Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner assembly line came with the hope of hundreds of supplier jobs that will crop up to support the aerospace giant as it pieces together the new passenger jets in North Charleston.
But those jobs aren't necessarily coming to the Lowcountry.
Because the aerospace industry tends to scatter its supply chain, vendors that work on the Dreamliner project could easily locate a short drive up the interstate to Orangeburg County, which has cheaper land, lower wages and an aggressive economic development strategy.
Or they could open up in Savannah, where Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. employs thousands of skilled aviation workers and where local officials enjoy nothing more than taking business from the Charleston area.
The possibility of having to compete with other areas for Boeing supplier jobs has local economic development officials gearing up for a fight.
"Do we want to turn this into a blood bath? Absolutely not," said Charleston County Councilman Elliott Summey, who oversees the county's economic development committee. "But Charleston County is going to be competitive. ... We're not going to take this lightly."
Boeing hasn't yet put an estimate on the number of supplier companies that will need to be near the massive new assembly line under construction at Charleston International Airport.
"We don't have a sense for that," said Boeing Charleston spokeswoman Candy Eslinger.
Local commercial brokers and economic development officials say Washington-based suppliers have already begun to shop around the region for space. The question that remains is how far they'll be able to locate from the Boeing campus.
Economic development officials compare the Boeing investment to BMW's assembly plant in Greer, which has generated thousands of spinoff jobs from vendors and other businesses. But unlike an auto manufacturer that needs lots of parts right away -- a manufacturing practice termed "just in time" -- Boeing will be producing fewer planes and therefore have more time to round up parts from its suppliers.
And Boeing is not a company that's hesitant to scatter its supply chain. Parts of the 787 already are being flown from all over the world to Seattle for final assembly: wing tips from Korea, passenger-entry doors from France and the wing's movable back edges from Australia. Fuselage sections are made in North Charleston.
"You don't have to be that close," said Ed McCallum, a Greenville site consultant who works with companies looking to locate new operations throughout the Southeast. "Where they go -- whether it's an hour away or two, three hours away -- it doesn't matter for a major supplier."
McCallum pointed out that the Savannah region is home to Gulfstream, a private-aircraft manufacturer that employs 6,000 in that area. That operation shows that aerospace skills run deep within the local workforce, he said.
The agency responsible for recruiting new jobs and industry to South Carolina is keenly aware of the competition for Boeing suppliers that want to be relatively close to the North Charleston plant.
"We do believe there are opportunities, but I do think that you can make the assumption that North Carolina and Georgia will be pursuing those opportunities aggressively, too," said Kara Borie, spokeswoman for the S.C. Commerce Department of Commerce.
McCallum said a closer competitor for the Charleston region is Orangeburg County, which has a business recruitment team led by former Commerce official Gregg Robinson. That region has large swaths of ready-to-develop land, cheap utility rates and two major interstate highways.
"You can't count them out." McCallum said. "It's pretty common knowledge they're aggressive," he said.
Robinson confirmed that some Boeing suppliers have already looked at locating in Orangeburg, but he declined to give specifics.
"We have had a decent amount of interest as a result of the announcement, and everybody's excited about the opportunity," said Robinson, who called his rivalry with his Lowcountry counterparts "a friendly competition."
Friday, January 29, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Startup funding may help lure Southwest here, officials say
By David Dykes
Business writer
An Upstate lawmaker this week is expected to propose initiatives to boost airline competition at the state’s airports, including Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport, where efforts are underway to lure discount carrier Southwest Airlines.
State Rep. Bill Wylie, a Simpsonville Republican, said the legislation he expects to introduce will center on creating a state-administered fund to help an airline offset startup costs at any of South Carolina’s commercial airports.
While Wylie said his measure won’t target a specific airport, local officials believe it will be crucial to their efforts to bring Southwest to GSP — and put downward pressure on local airfares that are among the highest in the nation.
Wylie said he has lined up several sponsors to support the legislation, which would include a fund of approximately $15 million to reimburse certain losses for up to 24 months based on an agreement the airport and a carrier believe is equitable for both sides.
Local business and community officials hope to attract Southwest this year, but an airline spokeswoman said last week “there is no imminent plan” to announce any additional new service for 2010.
