SQ22 wrote:

Please keep thios thread on topic. This thread is not about 10 vs. 9 vs. 8 abreast seating layouts.

No I agree it's not but it is material and is in response to previous comments which I did not raise I might add. And this is possibly a relevant point to the viability of an order, surely. Discounts plus the particular airline's intentions. How specific do you require a response to be, given aforementioned responses? Would you rather I raised a separate topic?

NZ321 wrote:

SQ22 wrote:

Please keep thios thread on topic. This thread is not about 10 vs. 9 vs. 8 abreast seating layouts.

No I agree it's not but it is material and is in response to previous comments which I did not raise I might add. And this is possibly a relevant point to the viability of an order, surely. Discounts plus the particular airline's intentions. How specific do you require a response to be, given aforementioned responses? Would you rather I raised a separate topic?

We do not need to turn this thread into a general seating layout discussion. Its about Air Asia ordering more Airbus aircraft. Anyway feel free to open a new thread if you want to have a general or Air Asia focused discussion about it.

As a layman without any Airbus v/s Boeing bias, when a narrower (well.0.7 inches to be precise) 9-abreast B787 vs 9-abreast A350 debate with the paying customer is being cited as the king, against a 9 abreast A330neo (for Air Asia and a couple of others) vs comfort of a 9-abreast B787 (here 0.8 inches) isn't the customer still the king?

I agree it may be terrible, but they have a customer who doesn't care for as long as Air Asia can offer cheaper fares, It may not your cup of tea, but they do have a set of clientele who doesn't consider this to be a deal breaker as long as the fare is cheap. Can we all just leave it at that?

Congrats A330neo (if it is true), you fight to see another day, having said that Boeing ain't going to make it easy in the future, we shall all enjoy this enthralling duel. I suspect there is a lot more in this battle.

Not sure if Airbus makes a profit with Air Aisia, but if the rumor is true I think Airbus made it clear for Boeing that they will not 'allow' for eroding the A330NEO customer base more. But one was triggered for sure: When the A330 NEO gets traction now Airbus will (have to) make a more agressive cost reduction program then it was probably anticpated previously. I do not share the opinion that Boeing can produce the 789 cheaper then Airbus the A330. Probably they are close on a variable cost basis, but too much is 'written Off' technology on the A330 compared to the 789. I also believe that actual 'low' pricing is probably coming to a low end now when Boeing realizes that the A330NEO will not be dead and may not give room for the 797. Still more lower pricing will ruin both and lower the market opportunity for the 797.


Flyglobal

Airbus may be hard pressed to fend off Boeing though. You already have Norwegian UK flying segments blocked at 13:40 on an all-economy B789 at W35Y309 or W56Y282 on LGW to EZE, which southbound is blocked at 13:40 and is 6000 nmi straight distance. KUL-LHR is 5730 nmi straight distance, which can't be done in a 242t A333 or A339 in D7's configuration. The A339 at 251t doesn't yet exist, while the B789 already exist. In D7's configuration, this should be very doable. D7 could also add more W seats. This is an order that Airbus needs to keep, as the A330neo program keeps suffering blow after blow. I'd be surprised if the B78J is in play for D7 unless the order is a combination of B789 and B78J.

lightsaber wrote:

Revelation wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

A CEO must be unemotional and only think of profit and risk. Price, delivery times, and financing will determine the A330NEO's fate at AirAsia. Money isn't a bias. It isn't a want for price, it is negotiations and if Boeing made the offer they should have, Airbus is in a bind.

There is no sale leaseback on the A330NEO in today's market. If Airbus doesn't help with financing, there cannot be a deal. At this time the A330NEO is an orphan aircraft, the best analogy is the 717. If Airbus does finance, it could be like the 717 where the vendor (Boeing) has to finance the aircraft for the entire service life tying up capital.

So there is a limit to what AirAsia will pay and a limit to how much Airbus will discount and finance. There should be a middle ground, but it is possible that the current 787 pricing and ability to finance forces AirAsia's hand.

Farnborough will be facinating.

Kinda funny how your post is being largely ignored. We have many posts are saying this is all about negotiating postures and brinksmanship when the inconvenient truth is that this is all numbers driven, and as of right now the numbers are adding up to "no sale". Personally I doubt wanting to make a splash at an air show is going to be a decisive factor. I think the players are disciplined enough to know that they're going to have to live with the deal for many years to come and the short term buzz from a splash at an airshow will wear off quickly.

I'm often ignored.

It should all be numbers driven. DL has such a blue Chip credit rating, they will not have an issue financing their A330NEOs, but AirAsia will.

The market has stalled for financing A330NEOs. AirAsia needs help. Tony's tweets are... abrasive but screen of a customer having financing issues.

As I posted before, AirAsia has there needs and Airbus opposing needs. Something will give. At this time, the A330NEO is in Abad spot. In particular with Iran deliveries halted (I believe 12 in 2019). For a CEO not to take advantage of the negotiating opportunity A330NEO delays have oppened would not be meeting fiducial duty. In particular with the current horrid widebody leasing market for non blue Chip airlines.

Lightsaber

Sorry to dig this up late in the piece, but the comments re financing the A330neo are plain wrong. BOC Aviation and CDB Aviation Lease Finance have signed sale-and-leaseback deals on A330-900s with TAP, plus the type has direct orders from Avolon and Air Lease Corp - so it's inaccurate to say that they can't attract financing. AirAsia X is far from a poor credit, so it will be able to tap financing when the deliveries come up, and in time more 330neos will be sold. The 787 will not replace all the A330ceos out there.

