XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Aug 31, 2016 15:42:22 GMT 1
|
|
sciing
in service - 1 year
Enter your message here...
Posts: 2,503 
|
Post by sciing on Aug 31, 2016 15:55:17 GMT 1
They have big financial loses because of missing aircraft? At least we know now why QR is using any chance to defer deliveries. But why is AAB now talking nonsense? |
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Sept 1, 2016 0:29:05 GMT 1
Instead of analysing the reasons for the losses, AAB is obviously trying to lay the blame on Airbus. This attempt is not going to increase his credibility. I am however concerned by the persistent confrontation about A320neo. I fail to understand QR's stance : AAB complains about delivery delays, yet refuses deliveries ... Is it just about compensation ? |
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Sept 1, 2016 4:14:31 GMT 1
QR's losses, if they have any, are mostly AAB's own fault. We have an aircraft that is certified by regulators albeit with some performance limitations. But that doesn't really mean they should hold back on accepting the aircraft till the limitations are sorted. If you have a market that is really growing, you are losing out by not taking the aircraft and putting them to use even though some interruptions and limitations are to be expected. Whining about aircraft shortages is completely the wrong way to go about it. Airbus should, in theory, be able to compensate those costs that are directly in their hands: i.e. interruption costs and loss of revenue attributable to the performance limitations. Everything else is beyond Airbus's scope.
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,959
|
Post by s543 on Sept 1, 2016 8:06:28 GMT 1
I am not so sure about their need for NB planes. They got rid of perfectly serviceable 4 pcs A321 a year back (MSN 3xxx), they are getting rid of decent A332s - (MSN 6xx) and delaying A359 - while happily operating 4xA346.
So overall their fleet policy is hard to understand.
I do not believe there are financial reasons since they recently purchased another 5% of IAG which was for sure more money than a few A320s - it might be simply not enough passengers to fill their planes and they plan accordingly ?
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Sept 1, 2016 9:22:59 GMT 1
Airbus should, in theory, be able to compensate those costs that are directly in their hands: i.e. interruption costs and loss of revenue attributable to the performance limitations. Everything else is beyond Airbus's scope. Part of the difference may be about the consequences of QR, enjoying launch customer status and pricing, yet refusing to take delivery. Launch customers should accept some initial problems and delivery delays (that's why they get an extra rebate), but QR does not seem to see it that way. Airbus may now have granted launch customer status to LH, and may be inclined to raise QR prices, or cancel some advantages such as maintenance credits ... |
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Sept 1, 2016 9:27:03 GMT 1
I do not believe there are financial reasons since they recently purchased another 5% of IAG which was for sure more money than a few A320s - it might be simply not enough passengers to fill their planes and they plan accordingly ? There might still be some financial issues. It might be more easy to fund the purchase of shares of a listed company (which are excellent collateral for a loan) than a major fleet expansion in an uncertain environment ... |
|
|
|
Post by captaindave on Sept 2, 2016 9:24:52 GMT 1
So when will Qatar get first one of the ones they cancelled course other airline look like they taking some now.
|
|
|
|
Post by addasih on Sept 7, 2016 21:22:40 GMT 1
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Sept 14, 2016 13:07:23 GMT 1
|
|