“First and foremost with Southwest, it’s not done, and it’s not dead,” Dave Edwards, GSP’s executive director, said in an interview.
“There’s always a possibility of Southwest being able to come in 2010,” he said. “Part of that would be can we assemble something that is of a nature that attracts Southwest to come to the community? I don’t think there’s any question that we have the market here, we have the pent-up desire of this community to have a low-cost, low-fare carrier in the market.”
Airline officials have confirmed that Southwest, the biggest U.S. discount carrier, sent its scheduling and planning officials to Greenville. The officials cautioned that airline representatives have attended similar recruitment meetings in many other cities.
In a statement last week, Southwest’s spokeswoman, Ashley Rogers, said, “Our new Panama City Beach (Fla.) service that begins in May is the only new service that’s scheduled for 2010.”
“The leadership here at Southwest is always open to exploring new areas and will continue to monitor the economic environment in an effort to make the best decisions for our customers and our employees,” Rogers said.
A spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford said the Governor’s Office likely would wait to see the final language before deciding whether to support Wylie’s legislation.
The spokesman, Ben Fox, said, “carve-out incentives of this nature can be troublesome for some” and would need to go “through a rigorous cost-benefit analysis to make sure the taxpayer is protected alongside potentially boosting the local and state economy.”
Local business and community leaders are eager to bring Southwest and its large jet service to GSP, where regional carriers and smaller commuter aircraft dominate.
High airfares and a lack of western routes are causing two of every three potential passengers to bypass GSP in favor of flights in other cities, primarily Charlotte and Atlanta, according to business leaders and airport officials.
Currently, Allegiant, a low-fare carrier, provides service from GSP to several locations in Florida.
Edwards said GSP needs to broaden the airport’s discount-carrier offerings, particularly for business travelers who often fly on short notice.
“There is no question that people know that we’ve been in dialogue with Southwest,” he said. “We are trying to develop a partnership arrangement with the community, including the state Legislature, in order to assemble a package that might be attractive enough to secure service from Southwest at some point in the future. That’s our goal at this point — to try to get that in place.
“Most airlines will tell you for them to start new service at an airport, the station cost at the airport to install equipment, phones, get all of their build-out done for facilities usually runs a half-million dollars to $600,000,” Edwards said.
For airport operators, it’s important to “minimize that cost of entry for them,” and “basically just give them a turn-key operation that they can walk in the door with their staff, bring their ancillary equipment to the table, but have all of the hard infrastructure in place,” he said.
“That creates a much better situation for them to entertain coming into the market,” he said.
Edwards came to GSP last July after working at Asheville, where he helped attract more airline service, including discount carrier AirTran Airways.
It was a similar situation to GSP’s, Edwards said.
Airport officials in Asheville wanted more competition and developed an air-service plan to identify incentives that were allowed under FAA regulations, including marketing dollars and fee waivers, he said.
Airports can’t provide direct cash subsidies or direct revenue guarantees to an airline to ensure they’re going to be profitable in a market, Edwards said.
Overall, it took about five years of discussions with AirTran before Asheville secured the airline’s service, he said.
“That’s a long period of courtship,” Edwards said, “and it’s a constant discussion that you have to have.”
In the end, Asheville provided AirTran — as part of the airport’s air-service incentive policy — with marketing dollars and fee waivers and did some facility improvements “that would not only benefit them in their startup but also would enable us to help lure some other airlines to the table in the future,” Edwards said.
AirTran officials couldn’t be reached for comment.
These days, carriers are looking for an edge, and increasingly, funds need to go to keeping their costs down, Edwards said.
“It used to be there were no incentives required, essentially, to get air service to the table,” he said.
“Now, that’s become the standard, and now we’re kind of moving into this next phase, because of the economic climate, of having to help a carrier mitigate their risk in the first two or three years of providing service in order to give them an opportunity to get up and running and become successful in a market,” Edwards said.
Wylie has said his legislation won’t be geared to any one carrier. It will be an air-service development program, administered by state aeronautics officials, for any of South Carolina’s commercial airports, he said.
That suits Edwards, who said South Carolina needs to “raise the attention, heighten the awareness of how important aviation is to the future economic success of the state.”
It’s an economic opportunity similar to BMW’s presence in the Upstate or Boeing’s plan for the Charleston area, he said.
