraer are probably giving them a more than "good deal".


Wrong.
They are taking the E175 because they are the best plane in its category.
And again:
Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/embraer-sell ... 854253.htm
"The company noted the E175 enjoys an 80 percent share of net orders in North America since 2013."

https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... ional-e175
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... raer-fleet
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... -ten-e175s

And, maybe you can help me here with the latest MRJ90/70 order ...

Waterbomber wrote:

MRJ subsidised? Not more than any Embraer product.


Wrong again.
Brazilian Government barely can afford to pay its own debts.
You can say The Brazilian Government pays Embraer for the KC-390 transport/tanker project.
Embraer is a sub-contracted and not the onwer of the project.
In fact, for some time Embraer paid with its own funds the bills of the project in order to avoid it stoped and due to delays from Brazilian Government payments.


Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


Will not happen, but just for your information as you believe in that:

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/57c86938-944 ... 9fde0b9506
Extract:
"According to the Wall Street Journal, Boeing and Embraer have been in discussions over a deal that would see the US defense group pay a “relatively large premium” for its Brazilian rival."

By the way, the market value is at least US$ 4.7 Billions ...

I suggest to you in the next attempt to present facts.
Your assumptions do not convince.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:16 pm

PPVRA wrote:
It's been said a million times before, but no one listens--

Embraer saw similar thin order books with the EJet E1 until after EIS. For that matter, they had very few large orders the entire life of the EJets. The EJets have sold in relatively small batches but to numerous different customers. A few have accumulated large fleets over time, but for the most part few customers took them in large batches.

This is nothing new to Embraer.


People here don´t see the facts, only what on that they believe for ...

Enquanto isso o mundo gira e a Lusitana roda.
Enquanto isso o mundo gira e a Embraer voa (e alto !!!) ...
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:33 pm

Waterbomber wrote:

Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon.
.

In this moment they are number 1 in reorganization ... (again) ...
Source:
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... al-changes

Excerpt:
"Mitsubishi Aircraft plans to undergo organizational changes that will see MRJ program director Alex Bellamy run what the company calls its new program management division starting January 1, Mitsubishi announced Wednesday. Established to “reinforce the development and management of the MRJ program,” the division encompasses the newly established integrated product team (IPT) execution department, the governance management office, and the product strategy office."
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:40 pm

Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


In 5 years I predict that the E2 will have over 60% of the market share on its category.
Your prediction.
My prediction.
Same crystal ball.
But not supported by facts ...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 14639
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:57 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


In 5 years I predict that the E2 will have over 60% of the market share on its category.
Your prediction.
My prediction.
Same crystal ball.
But not supported by facts ...

What category? The E2-175 is just too heavy. If the weight limit is increased, that will help the MRJ too. It is a cost versus revenue situation and currently RJs must get down their costs. Or... Airlines will look into turboprops. :( (I much prefer RJs.)

Embraer is an interesting buy. Short term, the E2-195 is the only plane of theirs I see with much potential (unless the 86,000 lb RJ limit is raised). The MRJ-70 will have to drop MTOW by 2,626 lb (unless Mitsubishi beats weight...) to sell, but it is a good option.

To be blunt, the CF-34 has run its course. It cannot compete in a world of NEOs, MAXs, and C-series jets with modern engines.

Embraer would do better if they designed a more US specific plane. Say an E2-170 built a little shorter, a bit lighter, for the 86,000 lb scope clause limits.

I personally believe Boeing has decided they will attempt a 5-across cross section and Embraer will help engineer and certainly build the plane for less. I speculate Boeing will contribute much to the design, but little to the manufacture. Ironically, Mitsubishi will bid on wing building...

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
MHI wants to be a Aircraft producer, not a component maker.

It appears you have ZERO idea what you are talking about.
Image

But if that's too ancient, here are some other designs from them

Just remember, these are their own designs. In addition they build whole aircraft under license, so not just a component maker....

The MRJ is subject to new qualification rules that require better documentation and more flight testing (reduced hours due to lessons learned on how to combine multiple certification events into one flight).

So Mitsubishi has lots of experience on the old (out of date) certification methodology. Now they will know the knew methodology.

There have been rumors that Mitsubishi will partner with another Japanese company (who would be prime) for a 150 to 200 seat 6-across concept. Boeing contracts for 787 wings prohibit them from being prime. But they would certainly contribute and ensure they built a good portion of the plane (certainly the wing box and wings).

To others:
Yes, Mitsubishi has made mistakes. They are learning. I saw some of the early MRJ proposals and was appalled at the lack of engineering rigor. (They were like grad student concepts, much intelligence put into them, but no industry rigor into weeding out bad concepts.) While there have been further mistakes, they are learning.

Lightsaber

Ps, late edit:
I had the pleasure of meeting the Zero's chief engineer in my childhood. He was the grandfather of a neighbor here in California. While I couldn't communicate (I only know a few polite Japanese phrases and his English wasn't up to a hyperactive child...), it was a fond memory of mine.
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 9:38 pm

lightsaber wrote:
What category?

As I said:
His prediction.
My prediction.
Same crystal ball.
But not supported by facts.

lightsaber wrote:
E2-175 is just too heavy. If the weight limit is increased, that will help the MRJ too.


The E175 has a solid position among US regional operators.
If (a big "if" here) they increased the weight limit I foresee more chances for the E175-E2 once this one won´t be 100% "new in the house".


lightsaber wrote:
To be blunt, the CF-34 has run its course. It cannot compete in a world of NEOs, MAXs, and C-series jets with modern engines.


Except for the CS100, I see the E190-E2 e E195-E2 below that category.


lightsaber wrote:
It would do better if they designed a more US specific plane. Say an E2-170 built a little shorter, a bit lighter, for the 86,000 lb scope clause limits.


Problem is 76 seats in 3 classes: C, Y premium and Y.

lightsaber wrote:
personally believe Boeing has decided they will attempt a 5-across cross section and Embraer will help engineer and certainly build the plane for less.
Or a new plane to replace the 737 family ( I think the MAX is the limit for the 737 family).



lightsaber wrote:
To others:
Yes, Mitsubishi has made mistakes. They are learning. I saw some of the early MRJ proposals and was appalled at the lack of engineering rigor. (They were like grad student concepts, much intelligence put into them, but no industry rigor into weeding out bad concepts.) While there have been further mistakes, they are learning.


