Airbus is going to cut back its new airplane research and development spending and redirect efforts more toward derivative airplanes, EADS CEO Tom Enders told aerospace analysts at the EADS Global Investors Forum.
Buried in a Bloomberg News report of the GIF is this:
Enders also wants to curb cash-hungry development efforts in favor of milking existing products for higher returns. At Airbus, he backed the re-engining of the A320 narrow-body over building a new plane. No new jets are planned at Airbus beyond the A350, which is due to commence deliveries late next year.
“Why should we spend large amounts of money when we can make significant incremental improvements?” he said. “This principle can be applied outside of just civil aircraft.”
Airbus, like Boeing, suffered under the strain of new aircraft programs, notably the A380 and A400M. As yet, the A350 doesn’t seem to have been a black hole, with normal development costs.
Richard Aboulafia of The Teal Group was critical of Boeing for years for starving R&D for new aircraft and over-relying on derivatives while Airbus invested in new aircraft programs. He had this to say about Enders’ news:
This is only possible as a percent of sales. Airbus is at a twin aisle product line disadvantage relative to Boeing, so this isn’t the time for them to rest on their laurels. Some kind of response to the 777-9X is essential, even if it arrives a few years after the Boeing jet. Whether it’s an A350-1100 or a clean sheet, it requires a significant investment right after A350XWB-800/900/1000 spending winds down. Thus, in absolute numbers, the company would be advised to keep spending high for the next ten years. But on the positive side, since Airbus’s revenue will grow with A350 (and incrementally with the A320 neo), the company’s percent of revenue spent on IRAD will decline.
Enders’ comments reflect the changing nature of Airbus’s shareholder relations more than anything else. They’ll need to focus more on profitability rather than new product development over the next ten years; they may wind up looking more like Boeing.
Airbus’ 5th quarter: John Leahy, COO-Customers of Airbus, is so well known for announcing a whole bunch of orders at the company’s annual review press conference (January 13 this time) that Boeing dubbed it the “5th quarter,” and the quip has stuck. Aeroturbopower has a wrap up of how many orders could be announced at the 5th quarter.
Boeing, IAM Meet: Dominic Gates of The Seattle Times reports that Boeing and the IAM met for the first time since the 2-1 vote rejection November 13 of the contract offer in connection with the 777X site selection.
777X responses to RFP: The following news articles try to detail some of the responses by states to Boeing’s 777X site selection RFP:
California and another California
Missouri: The county votes to add $1.8bn in tax breaks to the State’s $1.7bn.
Washington: The State adds Spokane to the list of alternative sites, according to Glenn Farley at KING5 (NBC, Seattle). (No link available.)
New York Times: Losing 777X would start a death spiral for WA State.
On Tuesday, the day the RFPs were due to Boeing, the Washington Congressional delegation released a letter to Boeing CEO Jim McNerney urging that the 777X be assembled in the state. The letter is below the jump.
This follows an Open Letter to Boeing on December 6 from Snohomish County officials (Everett is in this county), published in The Everett Herald.
We received an email from a Reader, who works for Boeing, about the details that emerged last week of Boeing’s Request for Proposals for the site location for the 777X:
I went to your site today to see what you had on the leaked RFI, and I have to say the whining by your crowd of Airbus fanboys is just astounding. Given all of the support given to Airbus for the A380, with Hamburg filling in a protected wildlife sanctuary, giving billions of euros of infrastructure. Changing laws so they could snatch land for Airbus. The hypocrisy just makes me puke. Not one of your posters, nor you, even bother to look at what the over guys got. Nope, just bad, evil Boeing. You could do better, you know.
We replied to this Reader that shortly after the details emerged and we posted links to the newspapers that had them, our power went down for the next 16 hours. When it was restored, we had moved on to other things. The email prompted us to go back, look at the comments and ponder the Reader’s premise. Here is what we came up with:
Airbus held a summit December 4 for stakeholders in the A340 to explain how there continues to be life after production ended and despite being a four-engined airplane in a two-engine world.
Key to the future of this out-of-production airliner is increasing the capacity of the A340-600 to an exit-limited 475 seats and for Rolls-Royce to alter its Total Care engine maintenance Power-by-the-Hour terms and conditions to reduce costs.
Airlines, financiers, appraisers and the engine makers were invited by John Leahy, chief operating officer-Customers of Airbus. Engine providers CFM International, Rolls-Royce, Lufthansa Airlines and Hi Fly, a small European airline, made presentations in addition to Airbus.
Airbus produced 246 A340-200/300s and 131 A340-500/600s; 227 and 131 respectively are in operation or parked.
Status |
A340-200 |
A340-300 |
A340-500 |
A340-600 |
In Service |
19 |
175 |
20 |
90 |
Stored |
6 |
27 |
14 |
7 |
Airbus guaranteed the residual value on an unknown number, and has strong motivation to see these airplanes continue in service, according to one person familiar with the situation.