“Without appropriate air service to the state, it will never achieve the highest level of economic benefit that it can achieve,” Edwards said.
“Ultimately, it’s really all about jobs and quality of life and all of those things built around it,” he said.
For now, GSP officials are talking to several discount carriers, including Southwest, about starting service here, Edwards said.
“I think we have a good chance to be successful in securing a low-cost, low-fare carrier,” he said. “I think we have a good possibility in being successful with Southwest. But again, it’s not done, and it’s going to take all of the efforts that are currently underway, from the state Legislature to the local community to the private sector to the airport commission in order to bring this thing to fruition.
“And if all of those pieces of the puzzle don’t come together, it’s probably not going to happen.”
Business writer
An Upstate lawmaker this week is expected to propose initiatives to boost airline competition at the state’s airports, including Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport, where efforts are underway to lure discount carrier Southwest Airlines.
State Rep. Bill Wylie, a Simpsonville Republican, said the legislation he expects to introduce will center on creating a state-administered fund to help an airline offset startup costs at any of South Carolina’s commercial airports.
While Wylie said his measure won’t target a specific airport, local officials believe it will be crucial to their efforts to bring Southwest to GSP — and put downward pressure on local airfares that are among the highest in the nation.
Wylie said he has lined up several sponsors to support the legislation, which would include a fund of approximately $15 million to reimburse certain losses for up to 24 months based on an agreement the airport and a carrier believe is equitable for both sides.
Local business and community officials hope to attract Southwest this year, but an airline spokeswoman said last week “there is no imminent plan” to announce any additional new service for 2010.
“First and foremost with Southwest, it’s not done, and it’s not dead,” Dave Edwards, GSP’s executive director, said in an interview.
“There’s always a possibility of Southwest being able to come in 2010,” he said. “Part of that would be can we assemble something that is of a nature that attracts Southwest to come to the community? I don’t think there’s any question that we have the market here, we have the pent-up desire of this community to have a low-cost, low-fare carrier in the market.”
Airline officials have confirmed that Southwest, the biggest U.S. discount carrier, sent its scheduling and planning officials to Greenville. The officials cautioned that airline representatives have attended similar recruitment meetings in many other cities.
In a statement last week, Southwest’s spokeswoman, Ashley Rogers, said, “Our new Panama City Beach (Fla.) service that begins in May is the only new service that’s scheduled for 2010.”
“The leadership here at Southwest is always open to exploring new areas and will continue to monitor the economic environment in an effort to make the best decisions for our customers and our employees,” Rogers said.
A spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford said the Governor’s Office likely would wait to see the final language before deciding whether to support Wylie’s legislation.
The spokesman, Ben Fox, said, “carve-out incentives of this nature can be troublesome for some” and would need to go “through a rigorous cost-benefit analysis to make sure the taxpayer is protected alongside potentially boosting the local and state economy.”
Local business and community leaders are eager to bring Southwest and its large jet service to GSP, where regional carriers and smaller commuter aircraft dominate.
High airfares and a lack of western routes are causing two of every three potential passengers to bypass GSP in favor of flights in other cities, primarily Charlotte and Atlanta, according to business leaders and airport officials.
Currently, Allegiant, a low-fare carrier, provides service from GSP to several locations in Florida.
Edwards said GSP needs to broaden the airport’s discount-carrier offerings, particularly for business travelers who often fly on short notice.
“There is no question that people know that we’ve been in dialogue with Southwest,” he said. “We are trying to develop a partnership arrangement with the community, including the state Legislature, in order to assemble a package that might be attractive enough to secure service from Southwest at some point in the future. That’s our goal at this point — to try to get that in place.
“Most airlines will tell you for them to start new service at an airport, the station cost at the airport to install equipment, phones, get all of their build-out done for facilities usually runs a half-million dollars to $600,000,” Edwards said.
For airport operators, it’s important to “minimize that cost of entry for them,” and “basically just give them a turn-key operation that they can walk in the door with their staff, bring their ancillary equipment to the table, but have all of the hard infrastructure in place,” he said.
“That creates a much better situation for them to entertain coming into the market,” he said.
Edwards came to GSP last July after working at Asheville, where he helped attract more airline service, including discount carrier AirTran Airways.