Couldn´t agree more ...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 14639
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 9:56 pm

PPVRA wrote:
It's been said a million times before, but no one listens--

Embraer saw similar thin order books with the EJet E1 until after EIS. For that matter, they had very few large orders the entire life of the EJets. The EJets have sold in relatively small batches but to numerous different customers. A few have accumulated large fleets over time, but for the most part few customers took them in large batches.

This is nothing new to Embraer.

I disagree.
While the launch orders (40 E-170 and 30 E-190) were thin, there were some early large orders (e.g., JetBlue) that gave other airlines confidence to order the plane.

Embraer sold to those many tiny airlines as the original E-jet family
Republic ordered large and has 185 in service.
JetBlue initially ordered 100 E-190s (reduced to 60 in service)
Compass and Gojet placed a large "up to 100" E-jet order
Azul started with 36


Now TIanjin ordered in smaller batches to a large fleet.



Links: Republic 2013 top off of 47 for republic:
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... r-republic
compass and E-jet
http://www.airguideonline.com/compass-a ... -e175-e2s/
Old news on Azul and the e-jets.
http://blog.flightstory.net/1043/embrae ... as-aereas/

Needing an update page with lots of good E-jet information:
http://www.aerospace-technology.com/pro ... braer_170/

A nice timeline of E-jet history, but lacks orders:
http://www.modernairliners.com/embraer- ... 5-190-195/

An old wiki copy has good information:
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJn ... amily.html


The big issue for Embraer is that the E2-175 orders are a ghost order; The SkyWest order cannot be completed. The MRJ has an empty weight a few thousand pounds lighter than the E2-175, so if there are concessions to weight, the MRJ has the advantage. This isn't the E-170/175 vs CR7/CR9 where the comfort and efficiencies of the E-jets overcame the weight advantage of of the CRJ.

I'd like the E2-jets to thrive. I see a market for the E2-195, assuming a range improvement (which I fully expect a 'surprise' at EIS). But otherwise, Embraer needs a breakthrough. How? Now Embraer has some economy of scale advantage from the E1 jets, but so many subsystems had to be improved, much of that advantage is 'broken.' :(

Lightsaber
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:25 pm

lightsaber wrote:


The big issue for Embraer is that the E2-175 orders are a ghost order; The SkyWest order cannot be completed. The MRJ has an empty weight a few thousand pounds lighter than the E2-175, so if there are concessions to weight, the MRJ has the advantage. This isn't the E-170/175 vs CR7/CR9 where the comfort and efficiencies of the E-jets overcame the weight advantage of of the CRJ.


What happens to the E175-E2 happens the same to MRJ.

But, as I said before, the E175-E2 it is not 100% "new in home".
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2114
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:36 pm

Welp this isn’t even about Boeing and Embraer.
 
Nean1
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Thu Dec 28, 2017 11:27 pm

lightsaber wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


In 5 years I predict that the E2 will have over 60% of the market share on its category.
Your prediction.
My prediction.
Same crystal ball.
But not supported by facts ...

What category? The E2-175 is just too heavy. If the weight limit is increased, that will help the MRJ too. It is a cost versus revenue situation and currently RJs must get down their costs. Or... Airlines will look into turboprops. :( (I much prefer RJs.)

Embraer is an interesting buy. Short term, the E2-195 is the only plane of theirs I see with much potential (unless the 86,000 lb RJ limit is raised). The MRJ-70 will have to drop MTOW by 2,626 lb (unless Mitsubishi beats weight...) to sell, but it is a good option.

To be blunt, the CF-34 has run its course. It cannot compete in a world of NEOs, MAXs, and C-series jets with modern engines.

Embraer would do better if they designed a more US specific plane. Say an E2-170 built a little shorter, a bit lighter, for the 86,000 lb scope clause limits.

I personally believe Boeing has decided they will attempt a 5-across cross section and Embraer will help engineer and certainly build the plane for less. I speculate Boeing will contribute much to the design, but little to the manufacture. Ironically, Mitsubishi will bid on wing building...

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
MHI wants to be a Aircraft producer, not a component maker.

It appears you have ZERO idea what you are talking about.
Image

But if that's too ancient, here are some other designs from them

Just remember, these are their own designs. In addition they build whole aircraft under license, so not just a component maker....

The MRJ is subject to new qualification rules that require better documentation and more flight testing (reduced hours due to lessons learned on how to combine multiple certification events into one flight).

So Mitsubishi has lots of experience on the old (out of date) certification methodology. Now they will know the knew methodology.

There have been rumors that Mitsubishi will partner with another Japanese company (who would be prime) for a 150 to 200 seat 6-across concept. Boeing contracts for 787 wings prohibit them from being prime. But they would certainly contribute and ensure they built a good portion of the plane (certainly the wing box and wings).

To others:
Yes, Mitsubishi has made mistakes. They are learning. I saw some of the early MRJ proposals and was appalled at the lack of engineering rigor. (They were like grad student concepts, much intelligence put into them, but no industry rigor into weeding out bad concepts.) While there have been further mistakes, they are learning.

Lightsaber

Ps, late edit:
I had the pleasure of meeting the Zero's chief engineer in my childhood. He was the grandfather of a neighbor here in California. While I couldn't communicate (I only know a few polite Japanese phrases and his English wasn't up to a hyperactive child...), it was a fond memory of mine.


Lightsaber,

It is always a pleasure to read your posts.

As I am not especially smart nor have access to inside information I will make an analysis of what I understand to be the obvious:

1. E175 E2 vs. MRJ: The Japanese aircraft should be slightly lighter and have less drag by the chosen design. On the other hand MRJ is much more limited in its growth. While the ERJ can cover the range of 70-130 seats the MRJ will be limited to 60-100 seat range. Considering that the development cost of the E2 family is 1.7 USD billion I am sure that the marginal cost of the 175 E2 program does not exceed 0.5 USD billion, a fraction of the disbursement with the MRJ (3.2 to 4.0 USD billion?). In other words, the 175 E2 represents an effective defensive move (perhaps unnecessary?);

2. 170 E2: In aircraft development the advance in motorization has always been the major obstacle, even more so than the existence of a measurable market. What would be a suitable (light) engine for a short-range jet? I do not know, could the problematic Safran Silvercrest be the answer? Anyway in this segment Embraer is not threatened so can wait for the cards of the other players.

3. New single-aisle jet: I can not see competitiveness for a a 5-across cross section jet, I think it's a niche. I think Boeing will soon be looking for something similar to the A320 / 321, leaving the 737 to play in the lower segment (150-170 passengers). The 100-150 passenger segment is small and I see no reason for it to grow much. A partnership with Embraer that allows the reduction of fixed costs of operation of jets such as 190/5 E2 to routes of lower flow and low frequency is something that seems to me within reach of this partnership.

