Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, January 18, 2007
George Will :: Townhall.com Columnist
Boeing and the Aviation Market
by George Will
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


CHICAGO -- After an excellent year, Boeing is counting its blessings, which include its competitor. They also include an anticipated doubling of the commercial aviation market in the next 20 years, which will require 27,000 new planes costing $2.6 trillion.

Americans ambivalent about globalization should note how Boeing, under CEO James McNerney, is prospering. The 9/11 attacks devastated commercial airlines, causing Boeing -- which cut its jetliner production in half -- to rapidly shed more than 40,000 of its 93,000 workers who designed and built the planes. But the revival has added back some 13,000 new jobs and raised Boeing's stock price from $25 to $88.

Even without terrorism, the commercial aircraft industry is not for the fainthearted. Companies must wager billions developing products that anticipate travelers' preferences and airline strategies a decade later. Boeing reportedly wagered $8 billion in developing the midsize widebody (up to 290 passengers) 787 Dreamliner, the first of which will be delivered in 2008. Boeing's bet is that the market favors point-to-point flights rather than a hub-and-spoke system with huge planes delivering passengers to a few large cities, from which they are dispersed to their destinations in smaller planes. With 471 orders and commitments for 787s, at up to $180 million apiece, the plane -- made largely of a light (fuel-saving) carbon composite material -- already is a huge success. Boeing's competition no longer is.

The average jetliner is struck by lightning twice a year. Boeing's competitor in the commercial aircraft duopoly, Airbus, has recently struck itself twice. The government-created European consortium decided to build the wrong aircraft, then built it badly.

The market quickly judged Airbus' A350 inferior to the 787, and costly redesigns have begun. Worse, Airbus, assuming that the world was wedded to a hub-and-spoke system, made a bad $16 billion bet on huge demand for its A380, a double-deck superjumbo (typically seating 555).

Created in 1970, Airbus prospered. From 2001 to 2005, its annual orders exceeded Boeing's, and it will deliver more planes than Boeing this year. But now Airbus has problems inherent in its role as Europe's iconic public-private collaboration. Such collaboration, called ``industrial policy,'' involves the irrationalities of economic nationalism as each of the nine countries involved in subsidizing the A380 fights for ``its'' jobs.

And there have been gross management blunders. Wiring (the A380 has 312 miles of it) made in Germany was mismatched for airframes made in France. To truck huge components to a French assembly line, more than 100 miles of highway had to be widened and straightened.

The A380 has received $3.8 billion in cheap loans and other ongoing government subsidies misleadingly called ``launch aid.'' This amounts to seminationalization, giving the governments involved an incentive to regard one another as rivals. Boeing wants the World Trade Organization to compel European governments to stop their subsidies. McNerney, however, acknowledges that some people think Boeing should allow Airbus to break WTO rules -- and continue to be plagued by political decisions trumping economic rationality. Airbus is illustrating what happens when governments treat commercial enterprises as jobs programs and instruments of national glory.

McNerney says that what ocean shipping did for Hong Kong, jet aircraft can do for, say, Dubai, which is becoming a world trading center. He believes that over the next 30 years the growth rate for cargo aircraft could be significantly larger than for passenger aircraft. Fred Smith, founder and CEO of FedEx, says that 98 percent of the weight of international commerce is shipped by sea, but the 2 percent moved by air constitutes 40 percent of the economic value.

Boeing exported $14 billion worth of commercial aircraft in 2005 and expects to prosper as China and India do. Boeing projects that, in addition to the 367 orders yet to be delivered to the two countries, China over the next 20 years will need 2,900 new passenger and freight aircraft costing $280 billion, and India will need 856, worth $72 billion. For the last four years, close to 20 percent of Boeing's orders have been from China, which since 1972 has bought 678 Boeing planes worth $37 billion.