It was a similar situation to GSP’s, Edwards said.
Airport officials in Asheville wanted more competition and developed an air-service plan to identify incentives that were allowed under FAA regulations, including marketing dollars and fee waivers, he said.
Airports can’t provide direct cash subsidies or direct revenue guarantees to an airline to ensure they’re going to be profitable in a market, Edwards said.
Overall, it took about five years of discussions with AirTran before Asheville secured the airline’s service, he said.
“That’s a long period of courtship,” Edwards said, “and it’s a constant discussion that you have to have.”
In the end, Asheville provided AirTran — as part of the airport’s air-service incentive policy — with marketing dollars and fee waivers and did some facility improvements “that would not only benefit them in their startup but also would enable us to help lure some other airlines to the table in the future,” Edwards said.
AirTran officials couldn’t be reached for comment.
These days, carriers are looking for an edge, and increasingly, funds need to go to keeping their costs down, Edwards said.
“It used to be there were no incentives required, essentially, to get air service to the table,” he said.
“Now, that’s become the standard, and now we’re kind of moving into this next phase, because of the economic climate, of having to help a carrier mitigate their risk in the first two or three years of providing service in order to give them an opportunity to get up and running and become successful in a market,” Edwards said.
Wylie has said his legislation won’t be geared to any one carrier. It will be an air-service development program, administered by state aeronautics officials, for any of South Carolina’s commercial airports, he said.
That suits Edwards, who said South Carolina needs to “raise the attention, heighten the awareness of how important aviation is to the future economic success of the state.”
It’s an economic opportunity similar to BMW’s presence in the Upstate or Boeing’s plan for the Charleston area, he said.
“Without appropriate air service to the state, it will never achieve the highest level of economic benefit that it can achieve,” Edwards said.
“Ultimately, it’s really all about jobs and quality of life and all of those things built around it,” he said.
For now, GSP officials are talking to several discount carriers, including Southwest, about starting service here, Edwards said.
“I think we have a good chance to be successful in securing a low-cost, low-fare carrier,” he said. “I think we have a good possibility in being successful with Southwest. But again, it’s not done, and it’s going to take all of the efforts that are currently underway, from the state Legislature to the local community to the private sector to the airport commission in order to bring this thing to fruition.
“And if all of those pieces of the puzzle don’t come together, it’s probably not going to happen.”
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Airbus snagged more orders in '09, but Boeing netted more cash
The Seattle Times
SEATTLE — SEATTLE — Airbus topped Boeing both in the number of planes produced and in the total of new orders last year, but the U.S. company prevailed in perhaps the most important tally: the actual money received for airplanes delivered to customers.
Whether calculated on list prices or on more realistic data using standard sales discounts, Boeing’s deliveries were worth about $4 billion more than Airbus’s.
Airbus said last week that it won 271 net orders versus Boeing’s 142, and delivered a company record 498 airplanes compared to Boeing’s 481. The European plane-maker’s executives also conceded serious problems with the A380 superjumbo jet program and with the money-draining A400M military cargo plane.
Orders and deliveries are the numbers that get the most attention, but from a business perspective, the value of deliveries is key.
According to data from aircraft valuation firm Avitas, after standard sales discounts the Boeing jets delivered in 2009 were worth an estimated $32.8 billion.
Airbus’ 2009 deliveries were worth an estimated $28.4 billion.
Despite delivering 17 fewer airplanes, Boeing produced a more valuable mix: Airbus’s output of the more expensive large jets didn’t match Boeing’s 777 production line in Everett.
Airbus rolled out only 20 of its larger-sized wide-bodies: only 10 from the moribund A340 program and another 10 from the A380 superjumbo program, which has slowed to a crawl because of production issues.
In contrast, Boeing rolled out 88 of its expensive large wide-body 777s in 2009, a record pace.
In addition, Boeing delivered eight of its pricey 747-400 jumbo jets before it suspended that assembly line last May as it transitions to the new model 747-8.
According to the catalog list prices of the airplanes delivered, not allowing for discount pricing, Boeing’s delivery total is $55.1 billion compared to Airbus’ $51.6 billion.
That outcome fits the pattern of recent years, though the Machinist strike in 2008 that stopped production for two months meant Airbus beat Boeing in the value of its jet deliveries that year.