4. Orders vs. Decisions: Embraer has a history of difficult decisions regarding the launch of new products, which basically bet the company's future. If taken later, with better data, possibly the ideal timing would be lost. The 170/190 family represented a huge risk, which was worth it. As the pace was too great the E2 family had chances to reap optimizations that the first generation left behind, due to lack of time, money and expertise. There are people who believe that second generation will have very favorable conditions to remain competitive for a long time, given its cost x benefit.

ps: O mundo gira e a Lusitana roda, mas responder a figuras como Waterbomber é um esforço jogado fora.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:14 am

ikolkyo wrote:
Welp this isn’t even about Boeing and Embraer.


Actually is all about the industry and its transformation on light of the end of this decade:

- Boeing and Embraer:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... or-444435/

- Airbus and Bombardier:
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ies-effort

- Mitsubishi:
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... al-changes

- Comac:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ht-444252/

- Comac and United Aircraft Corporation:
http://atwonline.com/manufacturers/sino ... ganization
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:15 am

Nean1 wrote:
ps: O mundo gira e a Lusitana roda, mas responder a figuras como Waterbomber é um esforço jogado fora.


ele merece ...
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 618
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:25 am

EMBSPBR wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:
Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon. Embraer will have to fight for number 2 if Sukhoi comes in with the SSJ130, but they are already losing campaigns.
Need a regional jet with low operating costs? You pick the MRJ.
Need a regional jet with low capital costs? You pick the SSJ100.


If you didn´t read my other post I write it again for you:
With no relax on the "scope clauses" we won´t see neither the MRJ90 nor the E175-E2 flying with regionals in US.

Source:
https://leehamnews.com/2017/01/18/regio ... e-clauses/
"The regional market and scope clauses"

MRJ90 orders:
TransState Holding: (-) 50
Skywest: (-) 100
Net orders: 73

E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263 (-) 100 E175-E2 for Skywest - Net orders: 163.
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets

Waterbomber wrote:

E2 order book also has big issues.
Lessors right and left but no takes for their orders.


Again:
E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets


Waterbomber wrote:

and another one are HNA subsidiaries and we know how well that venture is doing.


Wrong: Azul it is not a susidiaries of HNA Group:
Source: http://www.mro-network.com/airlines/chi ... l-airlines
China’s HNA Group Buys 23.7% Stake In Azul Airlines

Waterbomber wrote:

Skywest is taking end of the line Ejets because Embraer are probably giving them a more than "good deal".


Wrong.
They are taking the E175 because they are the best plane in its category.
And again:
Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/embraer-sell ... 854253.htm
"The company noted the E175 enjoys an 80 percent share of net orders in North America since 2013."

https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... ional-e175
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... raer-fleet
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... -ten-e175s

And, maybe you can help me here with the latest MRJ90/70 order ...

Waterbomber wrote:

MRJ subsidised? Not more than any Embraer product.


Wrong again.
Brazilian Government barely can afford to pay its own debts.
You can say The Brazilian Government pays Embraer for the KC-390 transport/tanker project.
Embraer is a sub-contracted and not the onwer of the project.
In fact, for some time Embraer paid with its own funds the bills of the project in order to avoid it stoped and due to delays from Brazilian Government payments.


Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


Will not happen, but just for your information as you believe in that:

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/57c86938-944 ... 9fde0b9506
Extract:
"According to the Wall Street Journal, Boeing and Embraer have been in discussions over a deal that would see the US defense group pay a “relatively large premium” for its Brazilian rival."

By the way, the market value is at least US$ 4.7 Billions ...

I suggest to you in the next attempt to present facts.
Your assumptions do not convince.


If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winner-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.
I understand your Brazilian pride, but you need to be realistic. Without Boeing, you guys are going to lose a ton of jobs.
Don't try to drawn the rescuer who's coming to take you back ashore.

Also, while the MRJ is subject of national pride, if Embraer decides to walk the lonely road, I can't rule out that MHI and Boeing won't do a JV for the NSA after Boeing's success working with them on the B787 program. That would be the death blow for Embraer and would also kill any prospects of collaborating on other programs such as NMA.
Last edited by Waterbomber on Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:39 am

Waterbomber wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:
Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon. Embraer will have to fight for number 2 if Sukhoi comes in with the SSJ130, but they are already losing campaigns.
Need a regional jet with low operating costs? You pick the MRJ.
Need a regional jet with low capital costs? You pick the SSJ100.


If you didn´t read my other post I write it again for you:
With no relax on the "scope clauses" we won´t see neither the MRJ90 nor the E175-E2 flying with regionals in US.

Source:
https://leehamnews.com/2017/01/18/regio ... e-clauses/
"The regional market and scope clauses"

MRJ90 orders:
TransState Holding: (-) 50
Skywest: (-) 100
Net orders: 73

E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263 (-) 100 E175-E2 for Skywest - Net orders: 163.
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets

Waterbomber wrote:

E2 order book also has big issues.
Lessors right and left but no takes for their orders.


Again:
E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets


Waterbomber wrote:

and another one are HNA subsidiaries and we know how well that venture is doing.


Wrong: Azul it is not a susidiaries of HNA Group:
Source: http://www.mro-network.com/airlines/chi ... l-airlines
China’s HNA Group Buys 23.7% Stake In Azul Airlines

Waterbomber wrote:

Skywest is taking end of the line Ejets because Embraer are probably giving them a more than "good deal".


Wrong.
They are taking the E175 because they are the best plane in its category.
And again:
Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/embraer-sell ... 854253.htm
"The company noted the E175 enjoys an 80 percent share of net orders in North America since 2013."

https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... ional-e175
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... raer-fleet
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... -ten-e175s

And, maybe you can help me here with the latest MRJ90/70 order ...

Waterbomber wrote:

MRJ subsidised? Not more than any Embraer product.


Wrong again.
Brazilian Government barely can afford to pay its own debts.
You can say The Brazilian Government pays Embraer for the KC-390 transport/tanker project.
Embraer is a sub-contracted and not the onwer of the project.
In fact, for some time Embraer paid with its own funds the bills of the project in order to avoid it stoped and due to delays from Brazilian Government payments.


Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


Will not happen, but just for your information as you believe in that:

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/57c86938-944 ... 9fde0b9506
Extract:
"According to the Wall Street Journal, Boeing and Embraer have been in discussions over a deal that would see the US defense group pay a “relatively large premium” for its Brazilian rival."

By the way, the market value is at least US$ 4.7 Billions ...

I suggest to you in the next attempt to present facts.
Your assumptions do not convince.


If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winne-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.


Embraer really did build the EJets without subsidies. Not sure why this is so hard to swallow. It's totally doable, they also build. . .

Phenom 100
Phenom 300
Legacy 450
Legacy 500
EJet E2s

. . . without any subsidies.

The Ejets E1 were built under a risks haring partnership with various other companies, to make it feasible. But it was done.

Embraer, btw, is a privately owned company traded in the New York Stock Exchange. The golden share of the government is a power thing, not an economic ownership stake.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Nean1
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:55 am

Waterbomber wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:
Mitsubishi is clearly already number 1. In fact, the only thing that could beat the MRJ in tems of fuel efficiency is a re-engined CRJ, but that is no-where on the horizon. Embraer will have to fight for number 2 if Sukhoi comes in with the SSJ130, but they are already losing campaigns.
Need a regional jet with low operating costs? You pick the MRJ.
Need a regional jet with low capital costs? You pick the SSJ100.


If you didn´t read my other post I write it again for you:
With no relax on the "scope clauses" we won´t see neither the MRJ90 nor the E175-E2 flying with regionals in US.

Source:
https://leehamnews.com/2017/01/18/regio ... e-clauses/
"The regional market and scope clauses"

MRJ90 orders:
TransState Holding: (-) 50
Skywest: (-) 100
Net orders: 73

E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263 (-) 100 E175-E2 for Skywest - Net orders: 163.
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets

Waterbomber wrote:

E2 order book also has big issues.
Lessors right and left but no takes for their orders.


Again:
E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets


Waterbomber wrote:

and another one are HNA subsidiaries and we know how well that venture is doing.


Wrong: Azul it is not a susidiaries of HNA Group:
Source: http://www.mro-network.com/airlines/chi ... l-airlines
China’s HNA Group Buys 23.7% Stake In Azul Airlines

Waterbomber wrote:

Skywest is taking end of the line Ejets because Embraer are probably giving them a more than "good deal".


Wrong.
They are taking the E175 because they are the best plane in its category.
And again:
Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/embraer-sell ... 854253.htm
"The company noted the E175 enjoys an 80 percent share of net orders in North America since 2013."

https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... ional-e175
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... raer-fleet
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... -ten-e175s

And, maybe you can help me here with the latest MRJ90/70 order ...

Waterbomber wrote:

MRJ subsidised? Not more than any Embraer product.


Wrong again.
Brazilian Government barely can afford to pay its own debts.
You can say The Brazilian Government pays Embraer for the KC-390 transport/tanker project.
Embraer is a sub-contracted and not the onwer of the project.
In fact, for some time Embraer paid with its own funds the bills of the project in order to avoid it stoped and due to delays from Brazilian Government payments.


Waterbomber wrote:

In 5 years, I predict that the MRJ will have over 60% market share for all new RJ orders.


Will not happen, but just for your information as you believe in that:

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/57c86938-944 ... 9fde0b9506
Extract:
"According to the Wall Street Journal, Boeing and Embraer have been in discussions over a deal that would see the US defense group pay a “relatively large premium” for its Brazilian rival."

By the way, the market value is at least US$ 4.7 Billions ...

I suggest to you in the next attempt to present facts.
Your assumptions do not convince.


If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winner-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.
I understand your Brazilian pride, but you need to be realistic. Without Boeing, you guys are going to lose a ton of jobs.
Don't try to drawn the rescuer who's coming to take you back ashore.

Also, while the MRJ is subject of national pride, if Embraer decides to walk the lonely road, I can't rule out that MHI and Boeing won't do a JV for the NSA after Boeing's success working with them on the B787 program. That would be the death blow for Embraer and would also kill any prospects of collaborating on other programs such as NMA.


The bet on the MRJ-70/90 for USA should be viewed with great caution. Within the current rules, the range would be too low (MRJ-90) or face a negative effect on the CASM, since the MRJ-70 takes fewer passengers than the E-175 E1 / CRJ-900.

Sky West's request foresees commissioning in 2018, which will not happen. Would Sky West still obliged to take the planes? Will the promised performance come true? The MRJ-90 took off for the first time in 2015 and it would be reasonable for the manufacturer to give clear indications in this regard. The silence of the MHI and the new date of entry into service (2020) makes me suspect that the aircraft is not yet performing satisfactorily.

Regarding your claims of subsidies for E2 you obviously do not know what you're talking about (it seems to be a personal lifestyle).
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 618
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:58 am

PPVRA wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:

If you didn´t read my other post I write it again for you:
With no relax on the "scope clauses" we won´t see neither the MRJ90 nor the E175-E2 flying with regionals in US.

Source:
https://leehamnews.com/2017/01/18/regio ... e-clauses/
"The regional market and scope clauses"

MRJ90 orders:
TransState Holding: (-) 50
Skywest: (-) 100
Net orders: 73

E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263 (-) 100 E175-E2 for Skywest - Net orders: 163.
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets



Again:
E2 total orders: 233 plus 30 Paris Air Show orders and commitments (not mentioned by wikipedia): 263
http://atwonline.com/paris-air-show-201 ... -38-e-jets




Wrong: Azul it is not a susidiaries of HNA Group:
Source: http://www.mro-network.com/airlines/chi ... l-airlines
China’s HNA Group Buys 23.7% Stake In Azul Airlines



Wrong.
They are taking the E175 because they are the best plane in its category.
And again:
Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/embraer-sell ... 854253.htm
"The company noted the E175 enjoys an 80 percent share of net orders in North America since 2013."

https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... ional-e175
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... raer-fleet
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... om-skywest
https://www.embraer.com/global/en/news# ... -ten-e175s

And, maybe you can help me here with the latest MRJ90/70 order ...



Wrong again.
Brazilian Government barely can afford to pay its own debts.
You can say The Brazilian Government pays Embraer for the KC-390 transport/tanker project.
Embraer is a sub-contracted and not the onwer of the project.
In fact, for some time Embraer paid with its own funds the bills of the project in order to avoid it stoped and due to delays from Brazilian Government payments.




