Boeing: The US pilot's enemy
 

We all know about the legalized prostitution of our White House and Congress. Since they'll always be addicted to the "clients" who pay them the most, the focus on politicians is a waste of time. If we are to stop foreign airlines from operating the US air transportation system, we have to stop trying to buy more politicians than they do. We can't cutoff the Middle East's financing of our politicians, but we can cutoff Boeing's financing of our politicians.

This is one issue where airline management and airline labor interests align. The Middle East airlines are buying Boeing aircraft under the overt proviso that they will be granted access to US markets as a result. If they get that access, it will likely eliminate a number of US airlines. The same US airlines that made Boeing the success they are today. Now Boeing is working to cut our collective throats to increase sales. US airline management and labor needs to join forces and state that all US airlines will boycott the purchase of Boeing aircraft unless Boeing agrees to stop their lavish spending on and arm twisting of politicians to allow foreign access to our markets.

Boeing doesn't care who actually runs our air transportation system because they've calculated they will still be the largest provider of aircraft to whoever ultimately survives. Management and labor need to show Boeing they've calculated wrong...and give them a huge public relations black eye in the process. Thoughts?

Carl

But I strut the terminal like John Travolta, cuz I am Boeing guy... a yoke pilot... I even have a My Other Car is a Boeing plate frame.... yeah I'm cool.....

Anyway, what?

I think the US pilot's enemy is him or herself, specifically those who choose to work for the gulf airlines.

Canoe,
That is like saying the problem with Delta, is the pilots' who choose to work for UAL and American.

um, not really, no.

Uhh no.....

They are like pimps setting up their ***** houses. The pay is phenomenal with some of them. For me, I do not want to live in the sandbox. Oil baby! If they didn't have it, they would be like sand flies swatted by camel tails. Of course, the Asian carriers are almost as good. If they didn't have western pilots, they would have a problem.

And if we don't reverse the trend they'll be the only place to work if you want to fly anything more than domestic feed. :eek:

Interesting to watch Emirates and Qatar openly worry that Boeing will outsource the 777X production, thus robbing them of their little political ploy.

Buy Sukhoi! :D

Yeah, that'll teach 'em

Please provide detailed evidence to prove your accusations.



Typhoonpilot

Typhoon flies for Emirates as I recall.

"a capitalist will sell you the rope that will be used to hang him"

The above quote is from memory, so it might be off a little, but it is a condensed version of your post.

This is our system and how it works. As the limits that came to be (largely due to the great economic crash and ensuing world catastrophe of WWII) from the 30's through the 60's are dismantled one by one, the protections that pilots have had from overseas competition will probably suffer the same fate that most other workers already have.
Most people I know are very supportive of this system and will react vehemently at any suggestion of reining it in. (even as they bemoan the fact that they can't make ends meet with his job at BassPro and his wife's job at Wallmart....and both of their employers subsidized from their property taxes)
There will be no public outcry, as we have come to accept that worker drones are to be sacrificed in the name of the free market. (besides, thoseairline jerks should finally be made to live like the rest of us, overpaid bus drivers and all)

The airlines themselves wil buy the airplanes from the manufacturer that gives them the best deal/mission capable product. If it is Boeing, they will buy from Boeing no matter what. There will be no boycott as that would imply both a long term vision and a short term interuption of the present gravy train(for senior Mgmt and institutional shareholders such as hedge funds)

Carl, while you are correct on the threat, without a sea-change in public attitudes we are bystanders and can only hope that these 3 ave bit off more than they can chew and it will overwhelm them.

As an aside, I see ALPA magazine just did a short mention of the US Merchant Marine fleet and it's demise as a world player. I have been citing what happened to them for at least 20 years, maybe 25.(also how they handled the training and certification of officers and ONE list of officers and sailors) Only as the threat looms closer to us, do we finally consider what we have been supporting for the last 30 plus years.

Sorry for the ramble, but the above doesn't even scratch the surface as to how deep the problem(s) are and how precarious is our collective economic future.

Could not possibly agree any more. Exactly right.

Thanks Blue
(I was expecting to get bashed pretty bad by some..probably still will...)
)

It still doesn't address this statement with any evidence:

Nor is there any proof in there of this rather inflammatory accusation:



Typhoonpilot

Typhoon pilot... do you fly for EK/Emirates?