But in 2007 and 2006, Boeing topped Airbus both in the number of new jet orders and in the dollar value of jet deliveries.
At the Airbus news conference, chief executive Tom Enders spoke of two issues that Boeing executives will watch closely as they consider their own corresponding moves.
He said Airbus expects to roughly maintain production rates in the year ahead. And the leadership will decide whether to go ahead with a new engine program for the A320 narrow-body family.
Enders also said Airbus should cancel the delayed and over-budget A400M project if customer governments fail to commit more funds soon because it is swallowing money and valuable resources.
And he acknowledged a “big disappointment” with Airbus’ newest plane, the A380 superjumbo, which has suffered from costly delays. Airbus’s 10 deliveries last year were well below its initial goal of 18, and Enders said the program will be “a financial liability” for years to come.
At the same time, the hulking gray A400M turboprop, which made its first flight only last month, is costing euro100 million ($145 million) each month and valuable engineering resources, Enders said.
“Part of my responsibility as CEO is when you see a clear danger coming up, that you speak up, that you suggest action, that you take action and that is what I am doing,” he told The Associated Press in Seville, Spain.
The money being spent on the A400M could be used on other Airbus projects: it wants to double production of the A380 to 20 planes this year. Airbus is also working on a new widebody, the A350 XWB, and is thinking about fitting a new engine to its A320 single-aisle workhorse.
Airbus was “stupid” to agree to the original fixed-price contract for the A400M with an unrealistic delivery schedule, Enders said at the company’s New Year’s news conference in Seville.
EADS CEO Louis Gallois called some of the A400M arrangements imposed on the company by governments “baroque.” He said governments should resolve the issue of who pays for the extra costs “no later than end of January.”
“The A400M puts all of Airbus in jeopardy,” Enders said.
Analysts have said the threat is aimed at forcing governments to move ahead with a project that supports 40,000 jobs, many of which would be based in Seville, where the A400M is assembled.
The A400M project was launched six years ago with an order for 180 planes from seven governments — Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain and Turkey.
The original price was euro20 billion ($29.5 billion), but a preliminary report by auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers said EADS might need an extra euro5 billion — inflating the final bill by 25 percent. Some reports have put the extra bill as high as euro11 billion.
Defense officials involved in the project are due to meet in London on Thursday, ahead of a Jan. 30 deadline to reach a financing deal on how to cope with the cost overruns. That deadline has already been extended several times, and it is a year since Airbus proposed a “new approach” for the troubled program.
In its main jetliner business, Airbus survived a crisis year for the airline industry to post better results than Boeing on both orders and deliveries.
“Under the circumstances it was a rather good year,” Enders said.
The European planemaker captured 310 gross orders in 2009, within the target range set by chief salesman John Leahy a year ago.
The net tally of 271 beat Boeing’s 142 after the Chicago-based rival suffered multiple cancellations of its delayed 787.
Leahy said he expects between 250 and 300 gross orders this year, as well as more than four orders for A380s this year for a total of less than 10 plans. The pickup won’t come before 2012, he said.
He denied that Airbus gained more orders than Boeing because it is offering bigger discounts. “We never had cheaper planes,” he said.
Enders said he expects deliveries in 2010 to remain at the same level as the past two years, and has no plans to slow down production schedules for any of its planes.
The crisis, however, has caused disruption, with changes to 500 delivery slots, he said. Airbus has moved up some of its more financially secure customers to 2010 slots for planes originally scheduled for delivery in 2011, 2012 and even 2013, he said.
Enders said that in 2010 he plans to make a decision on whether to put new engines on the A320 to keep up with competition — a decision he described as crucial.
“That’s our bread-and-butter business,” he said. “If I get that wrong, I would be in serious trouble.”
Airbus’ parent company EADS also gave an early view of its full-year earnings, saying 2009 revenue fell 3.6 percent to euro41.7 billion ($60.6 billion) from euro43.26 billion in 2008.
Gallois blamed the weakening dollar, saying revenue was “a bit less than 2008 not in volume but only because of the dollar effect,” he said.
Airbus sells its planes in dollars, but many of its costs are in euros.
SEATTLE — SEATTLE — Airbus topped Boeing both in the number of planes produced and in the total of new orders last year, but the U.S. company prevailed in perhaps the most important tally: the actual money received for airplanes delivered to customers.