Will not happen, but just for your information as you believe in that:

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/57c86938-944 ... 9fde0b9506
Extract:
"According to the Wall Street Journal, Boeing and Embraer have been in discussions over a deal that would see the US defense group pay a “relatively large premium” for its Brazilian rival."

By the way, the market value is at least US$ 4.7 Billions ...

I suggest to you in the next attempt to present facts.
Your assumptions do not convince.


If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winne-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.


Embraer really did build the EJets without subsidies. Not sure why this is so hard to swallow. It's totally doable, they also build. . .

Phenom 100
Phenom 300
Legacy 450
Legacy 500
EJet E2s

. . . without any subsidies.

The Ejets E1 were built under a risks haring partnership with various other companies, to make it feasible. But it was done.

Embraer, btw, is a privately owned company traded in the New York Stock Exchange. The golden share by the government is a power thing, not an economic ownership stake.


What you are saying can be told to a naive 8 year old kid.
Virtually every commercial aircraft program in the world is subsidised. Aerospace brings know-how, jobs and status.
Embraer and Brazil can write whatever they want on magazines and newspapers, since no-one can or will verify whatever they say or where the money comes from.

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile. ... DF-ENG.pdf

Page 2.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:02 am

Waterbomber wrote:
PPVRA wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winne-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.


Embraer really did build the EJets without subsidies. Not sure why this is so hard to swallow. It's totally doable, they also build. . .

Phenom 100
Phenom 300
Legacy 450
Legacy 500
EJet E2s

. . . without any subsidies.

The Ejets E1 were built under a risks haring partnership with various other companies, to make it feasible. But it was done.

Embraer, btw, is a privately owned company traded in the New York Stock Exchange. The golden share by the government is a power thing, not an economic ownership stake.


What you are saying can be told to a naive 8 year old kid.
Virtually every commercial aircraft program in the world is subsidised. Aerospace brings know-how, jobs and status.
Embraer and Brazil can write whatever they want on magazines and newspapers, since no-one can or will verify whatever they say or where the money comes from.

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile. ... DF-ENG.pdf

Page 2.


You should educate yourself on the history of Embraer before posting stuff you obviously haven't read yourself. You also apparently like to make stuff up without sharing any evidence.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:13 am

Waterbomber wrote:

If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.


Bring me facts, not your assumption.

Waterbomber wrote:
As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real.


Wrong.
Labor costs is only part of the costs.

Waterbomber wrote:
So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.


Wrong.
Wall Street Journal said a take-over.
Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... or-444435/
Excerpt:
"But the biggest obstacle to consummating any “combination” between Boeing and Embraer remains the Brazilian government. The Brazilian air force created Embraer in 1969 as a state-owned company. The government agreed to privatise Embraer in 1994, but retained a golden share with veto power over any proposal that would transfer control of the company’s shares to a new owner. The Brazilian air force remains deeply invested in Embraer’s activity, having financed development of the KC-390 and assigned Embraer to participate with Saab in development of the Gripen E fighter."

Waterbomber wrote:
Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.
I understand your Brazilian pride, but you need to be realistic. Without Boeing, you guys are going to lose a ton of jobs.
Don't try to drawn the rescuer who's coming to take you back ashore."


Wrong again.
It´s not about pride.
It´s about a company valued at least US$ 4,7 billions.
At this time, it´s the Boeing needing Embraer in order to answer CSALP and not the opposite.

Waterbomber wrote:
Also, while the MRJ is subject of national pride, if Embraer decides to walk the lonely road, I can't rule out that MHI and Boeing won't do a JV for the NSA after Boeing's success working with them on the B787 program. That would be the death blow for Embraer and would also kill any prospects of collaborating on other programs such as NMA.


Wrong again.
MHI is just a Boeing´s subcontractor for the B787 program.
As said by "lightsaber" right above:
"Yes, Mitsubishi has made mistakes. They are learning. I saw some of the early MRJ proposals and was appalled at the lack of engineering rigor. (They were like grad student concepts, much intelligence put into them, but no industry rigor into weeding out bad concepts.) While there have been further mistakes, they are learning."

And this is for a project dated from 2007 and suposed to be certified in 2012.
Very far from "That would be the death blow for Embraer and would also kill any prospects of collaborating on other programs such as NMA" using your words.

The Ejets-E2 are a family of aircrafts that ranges from 70 to 140 seats.
That´s what Boeing needs to complement its line.
But it has a price ...
 
Nean1
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:20 am

Waterbomber wrote:
PPVRA wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:

If scope clauses remain in place after 2019, Embraer is going to lose the entire regional market to the MRJ in the form of the MRJ70.
In addition, even at a derated scope clauses limited MTOW of 86.000lbs, the MRJ has a useful load of 13 tons, which is decent enough for a lot of regional feeder routes, which is what the scope clause try to protect in the first place.

As for Brazil not subsidising Embraer "because it can barely afford to pay off its own debts", from the moment that Brazil is able to print money, the Ejets are a vehicle to acquire foreign currency from labor paid in Real. So call it what you want, but Embraer might as well be a national entity. The involvement of the Brazilian political elite in this potential Boeing take-over more than proves this point.

The regional market is a winne-takes-all kind of market.
Look at how the Ejets prevailed over the CRJ series and the ATR72 over the Q400.
It's a market that can change very quickly and that's exactly what is happening right now.

Embraer would be much stronger under Boeing. It's not the right time for national pride.


Embraer really did build the EJets without subsidies. Not sure why this is so hard to swallow. It's totally doable, they also build. . .

Phenom 100
Phenom 300
Legacy 450
Legacy 500
EJet E2s

. . . without any subsidies.

The Ejets E1 were built under a risks haring partnership with various other companies, to make it feasible. But it was done.

Embraer, btw, is a privately owned company traded in the New York Stock Exchange. The golden share by the government is a power thing, not an economic ownership stake.


What you are saying can be told to a naive 8 year old kid.
Virtually every commercial aircraft program in the world is subsidised. Aerospace brings know-how, jobs and status.
Embraer and Brazil can write whatever they want on magazines and newspapers, since no-one can or will verify whatever they say or where the money comes from.

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile. ... DF-ENG.pdf

Page 2.


When there is widespread suspicion of subsidies, it is common for the complainant in the WTO to propose an investigation against the country that initiated the dispute. This has happened before with Canada (BBD) and Brazil (Embraer), as well as with the USA (Boeing) and Europe (Airbus). In 2017 Brazil requested investigation of some Canadian programs to support the launch of the C-Series. I am currently waiting for some movement from Canada other than to delay the opening of a panel of inquiry ....
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:23 am

Waterbomber wrote:
[
What you are saying can be told to a naive 8 year old kid.
Virtually every commercial aircraft program in the world is subsidised. Aerospace brings know-how, jobs and status.
Embraer and Brazil can write whatever they want on magazines and newspapers, since no-one can or will verify whatever they say or where the money comes from.