It really depends on how tough Airbus wants to be in fighting the competition from Boeing.

Airasia X could be offered 2 or 3 A350s at very, very special prices right now so that it can relaunch its KUL-LGW route. The A339 can do the EU routes - so there is no need for the A350 for these.

All should be revealed in the coming days, I guess...

Newbiepilot wrote:

Which lendor is confident that Air Asia will take delivery and operate all 66 A330neos the full duration of the financing terms? Given how fluid their route network and history has been, banks may be charging a premium for the risk that airplanes need to be resold. I would not be surprised if Air Asia is asking for help from Airbus to secure financing

From where is this coming, that there could be financing problems?

The bank that financed them before is even advertising with them:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/ass ... udy-en.pdf

And:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hct6YOSU_Uw
(best is: "I am not paid to say that!")

Also interesting:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate ... 01704.html

For me it is not credible, that Air Asia has financing problems....

rheinwaldner wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

Which lendor is confident that Air Asia will take delivery and operate all 66 A330neos the full duration of the financing terms? Given how fluid their route network and history has been, banks may be charging a premium for the risk that airplanes need to be resold. I would not be surprised if Air Asia is asking for help from Airbus to secure financing

From where is this coming, that there could be financing problems?

The bank that financed them before is even advertising with them:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/ass ... udy-en.pdf

And:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hct6YOSU_Uw
(best is: "I am not paid to say that!")

Also interesting:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate ... 01704.html

For me it is not credible, that Air Asia has financing problems....

In addition, @newbiepilot you might want to read his autobiography how banks and financial institution stick with them through thick and thin. They (lessor and banker were accommodating when AirAsia X needed to scale back their expansion few years ago (leading to A330ceo order swapping/ cancellation and deferring order).

As you have mentioned, those institutions may have charge a premium, I am pretty sure AirAsia Group would have considered this before signing the dotted line.

EBT wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Kinda funny how your post is being largely ignored. We have many posts are saying this is all about negotiating postures and brinksmanship when the inconvenient truth is that this is all numbers driven, and as of right now the numbers are adding up to "no sale". Personally I doubt wanting to make a splash at an air show is going to be a decisive factor. I think the players are disciplined enough to know that they're going to have to live with the deal for many years to come and the short term buzz from a splash at an airshow will wear off quickly.

I'm often ignored.

It should all be numbers driven. DL has such a blue Chip credit rating, they will not have an issue financing their A330NEOs, but AirAsia will.

The market has stalled for financing A330NEOs. AirAsia needs help. Tony's tweets are... abrasive but screen of a customer having financing issues.

As I posted before, AirAsia has there needs and Airbus opposing needs. Something will give. At this time, the A330NEO is in Abad spot. In particular with Iran deliveries halted (I believe 12 in 2019). For a CEO not to take advantage of the negotiating opportunity A330NEO delays have oppened would not be meeting fiducial duty. In particular with the current horrid widebody leasing market for non blue Chip airlines.

Lightsaber

Sorry to dig this up late in the piece, but the comments re financing the A330neo are plain wrong. BOC Aviation and CDB Aviation Lease Finance have signed sale-and-leaseback deals on A330-900s with TAP, plus the type has direct orders from Avolon and Air Lease Corp - so it's inaccurate to say that they can't attract financing. AirAsia X is far from a poor credit, so it will be able to tap financing when the deliveries come up, and in time more 330neos will be sold. The 787 will not replace all the A330ceos out there.

I'm afraid those Avolon deals will probably have to be re-negotiated with the bankruptcy of HNA. You do realize much of the growth in aircraft leasing was being led by the HNA group? e.g., They own 52% of Avolon:
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ast-340080

HNA is a major leasing company of Airbus aircraft now, in particular the A330. Airbus cannot deliver to them (insufficient payment): https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... on-payment

Wait... HNA owns 52% of Avolon which owns CIT
CIT: 15 A339 orders
Avolon: 15 A339 orders, plus financing a number of TAP's A339s.


So I'm afraid the statements about the Sale/Leaseback of the A330NEO are accurate with the collapse of HNA group. Widebody leasing hasn't been healthy, but was rebounding thanks to a flood of money from HNA (includes Avolon)... which suddenly disappeared. Oops.
Even before HNA failed:
Sale and leaseback transactions, which constitute an increasingly large proportion of new aircraft deliveries, continue to involve higher lease rates than those attributed to vanilla dry operating lease rentals.

https://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/some- ... -pressure/

Boeing is being much more aggressive selling the 787. So they will replace some of the A330CEO. The speed up of the 787 production is impacting A330NEO sales.

But despite the lure of a 100-plane order, all eyes are on whether AirAsia will confirm the A330neo, since there is no problem selling the smaller single-aisles.

AirAsia, Asia’s largest budget carrier, has been sending mixed signals for months about whether it will confirm its earlier deal for 66 of the upgraded A330neo - watched from afar by Boeing, which hopes to replace the order with its 787 Dreamliner.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/15/airasia ... order.html

Airbus also has to place the Iran A330 orders (28 A339 need a new buyer).

Right now the A330NEO is the 717 of the widebody fleet.

