Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[Indiscipline 6]

Didn`t Big Dumbster opend a specific thread, where he said, he will keep away from the forum?

Looks like that was a lie again.

Edited December 20, 2009 by Indiscipline

[wacmedia 277]

Simply not true. Both companies are privately run, with no government funds required.

 

You believe in Regulation, not free markets.

 

Hi,

 

Both companies are privarely run. But have you read anything about the massive fines imposed on them for trying to stop fair competition? Free markets are a fine idea in principle, but I'm afraid in practice it leads to cartels and US companies trying to force any opposition out of the market so they can a monopoly.

Europe Fines Intel $1.45 Billion in Antitrust Case

 

 

By JAMES KANTER

Published: May 13, 2009

BRUSSELS — The European Commission fined Intel a record 1.06 billion euros Wednesday for abusing its dominance in the computer chip market, the strongest sign yet that regulators worldwide are serious about opening the technology sector to competition.

 

The European Union’s competition commissioner, Neelie Kroes, said the penalty against Intel, the equivalent of $1.45 billion, was justified because the company had skewed competition and denied consumers a choice for chips.

 

Intel “went to great lengths to cover up its anti-competitive actions” and “harmed millions of European consumers” to maintain its dominance of the global market for the chips, which is worth about 22 billion euros a year, Ms. Kroes said. Sales in Europe represent about a third of that amount.

 

D. Bruce Sewell, Intel’s chief lawyer, took “great exception” with the decision and pledged to file an appeal at the Court of First Instance, the second-highest tribunal in Europe.

 

The fine was the largest ever for any breach of competition law in the European Union, previous records were levied mostly on companies involved in cartels.

 

The ruling was also a reminder of the emergence of European regulators as some of the most activist enforcers of antitrust law, and an additional sign that the authorities worldwide are challenging the business and growth strategies of technology titans like Microsoft and I.B.M..

 

Michael Reynolds, an antitrust partner with the law firm Allen & Overy in Brussels, said Europe was continuing to burnish its reputation for activism.

 

The Intel decision showed the commission “wanted to send a clear signal that it is taking a leadership role in enforcing competition rules against dominant companies in the technology markets,” Mr. Reynolds said.

 

Ms. Kroes ordered Intel to stop offering rebates that were conditioned on buying less of a rival’s product, or not buying them at all, which she said had helped Intel maintain a share of at least 70 percent of chip sales market from October 2002 to December 2007.

 

She said Intel had granted rebates to major computer, including Acer, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo and NEC, on the condition that they purchased all or almost all of their supplies from Intel.

The E.C. added that Microsoft has committed to allow interoperability between third-party products and key products like Windows and Office.

 

Europe's regulator and Microsoft have frequently clashed, notably when the software giant was fined 899 million euros ($1.35 billion) in 2008 for not complying with previous rulings.

Steve Goldstein is MarketWatch's London bureau chief. Edited December 21, 2009 by wacmedia

[joekicker 53]

Europe's regulator and Microsoft have frequently clashed, notably when the software giant was fined 899 million euros ($1.35 billion) in 2008 for not complying with previous rulings.

 

Hmmm. I don't think they collected anything. Lots of lawyers kept Mercedes Benz busy, though. YOUR tax dollars at work, thank Khrighst for that. I imagine Yurp will get approximately the same deal from Intel.

 

.

[wacmedia 277]

Hmmm. I don't think they collected anything.

 

Hi,

 

I was highlightimg the behaviour of the "free market" companies beloved by MrMango.

[MrMango 667]

Hi,

 

Both companies are privarely run. But have you read anything about the massive fines imposed on them for trying to stop fair competition? Free markets are a fine idea in principle, but I'm afraid in practice it leads to cartels and US companies trying to force any opposition out of the market so they can a monopoly.

You make my point. The Governments also are not for free markets, but regulation and taxes. I dont remember seeing any refunds that I have paid to Microsoft from the Government.

 

Its regulation and taxes, period.

[Samsonite 181]

ZA002 to fly December 22nd, weather permitting

By Jon Ostrower on December 21, 2009 7:40 PM |

 

Boeing has confirmed that ZA002 (N787EX) will fly around 845 AM PST from Everett on Tuesday, December 22nd.

 

At the controls will be Captain Randy Neville and chief project pilot Captain Mike Carriker.