To make a point, should I resign my job, on principle , just because Boeing is selling aircraft to the airlines in the gulf? Would it be okay if they bought A350's and 380's only? I don't consider what I am doing as prostituting, I worked for an airline that failed, I have children to support and a retirement to plan for, I accepted a good job, with relatively good pay because it's better than having to work at Walmart or Publix, paper or plastic?

Carl is advocating a boycott on Boeing products by U.S. airlines because they sell those same airplanes to foreign competitors and sometimes they are financed with Ex Im financing.

Let's just take a look at the ridiculousness of that line of thought. Yes, I do fly for Emirates but I am also an American and I believe that Boeing is one of the last remaining manufacturing companies that made America great. Any move to hurt them financially by Americans must be looked at closely.

The U.S. import/export gap has a profound effect on every American. Boeing makes up a huge dollar amount of U.S. exports. A negative trade balance adversely affects the value of the U.S. dollar. Any move to further erode the trade balance will also further erode the value of the U.S. Dollar.

Okay now for some of the assertions in the ALPA white paper. Anyone ever read the book, " How to Lie with Statistics"? The white paper is guilty of that in this statement, paraphrased. Since the beginning of Open Skies negotiations ( 1992 ) the U.S. share of the International Widebody Fleet has decreased from 45% to 17 and is forecast to drop to 5% by 2025. Sounds ominous doesn't it? All those widebody jobs lost to foreign competition. Anyone want to bet the U.S. majors have more widebody airliners in their fleet now than in 1992? Those percentages that ALPA chose to use do not take into account the incredible growth in air travel since 1992, especially in foreign countries. In China, for example, there were only a little over 400 commercial aircraft as late as 1996. Today there are over 2000, including a substantial increase in widebody airliners, that amazingly are not all used on services to the USA.

Since I do know Emirates fairly well lets look at the ALPA argument closer in respect to them. Emirates operates to 7 U.S. cities, soon to be 8. Those would all be considered Ultra Long Haul routes which require 2.5 aircraft per city pair per frequency. So that means if they were all served by Boeing aircraft and including the double daily to JFK the total requirement would be 22.5 aircraft. Ah, but JFK is served by the A380 and LAX goes to the A380 on December 2nd. So, even after Boston is added the total number of Boeing 777s required for Emirate's services to the USA is 15 aircraft. That is out of a fleet of 130+ B777s.

So just to get this straight. There are some here who advocate penalizing a great U.S. manufacturer; all their employees; and the employees in the USA of all of their supply chain affiliates just because a foreign competitor is using a little more than 10% of the planes they buy from them to serve the USA.

I just want to make sure that is correct, because I am having a difficult time getting my mind around the concept and how this benefits America or the airline pilots of the USA.


Typhoonpilot

What ALPA is advocating is that the EXIM bank, funded by US tax payers, not be used to offer attractive financing loans to wealthy ME states, that back their airlines, don't have the same regulatory structure, are anti-union, and intend to dominate the global WB flying, taking US jobs...

If the ME states want to dominate the global WB market, let them...

Compete on a level playing field...

1. Build their own jets. OR
2. Finance their own aircraft loans
3. No US Customs pre-clearance facility in Abu Dhabi, funded pay US taxes for the sole benefit of Etihad....

Let's just shoot this part of the debate down right away. Again, ALPA and ALPA members are using inflammatory rhetoric that is simply not true. A little excerpt from the facts of the EXIM bank:


and




Typhoonpilot

YES. What Snarge said!

If they default, will the US Govt bail them out?

Typhoonpilot,

Point 1, where did the billions of dollars in "capital" to start the EXIM bank come from? Hint: US Taxpayers.

Point 2, just think how much MORE money the EXIM bank could make for the US taxpayer if they charged interest rates that US Airlines have to pay or let US Airlines use them to finance aircraft too.

Denny

^^^^Bingo^^^^

Delta Assault On Ex-Im Bank Misleads Congress, Undermines Boeing - Forbes

Atlas Air, a U.S. based corporation uses Ex-Im bank financing to fund aircraft purchases.

So how about Delta, United, American, and USAirways purchasing of Airbus aircraft? Did they get any sweet financing deals from the Europeans? Are Airbus manufactured aircraft obtainable at a lower cost due to European government subsidies in the development of Airbus products?