We're two years into a winners & losers market on aircraft leasing (article from early last year):
https://www.aerotime.aero/oleg.volkov/1 ... and-losers

I repeat, the lease market is much worse now with HNA group failing. I find it interesting that AirCap, a major widebody leasor, has not placed an A330NEO order.

Perhaps BOC (Bank of China) will fund more?

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Wait... HNA owns 52% of Avolon which owns CIT
CIT: 15 A339 orders
Avolon: 15 A339 orders, plus financing a number of TAP's A339s.

More correctly, HNA Capital owns a major stake in Bohai Capital, which is the parent company of Avolon. The leasing company continues to operate, take delivery of aircraft, finance them and lease them to a number of airlines around the world. The HNA link is placing a small amount of upward pressure on their debt pricing, but there is no evidence that it is affecting Avolon's liquidity or day-to-day operations. Last year it structured some debt capital so that it could not be funneled back to HNA, which should signal that it is prepared to stand on its own, if necessary.

Widebody leasing is doing fine, and benefitting from the huge amounts of capital that remains in the aircraft finance market coming not only from China but also Japan, Korea, hedge funds and other emerging markets. Narrowbody leasing is cutthroat with so many players in that market, and some lessors are seeing better returns from deploying capital into widebodies. It is different as the lease terms are longer, and the return conditions need to be a lot more watertight, but it's doable for those who know what they are doing.

BOC Aviation and Air Lease Corp (Steven Udvar-Hazy's company) are both backing the A330neo, and while it could be a bad bet, they will lead the market and others will follow. BOCA in particular has been very vocal about how most of the future capital going into aircraft deliveries - by dollar value - is shifting to favour widebodies.

AerCap have overall been selling down their portfolio, as they see returns at the moment are better in buying up their own stock rather than expanding. GECAS is in a similar boat with it selling down jets (including 737 Maxes recently), mostly because they can profit from it due to high prices.

The leasing industry has been growing strongly since the GFC, thanks in large part to strong passenger growth and low interest rates. Yes, the latter are going up but nowhere near as quick as needed to soak up the cash that is out there, and seeking assets to be deployed against.

Airbus got burned when they offered residual guarantees on the last product that needed it (A340-500s) so they're not going to jump in unless absolutely necessary. In the meantime, there are plenty of channels and a lot of money looking to go into aircraft, and I expect that will see it go to A330neos as needed.

juliuswong wrote:

rheinwaldner wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

Which lendor is confident that Air Asia will take delivery and operate all 66 A330neos the full duration of the financing terms? Given how fluid their route network and history has been, banks may be charging a premium for the risk that airplanes need to be resold. I would not be surprised if Air Asia is asking for help from Airbus to secure financing

From where is this coming, that there could be financing problems?

The bank that financed them before is even advertising with them:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/ass ... udy-en.pdf

And:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hct6YOSU_Uw
(best is: "I am not paid to say that!")

Also interesting:
https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate ... 01704.html

For me it is not credible, that Air Asia has financing problems....

In addition, @newbiepilot you might want to read his autobiography how banks and financial institution stick with them through thick and thin. They (lessor and banker were accommodating when AirAsia X needed to scale back their expansion few years ago (leading to A330ceo order swapping/ cancellation and deferring order).

As you have mentioned, those institutions may have charge a premium, I am pretty sure AirAsia Group would have considered this before signing the dotted line.

Charge a premium is the problem. Their competitor Scoot which is tied to Singapore Airlines likely doesn’t have the same financing issues leading to lower financing costs. That gives them an advantage to offset the difference in purchase price between 787s and A330neos.

I don’t know what the end result is, but financing is another challenge for the A330neo like it was for the 717, 757-300, CSeries, A340-500, etc. Airbus can help, and I expect is being asked to help step in.

EBT wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Wait... HNA owns 52% of Avolon which owns CIT
CIT: 15 A339 orders
Avolon: 15 A339 orders, plus financing a number of TAP's A339s.

More correctly, HNA Capital owns a major stake in Bohai Capital, which is the parent company of Avolon. The leasing company continues to operate, take delivery of aircraft, finance them and lease them to a number of airlines around the world. The HNA link is placing a small amount of upward pressure on their debt pricing, but there is no evidence that it is affecting Avolon's liquidity or day-to-day operations. Last year it structured some debt capital so that it could not be funneled back to HNA, which should signal that it is prepared to stand on its own, if necessary.

Widebody leasing is doing fine, and benefitting from the huge amounts of capital that remains in the aircraft finance market coming not only from China but also Japan, Korea, hedge funds and other emerging markets. Narrowbody leasing is cutthroat with so many players in that market, and some lessors are seeing better returns from deploying capital into widebodies. It is different as the lease terms are longer, and the return conditions need to be a lot more watertight, but it's doable for those who know what they are doing.

BOC Aviation and Air Lease Corp (Steven Udvar-Hazy's company) are both backing the A330neo, and while it could be a bad bet, they will lead the market and others will follow. BOCA in particular has been very vocal about how most of the future capital going into aircraft deliveries - by dollar value - is shifting to favour widebodies.

AerCap have overall been selling down their portfolio, as they see returns at the moment are better in buying up their own stock rather than expanding. GECAS is in a similar boat with it selling down jets (including 737 Maxes recently), mostly because they can profit from it due to high prices.

The leasing industry has been growing strongly since the GFC, thanks in large part to strong passenger growth and low interest rates. Yes, the latter are going up but nowhere near as quick as needed to soak up the cash that is out there, and seeking assets to be deployed against.

