China Airlines to order 747-8's

[bits44]

Overheard at Christmas party

China Airlines will be next 747-8 customer purchasing up to thirty frames for fleet replacement, including options.

Also mentioned was the strong possibility of Boeing posting an additional sixty orders prior to year end, bring their total order book to over 1000.

A great year for Boeing after lagging Airbus for so long!

Merry Christmas to All.

KT

[TexasGuy]

Wow. If this happens it will be good for the 747-8

[smokejumper]

The final tallys for Airbus and Boeing will be interesting to examine.

There is lots of life in the old girl (747 airframe) that Boeing will certainly exploit. With new engnes, wings and minor touchups, she'll be around for another 25 years or so.

Such longevity might only be overshadowed by the Boeing B-52 which first rolled out of the plant in 1951. Upgrades, new engines and other modifications will keep her in the air until 2040 or later.

[DFW]

If this order for fleet replacement comes true, then it validates what I've been saying. Airbus made a serious mistake by not developing an aircraft to replace all those aging 747s, and there are a lot of them. The A380 was not designed as a replacement for the 747. In fact, some on this forum have suggested that a future stretched version is the designed optimal configuration. But a shortened A380 would be heavy and not enticing for the 400 seats market.

I would not be surprised if SQ ordered a few 747-8Is, despite what they've been saying. Some routes are going to be better served by a 400 seat airplane.

[David747]

If this order for fleet replacement comes true, then it validates what I've been saying. Airbus made a serious mistake by not developing an aircraft to replace all those aging 747s, and there are a lot of them. The A380 was not designed as a replacement for the 747.

If the story is true, it is just an airline ordering the 748 based on the needs of this particular carrier and it doesn't in anyway take away the market potential of the A380. When the A380 comes into service, It wouldn't surprise me to see more orders for this plane by blue chip customers to replace many 747's in their fleet, many of these carriers operate the 747-400 and other 747's which are aging at the moment. And if Airbus's number turn out to be true about the efficiency of the A380 over the 744, and 748, with a lower price tag, Airbus could reach their break even point within 5 years.

In fact, some on this forum have suggested that a future stretched version is the designed optimal configuration. But a shortened A380 would be heavy and not enticing for the 400 seats market.

That all depends on Airbus's market outlook for a streched A380 and the potential impact on the market. Derivatives do well once introduced.

I would not be surprised if SQ ordered a few 747-8Is, despite what they've been saying. Some routes are going to be better served by a 400 seat airplane.

SIA views the 747 as a 40 year old design, I think that sentiment by SIA means that they are going forward with the A380 as their premier long haul jetliner, and will use the 777-300 to fill the gap between the A380 and their aging 747's.

[fleabyte]

Boeing will not claim it is an order like Airbus did last year. That is why if you look justplanes.com order tally for 2005, Airbus tally dropped to like 800 after the dust settled.

But if China places an order for 30 747-8i what a year for the Queen of the Sky and for Boeing widebody aircraft programs.

This momentum will certainly give Boeing confidence for pushing on with Y1 and Y3.

[cageyjames]

That all depends on Airbus's market outlook for a streched A380 and the potential impact on the market. Derivatives do well once introduced.

Yea like the A318?

We dumped our order for them.

[teach]

Boeing will not claim it is an order like Airbus did last year. That is why if you look justplanes.com order tally for 2005, Airbus tally dropped to like 800 after the dust settled.

Not this again

Airbus doesn't count order unless they are signed, just like Boeing. And no, the Airbus 'tally' never 'dropped' to 800. It's funny that you accuse Airbus of counting orders before they are signed, and in the same sentence mention justplanes.com as somehow being an illstration of what it really should be. In reality, it is justplanes which counts orders before they are signed, and Airbus who only counts them when signed.

[DFW]

Don't get me wrong. I think there is a good market for 550 seat airplanes. But the smart thing would have been to design an airplane that would overlap an existing market (747 fleet replacement) at the low end while creating a new market at the high end (but not the super high end).

By not doing so, Airbus left the 747 fleet replacement market open for Boeing to make some sales with a moderate investment. True, some airlines will indeed replace their 747s with 380s. But Airbus could have had the entire replacement market to itself.

[David747]

That all depends on Airbus's market outlook for a streched A380 and the potential impact on the market. Derivatives do well once introduced.

Yea like the A318?

We dumped our order for them.

I was thinking more of the B777-200ER, which was the better seller than the B777-200.

DFW:Don't get me wrong. I think there is a good market for 550 seat airplanes. But the smart thing would have been to design an airplane that would overlap an existing market (747 fleet replacement) at the low end while creating a new market at the high end (but not the super high end).

I understand where you are coming from, but I believe that Airbus wanted to introduced the A380 on the market not only to replace the 747, but to add more capacity to long haul travel. Either way, I do believe the 747-8 and A380 will do well, but they will only sell around 900 units combined IMO, the market doesn't seem big enough for VLA's, and planes like the B777 and 787, and to some extent the A350 will do a lot better in the next 20 years for widebodies.

[fleabyte]

But do not need to brng up this topic until 2006 closes and we can analyze the claims of A&B

[teach]

But do not need to brng up this topic until 2006 closes and we can analyze the claims of A&B

I'm not the one who brought it up, am I? If you're not willing to defend and back up your unsupported accusations, don't make them to begin with.

[Zenfookpower]

Boeing will not claim it is an order like Airbus did last year. That is why if you look justplanes.com order tally for 2005, Airbus tally dropped to like 800 after the dust settled.

But if China places an order for 30 747-8i what a year for the Queen of the Sky and for Boeing widebody aircraft programs.

This momentum will certainly give Boeing confidence for pushing on with Y1 and Y3.