Whether calculated on list prices or on more realistic data using standard sales discounts, Boeing’s deliveries were worth about $4 billion more than Airbus’s.
Airbus said last week that it won 271 net orders versus Boeing’s 142, and delivered a company record 498 airplanes compared to Boeing’s 481. The European plane-maker’s executives also conceded serious problems with the A380 superjumbo jet program and with the money-draining A400M military cargo plane.
Orders and deliveries are the numbers that get the most attention, but from a business perspective, the value of deliveries is key.
According to data from aircraft valuation firm Avitas, after standard sales discounts the Boeing jets delivered in 2009 were worth an estimated $32.8 billion.
Airbus’ 2009 deliveries were worth an estimated $28.4 billion.
Despite delivering 17 fewer airplanes, Boeing produced a more valuable mix: Airbus’s output of the more expensive large jets didn’t match Boeing’s 777 production line in Everett.
Airbus rolled out only 20 of its larger-sized wide-bodies: only 10 from the moribund A340 program and another 10 from the A380 superjumbo program, which has slowed to a crawl because of production issues.
In contrast, Boeing rolled out 88 of its expensive large wide-body 777s in 2009, a record pace.
In addition, Boeing delivered eight of its pricey 747-400 jumbo jets before it suspended that assembly line last May as it transitions to the new model 747-8.
According to the catalog list prices of the airplanes delivered, not allowing for discount pricing, Boeing’s delivery total is $55.1 billion compared to Airbus’ $51.6 billion.
That outcome fits the pattern of recent years, though the Machinist strike in 2008 that stopped production for two months meant Airbus beat Boeing in the value of its jet deliveries that year.
But in 2007 and 2006, Boeing topped Airbus both in the number of new jet orders and in the dollar value of jet deliveries.
At the Airbus news conference, chief executive Tom Enders spoke of two issues that Boeing executives will watch closely as they consider their own corresponding moves.
He said Airbus expects to roughly maintain production rates in the year ahead. And the leadership will decide whether to go ahead with a new engine program for the A320 narrow-body family.
Enders also said Airbus should cancel the delayed and over-budget A400M project if customer governments fail to commit more funds soon because it is swallowing money and valuable resources.
And he acknowledged a “big disappointment” with Airbus’ newest plane, the A380 superjumbo, which has suffered from costly delays. Airbus’s 10 deliveries last year were well below its initial goal of 18, and Enders said the program will be “a financial liability” for years to come.
At the same time, the hulking gray A400M turboprop, which made its first flight only last month, is costing euro100 million ($145 million) each month and valuable engineering resources, Enders said.
“Part of my responsibility as CEO is when you see a clear danger coming up, that you speak up, that you suggest action, that you take action and that is what I am doing,” he told The Associated Press in Seville, Spain.
The money being spent on the A400M could be used on other Airbus projects: it wants to double production of the A380 to 20 planes this year. Airbus is also working on a new widebody, the A350 XWB, and is thinking about fitting a new engine to its A320 single-aisle workhorse.
Airbus was “stupid” to agree to the original fixed-price contract for the A400M with an unrealistic delivery schedule, Enders said at the company’s New Year’s news conference in Seville.
EADS CEO Louis Gallois called some of the A400M arrangements imposed on the company by governments “baroque.” He said governments should resolve the issue of who pays for the extra costs “no later than end of January.”
“The A400M puts all of Airbus in jeopardy,” Enders said.
Analysts have said the threat is aimed at forcing governments to move ahead with a project that supports 40,000 jobs, many of which would be based in Seville, where the A400M is assembled.
The A400M project was launched six years ago with an order for 180 planes from seven governments — Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain and Turkey.
The original price was euro20 billion ($29.5 billion), but a preliminary report by auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers said EADS might need an extra euro5 billion — inflating the final bill by 25 percent. Some reports have put the extra bill as high as euro11 billion.
Defense officials involved in the project are due to meet in London on Thursday, ahead of a Jan. 30 deadline to reach a financing deal on how to cope with the cost overruns. That deadline has already been extended several times, and it is a year since Airbus proposed a “new approach” for the troubled program.
In its main jetliner business, Airbus survived a crisis year for the airline industry to post better results than Boeing on both orders and deliveries.