 

Neville will fly left-seat for this second 787 flight that will see the aircraft flown from Paine Field to Boeing Field as part of a quick ferry flight from the factory site to the flight test center.

 

The weather at the time of takeoff is slated to be partly cloudy and 37 F, 3 kt winds from the SSW with a 20% chance of rain, significantly better than the window that allowed ZA001 to take off on December 15.

 

ZA002, powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines, is the second of six flight test aircraft participating in the flight test campaign.

 

The Future of Flight will open the Stratodeck viewing area overlooking the airport beginning at 8 AM to view the flight."

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/

[BigDUSA 71]

ZA002 to fly December 22nd, weather permitting

By Jon Ostrower on December 21, 2009 7:40 PM |

 

Boeing has confirmed that ZA002 (N787EX) will fly around 845 AM PST from Everett on Tuesday, December 22nd.

 

At the controls will be Captain Randy Neville and chief project pilot Captain Mike Carriker.

 

Neville will fly left-seat for this second 787 flight that will see the aircraft flown from Paine Field to Boeing Field as part of a quick ferry flight from the factory site to the flight test center.

 

The weather at the time of takeoff is slated to be partly cloudy and 37 F, 3 kt winds from the SSW with a 20% chance of rain, significantly better than the window that allowed ZA001 to take off on December 15.

 

ZA002, powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines, is the second of six flight test aircraft participating in the flight test campaign.

 

The Future of Flight will open the Stratodeck viewing area overlooking the airport beginning at 8 AM to view the flight."

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/

 

Finally a series of good news about the 787.

[Samsonite 181]

Finally a series of good news about the 787.

ZA002 is Airborne!

ZA002 took to the skies at approximately 9:10 PST from Paine Field in Everett, Washington after completing three taxi runs. At the controls is Capt. Randy Neville, accompanied by Capt. Mike Carriker in the right seat. Follow the latest developments on the first flight of Boeing 002 Experimental on twitter by following me and the #787FT hashtag."

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/

[wacmedia 277]

Finally a series of good news about the 787.

 

Hi,

 

I dont want to rain on your parade but the first flight was shortened by a few hours and the second one had issues with its landing gear. Plenty of work still to be done.

 

 

The Governments also are not for free markets,

 

Hi,

 

Governments and Big Business are both out to screw the small guy.

[MrMango 667]

Governments and Big Business are both out to screw the small guy.

Maybe in your perverted opinion.

 

IMHO, Governments are out to extract as much money as possible from EVERYBODY.

 

Business (both Big and Small) try to maximize profits.

 

Get it?

[eltib 54]

Maybe in your perverted opinion.

 

IMHO, Governments are out to extract as much money as possible from EVERYBODY.

 

Business (both Big and Small) try to maximize profits.

 

Get it?

 

Mango,

 

Your second sentence is a crock of shit. Especiallly since your buddy GWB gave all you slave drivers tax breaks to the tune of 2.1% to offshore jobs to foreign countries. Those will expire next year, and Obama will not renew that legislation.

 

Capitalism only works when people are able to buy creating supply and demand.

 

Please take note. Especially around the 5:15 - 5:35 point in the video. I made this video for guys like you. I hope you are not in communist China, like Stinky is, because they still censor everything from the West. So much for Democracy in other parts of the world.

 

Edited December 23, 2009 by eltib

[Samsonite 181]

..I dont want to rain on your parade but the first flight was shortened by a few hours and the second one had issues with its landing gear. Plenty of work still to be done.

Well, as usual, you don't know what you are talking about. (I was going to say you still have your head up your ass, but that wouldn't be nice. )

 

They are called "test flights" for a reason. Get it, there wacky? "Test" flight.

 

Tuesday's flight of the second "TEST" plane had a problem with a landing gear door and the problem was resolved. Details here: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightbl...ve-noticed.html

 

The first "TEST" flight was cut short by two hours due to the weather. They couldn't even find enough good weather to fly straight and level for the required distance.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Samsonite

[Samsonite 181]

"...Especiallly since your buddy GWB gave all you slave drivers tax breaks to the tune of 2.1% to offshore jobs to foreign countries. Those will expire next year, and Obama will not renew that legislation....

That has been going on since the 1960s, if not the '50x, and it was started by some boneheads at Foggy Bottom (The State Department).

I'm not even going to start about OneBigAssMistakeAmerica.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Samsonite

[eltib 54]

I'm not even going to start about OneBigAssMistakeAmerica.