It just proves what can be done once a business management is focused, creative and customer driven ..

[Mercutio]

Airbus doesn't count order unless they are signed, just like Boeing. And no, the Airbus 'tally' never 'dropped' to 800.

Actually Airbus did claim to have exceeded Boeing's order total last year but were corrected by Chinese airlines who had placed large orders for the A320 family. The Chinese buyers claimed that their orders were not finalised and shouldn't be counted as firm and final. I also noticed that Boeing stopped counting their annual orders at the end of December wheras Airbus continued to count orders until late January as being part of their 2005 total. The reality is that Boeing comfortably outsold Airbus in both 2005 and 2006.

[teach]

The Chinese buyers claimed that their orders were not finalised and shouldn't be counted as firm and final. I

Not true. Airbus signs the purchase agreements with CAAC, and they DID sign on the dotted line before the end of last year. The deals with the individual airlines to which the planes are allotted are worked out later, but the sontract to sell the planes is signed by CAAC. Airbus has always counted CAAC orders as such

I also noticed that Boeing stopped counting their annual orders at the end of December wheras Airbus continued to count orders until late January as being part of their 2005 total.

Again: no. Just because the final tally for Airbus is annouced mid-January, doesn't mean the orders are only placed at that date. The Airbus spreadsheet clearly showed each and every one of those orders announced as having been signed in 2005. If you're saying that is not true, then that means you're accusing Airbus of backdating official documents, which is highly illegal. And here again: Airbus has always announced their final order tally mid-January.

The reality is that Boeing comfortably outsold Airbus in both 2005 and 2006.

You do realise that, if what you wrote in your previous sentence were true (and the orders announced in January were not from 2005) that they would count for this year right? In which case Airbus would likely be ahead of Boeing this year...

[Mercutio]

^ No they wouldn't be. Airbus would be behind Boeing regardless. It doesn't matter if you count the years separately or in combination. The issue with the Chinese order was over deposits:


Deposits for Chinese airlines' order may not have been paid to Airbus - report
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... _n16071840

Airline Industry Information, Feb 20, 2006
AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION-(C)1997-2006 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

Reports claim that deposits, which would usually be required to classify an order as a firm deal, may not have been paid to Airbus for an order by Chinese airlines valued at USD10bn.

Airbus however said on Friday (17 February) that deposits had been paid and that it had satisfied the conditions for reporting the aircraft as firm orders, according to Reuters.

The airlines that are scheduled to receive the aircraft have apparently stated that deposits have not yet been paid.

The order, which was for a total of 150 aircraft and was signed in December, reportedly enabled Airbus to overtake Boeing in its order intake figures. If the Chinese airlines deal is not counted, Airbus would have lost out to Boeing in the year's order intake figures for the first time since 2000, Reuters said.


Questions raised over Airbus orders
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aero ... 101586.asp

Airbus beat Boeing in orders in 2005 because of a 150-plane deal from China that was posted by Airbus as a firm order before the books closed on 2005. At the time, Boeing said it would not have claimed such an order as firm because the individual airlines had not signed contracts for the planes.

Now, some of those same Chinese airlines are saying they never paid any deposit to Airbus and still do not know how many planes they will order, raising further questions whether the 150 planes should have been counted by Airbus for 2005. Airbus says deposits were paid, the orders are firm and should have been counted.

[teach]

So let's see, 'reports say' and 'MAY not'... Not what I'd call a convincing case, is it?

Furthermore, from the articles:

some of those same Chinese airlines are saying they never paid any deposit to Airbus and still do not know how many planes they will order

vs

Airbus says deposits were paid

See how Airbus doesn't claim the airlines were the ones who paid the deposits, just that they were paid? Perfectly possible that the deposits were paid by the CAAC, and the airlines paid those back to the CAAC once the allotments were made.

Oh, and:

No they wouldn't be.

Airbus signed some 500 orders in December last year, which were reported in January. They're trailing Boeing by less than 300 this year(also taking into account Boeing numbers are accurate up to December 20th, Airbus only up to November 30th). Switch those over to this year, and they're in the lead.

[DFW]

Other than bragging rights (and making your resume look good), the airplane count is of lesser value than the actual business worth of the sales. By this measure, Boeing is solidly in the lead for 2006 because it is far outselling Airbus in widebodies ($$$). Last I saw the numbers in October, Boeing was ahead by about 4:1. Since that time, Airbus has made some very good gains with A330 sales and a few firmed up options on A380 (albeit at very steep discounts). But it looks like 2006 will close with Boeing having much higher revenue bookings. Even Leahy would prefer this over bragging rights.

[David747]

Man alive, we are still talking about last year's order race(2005), gee, I can't wait to see the discussion this year about the order race. Like last year, Boeing has been crowned champion, that is until Airbus comes out with its numbers by the middle of january and the fun will begin all over again, about this useless and most insignificant race amongst the manufacturers(remember, it is deliveries that count, not orders, and with that being said, Airbus will be ahead on deliveries until 2008 or 2009). With that being said, wasn't the topic here about the 747-8I being ordered by China Airlines. I came across an article recently that said the airline would not make an order anytime soon, but they are looking to renew their fleet.

[Mercutio]

Airbus signed some 500 orders in December last year, which were reported in January. They're trailing Boeing by less than 300 this year(also taking into account Boeing numbers are accurate up to December 20th, Airbus only up to November 30th). Switch those over to this year, and they're in the lead.

Please run this by me again.... how can you possibly skew the figures to show Airbus ahead? It's obvious that Boeing has sold more in 2005 and 2006.

@DFW
You are right. Boeing has not only sold more planes, they have also sold far more valuable and profitable planes (ie widebodies). Boeing has clearly won the orders race these last two years.