Airbus got burned when they offered residual guarantees on the last product that needed it (A340-500s) so they're not going to jump in unless absolutely necessary. In the meantime, there are plenty of channels and a lot of money looking to go into aircraft, and I expect that will see it go to A330neos as needed.

The leasing industry has been growing. Per my prior link, due to HNA. I would love to know the exact terms and issues.

I realize Avolon is firewalled to keep money from flowing to HNA, but HNA was their source of funds. Multiple news articles note widebody leasing is being pulled back on. In my 777-300ER glut thread, my op post had serveral links on the widebody glut with posts by respected users that blue Chip airlines had no trouble leasing, everyone else is having issues. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

Lightsaber

This is by far the most interesting sales campaign going, IMO. We've seen reports citing "insiders" that Boeing had lost and a deal would be announced at FIA, but it appears still to be in play. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-aira ... SKBN1K71V3

IMO this A339 vs. 78X issue, if viewed in isolation, is a no-brainer for the 78X. I don't have access to any published analyses of 78X vs. A339, but analyses of A339 vs. 789 converge at 2-3% variable operating cost advantage for 789 over a 3000nm mission (8ab A330). If we assume that 78X has ~14% more capacity than 789, and that the extra capacity's variable trip cost is ~50% of capacity delta, then 78X should have ~7% lower variable cost per seat than A339 and only ~7% higher trip cost. If we move A339 to 9ab, variable cost per seat should be about equal.

Boeing seems able now to match A339's price, which means 78X should be beat to match the price-per-seat of A339 (incremental cost of 78X production over 789 should be low-single-digits).

Folks in this thread have discussed whether Air Asia X can charge a premium for 78X seating, but that's not even necessary, IMO:
AAX seats "only" 377 pax in its A333's; 15% more seats would mean 434 seats in 78X - just short of max seating capacity (440).
And that's assuming an equal mix of J/Y and retention of 32in pitch in the 78X. Most likely, AAX would slightly shrink seat pitch (31in) and slightly increase the J/Y ratio. The combination of these two should keep average yields approximately equal.

So 78X should have slightly better cost/seat than even a 9ab A339; trip cost should be within a few %. Viewed in isolation, 78X seems like the far better A333 successor than A339.

Against these arguments for the 78X are (1) transition costs from A330 to 787, (2) capacity risk and yield dilution, and (3) Airbus-AirAsia strategic relationship.

Re (1), these are often overstated. Pilot costs in total are low-single-digits % of total widebody operating cost. If transition costs (training and/or hiring) are 10% of lifetime pilot costs then we're talking a fraction of a percent of lifetime total costs.

Re (2), AAX's yield curve is likely very flat. If they want to expand in Europe (they do) and capture more share in Australia/NZ, then they will undoubtedly be constrained by a reputation for the narrowest seats in the world. Non-Asians are fatter and have different social conventions about personal space; I just can't see many fat Germans (they approach us Americans in average girth) tolerating 16in seats for a 10hr flight. So in sum, the capacity/yield issues are ambiguous at best and could reasonably be seen as favoring 787.

Re (3) - this is kicker IMO. A321NEO is plainly the best narrowbody product available, especially for high-density LCC's like AirAsia. Airbus' ability to bundle A321 with A330 will probably result in keeping this deal away from Boeing.

But this doesn't come free. Airbus will have to give some on the A321 terms to keep the A330NEO alive. Is that a good long-term strategy for Airbus? I have my doubts. Given Boeing's rapid acceleration and improvement of 787 production, the A330NEO seems like a mistake. The 78X is a better A333 replacement for all but capacity-sensitive 9ab operators. Airbus can keep the NEO alive via strategic bundling, but that basically means "spending" some A321neo profits on A330neo.

Matt6461 wrote:

This is by far the most interesting sales campaign going, IMO.


But this doesn't come free. Airbus will have to give some on the A321 terms to keep the A330NEO alive. Is that a good long-term strategy for Airbus? I have my doubts. Given Boeing's rapid acceleration and improvement of 787 production, the A330NEO seems like a mistake. The 78X is a better A333 replacement for all but capacity-sensitive 9ab operators. Airbus can keep the NEO alive via strategic bundling, but that basically means "spending" some A321neo profits on A330neo.

Correct. Boeing is trying to turn around it again giving even more concessions, as they Need to 'erase' the A330NEO to justify the Business case- the existence of the A330NEO hurts them.

But you are right the playing field where Airbus can move is the huge number of A321s they have.

It’s obviously not over yet, but Airbus has to defend it, whatever it means.

The question for Boeing is: When all others note how much Boeing is ready to do concessions, how much will this affect future profitability of the 787 and in Addition, given a 787-9 and 787-8 must be lower sales Price then a 787-10, how much duo they hurt their own cost/ Profit Outlook for the 797.
Don't they bring their own Project in danger with it?

Flyglobal

I really wish the money spent on the A330 NEO had been spent on an optimized wing for the A350-800, but then the A350 ‘family’ would have three siblings that didn’t share as much as most aircraft families do. It seems odd to me that Airbus best plane, the A321 NEO (my opinion only) is possibly being used as a bargaining chip for a less than optimal A339.

I think both Airbus and Boeing are also wary of Trump's trade wars and both are still adopting a wait and see attitude. They have to wait for clear signals before they can plan something major.