“Under the circumstances it was a rather good year,” Enders said.
The European planemaker captured 310 gross orders in 2009, within the target range set by chief salesman John Leahy a year ago.
The net tally of 271 beat Boeing’s 142 after the Chicago-based rival suffered multiple cancellations of its delayed 787.
Leahy said he expects between 250 and 300 gross orders this year, as well as more than four orders for A380s this year for a total of less than 10 plans. The pickup won’t come before 2012, he said.
He denied that Airbus gained more orders than Boeing because it is offering bigger discounts. “We never had cheaper planes,” he said.
Enders said he expects deliveries in 2010 to remain at the same level as the past two years, and has no plans to slow down production schedules for any of its planes.
The crisis, however, has caused disruption, with changes to 500 delivery slots, he said. Airbus has moved up some of its more financially secure customers to 2010 slots for planes originally scheduled for delivery in 2011, 2012 and even 2013, he said.
Enders said that in 2010 he plans to make a decision on whether to put new engines on the A320 to keep up with competition — a decision he described as crucial.
“That’s our bread-and-butter business,” he said. “If I get that wrong, I would be in serious trouble.”
Airbus’ parent company EADS also gave an early view of its full-year earnings, saying 2009 revenue fell 3.6 percent to euro41.7 billion ($60.6 billion) from euro43.26 billion in 2008.
Gallois blamed the weakening dollar, saying revenue was “a bit less than 2008 not in volume but only because of the dollar effect,” he said.
Airbus sells its planes in dollars, but many of its costs are in euros.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Boeing Co. deal earns national recognition
The Post and Courier
Celebrities have the People's Choice Awards. Smokestack chasers have the annual Economic Development Deal of the Year Awards, as chosen each year by Business Facilities magazine.
And as it turns out, Joe Taylor and his staff over at the S.C. Department of Commerce rose to the top for 2009 on the wings of none other than Boeing Co.
Agencies from 15 states nominated what the trade publication call 19 "big-ticket projects" for consideration by a panel of judges who evaluated economic impact statistics, job-creation estimates and project narratives.
The commerce department snared the "Gold Award" for Boeing's decision to pick North Charleston as the site of its new 787 Dreamliner assembly plant, the magazine noted.
With completion set for mid-2011, the $750 million investment "vaults the Palmetto State into a leadership position in aerospace manufacturing," according to the Tinton Falls, N.J.-based publication.
"The choice of North Charleston as a manufacturing site for Boeing's best-selling commercial jet will have a seismic impact on South Carolina's economic development," said editor-in-chief Jack Rogers.
Several mega-projects -- with a projected overall economic impact of more than $1 trillion -- were nominated for the top award. The runners-up were Tennessee's Department of Economic & Community Development for luring a Hemlock Semiconductor plant; and the Virginia Economic Development Partnership for its role in landing the Northrup Grumman Shipbuilding-led AREVA/Newport News partnership.
Celebrities have the People's Choice Awards. Smokestack chasers have the annual Economic Development Deal of the Year Awards, as chosen each year by Business Facilities magazine.
And as it turns out, Joe Taylor and his staff over at the S.C. Department of Commerce rose to the top for 2009 on the wings of none other than Boeing Co.
Agencies from 15 states nominated what the trade publication call 19 "big-ticket projects" for consideration by a panel of judges who evaluated economic impact statistics, job-creation estimates and project narratives.
The commerce department snared the "Gold Award" for Boeing's decision to pick North Charleston as the site of its new 787 Dreamliner assembly plant, the magazine noted.
With completion set for mid-2011, the $750 million investment "vaults the Palmetto State into a leadership position in aerospace manufacturing," according to the Tinton Falls, N.J.-based publication.
"The choice of North Charleston as a manufacturing site for Boeing's best-selling commercial jet will have a seismic impact on South Carolina's economic development," said editor-in-chief Jack Rogers.
Several mega-projects -- with a projected overall economic impact of more than $1 trillion -- were nominated for the top award. The runners-up were Tennessee's Department of Economic & Community Development for luring a Hemlock Semiconductor plant; and the Virginia Economic Development Partnership for its role in landing the Northrup Grumman Shipbuilding-led AREVA/Newport News partnership.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)