 

Scally,

 

I was speaking to Mango, but somehow you felt the post was directed towards you.

 

You probably couldn't anyway. The fact that the stock market being up over 10000 is no fluke. What was the DJI when Dumbya left office? 6900? Heck when GWB left office this year job postings in my field were down to 6500 at the EDD board. Today they are up to almost 9400. Obama is doing something right. Maybe not fast, but I see results. You just have a problem because he is a black man.

Edited December 23, 2009 by eltib

[Samsonite 181]

...I was speaking to Mango, but somehow you felt the post was directed towards you.

Well, I know it wasn't directed at me, but thought it important to point out Mr. Bush was not responsible for the long standing government policy of giving tax breaks to companies who move their manufacturing plants overseas. A policy I certainly don't agree with, BTW.

 

...The fact that the stock market being up over 10000 is no fluke. What was the DJI when Dumbya left office? 6900? Heck when GWB left office this year job postings in my field were down to 6500 at the EDD board. Today they are up to almost 9400. Obama is doing something right. Maybe not fast, but I see results. You just have a problem because he is a black man.

The color of his skin has nothing to do with it. Attacking someone by calling them a racist, is typical of the left wing nuts who use that tactic to sidetrack any intelligent, rational discussion. If you don't totally agree with the feminazis, they call you a misogynist. If you don't agree with the fags and lesbians, they call you a homophobia. If you don't agree with Mr. Obama and the "democommunists" you are called a racist, and so on, and so on. Such people are incapable of seeing both sides of an issue and discussing the pros and cons of both points of view.

 

As to the stock market, do you know the difference between a stock and a bond? The current news supplies the excuses used by 'big boys' to try and explain the daily movements of the market. Nothing happens that the bankers don't want to happen. They make their money before the rest of the world really knows what is going on. You can't beat the house, and that is the reason the market is called, "The gentlemen's Las Vegas."

Edited December 23, 2009 by Samsonite

[MrMango 667]

Mango,

 

Your second sentence is a crock of shit. Especiallly since your buddy GWB gave all you slave drivers tax breaks to the tune of 2.1% to offshore jobs to foreign countries. Those will expire next year, and Obama will not renew that legislation.

Your statement above is unreadable. Please post the source to this incoherent gibberish.

 

Capitalism only works when people are able to buy creating supply and demand.

Now that is REALLY a crock of shit. Straight out of the wacko leftist handbook.

 

Capitalism is the ONLY system that works over the long term.

[eltib 54]

Now that is REALLY a crock of shit. Straight out of the wacko leftist handbook.

 

Thank You, I appreciate the insult.

 

 

Now explain what happened the past 8 years prior to 1/20/2009

Edited December 23, 2009 by eltib

[TheFiend 1,181]

The color of his skin has nothing to do with it. Attacking someone by calling them a racist, is typical of the left wing nuts who use that tactic to sidetrack any intelligent, rational discussion. If you don't totally agree with the feminazis, they call you a misogynist. If you don't agree with the fags and lesbians, they call you a homophobia. If you don't agree with Mr. Obama and the "democommunists" you are called a racist, and so on, and so on. Such people are incapable of seeing both sides of an issue and discussing the pros and cons of both points of view.

 

And if you don't agree with what Europeans post about America and American companies, you call it Anti-American!!!

[joekicker 53]

And if you don't agree with what Europeans post about America and American companies, you call it Anti-American!!! allright

 

Not all European critics are anti-American, not all anti-Obama people racists and not all those who disagree with feminazis are misogynists. But some are. Heck, some are all three. And those who are, deserve to be called out from under their rocks.

 

.

[Samsonite 181]

"Airbus Subsidies Have Destroyed Thousands of U.S. Jobs

Author: Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.

Date: Monday, December 21, 2009

 

In a few days, the world's two major producers of commercial transports (jet airliners) will release their order and delivery results for 2009. The results will show that European champion Airbus delivered slightly over 50% of all planes built, while greatly exceeding American champion Boeing in the number of new planes ordered. It's been going this way pretty much since the decade began, because after 40 years of subsidies from European governments, Airbus now has a complete family of transports that can aggressively compete in virtually any capacity/range category with Boeing.