Assuming that Boeing manages the supply chain -- with ten subcontractors on four continents -- for a plane with 4 million parts, the 787 might solidify Boeing's supremacy. An Airbus CEO recently said he hoped his company could catch up ``in 15 years.'' Then he resigned. Boeing's successes -- 600,000 people fly in its planes daily -- have so filled its manufacturing capacity that it has limited Boeing's ability to further exploit Airbus' problems. For McNerney, such a problem is a blessing.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
George F. Will is a 1976 Pulitzer Prize winner whose columns are syndicated in more than 400 magazines and newspapers worldwide.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read George Will's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Simplistic
Putting aside the fuel issues that will in the next 10-20 years begin seriously challenging the aviation industry, this is a simplistic analysis of Airbus.

First, the manufacture of a Boeing craft involves companies in several countries - just like Airbus. That presents similar supply chain challenges. Trumpeting one failure of Airbus after a stream of successes is childish.

Second, politics is a major part of Boeing's business as well. All those suppliers in those foreign countries typically have the ear of their governments. A Boeing deal can certainly have similar issues as an Airbus deal.

Third, Boeing benefits from subsidies to a large extent. It is the largest defense contractor, first off. And, being America's last real unchallenged industry, excepting Airbus which is, after all, Western, it's not like it doesn't get favorable treatment by the U.S.

That being said, whenever I fly I try to fly Boeing because its planes just seem much better. Less rickety. Not that that statistically means much.

Here is another case where the idiotic
Drive-By media was WRONG! I clearly remember a few years back the network news programs touting the A380 as the future of the Airline industry and how American run Boeing was struggling to produce the 787, obviously a plane behind the times, and that no airline would want to buy.
Let's see now. Has anyone heard any apologoes by the leftist MSM to Boeing for these slanderous reports. Ummm NO! And don't expect one either.
The Moonbats never admit it when they are wrong the just forget it.
Well Phooey on them and Phooey on Airbus. Let the French government keep propping them up. When they break the financial back of the European Union, we can sit back watching the finger pointing, and listen to the name-calling from across the Pond.

subsidies schmubsidies
Airbus gets subsidies and always has done. So does Boeing. What else do you call government contracts with guaranteed profit margins? Which is how Boeing managed to develop into the huge commercial and military aircraft company that it is today. You don't develop that sort of huge capital intesive technology without government help, and Boeing got plenty of it. At least Airbus was honest about it.
I'm not having a pop at boeing as such - their planes are excellent and the A380 was a case of their eyes being too big for their stomachs. But on the subject of subsidies, the playing field was level.

Monty
The Airbus380 was to be THE FUTURE of Airbus. The fact that the 380 can land at only a few of the many thousands of airports in NAmerica is a huge drawback. The market research people for Airbus should be fired. Since this is a goverment entity, I'm sure they won't happen. A simple look at the FAA Flight Planning manual would have showed that airports in smaller markets such as Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Fresno, and Memphis would have to spend millions in runway rennovations to accomodate Airbus. This of course won't happen. For the midsized airliners who shuttle people from these fileds, the 380 is not an option.

Airbus just wasted 15 billion in R&D, and will miss out on several hundred billin in lost revenue. This is a disaster for them. The EU through subsidies will keep AirBus afloat, but thier future does not look good.

The Airbus A-380
has had major delays twice now...and Boeing is reeling in angry Airbus customers, including FedEx. Airbus got cocky, and Boeing got hungry...and smart.

hungry is good
celtic-dragon hit the nail on the head. Airbus got big because Boeing got fat dumb and lazy. Then Boeing got hungry and Airbus got lazy. I wonder if any smaller companies are getting hungry

Airbus shouldn't be blamed ..
.. after all, their workers (and all workers in the People's Republic of Europe) have:

* free medical care from cradle to grave
* free dentures
* glorious retirement benefits
* public education - oops, we have that too, and it is ruining us!

So what if they aren't particularly market-savvy? Their hearts are in the right place. That is something that we heartless Americans would never understand!


Bo-Ing: The Chinese Competition
George's thinking here is about as contemporary as his hairstyle. Like other so-called "free-traders", he fails to recognize the nature of the new competition.

A great deal was made about China's recent purchase of six Boeing aircraft. Have we learned nothing about our "free tradin'" buddies to the East? They purchased those jets as templates. They will soon be churning out clones, and all these lofty notions touted by will and others will come crashing down. It will not be long before the not-so-friendly skies will be filled with whizzing, roaring new craft from BO-ING, China's next great enterprise.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.