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile. ... DF-ENG.pdf

Page 2.


Apparently you do not know the history of Embraer.

I suggest you read exactly what you cited:

https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile. ... DF-ENG.pdf
or
https://www.amazon.com/History-Embraer- ... 1932022406
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 508
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:16 am

EMBSPBR wrote:
People here don´t see the facts, only what on that they believe for ...



:checkmark: :checkmark:
 
grbauc
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:28 am

I has a customer Really Like the E-175 and don't care at all for the CRJ 7/9 I hope any Boeing Tie up would not ruin this beautiful little plane. Thanks for this tread ive enjoyed reading it.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:51 am

LockheedBBD wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
People here don´t see the facts, only what on that they believe for ...



:checkmark: :checkmark:


yup, pretty much sums up a.net in a nutshell. A place for people to complain about airlines not flying this or that route to their home-base airport. (*Ahem, DTW... :| )
Next flights:
PDX-MSP-PDX (Delta)
PDX-LAX-MIA (American)
MCO-DFW-PDX (American)
 
nostatic
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 7:32 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 7:56 am

This is my first post here and this are my thoughts regarding this situation.
Boeing is more interested in securing enginering resources than current embraer portfolio ( atleast comercial one). Should he move with MOM and attack 200-270 market airbus /csalp would imho launch CS500/700 with 6 abrest capable of carriing 180-200 passangers( thiner insulation, optimized cabin), optimized for up to 2000nm missions, where the main advantage of 737-800 lies. Perhaps even with new engines( leap-x?).And 322 with new wing to cut as much as possible on the higher end of the market. While Boeing would probably dominate the MOM market he would be left with dissadvantage on the lover end. I simply think Boeing doesnt have the resources to launch two clean sheet designs by themself (engeniring), thus Embraer fits perfectly as it is the only westeren manufacturer left who has the skills and knowhow to help Boeing lounch two new sheet designs at the same time covering both end of the market.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:02 am

Brazil government is starting to interfere:

Brazil’s defense minister said the government was concerned that talks about Boeing Co.’s possible takeover of Embraer SA had gone ahead without its knowledge, and demanded explanations from the Brazilian aircraft maker.

...

“No country would agree to give up control of a company like this one,” the minister said at a press conference in Brasília, explaining that Embraer played a central role in Brazil’s military strategy as well as its manufacturing industry.


Ref https://www.wsj.com/articles/brazilian- ... 1514488717
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 618
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:31 am

This begs the question. Is this situation with the Brazilian government really better than if Boeing had negotiated with BBD and the Canadian government for a stake in the Cseries?
This is embarassing for Boeing... not only do they have to settle for the smaller Ejet, even that seems impossible as the Brazilians don't want them anywhere near their crown jewel.

Well, the way this is going, Boeing might not have other options than to drop the "bottom of the market" and focus on the MoM.
Japan is ready to go all-in on the B797 and not as subcontractors, but as risk-sharing JV partners:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-upgrade/

A join venture with Boeing?
Yet Boeing remains mum on how work on its next new airplane will be allotted and who might help build it.

Asked in an interview in Tokyo about the concerns of the Heavies that Boeing is not sharing its thinking on the potential 797, Brett Gerry, president of Boeing Japan, said it’s too early for that.

“This is a very sophisticated and advanced manufacturing culture and workforce,” Gerry said. “The technical excellence of the partnership has … led to the creation of tens of thousands of aerospace jobs in the U.S. and Japan.”

But as for future airplanes, he said, “We haven’t made any decisions.”

If and when Boeing does finally decide on its next move, Japan will have to compete fiercely for work, said aviation-industry analyst Richard Aboulafia.

“Everyone wants a piece of the 797,” he said.

Aboulafia said the next new jet now under consideration is a high-volume, twin-aisle airplane priced closer to a single-aisle jet. It will be, he predicted, “the most intensely cost-driven airplane” Boeing has ever produced.

Given the imperative for lower costs, it’s conceivable Boeing will again outsource the composite wing, as it did to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries on the 787.

As for the body of the plane, which will likely be metal, building those sections might come down to a competition between the Japanese Heavies and Spirit AeroSystems of Wichita, Kansas.

Yet a more radical outsourcing plan might also be possible, said Aboulafia, given the prospect of high rates of production: some kind of joint venture between Boeing and the Heavies, “a grand transoceanic partnership,” similar to the highly successful CFM joint venture between U.S. jet engine maker GE and its French counterpart Safran.

In such a scenario, he said Japanese-owned aircraft plants wouldn’t necessarily have to be in Japan.

Japanese industry already thinks globally, he said, and the Heavies could operate plants wherever it makes business sense, be that the U.S. or Southeast Asia.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:35 am

Embraer is on record saying they’d love to partner with Airbus or Boeing. Not as a subcontractor, but as a risk-sharing partner.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18192
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:19 pm

Waterbomber wrote:
This begs the question. Is this situation with the Brazilian government really better than if Boeing had negotiated with BBD and the Canadian government for a stake in the Cseries?

As a friend said to me, it's hard to drive if you're only looking at the rear view mirror.

Boeing took a good look at BBD and chose to walk away. It's no longer an option.

My bet is that they'll walk away from EMB with at best an enhancement of the current partnerships they have, but nothing more.

As I said earlier, this is largely a narrative driven story. The real world facts indicate to me at least that there is no real basis for "takeover talks" to conclude.

It seems everyone is rooting for the narrative to play out and for Boeing to get into a "rebound relationship", but as we all know those almost never work out.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
BREECH
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:20 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:08 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
show me Embraer's space vehicle?

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0. If "all you could find was that", then maybe you should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Nestle. Show me Nestle's F-class limousine! Show me Mercedes' baby formula!
No friendship, love or respect unite people as much as shared hatred.
Sergey Dovlatov
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:54 pm

BREECH wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
show me Embraer's space vehicle?

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0. If "all you could find was that", then maybe you should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Nestle. Show me Nestle's F-class limousine! Show me Mercedes' baby formula!


Don´t bother about what he says.
He doesn't like neither Embraer nor Boeing.
You made a comparison.
He compares apples to oranges.
Who cares ...