 

In 1990, U.S. commercial transport producers had an 85% share of the global market and Airbus had a mere 15%. But as Airbus leveraged subsidies to aggressively price its planes and expand offerings, U.S. producers gradually lost ground. Lockheed exited the business in the 1980s. McDonnell Douglas effectively gave up in the 1990s. Boeing saw its market share fall from over 60% to under 50% in the current decade. As a result of these setbacks, tens of thousands of American aerospace jobs disappeared, and tens of billions of dollars in export earnings were lost.

 

This posting isn't about why policymakers should take illegal subsidies into account in comparing the Airbus and Boeing planes being proposed as a future Air Force tanker. I'll talk about that some other time. It's about something more basic: a political system that is so insular and disorganized that it allows its great industries to be destroyed one by one through unfair, anti-competitive behavior without even noticing, much less acting. We have seen similar decay in steel, in electronics, in shipbuilding, in chemicals, in paper and in autos -- and the net result is that America now runs a trade deficit in manufactured goods of over a billion dollars per day. Needless to say, this has not been a positive development for the U.S. dollar's role a reserve currency.

 

What bothers me, and no doubt Boeing, is how European governments have been allowed to deliberately and systematically destroy America's global lead in jet airliners without any real sense of outrage in Washington. The European governments and Airbus routinely issue dishonest statements about how Boeing gets unfair assistance too, but when the time came to lodge a case with the World Trade Organization, they didn't even allege that Boeing gets the kind of launch aid that has enabled Airbus to undercut Boeing on price. Instead, they referred to more modest types of aid that Airbus gets too.

 

The lesson of all this is that when countries have been Number One in the world for as long as America has, it takes a while to grasp that the global alignment of power is changing. We were indifferent when Japan kicked American auto companies out so Toyota would have a protected home market, and we were barely aware when China built up its steel industry to five times the size of ours. But if we don't start getting our act together on demanding fair treatment of our exporters -- starting with Boeing -- then we shall not be Number One for much longer.

 

Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/airbus-s...?a=1&c=1171

[Samsonite 181]

...And if you don't agree with what Europeans post about America and American companies, you call it Anti-American!!

Simply not so. Again, you assume too much. It depends entirely on each company and their industry.

I have been very supportive of what the EU has been doing regarding microsoft and Intel as it seems the U.S. Justice Department is either blind or corrupt.

 

I'll tell you what really just angers me. Most of these Pattaya message boards are dominated by the British and many, in a very Pavlovian fashion, take every opportunity to knock everything American, often without any real knowledge of the subject at hand. The number of negative comments about anything European is miniscule in comparison.

 

Maybe the British are just bitter that the sun sat on the empire many years ago and they haven't been a power of any consequence since, if not before, World War II. They are getting more like the French everyday, but, hell, at least the French make good wine and know how to cook.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Samsonite

[eltib 54]

"Airbus Subsidies Have Destroyed Thousands of U.S. Jobs

Author: Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.

Date: Monday, December 21, 2009

 

In a few days, the world's two major producers of commercial transports (jet airliners) will release their order and delivery results for 2009. The results will show that European champion Airbus delivered slightly over 50% of all planes built, while greatly exceeding American champion Boeing in the number of new planes ordered. It's been going this way pretty much since the decade began, because after 40 years of subsidies from European governments, Airbus now has a complete family of transports that can aggressively compete in virtually any capacity/range category with Boeing.

 

In 1990, U.S. commercial transport producers had an 85% share of the global market and Airbus had a mere 15%. But as Airbus leveraged subsidies to aggressively price its planes and expand offerings, U.S. producers gradually lost ground. Lockheed exited the business in the 1980s. McDonnell Douglas effectively gave up in the 1990s. Boeing saw its market share fall from over 60% to under 50% in the current decade. As a result of these setbacks, tens of thousands of American aerospace jobs disappeared, and tens of billions of dollars in export earnings were lost.

 

This posting isn't about why policymakers should take illegal subsidies into account in comparing the Airbus and Boeing planes being proposed as a future Air Force tanker. I'll talk about that some other time. It's about something more basic: a political system that is so insular and disorganized that it allows its great industries to be destroyed one by one through unfair, anti-competitive behavior without even noticing, much less acting. We have seen similar decay in steel, in electronics, in shipbuilding, in chemicals, in paper and in autos -- and the net result is that America now runs a trade deficit in manufactured goods of over a billion dollars per day. Needless to say, this has not been a positive development for the U.S. dollar's role a reserve currency.

