Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 301 posts

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#61

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

snowwrestler wrote: post #44
davidhyde wrote: post #8

What is keeping Boeing's share price so stable in the wake of such catastrophic news for the company this year?

I'm sure Boeing would have loved to have those orders, but 50 planes is not catastrophic. In terms of the aircraft group, Boeing has steadily growing 787 orders and deliveries, with about 500 orders yet to deliver. In terms of their space program, they are close to testing their manned capsule and just got a light touch program review, while SpaceX got put through the ringer. And there are other aspects to Boeing tha…

> In terms of their space program, they are close to testing their manned capsule and just got a light touch program review, while SpaceX got put through the ringer.

I'm sure this will end well for them...

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#62

Post by CydeWeys »

rsynnott wrote: post #54
ahartmetz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like Airbus currently is different. Maybe the friction from it being very multinational prevented it from becoming like Boeing, maybe it will have its own big scandal in a month. Who knows. But currently, Airbus does look better.

I mean, it wasn’t a safety scandal, but the A380 was a huge disaster for the company. I’d be more comfortable getting on a notional A360 than a notional 797, but both companies have self-harmed recently.

It lost them money but it didn't hurt their brand. Those are great planes to fly in as a passenger, they're just not profitable in the end for Airbus.

Boeing can't even keep its newest plane in the skies, and may have killed off the 737 line for good. Think another revision after the MAX is ever going to be approved?

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#63

Post by nutjob2 »

whatshisface wrote: post #7

America is going to pay for the cronyism that merged every airplane manufacturer into one and eliminated internal competition. If you don't have internal competition, you'll collapse in the face of external competition. There is no way to get away from Boeing without getting away from the American aerospace industry entirely, a problem that didn't exist back when McDonnell Douglas was around.

Airbus and Boeing are widely considered to be the one of most competitive and efficient duopolies on the planet. That might have a lot to do with the fact that they are based in two different large economies and cultures.

The nature of their products and customers, and the scale needed, may not lend itself to having a lot of smaller competitors. Where are the economies of scale (or other efficiencies) going to come from? This may already be reasonably optimal for large aircraft.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#64

Post by socialdemocrat »

whatshisface wrote: post #29
wbl wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vertical integration means fewer middlemen driving up the margin on each part.

Efficient market theory would suggest that there is no margin in equilibrium, and what looks like margin is actually the cost of capital (which all companies, big and small, have to pay).

Except efficient market theory is a bunch of bullshit that does not fit reality.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#65

Post by kitteh »

arnon wrote: post #2

Mostly, this proves that the 737 MAX isn't a valid alternative to the 757. This goes against Boeing's official stance. The A321 (and the 757) is a lot more flexible, can carry more cargo, and has better performance.

Pilots have been saying this for a long time. But it started with anger towards the constant expansion of the 737 (the 900 has some additional limits that hit hard when icing conditions in some places like Denver). The 757 was the sports car of airliners but with a high price tag (and it never really displaced the 727). As for the A321...it had a rocky start.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#66

Post by wenc »

rootusrootus wrote: post #5

My takeaway is that Airbus and Boeing both need to make progress on their clean-sheet midsize designs. The A321XLR sounds great but it's kinda what Boeing has been doing to the 737, milking it for decades. The A320 is a newer design, for sure, but it's not young. I won't miss the 737. What I'd love to see is a twin-aisle-but-small short range aircraft. Yeah, that won't happen, but it would be comfy.

The Airbus A220 (formerly the Bombardier C-Series) is a clean sheet design and by most accounts, one of the best designs of its class today. It widely considered to be a next generation commercial aircraft, and will be unsurpassed by competitors for a couple of years until they catch up with newer designs. It’s enjoyed rave reviews by consumers and airplane nerds love it.

Delta has already bought a bunch and I look forward to these planes becoming more and more common.

Obligatory Wendover Productions video on the A220 and the fight with Boeing

https://youtu.be/V1YMPk3XhCc

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#67

Post by aguyfromnb »

magduf wrote: post #43
rsynnott wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, one option is to break up Boeing (and Airbus). They’re far too vertically integrated.

If you break both of them up too much, they may be unable to compete against a major Chinese manufacturer when it scales up.

>If you break both of them up too much, they may be unable to compete against a major Chinese manufacturer when it scales up.

This is a crucial point that so many people seem to miss. If you want to break up these companies (manufacturers, banks), they are going to get absolutely crushed in the global economy, competing against Chinese state-sponsored companies.

In the game theory of open global commerce, it pays to cheat.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#68

Post by theli0nheart »

whatshisface wrote: post #48
theli0nheart wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economics is laughably bad at predicting real-world economic behavior.

That's too broad a statement. There are some theories in economics that work very well, like supply and demand, or arbitrage theory. The idea of the cost of capital is also a fairly well-trodden one, it is taught in business courses, used on wallstreet, and seems to work in practice.

I can't think of a single broad economic axiom or theory that doesn't depend—wholly or in-part—on the principle of ceteris paribus, which excludes their practical application to essentially everything in real life.

In a few cases, economic theories do a passable job of roughly mirroring real-world behavior, but that's the exception and not the rule.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#69

Post by snowwrestler »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #61
snowwrestler wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure Boeing would have loved to have those orders, but 50 planes is not catastrophic. In terms of the aircraft group, Boeing has steadily growing 787 orders and deliveries, with about 500 orders yet to deliver. In terms of their space program, they are close to testing their manned capsule and just got a light touch program review, while SpaceX got put through the ringer. And there are other aspects to Boeing tha…

> In terms of their space program, they are close to testing their manned capsule and just got a light touch program review, while SpaceX got put through the ringer. I'm sure this will end well for them...

Ha! Yeah, the light touch worked so well for the 737 MAX. Well at least the first flight of their capsule will be unmanned...

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#70

Post by rsynnott »

CydeWeys wrote: post #62
rsynnott wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it wasn’t a safety scandal, but the A380 was a huge disaster for the company. I’d be more comfortable getting on a notional A360 than a notional 797, but both companies have self-harmed recently.

It lost them money but it didn't hurt their brand. Those are great planes to fly in as a passenger, they're just not profitable in the end for Airbus. Boeing can't even keep its newest plane in the skies, and may have killed off the 737 line for good. Think another revision after the MAX is ever going to be approved?

I think a more modest re-engine of the 737 would absolutely be approved. They’d have to sell it at a discount vs the a32x, obviously.
Post reply on HN