Have you read the ALPA white paper? It does talk about the Airbus side as well:

1:30 p.m. EDT September 5, 2013

Delta Air Lines announced a 40-jet order on Wednesday. Industry observers say the deal underscores Delta's desire for a deal as well as the competitiveness between the world's two biggest jetmakers.

Delta said it signed a firm order for 30 Airbus A321s, likely to be used mostly on domestic flights, and 10 A330 widebodies that are geared toward long-haul international routes. The new planes are to be delivered to Delta between 2015 and 2017.

An Airbus statement said "many of Delta's A321s are expected to be assembled at the brand-new Airbus assembly line in Mobile, Ala.," though the Mobile Press-Register adds "it was not immediately clear how many aircraft constitute 'many.' " Airbus' Alabama facility is set to start delivering Airbus' A320 family – which includes the A321 – in 2016.

Delta's order is only the second that it has ever placed with Airbus, with the last coming more than two decades ago. However, Delta does already have 158 Airbus planes that it inherited via its 2008 acquisition of Northwest Airlines.

As for Wednesday's order, The Wall Street Journal called it "a victory for the European plane maker because (Delta) has mainly bought planes from rival Boeing in the past." Reuters echoed that sentiment, writing Delta appears to be "softening its reliance on Boeing for the first time in two decades as it looks for plane bargains."

On the subject of bargains, Delta's 40-jet Airbus order would be worth $5.6 billion at list prices – though the carrier is all but certain to have negotiated a substantial discount.

"I would be surprised if Delta didn't get a phenomenally good deal," Adam Pilarski, senior vice president at U.S.-based aviation consultants Avitas, says to Reuters.

Delta's bargain-seeking likely was helped by the fact that it chose Airbus plane models that are giving way in popularity to next-generation options. The News-Tribune of Tacoma, Wash., writes that "by selecting the existing designs, Delta likely took advantage of closeout savings on the aircraft it ordered. The A321 is being succeeded by the A321neo, and the A330's new technology cousin is Airbus' A350."

"Certainly you would think it's a buyer's market for those planes," Fred Lowrance, an analyst at Avondale Partners, says to Bloomberg News. "Those aren't the 'hot' planes these days."

Bloomberg also says that by keeping its fleet a mix of Boeing and Airbus planes, Delta "gets leverage in negotiations with planemakers that already offer discounts."

Delta CEO Richard Anderson himself described Wednesday's order as an "opportunistic" one that allowed his company to buy "economically efficient, proven-technology aircraft."

In its coverage of the deal, The Associated Press notes "the new-plane smell is rare at Delta." AP points out that Delta's "getting used Boeing 717s from Southwest Airlines, which got them when it bought AirTran but didn't want to keep them. Delta will use them in part to replace DC-9s that are an average of 35 years old."

"Delta has also bought dozens of used MD-90s, last built in 2000. And it has delayed delivery of Boeing's new 787 until 2020, while competitors such as United Airlines are flying that long-haul jet now," AP adds.

Delta's most recent delivery of a brand-new aircraft came in December 2010, and the carrier is set to begin taking deliveries of new Boeing 737-900s later this month, according to AP.

Richard Aboulafia, vice president of the Virginia-based consultant Teal Group, tells Bloomberg News that Delta's aircraft strategy has left it with one of the "least heterogeneous" fleets in the industry. However, he says Delta appears to have used that as an advantage by seeking "bottom-feeder prices (for) current or end-of-production-life jets, coupled with lots of unloved but perfectly good used jets."


and:

Published: July 20, 2011


PARIS — American Airlines announced on Wednesday a record order for 460 single-aisle planes from Airbus and Boeing in a deal worth more than $38 billion. The order breaks the longstanding monopoly that Boeing has had with the airline and forced a significant shift in the company’s strategy.

American, based in Fort Worth, Tex., said that it planned to acquire 260 of the Airbus A320 aircraft and 200 Boeing 737s — half of which will be equipped with a new, more fuel-efficient engine. The move is a clear commitment by Boeing to revamp its best-selling 737 with new engines rather than develop an all-new version of the plane — a strategy that until now it had said most of its customers preferred.