As for Airasia/Airasia X's order at Farnborough, Airbus can kiss it goodbye as Fernandes has no plans to be there this week.

flee wrote:

I think both Airbus and Boeing are also wary of Trump's trade wars and both are still adopting a wait and see attitude. They have to wait for clear signals before they can plan something major.

As for Airasia/Airasia X's order at Farnborough, Airbus can kiss it goodbye as Fernandes has no plans to be there this week.

He doesn't actually have to be there to buy aircraft. It would still create a huge hoopla if he pulled the trigger from home.

JoeCanuck wrote:

flee wrote:

I think both Airbus and Boeing are also wary of Trump's trade wars and both are still adopting a wait and see attitude. They have to wait for clear signals before they can plan something major.

As for Airasia/Airasia X's order at Farnborough, Airbus can kiss it goodbye as Fernandes has no plans to be there this week.

He doesn't actually have to be there to buy aircraft. It would still create a huge hoopla if he pulled the trigger from home.

Yes, Airasia co-founder Kamarudin Meranun is in London for the Skytrax awards. He can deputise too, should Airbus or Boeing come up with a deal.

From the press conference...

https://twitter.com/rschuur_aero

. @AirAsia X re-eveluated previous order for 66 @Airbus A330-900’s and decided after seeing test data that after all it was the best aircraft, although it had a look at the @BoeingAirplanes 787-9. In the end it bought 34 extra.

This makes AirAsia X the largest A330 operator in the world, and I guess this is the largest single A330 order ever.

flee wrote:

As for Airasia/Airasia X's order at Farnborough, Airbus can kiss it goodbye as Fernandes has no plans to be there this week.

24 hours later....

Matt6461 wrote:

Airbus' ability to bundle A321 with A330 will probably result in keeping this deal away from Boeing.

No A321 deal announced, so it looks like the A339 has won the order fair and square on its own merits.

Richard28 wrote:

Matt6461 wrote:

Airbus' ability to bundle A321 with A330 will probably result in keeping this deal away from Boeing.

No A321 deal announced, so it looks like the A339 has won the order fair and square on its own merits.

Not really...there were a bunch of A350s that Air Asia wanted to cancel. They seem to managed to get those cancelled now with the new order. I will be surprised if that wasn't used as a bargaining chip during negotiations.

I just cannot seem to understand the cobfidence with which some are dropping statements here about sales campaigns and associated conditions.
It sais nothing about production costs that Boeing is selling 787's at a heavy discount. They might have altered the businesscase as to earn money from aftersale service. This is common practice in railroad and automobile business.

I hope all that hating and bashing shall stop now. Good luck to both Airbus and Boeing doeing business

And nobody mentions the most important detail of this deal: according to Airbus' own rendering, Tony told Toulouse "Go the hell away with you childish racoon mask"
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... 30neo.html

Richard28 wrote:

Matt6461 wrote:

Airbus' ability to bundle A321 with A330 will probably result in keeping this deal away from Boeing.

No A321 deal announced, so it looks like the A339 has won the order fair and square on its own merits.

Possible but not necessarily. Airbus was highly motivated to seal this deal - losing it would have been catastrophic for the NEO. So Airbus may have won on price, A339 might be the better plane at AAX, or A321 promises may have been made - we won't have access to the proprietary contract any time soon.

And it's always possible that Fernandes made a mistake. I know from experience that airlines can be myopic about capacity. If it was only 789 vs. A339, then it's easy to see why Airbus won.

Airbus is promising range for KL - LON

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... 30neo.html

It seems that rumours of A330 death have been greatly exaggerated . . . even the -800 now seems to be alive.

What one airshow can do!

Eyad89 wrote:

This makes AirAsia X the largest A330 operator in the world, and I guess this is the largest single A330 order ever.

Yes. Tony has now bet AirAsia's future on the type. I speculate the deal was good enough to be low risk. We will see a third of A330NEOs flying for AirAsia.

The fate of the plane is tied to one airline. Airbus should have been more agressive selling as I'm sure the deal favored AirAsia.

Lightsaber

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Airbus is promising range for KL - LON

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... 30neo.html

The caption under the small picture reads: "Asia’s largest low-cost airline, AirAsia X, has placed a firm order for 55 Airbus A330neo". So would the AAX order comprise 55 firm orders + 45 options?

tomcat wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Airbus is promising range for KL - LON

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... 30neo.html

The caption under the small picture reads: "Asia’s largest low-cost airline, AirAsia X, has placed a firm order for 55 Airbus A330neo". So would the AAX order comprise 55 firm orders + 45 options?

AirAsia’s original order was for 55 planes (they later converted CEOs to NEOs to get to 66). Someone from Airbus probably took the picture from the original order press but forgot to change the caption.

The 330neo hasn't even entered service yet so it was a bit early in the day to be singing dirges for it. Boeing was never going to kill it...at least not this early in a program designed to last for maybe a couple of decades. Airbus invested relative peanuts to upgrade a model that has made them a fortune...much of which was at the expense of the 787 during its troubles. They can afford to float the 330 for quite some time if they have to.

Boeing made it as tough as they can for Airbus, but at some point, they have to focus more on 787 profit than trying to knock the 330 out of the sky. No matter how much Boeing has streamlined 787 production, going to the mat for every single order is costing them a lot of money. There are lots of 330 operators and lots of 787 operators. It won't be cost effective for everybody to switch or add another brand to their fleets so they will just have to get used to sharing the market.