I would say again to him: bring us facts.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:05 pm

Waterbomber wrote:
This begs the question. Is this situation with the Brazilian government really better than if Boeing had negotiated with BBD and the Canadian government for a stake in the Cseries?
This is embarassing for Boeing... not only do they have to settle for the smaller Ejet, even that seems impossible as the Brazilians don't want them anywhere near their crown jewel.
Well, the way this is going, Boeing might not have other options than to drop the "bottom of the market" and focus on the MoM.
Japan is ready to go all-in on the B797 and not as subcontractors, but as risk-sharing JV partners:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-upgrade/


From the same source that you cited:

This business is very long term,” said Yugo Fukuhara, vice president of MRJ sales & marketing, in an interview in Tokyo. “We are not making just an aircraft.
We are creating a new industry in Japan.”

Shinji Suzuki, a professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at the University of Tokyo, said, “It might be difficult to post a profit with the MRJ … But if it continues, it will grow as the root of the Japanese aerospace industry.”

“This is the message Japan wants to send Boeing: That we are developing the ability to integrate aircraft,” Suzuki added. “Japan needs to go into a new phase, where the Heavies can codevelop aircraft with Boeing.

Waterbomber wrote:
This is embarassing for Boeing... not only do they have to settle for the smaller Ejet, even that seems impossible as the Brazilians don't want them anywhere near their crown jewel.


Sure it´s our "crown jewel".
And the japaneses are trying to create their own ...
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:09 pm

BREECH wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
show me Embraer's space vehicle?

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0. If "all you could find was that", then maybe you should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Nestle. Show me Nestle's F-class limousine! Show me Mercedes' baby formula!

Quoted out of context, and with total disregard to the various posts I was replying to. 3-out-of-10 (and I'm being generous)

The person you need to address your attack to is PPVRA;
PPVRA wrote:
And lastly, Mitsubishi isn't know for their reliable cars like Toyota and Honda are

Or do you agree with him that car production is justification for why Mitsubishi will fail with the MRJ? Compared to that, aerospace is very much more appropriate.
(Notwithstanding the inconvenient fact that the Mitsubishi Lancer features as one of the most reliable cars in recent years, beating both Toyota and Honda...)

You might also note that several Embraer fanboys here sincerely believe (and keep repeating) the fallacy that Mitsubishi are merely a component maker, and not a producer of whole aircraft. Shortly before citing the Mitsubishi space vehicle, I also provided pretty pictures of various Mitsubishi (whole) aircraft. But somehow you missed that too. I suggest you go back and read ALL the relevant posts, and then you will see it isn't my approach to comparison that is the issue, which in turn makes your comment rather foolish.

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0.

Of course you can; I don't doubt the figures. But that is only a narrow view; a selective snapshot from a moment in time can show almost anything. And right now you are comparing an established regional jet manufacturer, with Mitsubishi, offering an aircraft still "under development" with a first flight only two years ago. Maybe it is you who should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Agrale.

[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Agrale_4300.JPG/320px-Agrale_4300.JPG[img]
I promised myself I'd leave before the party turned ugly. I would quit at 1000 !
Here I am stuck at 994; each time I'm tempted to post, I find myself wondering who will even read it / what is the point?
Or maybe I've just got nothing left to say.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:54 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
Don´t bother about what he says.
He doesn't like neither Embraer nor Boeing.
You made a comparison.
He compares apples to oranges.
Who cares ...

I would say again to him: bring us facts.

I've shown you facts, and you have repeatedly ignored them. Ignoring facts seems to be a common theme amongst the Brazilian mafia (I'm joking... I don't know how else to describe various Embraer employees posting here). Here are a selection of your (plural) quotes;
"just because (Mitsubishi) make other products for heavy industries does not guarantee they can make a reliable airplane" ("heavy" also includes Nikon Cameras!)
"Me too company. Not stellar in anything." (apart from stellar space vehicles - but that upsets Breech)
"MHI wants to be a Aircraft producer, not a component maker." and "Being a supplier is different than putting together the whole animal."

A.net search results shows 3,055 matches for Mitsubishi aircraft, varying from licence built F-15DJ, to home designed F-1 & T-2 supersonic fighters & Diamond biz-jets. It surprises and disappoints me that there are people here on a.net who have no apparent knowledge of Mitsubishi's rich aviation history. Or indeed what they make currently.

And then when all reasonable argument fails, you bring out the dirt.
"the truly shocking issue is to understand how a company that has received a high magnitude government support and for so long can be so delayed in a regional jet program"
Pot. kettle, black, and a complete absence of those precious facts you demand from anyone criticising Embraer.

And here is the most recent example, specifically from you this time...
EMBSPBR wrote:
Sure it´s (Embraer) our "crown jewel".
And the japaneses are trying to create their own ...

Wrong; Mitsubishi is already a crown jewel in Japan, and has been for many years, and will be for many more, with or without a successful MRJ.

But as long as you, (and Breech) continue to focus on just one small aspect of Mitsubishi's business - an aspect where Embraer currently has a dominant position (so that it keeps your dreams intact), then you will sleep-walk into the same pickle as Boeing. I cannot guarantee that the MRJ will be a success, but please stop dismissing one of the world's most respected companies as if they were a second-rate player.
I promised myself I'd leave before the party turned ugly. I would quit at 1000 !
Here I am stuck at 994; each time I'm tempted to post, I find myself wondering who will even read it / what is the point?
Or maybe I've just got nothing left to say.
 
CX747
Posts: 6019
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 6:22 pm

Article discussing the deal, probable Boeing/Embraer JV and Boeing's current position in the market.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/seekingalp ... ngs-big-di
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 6:38 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
BREECH wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
show me Embraer's space vehicle?

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0. If "all you could find was that", then maybe you should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Nestle. Show me Nestle's F-class limousine! Show me Mercedes' baby formula!

Quoted out of context, and with total disregard to the various posts I was replying to. 3-out-of-10 (and I'm being generous)

The person you need to address your attack to is PPVRA;
PPVRA wrote:
And lastly, Mitsubishi isn't know for their reliable cars like Toyota and Honda are

Or do you agree with him that car production is justification for why Mitsubishi will fail with the MRJ? Compared to that, aerospace is very much more appropriate.
(Notwithstanding the inconvenient fact that the Mitsubishi Lancer features as one of the most reliable cars in recent years, beating both Toyota and Honda...)