 

What bothers me, and no doubt Boeing, is how European governments have been allowed to deliberately and systematically destroy America's global lead in jet airliners without any real sense of outrage in Washington. The European governments and Airbus routinely issue dishonest statements about how Boeing gets unfair assistance too, but when the time came to lodge a case with the World Trade Organization, they didn't even allege that Boeing gets the kind of launch aid that has enabled Airbus to undercut Boeing on price. Instead, they referred to more modest types of aid that Airbus gets too.

 

The lesson of all this is that when countries have been Number One in the world for as long as America has, it takes a while to grasp that the global alignment of power is changing. We were indifferent when Japan kicked American auto companies out so Toyota would have a protected home market, and we were barely aware when China built up its steel industry to five times the size of ours. But if we don't start getting our act together on demanding fair treatment of our exporters -- starting with Boeing -- then we shall not be Number One for much longer.

 

Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/airbus-s...?a=1&c=1171

 

This guy is good at writing fairy tales when it comes to McDonnell Douglas. He doesn't point out it was the DC-10 that hurt them back in the 70s. They could have made a 4 engine commercial jetliner to compete with the 747, but ol Harry Stonecipher, and Mike Sears didn't want to do it. They wanted more defense contracts. Contracts that they couldn't fulfill. Like the ISS. Which Boeing got in the mid 90s, and somehow went back to the Huntington Beach division that fucked it up originally. And then Boeing buys MCD in 1996,(at the urge of the US Government so they didn't have to provide a Chrysler bailout) and inherits all of McD liabilities in ethics violations. Shit do you see whats happening? Like someone once said "MCD bought Boeing with Boeing's money." I'd like to see Boeing get a set of cojones and divest most of MCDs businesses except the C-17, and Delta Rocket program.

 

Heres a guy I certainly believe over your guy Scally.

 

In addition, The Wall Street Journal reported in April that two key members of the Boeing board -- former McDonnell-Douglas chieftains John McDonnell and Harry Stonecipher -- were opposed to spending the money necessary to develop a new commercial airplane.

 

Instead, the Journal said, McDonnell and Stonecipher want Boeing to do what they did at McDonnell-Douglas -- shift emphasis to more profitable defense and airplane services.

 

The notion wasn't well received by many in aerospace.

 

"I think I speak for many in this industry when I ask, with all due respect, 'Harry Stonecipher? I thought he retired,'" wrote Richard Aboulafia, a widely quoted aerospace analyst from Alexandria, Va., in a note to his clients. "Why do you think a failed company provides a valid business model?"

 

Condit acknowledged the issue.

 

Last Prev. Close Day Range EPS Last Dividend Shares Outstanding

54.96 55.10 54.92 - 55.65 -0.04 $ 0.42 726,599,000

Edited December 24, 2009 by eltib

[Samsonite 181]

....In addition, The Wall Street Journal reported in April that two key members of the Boeing board -- former McDonnell-Douglas chieftains John McDonnell and Harry Stonecipher -- were opposed to spending the money necessary to develop a new commercial airplane.

 

Instead, the Journal said, McDonnell and Stonecipher want Boeing to do what they did at McDonnell/Douglas.

 

"I think I speak for many in this industry when I ask, with all due respect, 'Harry Stonecipher? I thought he retired,'" wrote Richard Aboulafia, a widely quoted aerospace analyst from Alexandria, Va., in a note to his clients. "Why do you think a failed company provides a valid business model?"...

Oh, I agree. Somewhere in one of these aviation threads I've said it would appear the same people who drove McDonnell/Douglas into the ground somehow gained control of Boeing.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Samsonite

[MrMango 667]

Thank You, I appreciate the insult.

I did not mean it to be a insult. You made a suggestion that you had to pay people a lot of money so they could "buy things" is just dumb, not insulting.

 

 

Now explain what happened the past 8 years prior to 1/20/2009

Well, we had one of the most productive economic periods in the history of the world.

[eltib 54]

I did not mean it to be a insult. You made a suggestion that you had to pay people a lot of money so they could "buy things" is just dumb, not insulting.

 

 

Somehow my comment was misinterpreted. I never said anything about people "having to pay people a lot of money." Just the fact of people having jobs to buy goods to drive the USA economy. You won't see me buying a pair of Nike, or Reebok's,(especially since they're made in China now) when I can get Crosstrekkers from Payless Shoe Source for 1/8 the price.