I believe that soon enough, the two makers will settle into a steady state with these models and the duopoly will reach a healthy balance, like it has with virtually every other competing product model.

lightsaber wrote:

Eyad89 wrote:

This makes AirAsia X the largest A330 operator in the world, and I guess this is the largest single A330 order ever.

Yes. Tony has now bet AirAsia's future on the type. I speculate the deal was good enough to be low risk. We will see a third of A330NEOs flying for AirAsia.

The fate of the plane is tied to one airline. Airbus should have been more agressive selling as I'm sure the deal favored AirAsia.

Lightsaber

Airbus needed a decision by Air Asia before they had any hopes of getting other airlines to order larger numbers.

From Airbus point of view:

- give the other customer the same or a lower price than Air Asia and Air Asia will ask for an even lower price or switch
- offer the other customer a higher price as Air Asia, gives the other airline no reason to sign, as they can wait and hope for an additional discount if Air Asia switches

Remember that when we compare the A330-900 to the 787-9 in an AirAsia configuration, where the A330 also has a 9 abreast economy class seating, the A330-900 with its longer cabin will have more seats onboard than the 787-9. This fact may well change which aircraft that is the most fuel efficient per seat.

reidar76 wrote:

Remember that when we compare the A330-900 to the 787-9 in an AirAsia configuration, where the A330 also has a 9 abreast economy class seating, the A330-900 with its longer cabin will have more seats onboard than the 787-9. This fact may well change which aircraft that is the most fuel efficient per seat.

That's why the deal in this case was between the A339 and the 787-10 as I recall.

Flyglobal

Flyglobal wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

Remember that when we compare the A330-900 to the 787-9 in an AirAsia configuration, where the A330 also has a 9 abreast economy class seating, the A330-900 with its longer cabin will have more seats onboard than the 787-9. This fact may well change which aircraft that is the most fuel efficient per seat.

That's why the deal in this case was between the A339 and the 787-10 as I recall.

Flyglobal

I did not see the 787-10 mentioned, but here on a.net. IMO it was Toni Fernandez asking Airbus how much price reduction he would get for upping the order from 66 frames to 100.

seahawk wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Eyad89 wrote:

This makes AirAsia X the largest A330 operator in the world, and I guess this is the largest single A330 order ever.

Yes. Tony has now bet AirAsia's future on the type. I speculate the deal was good enough to be low risk. We will see a third of A330NEOs flying for AirAsia.

The fate of the plane is tied to one airline. Airbus should have been more agressive selling as I'm sure the deal favored AirAsia.

Lightsaber

The question is: In order to lure Air Asia over Boeing gave everything they could for this deal. Airbus defended it.
Did now Boeing ruin the price for all further deals? Who will want to pay more now? Will the other 797-10 customers now knock the door in Seattle and say: Give me Air Asia conditions, or I make a visit in Toulouse. I think it's probably time to realize in Seattle/ Chicago that the A330NEO can't be killed. Better live with it and rescale the 797 Business now than to hurt all future 787 sales across the board.


Flyglobal

mjoelnir wrote:

Flyglobal wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

Remember that when we compare the A330-900 to the 787-9 in an AirAsia configuration, where the A330 also has a 9 abreast economy class seating, the A330-900 with its longer cabin will have more seats onboard than the 787-9. This fact may well change which aircraft that is the most fuel efficient per seat.

That's why the deal in this case was between the A339 and the 787-10 as I recall.

Flyglobal

I did not see the 787-10 mentioned, but here on a.net. IMO it was Toni Fernandez asking Airbus how much price reduction he would get for upping the order from 66 frames to 100.

And when TF flew to Seattle a few months back, the only thing he left with was some sweet Boeing swag. There was absolutely, no way, no how, Boeing never made him an offer. Nope. Didn't happen.

Flyglobal wrote:

seahawk wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Yes. Tony has now bet AirAsia's future on the type. I speculate the deal was good enough to be low risk. We will see a third of A330NEOs flying for AirAsia.

The fate of the plane is tied to one airline. Airbus should have been more agressive selling as I'm sure the deal favored AirAsia.

Lightsaber

The question is: In order to lure Air Asia over Boeing gave everything they could for this deal. Airbus defended it.
Did now Boeing ruin the price for all further deals? Who will want to pay more now? Will the other 797-10 customers now knock the door in Seattle and say: Give me Air Asia conditions, or I make a visit in Toulouse. I think it's probably time to realize in Seattle/ Chicago that the A330NEO can't be killed. Better live with it and rescale the 797 Business now than to hurt all future 787 sales across the board.


Flyglobal

A) how would they know what Boeing offered TF? B) why would Boeing offer them the same deal unless they were willing to make the same commitments as TF? Same goes the other way for Airbus. Yeah, they probably had to offer cut-your-own-throat pricing to win the deal, but there's not a lot of airlines out there who are going to place orders for 100 frames in one go, so they've insulated themselves a bit.

lightsaber wrote:

ap305 wrote:

From all the hints Fernandes is dropping, he wants to do a deal with Airbus- plain and simple. He just wants the pricing he thinks his Airline deserves. I understand certain folks here with a particular bias are reading different things into his messages as they have every right to but mark my words- Air Asia and Airbus will announce a large order at the air show along with reconfirmation of the original a330neo purchase.

A CEO must be unemotional and only think of profit and risk. Price, delivery times, and financing will determine the A330NEO's fate at AirAsia. Money isn't a bias. It isn't a want for price, it is negotiations and if Boeing made the offer they should have, Airbus is in a bind.

There is no sale leaseback on the A330NEO in today's market. If Airbus doesn't help with financing, there cannot be a deal. At this time the A330NEO is an orphan aircraft, the best analogy is the 717. If Airbus does finance, it could be like the 717 where the vendor (Boeing) has to finance the aircraft for the entire service life tying up capital.

So there is a limit to what AirAsia will pay and a limit to how much Airbus will discount and finance. There should be a middle ground, but it is possible that the current 787 pricing and ability to finance forces AirAsia's hand.

Farnborough will be facinating.

CEOs must think about profit and risk. But they must think about other things, or most of the businesses started would not be started. Remember what Robert Crandall said about American Airlines and the airline business in general?

But more to the point, CEOs, especially the startup kind, are almost never unemotional. Elon Musk just proved that, for one
https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/18/techno ... index.html

seahawk wrote:

Airbus needed a decision by Air Asia before they had any hopes of getting other airlines to order larger numbers.

From Airbus point of view:

- give the other customer the same or a lower price than Air Asia and Air Asia will ask for an even lower price or switch
- offer the other customer a higher price as Air Asia, gives the other airline no reason to sign, as they can wait and hope for an additional discount if Air Asia switches

You do realize that both Air Asia and Airbus will not disclose their pricing to anyone else, right?

Would you like Boeing to sell 777X to everyone for the lower price than the one Emirates and Qatar Airways got them for?

lightsaber wrote:

EBT wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I'm often ignored.

It should all be numbers driven. DL has such a blue Chip credit rating, they will not have an issue financing their A330NEOs, but AirAsia will.

The market has stalled for financing A330NEOs. AirAsia needs help. Tony's tweets are... abrasive but screen of a customer having financing issues.

As I posted before, AirAsia has there needs and Airbus opposing needs. Something will give. At this time, the A330NEO is in Abad spot. In particular with Iran deliveries halted (I believe 12 in 2019). For a CEO not to take advantage of the negotiating opportunity A330NEO delays have oppened would not be meeting fiducial duty. In particular with the current horrid widebody leasing market for non blue Chip airlines.

Lightsaber

Sorry to dig this up late in the piece, but the comments re financing the A330neo are plain wrong. BOC Aviation and CDB Aviation Lease Finance have signed sale-and-leaseback deals on A330-900s with TAP, plus the type has direct orders from Avolon and Air Lease Corp - so it's inaccurate to say that they can't attract financing. AirAsia X is far from a poor credit, so it will be able to tap financing when the deliveries come up, and in time more 330neos will be sold. The 787 will not replace all the A330ceos out there.

I'm afraid those Avolon deals will probably have to be re-negotiated with the bankruptcy of HNA. You do realize much of the growth in aircraft leasing was being led by the HNA group? e.g., They own 52% of Avolon:
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ast-340080

HNA is a major leasing company of Airbus aircraft now, in particular the A330. Airbus cannot deliver to them (insufficient payment): https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... on-payment

Wait... HNA owns 52% of Avolon which owns CIT
CIT: 15 A339 orders
Avolon: 15 A339 orders, plus financing a number of TAP's A339s.


So I'm afraid the statements about the Sale/Leaseback of the A330NEO are accurate with the collapse of HNA group. Widebody leasing hasn't been healthy, but was rebounding thanks to a flood of money from HNA (includes Avolon)... which suddenly disappeared. Oops.
Even before HNA failed:
Sale and leaseback transactions, which constitute an increasingly large proportion of new aircraft deliveries, continue to involve higher lease rates than those attributed to vanilla dry operating lease rentals.

https://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/some- ... -pressure/

Boeing is being much more aggressive selling the 787. So they will replace some of the A330CEO. The speed up of the 787 production is impacting A330NEO sales.

But despite the lure of a 100-plane order, all eyes are on whether AirAsia will confirm the A330neo, since there is no problem selling the smaller single-aisles.

AirAsia, Asia’s largest budget carrier, has been sending mixed signals for months about whether it will confirm its earlier deal for 66 of the upgraded A330neo - watched from afar by Boeing, which hopes to replace the order with its 787 Dreamliner.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/15/airasia ... order.html

Airbus also has to place the Iran A330 orders (28 A339 need a new buyer).

Right now the A330NEO is the 717 of the widebody fleet.

We're two years into a winners & losers market on aircraft leasing (article from early last year):
https://www.aerotime.aero/oleg.volkov/1 ... and-losers

I repeat, the lease market is much worse now with HNA group failing. I find it interesting that AirCap, a major widebody leasor, has not placed an A330NEO order.

Perhaps BOC (Bank of China) will fund more?

Lightsaber

The central government of China is helping HNA group but that does not mean they're bankrupt. They aren't going to let it enter bankrupt process

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

EBT wrote:

Sorry to dig this up late in the piece, but the comments re financing the A330neo are plain wrong. BOC Aviation and CDB Aviation Lease Finance have signed sale-and-leaseback deals on A330-900s with TAP, plus the type has direct orders from Avolon and Air Lease Corp - so it's inaccurate to say that they can't attract financing. AirAsia X is far from a poor credit, so it will be able to tap financing when the deliveries come up, and in time more 330neos will be sold. The 787 will not replace all the A330ceos out there.

I'm afraid those Avolon deals will probably have to be re-negotiated with the bankruptcy of HNA. You do realize much of the growth in aircraft leasing was being led by the HNA group? e.g., They own 52% of Avolon:
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ast-340080

HNA is a major leasing company of Airbus aircraft now, in particular the A330. Airbus cannot deliver to them (insufficient payment): https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... on-payment

Wait... HNA owns 52% of Avolon which owns CIT
CIT: 15 A339 orders
Avolon: 15 A339 orders, plus financing a number of TAP's A339s.


So I'm afraid the statements about the Sale/Leaseback of the A330NEO are accurate with the collapse of HNA group. Widebody leasing hasn't been healthy, but was rebounding thanks to a flood of money from HNA (includes Avolon)... which suddenly disappeared. Oops.
Even before HNA failed:
Sale and leaseback transactions, which constitute an increasingly large proportion of new aircraft deliveries, continue to involve higher lease rates than those attributed to vanilla dry operating lease rentals.

https://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/some- ... -pressure/

Boeing is being much more aggressive selling the 787. So they will replace some of the A330CEO. The speed up of the 787 production is impacting A330NEO sales.

But despite the lure of a 100-plane order, all eyes are on whether AirAsia will confirm the A330neo, since there is no problem selling the smaller single-aisles.

AirAsia, Asia’s largest budget carrier, has been sending mixed signals for months about whether it will confirm its earlier deal for 66 of the upgraded A330neo - watched from afar by Boeing, which hopes to replace the order with its 787 Dreamliner.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/15/airasia ... order.html

Airbus also has to place the Iran A330 orders (28 A339 need a new buyer).

Right now the A330NEO is the 717 of the widebody fleet.

We're two years into a winners & losers market on aircraft leasing (article from early last year):
https://www.aerotime.aero/oleg.volkov/1 ... and-losers

I repeat, the lease market is much worse now with HNA group failing. I find it interesting that AirCap, a major widebody leasor, has not placed an A330NEO order.

Perhaps BOC (Bank of China) will fund more?

Lightsaber

The central government of China is helping HNA group but that does not mean they're bankrupt. They aren't going to let it enter bankrupt process

That is not the same as HNA driving widebody lease growth. We can assume AirAsia received the terms needed to secure financing.

I never expected the A345/A346 to be returned under the terms that they were. The question is what financing concessions were given?

HNA isn't going officially bankrupt, but the pile of undelivered A330s for HNA speaks for itself.

lydh wrote:

DJ/XJ can order all the planes it wants, but it's still a trash airline. I tried their "business class" for the first time last week, and while the seat was more comfortable than I expected, their service is absolutely deplorable.

First and foremost their premium product isn't a business class product

BlueSky1976 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Airbus needed a decision by Air Asia before they had any hopes of getting other airlines to order larger numbers.

From Airbus point of view:

- give the other customer the same or a lower price than Air Asia and Air Asia will ask for an even lower price or switch
- offer the other customer a higher price as Air Asia, gives the other airline no reason to sign, as they can wait and hope for an additional discount if Air Asia switches

You do realize that both Air Asia and Airbus will not disclose their pricing to anyone else, right?

Would you like Boeing to sell 777X to everyone for the lower price than the one Emirates and Qatar Airways got them for?

They do not need to but the rumour mill works just fine in the industry. Everyone knows that Air Asia will have gotten a sweet deal, every one knew that Airbus would be in a hard place if Air Asia cancels. So if you are another customer waiting to sign, what do you have to loose?

seahawk wrote:

BlueSky1976 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Airbus needed a decision by Air Asia before they had any hopes of getting other airlines to order larger numbers.

From Airbus point of view:

- give the other customer the same or a lower price than Air Asia and Air Asia will ask for an even lower price or switch
- offer the other customer a higher price as Air Asia, gives the other airline no reason to sign, as they can wait and hope for an additional discount if Air Asia switches

You do realize that both Air Asia and Airbus will not disclose their pricing to anyone else, right?

Would you like Boeing to sell 777X to everyone for the lower price than the one Emirates and Qatar Airways got them for?

They do not need to but the rumour mill works just fine in the industry. Everyone knows that Air Asia will have gotten a sweet deal, every one knew that Airbus would be in a hard place if Air Asia cancels. So if you are another customer waiting to sign, what do you have to loose?

I think Airbus will be ok with this deal. The next customer who wants to buy 100 A339 will get the same price level and that's ok. One with a request for 10.... probably not!

PW100 wrote:

It seems that rumours of A330 death have been greatly exaggerated . . . even the -800 now seems to be alive.

What one airshow can do!

Hope took over from reason I guess.

seahawk wrote:

They do not need to but the rumour mill works just fine in the industry. Everyone knows that Air Asia will have gotten a sweet deal, every one knew that Airbus would be in a hard place if Air Asia cancels. So if you are another customer waiting to sign, what do you have to loose?

Launch or big customers get special sale prices but eventually those deals end. Customers know this. Unless a business succeeds in knocking the other guy out, then everybody's prices stabilize. The only thing keeping 787 prices as low as they are, is competition. If the 330neo was somehow knocked out, (which it won't be any time soon), Boeing would jack up the prices on the 787.

With the Air Asia order helping keep the doors open on the 330, the duopoly is getting reestablished and everybody can go back to making money. Trying to kill the other guy on every deal costs a lot of cash.