The deal, which American described as the largest commercial aircraft deal in history, also includes options and purchase rights for as many as 465 additional planes through 2025.

The airline said Airbus and Boeing had provided a combined $13 billion in financing through lease transactions, which it said would fully cover the cost of the first 230 deliveries, set to begin in 2013. American said it expected to begin receiving its first Airbus and Boeing aircraft equipped with the more advanced engines starting in 2017.

“Today’s announcement paves the way for us to achieve important milestones in our company’s future, giving us the ability to replace our narrow-body fleet and finance it responsibly,” said Gerard Arpey, the chairman and chief executive of American and its parent company, AMR. “With today’s news, we expect to have the youngest and most fuel-efficient fleet among our peers in the U.S. industry within five years.”

The order represents a coup for Boeing’s European rival, Airbus, which has not sold new planes to American in more than two decades. American retired its last Airbus jets — a handful of A300 widebodies — in 2009.

“Not only have they sold jets to American, but they have forced Boeing’s hand into pushing for a re-engined 737,” said Saj Ahmad, an analyst at FBE Aerospace in London.

Of the 260 Airbus jets on order, 130 will be for the A320neo, an upgraded version of its A320, which Airbus expects to bring to market beginning in 2016. Airbus has been promising fuel savings with the A320neo of as much as 15 percent over current engines. The new plane is also expected to run more quietly, cost less to operate and be able to fly farther or carry heavier loads while emitting less greenhouse gases.



The point being that U.S. airlines are benefiting just as much from government subsidies ( read buying Airbus aircraft at heavily discounted prices that are only sustainable due to the government backing of Airbus ) and cheap financing also backed by Airbus as foreign airlines might be from getting a couple percentage point discount on the widebody aircraft they buy from Boeing and financed through the Export import Bank.





TP

Boeing is not the enemy, much business has fled the US and continues to do so because we have constructed a climate hostile to business.

The boys in Dubai clearly know how to create an environment friendly to their interests, we could easily do the same but it looks very unlikely in the near future.

Fix our product to match theirs and we have nothing to worry about.

Sure. easily done. Get rid of the labor laws that protect anybody with any miles on their bones.. anybody with an alternate lifestyle (If you don't think that's a factor, I DARE you to go to Dubai and stand up and loudly start singing 'We Are Family' while wearing a rainbow thong. Having your biggest investor build you an airport... not just a terminal... an airport. And to top it off, get sweet deals on the only asset in the entire region which just happens to be the only thing of any value in the whole region... Of course that doesn't take into account the fact that their biggest investor also protects them while ours couldn't care less about our industry... Other than that, piece of cake. We should run right out and buy 50 or 60 777s and we can whip dey ***....

No, theirs will though.

It's not just about product. It's about the fact the an airline that doesn't play by the same rules wants carte blanche on an entire industry.

EK is the biggest threat to our jobs in the US and Europe than anything ever before. This airline could literally destroy this nations aviation industry if they get enough backstabbers to support cabbotage.

It's easy to make money when you have a country run by Feudal lords who put anyone in prison that doesn't fulfill their contract. Imagine how bad the UAE economy would be if they had to actually respect human rights and not get away with a 21st century form of slavery. Even china doesn't play the games that the UAE gets away with.

Not any deals that aren't available to you... M R Rats gets American airplanes financed at great rates funded by American taxpayers. We get the same deals (allegedly) that you are able to get from Airbus, and probably not as good because your sheik buddies walk in with blank checks...

This is a straw man argument on your part.

This^^^ right^^^^ here^^^

Anybody that believes any of those guys in the middle east are our friends are either high of naïve beyond any rational thought.

On a visceral level, I agree with you. but as a practical matter, it will never happen. Our government couldn't care less.

Ha, "free market" republican pilots worried about cabatage... That's funny.

I never liked cabbage.

So I'm assuming that Delta, United, BA, LH and AF are all paying and treating their employees in Dubai much better than EK? Well they aren't because if I recall last time I was there Dnata, which is owned by EK, does all their ground handling. EK engineers most likely provide all their technical support as well.

So to play by your rules I guess EK should pay a living wage for where? New York, Cleveland? Sure in a perfect world and in a perfect world the iPad your grimy fingers is clutching shouldn't be made with the blood of Asians.

Or Carnies. Smell like cabbage........small hands. :D