You might also note that several Embraer fanboys here sincerely believe (and keep repeating) the fallacy that Mitsubishi are merely a component maker, and not a producer of whole aircraft. Shortly before citing the Mitsubishi space vehicle, I also provided pretty pictures of various Mitsubishi (whole) aircraft. But somehow you missed that too. I suggest you go back and read ALL the relevant posts, and then you will see it isn't my approach to comparison that is the issue, which in turn makes your comment rather foolish.

I can show you the relative market shares of Mitsubishi and Embraer on regional jets market. Embraer - 50%, Mitsubishi - 0.

Of course you can; I don't doubt the figures. But that is only a narrow view; a selective snapshot from a moment in time can show almost anything. And right now you are comparing an established regional jet manufacturer, with Mitsubishi, offering an aircraft still "under development" with a first flight only two years ago. Maybe it is you who should stop using Bing. Your approach to comparison is similar to comparing Mercedes Benz and Agrale.

[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Agrale_4300.JPG/320px-Agrale_4300.JPG[img]


First of all, you need to read the Seattle Times article that Waterbomber posted above. Quite a good read actually, and it blows your assertion that Mitsubishi is an experienced “whole” aircraft manufacturer out of the water — and by Mitsubishi’s own admission.

Second, I didn’t say the MRJ would fail. It has struggled and likely will struggle further into EIS, probably more so than your average aircraft OEM considering all the new info you learned by reading the Seattle Times article. It’s not that Mitsubishi is incompetent, it’s that they’re new at this.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
novarupta
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:32 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 7:51 pm

PPVRA wrote:

First of all, you need to read the Seattle Times article that Waterbomber posted above. Quite a good read actually, and it blows your assertion that Mitsubishi is an experienced “whole” aircraft manufacturer out of the water — and by Mitsubishi’s own admission.

Second, I didn’t say the MRJ would fail. It has struggled and likely will struggle further into EIS, probably more so than your average aircraft OEM considering all the new info you learned by reading the Seattle Times article. It’s not that Mitsubishi is incompetent, it’s that they’re new at this.


The mere fact that Seattle times would print anything remotely suggesting that Mitsubishi is not an experienced "whole" aircraft manufacturer discredits them in my opinion. Especially when referring to the same Mitsubishi who were buiilding fighters/bombers (like the notorius Zero for example....) since World War 2. On the flip-side, Embraer only appeared on the scene in 1969, building licensed versions of Piper airplanes.
 
CX747
Posts: 6019
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:00 pm

I think the original article overstated what was going on. I don't see this as a takeover but a joint venture. With all of the moving pieces, multiple parties will have to be satisfied. I can't see the Brazilian military being a stumbling block. IF the Brazilian GOV wants this to happen, everyone will fall in line. IF not, then they will allow a squeaky wheel to hold up the venture. Either way, Boeing and Embraer will come out of this discussion far closer than they were before.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8113
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:02 pm

novarupta wrote:
PPVRA wrote:

First of all, you need to read the Seattle Times article that Waterbomber posted above. Quite a good read actually, and it blows your assertion that Mitsubishi is an experienced “whole” aircraft manufacturer out of the water — and by Mitsubishi’s own admission.

Second, I didn’t say the MRJ would fail. It has struggled and likely will struggle further into EIS, probably more so than your average aircraft OEM considering all the new info you learned by reading the Seattle Times article. It’s not that Mitsubishi is incompetent, it’s that they’re new at this.


The mere fact that Seattle times would print anything remotely suggesting that Mitsubishi is not an experienced "whole" aircraft manufacturer discredits them in my opinion. Especially when referring to the same Mitsubishi who were buiilding fighters/bombers (like the notorius Zero for example....) since World War 2. On the flip-side, Embraer only appeared on the scene in 1969, building licensed versions of Piper airplanes.


You mean the quotes from Mitsubishi management admitting they're new at this because they haven't really done anything like it in, what they said, 40 or 60 years? The Zero is a proud heritage of the company but absolutely meaningless in anything practical to Mitsubishi today.

Embraer's first aircraft was the EMB-110 Bandeirante, the precursor to the EMB-120 Brasilia.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Nean1
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:03 pm

CX747 wrote:
I think the original article overstated what was going on. I don't see this as a takeover but a joint venture. With all of the moving pieces, multiple parties will have to be satisfied. I can't see the Brazilian military being a stumbling block. IF the Brazilian GOV wants this to happen, everyone will fall in line. IF not, then they will allow a squeaky wheel to hold up the venture. Either way, Boeing and Embraer will come out of this discussion far closer than they were before.


This discussion has departed quite a bit from the theme, even though certain practices have remained. Embraer began its activities in a rather modest way, 50 years ago manufacturing a small twin-engine turboprop of its own project and an Italian licenced training jet.

From the moment the ERJ-145 is launched, after a development that almost takes the company to bankruptcy, it becomes a great success. From then on we heard very heavy critiques, with or without foundation in the facts. Pejorative expressions about the company or its products (Jungle Jet, Barbie Jet, E-180, confort woman, brazilian mafia ..) were convenient substitutes in the absence of proven facts.

What would be the reason for success for a small company in a country with no technological tradition to become the leader in the regional jet segment in 10 year lapse?

Like many aviation lovers I am fascinated by the charisma of the Mitsubishi Zero fighter, with clean lines and unique maneuverability. But what we are discussing about MRJ's potential is something completely different. It goes far beyond technical capabilities and concerns the real economic attractiveness of a project that will compete in a segment played by solid competitors. Spending at least 7 times what Embraer will disbursed in the 175 E2 anyone with a minimum of knowledge will think that obviously such a project will never bring economic payback.

If we compare with the situation of the Sukkoi SSJ 100 we will also see that another company with great technical resources and acclaimed military products could not establish itself in the market, experiencing a troubled introduction in the civil market.

With increasing Chinese military power and assertiveness the Japan is rightly concerned. It is not by chance that many traditional conglomerates are being encouraged, by various means, to enter the aerospace market. That is as a by-product of this new geopolitical tension and countries like Russia, China, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia and others will bring a lot of technical and economic resources to create powerful industries in this segment.

Boeing and Embraer certainly see very difficult scenarios in terms of increased competition and restrictions on access to these markets. If we combine this concern with doubts about the sustainability of this jetliner supercycle (see http://aviationweek.com/commercial-avia ... erspective), we can understand that these two companies have powerful motivators. The BBD / Airbus agreement was a remarkable event but there is so much more to worry about.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 14

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos