EddieDude wrote:

In the medium term I would expect DL to order more A330NEOs.

OS and SN could also do with the A330NEO, as well as KA. I am sure many other carriers will at least look into the A330NEO. Once more A332s and A333s start reaching their retirement age, carriers will definitely consider replacing them with NEOs.

reidar76 wrote:

I think people expect way to many coming A330 orders. I think it is reasonable to assume that Airbus with the current order backlog, and with coming orders, will be able to maintain the A330 production at 5 to 6 aircraft per months for many years to come. It is unlikely that the A330 ever again will reach a production rate of 10 per month. With the 787 at 12 per month, and production possibly increase to 14 per month in a few years, the market ratio in this segment will be approximately 33 % Airbus and 67 % Boeing. If we look at orders in the last 10 years, the market share ratio between the A330 and 787 has been 50/50. This will clearly not be the case going forward.

Note that the 777X and A330neo is in a similar situation.

First delivery:
A330: 1994
777: 1995

Both families have gone thru significant upgrades since first delivery, with significant MTOW increases.

Number of pax aircraft delivered since first delivery: (as of end of 2017)
A330 (-200/-300): 1323 aircraft
777 (-200/-300): 1377 aircraft

Boeing launched the 787, where the 787-8 is near identically sized as the A330-200-/800, and the 787-9 is near identically sized as the A330-300/-900.

A few years later Airbus launched the A350, where the A350-900 and A350-1000 are near one to one replacements for the 777-200ER and 777-300ER respectively.

Airbus responds to the 787 by upgrading the A330 family: New engines, increased wingspan, cabin upgrades etc. The A330neo is born.

Boeing responds to the A350 by upgrading the 777 family: New engines, increased wingspan, cabin upgrades, a slight stretch etc. The 777X is born.

I reckon these two warmed over families will continue to sell in similar numbers. Whether the A330neo (or 777X) is a success or not, depends on the price Airbus (Boeing) is able to achieve per aircraft sold. Ref. return on investments made.

The 777X/A350 market share ratio will probably be similar to the A330/787 ratio, with the warmed over families having closer to 33 % market share, while the clean sheet families enjoying closer to 67 % market share (in their respective market segments).

lightsaber wrote:

Farnborough will make or break the A330NEO.
The big decision will be Indigo. Indigo airlines is going more to a purchase outright model versus their prior sales/leaseback. However, they need financing flexibility and the option for sales leaseback...

Polot wrote:

JustSomeDood wrote:

Well, fact of the matter is, whether leasing companies were sure of their ability to place A330neos or not when they ordered them years ago, the fact that many of these frames are still unplaced 3+ years later cannot be seen as a good thing for the neo's prospects either with operators or orders.

Also most A330neo leasing orders were in fact placed without any idea who they would be leased too. CIT, Avolon, and ALC all committed to the A330neo at program launch at the Farnborough Air Show in 2014. You think they already had customers lined up? BOC is the only leasor to order A330neos since then (for 2), which are probably already committed.

The strength of the A330ceo meant the leasing gaints were comfortable placing speculative orders for the A330neo. But the Neo will have to survive based on its own merit, not the A330ceo’s past success. If it can’t then the leasors will just move on. They are not going to try to force the A330neo to have the same success as the A330ceo.

This needs to be emphasized that leasing companies places speculative orders. For a leasing company, a speculative order can be their most profitable order *if* the type is desirable.

The issue today with the A330NEO is that Airbus and leasing companies are competing with each other. The leasing companies have a decision:
1. Discount A330NEOs to keep contract commitments. If that happens, they will *not* place further orders except at discounts that meet their profit targets.
2. Differ A330NEO orders in hopes of finding future customers for unplaced frames. This keeps the leasing companies in competition with Airbus.
3. Pay penalties on an expensive lesson learned. This creates quite a bit of conflict between Airbus and the leasing companies as they of course want their money back.

At this time, leasing companies are very hesitant to place speculative orders for any widebody except the A350 and 787. Because of the issues leasing companies are having issues moving the A330NEO, who thinks they will offer excellent terms on sale/leasebacks? That type of financing is incredibly common. It is what we would expect AirAsia to do. But leasing companies will only do sale/leasebacks on terms that attract investors.

It is for Airbus to shock the market in a way that brings investors to the table. Otherwise, AirAsia will not finance their A330NEO purchases; I would be shocked if AirAsia didn't have an escape clause on financing terms. Airbus couldn't afford to finance the entire order... So there is risk of that order not being completed. And the Federal reserve just raised rates again...

It is for Airbus to solve the issue. Boeing created it by discounting 787s after reducing production costs more than any of us predicted (at least I do not recall any posts from 3+ years ago predicting this level of competition). The game changed since A330NEO launch. What is the recovery plan?

Serious question, what fraction of the leasing company orders for A330NEOs have customers? I know Azul, TAP, and others are taking leased airframes. But how many? Until the leasing companies *want* to dive back into the A330NEO business, the plane will be in purgatory. Not every airline is a DL with so little debt they can sign a contract at risk of not being able to lease it as DL has no issue raising funds (e.g., selling bonds or just borrowing from a bank). Then again, DL is buying so much just off profits...

Lightsaber

mjoelnir wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Farnborough will make or break the A330NEO.
The big decision will be Indigo. Indigo airlines is going more to a purchase outright model versus their prior sales/leaseback. However, they need financing flexibility and the option for sales leaseback...

Polot wrote:

Also most A330neo leasing orders were in fact placed without any idea who they would be leased too. CIT, Avolon, and ALC all committed to the A330neo at program launch at the Farnborough Air Show in 2014. You think they already had customers lined up? BOC is the only leasor to order A330neos since then (for 2), which are probably already committed.

The strength of the A330ceo meant the leasing gaints were comfortable placing speculative orders for the A330neo. But the Neo will have to survive based on its own merit, not the A330ceo’s past success. If it can’t then the leasors will just move on. They are not going to try to force the A330neo to have the same success as the A330ceo.

This needs to be emphasized that leasing companies places speculative orders. For a leasing company, a speculative order can be their most profitable order *if* the type is desirable.

The issue today with the A330NEO is that Airbus and leasing companies are competing with each other. The leasing companies have a decision:
1. Discount A330NEOs to keep contract commitments. If that happens, they will *not* place further orders except at discounts that meet their profit targets.
2. Differ A330NEO orders in hopes of finding future customers for unplaced frames. This keeps the leasing companies in competition with Airbus.
3. Pay penalties on an expensive lesson learned. This creates quite a bit of conflict between Airbus and the leasing companies as they of course want their money back.

At this time, leasing companies are very hesitant to place speculative orders for any widebody except the A350 and 787. Because of the issues leasing companies are having issues moving the A330NEO, who thinks they will offer excellent terms on sale/leasebacks? That type of financing is incredibly common. It is what we would expect AirAsia to do. But leasing companies will only do sale/leasebacks on terms that attract investors.

It is for Airbus to shock the market in a way that brings investors to the table. Otherwise, AirAsia will not finance their A330NEO purchases; I would be shocked if AirAsia didn't have an escape clause on financing terms. Airbus couldn't afford to finance the entire order... So there is risk of that order not being completed. And the Federal reserve just raised rates again...

It is for Airbus to solve the issue. Boeing created it by discounting 787s after reducing production costs more than any of us predicted (at least I do not recall any posts from 3+ years ago predicting this level of competition). The game changed since A330NEO launch. What is the recovery plan?

Serious question, what fraction of the leasing company orders for A330NEOs have customers? I know Azul, TAP, and others are taking leased airframes. But how many? Until the leasing companies *want* to dive back into the A330NEO business, the plane will be in purgatory. Not every airline is a DL with so little debt they can sign a contract at risk of not being able to lease it as DL has no issue raising funds (e.g., selling bonds or just borrowing from a bank). Then again, DL is buying so much just off profits...

Lightsaber

Farnborough will neither make nor break the A330neo. If Airbus will get a sizable order it is fine, if not the A330 production will go on.

Regarding the leasing companies, I am sure they have customer lined up. It will mainly be customers currently flying A330ceo and need to add or replace a few frames. There are worldwide 120 operators of A330. Most of those operators will have leased frames and leasing companies will know about their near future needs. We will not know about the leasing commitments before the frames get allocated sometime in the future,

We know a few future lessors. We know about Rwandair taking 2. About TAP leasing additional frames to the ones they have ordered. ALC has placed 10 frames with Hy fly. Air Mauritius are getting 2 frames, again ALC. I think we will hear more when the frames are getting nearer to delivery.

Polot wrote:

The problem is that is only a short term benefit. Leasing companies are businesses, not charities. If they find that they are getting significantly better returns of investment from 787s than A330neos then they will just stop placing large speculative follow up orders for the A330neo in favor of the 787, and a supply of cheap leasable A330neos will no longer exist. If Airbus can’t replace those orders from leasing companies with direct orders than the total number of A330neos, and it’s re-marketability, will decrease, and the premiums to finance the plane will increase. Making it harder to be price competitive. The lack of orders may also require a production cut, further rising production costs and making it harder to be price competitive.

Polot wrote:

That is why Airbus/the leasing companies need to work hard to get more solid orders and commitments from blue chip customers, not airlines like Rwandair. The fact that leasing companies are having to lease out relatively early slots to airlines who business model is subleasing, wet leasing, and chartering out planes (HiFly), aka leasing from one middle man to another, is a little worrisome.

Devilfish wrote:

Polot wrote:

The problem is that is only a short term benefit. Leasing companies are businesses, not charities. If they find that they are getting significantly better returns of investment from 787s than A330neos then they will just stop placing large speculative follow up orders for the A330neo in favor of the 787, and a supply of cheap leasable A330neos will no longer exist. If Airbus can’t replace those orders from leasing companies with direct orders than the total number of A330neos, and it’s re-marketability, will decrease, and the premiums to finance the plane will increase. Making it harder to be price competitive. The lack of orders may also require a production cut, further rising production costs and making it harder to be price competitive.

It's a buyers market now and airframers can no longer force upon it what it can't bear. Airbus' expectation of their A330N's value does not align with the airlines' perception of it. That landmark sale to DL didn't help things much. Now everyone is eyeing a better deal than they would normally get.

Polot wrote:

That is why Airbus/the leasing companies need to work hard to get more solid orders and commitments from blue chip customers, not airlines like Rwandair. The fact that leasing companies are having to lease out relatively early slots to airlines who business model is subleasing, wet leasing, and chartering out planes (HiFly), aka leasing from one middle man to another, is a little worrisome.

Airbus is in a dilemma. That vicious domino effect you mention above will last unless something drastic is done. 787 sales were sluggish until Boeing unleashed their offensive. Would Airbus bite the bullet and do the same?.....More to the point, would they be able to slash the A330N's price in time to catch up

lightsaber wrote:

Farnborough will make or break the A330NEO.
The big decision will be Indigo. Indigo airlines is going more to a purchase outright model versus their prior sales/leaseback. However, they need financing flexibility and the option for sales leaseback...
Lightsaber

sabby wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Farnborough will make or break the A330NEO.
The big decision will be Indigo. Indigo airlines is going more to a purchase outright model versus their prior sales/leaseback. However, they need financing flexibility and the option for sales leaseback...
Lightsaber

Why does Indigo need a large A330NEO order ? All of Asia is covered in A320NEO range, in fact if I remember correctly, the A330CEO still is more efficient <2500nm which is what most of Asia is for Indigo. If they want to venture into Europe, why don't they try with the A320NEO first and see if they get good load factors ? I'd think a low cost airline would prefer the narrow bodies for inaugural routes where possible.

It's a good plane, if the A330ceo could hold up against the 787 the A330neo should certainly be able to do the same. But still the airlines decide to order 787s and A350s instead. The interesting part of this discussion is to find out why they make those choices against the A330neo.

49Paralell wrote:

Here is another point...if the A338neo has the same range and capacity of the A350, why would airlines order the 797? If the numbers of profitability per seat, and operational costs do not come in line...Delta and other airlines that are potential customers of the 797, will default to the 338neo. More range, good capacity. Thoughts?

Polot wrote:

sabby wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Farnborough will make or break the A330NEO.
The big decision will be Indigo. Indigo airlines is going more to a purchase outright model versus their prior sales/leaseback. However, they need financing flexibility and the option for sales leaseback...
Lightsaber

Why does Indigo need a large A330NEO order ? All of Asia is covered in A320NEO range, in fact if I remember correctly, the A330CEO still is more efficient <2500nm which is what most of Asia is for Indigo. If they want to venture into Europe, why don't they try with the A320NEO first and see if they get good load factors ? I'd think a low cost airline would prefer the narrow bodies for inaugural routes where possible.

Indigo has intercontinental aspirations. An A320neo, especially in Indigo’s dense configuration, is not going to make it very far into Europe from India’s major cities. They currently need wide body range for that. Note the rumors are for up to 50 A330neos, I would expect that to include options. I don’t see them ordering 50 firm right off the bat.

49Paralell wrote:

It's a good plane, if the A330ceo could hold up against the 787 the A330neo should certainly be able to do the same. But still the airlines decide to order 787s and A350s instead. The interesting part of this discussion is to find out why they make those choices against the A330neo.

I don't know if it has been mentioned but the A330neo has the same range as the A350. The A338neo can reach 1,000 nm further than the 787. In essence, the A350 is competing with the A338neo. So if you are the Airline CEO, it boils down to profit per seat and operational cost. Forgive me but I have not looked at capacity from the A350 versus the A338neo, but if the operational costs are relatively the same but you can fit more passengers in the A350, then there is your answer right there. So in essence, this A338neo dilemma is not because of the 787 success, but rather to the A350 (I know I am about the get slaugthered here by Boeing fans). Look at the numbers and airline networks.

Here is another point...if the A338neo has the same range and capacity of the A350, why would airlines order the 797? If the numbers of profitability per seat, and operational costs do not come in line...Delta and other airlines that are potential customers of the 797, will default to the 338neo. More range, good capacity. Thoughts?

lightsaber wrote:

Polot wrote:

sabby wrote:

Why does Indigo need a large A330NEO order ? All of Asia is covered in A320NEO range, in fact if I remember correctly, the A330CEO still is more efficient <2500nm which is what most of Asia is for Indigo. If they want to venture into Europe, why don't they try with the A320NEO first and see if they get good load factors ? I'd think a low cost airline would prefer the narrow bodies for inaugural routes where possible.

Indigo has intercontinental aspirations. An A320neo, especially in Indigo’s dense configuration, is not going to make it very far into Europe from India’s major cities. They currently need wide body range for that. Note the rumors are for up to 50 A330neos, I would expect that to include options. I don’t see them ordering 50 firm right off the bat.

I agree, Indigo should order 25 to 30 with options. That said, Boeing will compete.

The A320NEO has about a 3,100nm still air range in a 186 seat configuration or 2,500nm or so range circle. . Recall the 3,700nm is for 162 seats with the ACT (cargo hold fuel tank that weights 3 tons full). Idigo uses exactly that 3 tons for 2.6 tons more payload and fittings (seats, O2).

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=2500nm%40del

It is worth noting Indigo could try a lower risk strategy with the A321LR. Either way, they are Airbus' only hope of a large kickoff order to restart A330NEO sales that I know of. Boeing knows this too. Indigo must be getting a lot of airframer love right now.

Lightsaber

RB211trent wrote:

Wait till Farnborough, an Asian airline may be ordering a few, not seen them mentioned here either.

Newbiepilot wrote:

I wonder who will order the A330-800



Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

I fully expect more A330-900 orders. There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

bigjku wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

I wonder who will order the A330-800



Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

I fully expect more A330-900 orders. There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

Can someone explain why leasing an A330-900 not already on order would create a low cost lease? It logically doesn’t make sense...

Newbiepilot wrote:

bigjku wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

I wonder who will order the A330-800



Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

I fully expect more A330-900 orders. There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

Can someone explain why leasing an A330-900 not already on order would create a low cost lease? It logically doesn’t make sense...

According to this thread, A330-900s were leased to Azul for $783,000 per month.

viewtopic.php?t=1374235#p19827945

That is less than a new 787-8 or A330-300 were going for a year ago:

viewtopic.php?t=1361025

If lessors are offering the plane for that price, there will be demand.

Newbiepilot wrote:

Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

Devilfish wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

Positive reinforcement. It wouldn't do to have a model you were trying to sell continue to be pilloried in the specialist press without some forceful defense. Besides, it likely did not cost Airbus much to build as common parts ought to be readily available from the A339 test-campaign? The winglets look like the old prototype they initially showed and the whole frame presumably is mostly an empty shell (remember the 788 parade? - hyped to large orders tho.) Lastly, Airbus must've been confident about the A338's business case going forward and built it fully convinced they'd use it for certification. And unless I'm badly mistaken, wasn't HI's order still alive (admittedly in a coma) when Airbus rolled-out the glider in full house colors?

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

There might be a few odd airlines out there (who could not quite spring for the 787 for one reason or another) that need the A338's range and not the A339's capacity --- if the price is right.

Newbiepilot wrote:

bigjku wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

I wonder who will order the A330-800



Why did Airbus go ahead and build a plane that no one wants to buy? Has there ever been a rollout for a jet before where the airplane had zero orders?

I fully expect more A330-900 orders. There is a market for low cost leases for widebodies, but who other than some rich head of state will buy the A330-800?

Can someone explain why leasing an A330-900 not already on order would create a low cost lease? It logically doesn’t make sense...

According to this thread, A330-900s were leased to Azul for $783,000 per month.

viewtopic.php?t=1374235#p19827945

That is less than a new 787-8 or A330-300 were going for a year ago:

viewtopic.php?t=1361025

If lessors are offering the plane for that price, there will be demand.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

DL customers are not fans of all the 767-300 and 767-400 being operated on so many longer flights. Spend an evening at JFK and just listen to the " oh not this old bird again" repeated throughout the gate areas. Delta is extremely active at getting feedback, and I have to think they are listening, especially to those of us flying over 50k per year. This being said, I can see DL placing a 50 firm/50 option order for A339NEO, and I think we will see some more firm A359 and 5 firm A35x as well.

sabby wrote:

If they really wanted to start mid-long hauls, they could get some cheap A330 ceo on lease and test the waters and adjust their business models accordingly before ordering their own. Anyway, interesting time for Indian Aviation I guess

RB211trent wrote:

Wait till Farnborough, an Asian airline may be ordering a few, not seen them mentioned here either.

bigjku wrote:

The question is basically this. If we know that the leasing companies aren’t getting the same return as they would on a 787 why would they invest more capital in buying A339neo’s for about the same price upfront? I am talking about leasing ones not already on order this generating new orders from leasing companies.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Had the 251t MTOW A338 been announced much earlier and the A350-800XWB, chances are that the A338 might have had actual sales.

lightsaber wrote:

Pressure is forming for A330 orders at Farnborough. Production to dip to 50/year in 2019.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/finance/n ... 00168.html

Jayafe wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Pressure is forming for A330 orders at Farnborough. Production to dip to 50/year in 2019.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/finance/n ... 00168.html

That's not pressure, not even artificial pressure, that's a paid PR article.

caljn wrote:

787 sales were sluggish until Boeing unleashed their offensive. Would Airbus bite the bullet and do the same?


When were 787 sales sluggish?

zkojq wrote:

I think Cathay Pacific will eventually make a decent order. Both for themselves and for Cathay Dragon.

49Paralell wrote:

It's a good plane, if the A330ceo could hold up against the 787 the A330neo should certainly be able to do the same. But still the airlines decide to order 787s and A350s instead. The interesting part of this discussion is to find out why they make those choices against the A330neo.

I don't know if it has been mentioned but the A330neo has the same range as the A350. The A338neo can reach 1,000 nm further than the 787. In essence, the A350 is competing with the A338neo. So if you are the Airline CEO, it boils down to profit per seat and operational cost. Forgive me but I have not looked at capacity from the A350 versus the A338neo, but if the operational costs are relatively the same but you can fit more passengers in the A350, then there is your answer right there. So in essence, this A338neo dilemma is not because of the 787 success, but rather to the A350 (I know I am about the get slaugthered here by Boeing fans). Look at the numbers and airline networks.

Here is another point...if the A338neo has the same range and capacity of the A350, why would airlines order the 797? If the numbers of profitability per seat, and operational costs do not come in line...Delta and other airlines that are potential customers of the 797, will default to the 338neo. More range, good capacity. Thoughts?

Elementalism wrote:

49Paralell wrote:

It's a good plane, if the A330ceo could hold up against the 787 the A330neo should certainly be able to do the same. But still the airlines decide to order 787s and A350s instead. The interesting part of this discussion is to find out why they make those choices against the A330neo.

I don't know if it has been mentioned but the A330neo has the same range as the A350. The A338neo can reach 1,000 nm further than the 787. In essence, the A350 is competing with the A338neo. So if you are the Airline CEO, it boils down to profit per seat and operational cost. Forgive me but I have not looked at capacity from the A350 versus the A338neo, but if the operational costs are relatively the same but you can fit more passengers in the A350, then there is your answer right there. So in essence, this A338neo dilemma is not because of the 787 success, but rather to the A350 (I know I am about the get slaugthered here by Boeing fans). Look at the numbers and airline networks.

Here is another point...if the A338neo has the same range and capacity of the A350, why would airlines order the 797? If the numbers of profitability per seat, and operational costs do not come in line...Delta and other airlines that are potential customers of the 797, will default to the 338neo. More range, good capacity. Thoughts?

Good point on the A350 vs A330Neo. I was looking at these aircrafts specifications last week and was surprised to find the A350 sits between the 787\330 and 777x in size. It is a tweener plane that may offer benefits over the 330 and thus airlines are skipping the plane and going to the 350. And the competition from the 787 is also a problem.

I do not think the 330 will compete with the 797. The 797 is supposed to be anything from a 757-300 to a 767-300ER. Totally different weight classes. But if an airline were debating between a 797 and the next step up. I think the 787 comes backs into play. The A300Neo is having a hard time of it right now vs the 787.

brindabella wrote:

I recall Richard Anderson saying that he got the 359s at $105K.

Devilfish wrote:

Airbus is in a dilemma. That vicious domino effect you mention above will last unless something drastic is done. 787 sales were sluggish until Boeing unleashed their offensive. Would Airbus bite the bullet and do the same?.....More to the point, would they be able to slash the A330N's price in time to catch up

RB211trent wrote:

Wait till Farnborough, an Asian airline may be ordering a few, not seen them mentioned here either.

Revelation wrote:

Devilfish wrote:

Airbus is in a dilemma. That vicious domino effect you mention above will last unless something drastic is done. 787 sales were sluggish until Boeing unleashed their offensive. Would Airbus bite the bullet and do the same?.....More to the point, would they be able to slash the A330N's price in time to catch up

Wonder if it makes sense for them to spend time/money reducing cost of production like they are doing with the A320 family, or is it too late for that?

Revelation wrote:

That would have been wonderful for him, but I think you meant $105M.

Momo1435 wrote:

RB211trent wrote:

Wait till Farnborough, an Asian airline may be ordering a few, not seen them mentioned here either.

Could it be SriLankan Airlines, they might be interested in the neo after their failed A350 adventure to replace their oldest A332s. And they still have some A350s on order that they can convert.

juliuswong wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

RB211trent wrote:

Wait till Farnborough, an Asian airline may be ordering a few, not seen them mentioned here either.

Could it be SriLankan Airlines, they might be interested in the neo after their failed A350 adventure to replace their oldest A332s. And they still have some A350s on order that they can convert.

UL is not in any financial position to lease or buy new aircraft. Their A333ceo is very new and they got badly burnt by A350 fiasco. Their A333ceo can do most, if not all their current long haul (whatever still remains). Don't need the range of A330neos.

godsbeloved wrote:

Boeing selling 787's at a certain price doesn't mean they are making/loosing money on the plane. No matter what is being said on this forum, selling planes is about a lot more then manufacturing costs. Future will tell...

lightsaber wrote:

Revelation wrote:

That would have been wonderful for him, but I think you meant $105M.

DIdn't Leeham quote Airbus as saying current production costs are $125M for the A350?

The reality is the 787 production costs are *finally* under control. It is a super competitive market the A330NEO is entering. Boeing will bid at every airline. I do expect Airbus to win some competitions. But it cost Airbus about $5 billion to develop the A330NEO (ironically about the same cost as 748I). So they need to sell.

Lightsaber