NationStates Jolt Archive

Just thought everyone would want to know the EU and Airbus have decided to play fair.

Reported in the Seattle PI (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/207500_boeingeu12.html) a couple days ago.

U.S., EU to negotiate on Airbus, Boeing subsidies
A 3-month freeze on help; complaints to WTO deferred


SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES

The governments of the United States and Europe agreed yesterday to stop subsidizing The Boeing Co. and Airbus for the next three months while they try to resolve a decades-old dispute over billions in subsidies to the aircraft makers.
...
"Finally, through our direct action, the Europeans have acknowledged the need to come to the table to account for and defend Airbus' unfair trade practices," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.


"The EU and Airbus have finally accepted that the status quo is indefensible. Now we must wait to see if the EU is interested in true competition between mature aerospace companies or a new subsidy regime to prop up an industry leader."


Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said the negotiations are likely to "break Airbus' addiction to European launch aid subsidies" that has caused "harm to our domestic work force."


Murray and other members of Congress have long complained that Airbus receives billions in cash advances that have enabled it to pursue virtually risk-free product development.

Well, so Boeing receives government subsidies too. That'll come as a big surprise in the other thread on the new jumbo.

Well, so Boeing receives government subsidies too. That'll come as a big surprise in the other thread on the new jumbo.
I think the subsidies are for Boeing's military planes specifically, if I remember correctly, as opposed to the subsidies Airbus gets for everything. But I'm not sure about that, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

U.S., EU to negotiate on Airbus, Boeing subsidies
A 3-month freeze on help; complaints to WTO deferred


SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES

The governments of the United States and Europe agreed yesterday to stop subsidizing The Boeing Co. and Airbus for the next three months while they try to resolve a decades-old dispute over billions in subsidies to the aircraft makers.
...
"Finally, through our direct action, the Europeans have acknowledged the need to come to the table to account for and defend Airbus' unfair trade practices," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.


"The EU and Airbus have finally accepted that the status quo is indefensible. Now we must wait to see if the EU is interested in true competition between mature aerospace companies or a new subsidy regime to prop up an industry leader."


Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said the negotiations are likely to "break Airbus' addiction to European launch aid subsidies" that has caused "harm to our domestic work force."


Murray and other members of Congress have long complained that Airbus receives billions in cash advances that have enabled it to pursue virtually risk-free product development.

Strange. I could have sworn you said the US government wasn't subsidising Boeing. :rolleyes:

Well, so Boeing receives government subsidies too. That'll come as a big surprise in the other thread on the new jumbo.

There's subsidies and there's subsidies. Boeing, like a lot of other manufacturers, get tax breaks and other kinds of benefits that look like subsidies. They don't get direct cash payments from the government like farmers do.

Strange. I could have sworn you said the US government wasn't subsidising Boeing. :rolleyes:
If I wasn't such a forthcoming type guy, I'd never have printed this.

Still none of really know how much the real subsidies to Boeing could be. When you consider the markups in military and space programs, it could be quite a considerable sum.

If both the US and the EU are serious about ending subsidies it might take an army of accountants on both sides.

Still none of really know how much the real subsidies to Boeing could be. When you consider the markups in military and space programs, it could be quite a considerable sum.

If both the US and the EU are serious about ending subsidies it might take an army of accountants on both sides.
Considering how a "subsidy" could be hidden in a tax break or in a contract guarantee, or even in an outright award, there is no way to estimate, let alone control government meddling.

Now, as far as the allegation that military and space contracts are marked up somehow, that is wrong. Once upon a time, the government would turn to a company like Lockheed and ask for an airplane that could fly higher and faster than anything else. Lockheed would say, "Sure!, That'll be XX million dollars, please". The government would pay and Lockheed would deliver. Somewhere along the line, feelings got hurt and auditors were added to control and oversee the whole process. That has added so much overhead to government programs that it would be better to have just let the contractors have their benefits.

Compliance with government regulations has also added a ton of engineering costs to a project. When I was on the Georgia Tech faculty, I bid on and was awarded a contract from gov't to build a small item for the International Space Station. It was pretty simple, I finished it under budget and on time, but the budget was unreal. The driving cost in the whole project was that the testing and documenting the design cost about twice what the actual design and manufacture of the first article cost.

Boeing...gets tax breaks and other kinds of benefits that look like subsidies.

If it walks like shit
Talks like shit

If it feels like shit
Tastes like shit

If it looks like shit
Sounds like shit

If it smells like shit
feels like shit
...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4167151.stm

Here's one without the biased views of the rather irrelevant Sen. P. Wash (it reads very similarly, but doesn't have the "evil Europeans have been forced to repent" and "will break Airbus" asshat-talk.

"If we had embarked on this contest at the WTO it might have cast a cloud, or at least a pall, over the president's visit," Mandelson said.

Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said the negotiations are likely to "break Airbus' addiction to European launch aid subsidies" that has caused "harm to our domestic work force."
They say it like those are bad things. :confused:

Personally, despite the fact i work a a subsidury company of the one that owns 80% of Airbus (won't advirtise who), both companies are as bad as each other. Both get subsidies of some form from governments so its a kinda pointless arguement.

As for the guy complaining about the subsidies causing "harm to our domestic work force." tough luck, it works both ways, if the european governments didn't give subsidies to Airbus, and let Boeing carry on getting them, then it would have an adverse effect on jobs in Europe.

Well this is just typical to the state of the world lift the subsidies that affect other rich countries and EU, USA and other rich countries can keap subsidies that mostly affect poor countries that really need a break, like fore example farming subsidies. Sorry if I'm to negative or cruising away from the topic.

Right, so both the US and the EU agree to stop subsidising companies. Your choice of thread title? "EU to Curb Airbus Subsidies". Airbus, a European company, roll out a rival to the 747 that is a far better aircraft. Your choice of thread title? "France builds big aircraft". You may not like the EU, or our aeronautical construction companies, but seriously, maybe you would want to try slightly less bias topic titles?

As for the actual topic of the thread, nice way of twisting an article, then actually posting it so we can all see the truth. US subsidies for Boeing started prior to the EU subsidies. Therefore, you can hardly complain about the EU providing Airbus with a helping hand to get into the market. The US can't monopolise the aircraft market I'm afraid. Sorry pal, but that's the way it is.

Right, so both the US and the EU agree to stop subsidising companies. Your choice of thread title? "EU to Curb Airbus Subsidies". Airbus, a European company, roll out a rival to the 747 that is a far better aircraft. Your choice of thread title? "France builds big aircraft". You may not like the EU, or our aeronautical construction companies, but seriously, maybe you would want to try slightly less bias topic titles?

As for the actual topic of the thread, nice way of twisting an article, then actually posting it so we can all see the truth. US subsidies for Boeing started prior to the EU subsidies. Therefore, you can hardly complain about the EU providing Airbus with a helping hand to get into the market. The US can't monopolise the aircraft market I'm afraid. Sorry pal, but that's the way it is.
Um, what would it say about Airbus if they couldn't build a better aircraft than the 747, seeing as the 747 is as old as it is?

Right, so both the US and the EU agree to stop subsidising companies. Your choice of thread title? "EU to Curb Airbus Subsidies". Airbus, a European company, roll out a rival to the 747 that is a far better aircraft. Your choice of thread title? "France builds big aircraft". You may not like the EU, or our aeronautical construction companies, but seriously, maybe you would want to try slightly less bias topic titles?

Why would I want to do that? I don't much care what the EU does. I think the idea of governments surrendering their sovereign rights to a bunch of bureaucrats is kind of sad, though.

As for the actual topic of the thread, nice way of twisting an article, then actually posting it so we can all see the truth. US subsidies for Boeing started prior to the EU subsidies. Therefore, you can hardly complain about the EU providing Airbus with a helping hand to get into the market. The US can't monopolise the aircraft market I'm afraid. Sorry pal, but that's the way it is.

I'm out of that business, now. But I'd rather see a company helped out by tax breaks than by direct aid. Felt that way about the Chrysler bail out as well as price supports to farmers. I'd just rather poke fun at Airbus that at my friends in the farming business.

airbus is seriously considering putting a new factory in new mexico, USA. maybe it is time for the EU to stop subsidizing them.

If the dollar continues to devalue against the euro, it won't be long before most European manufacturing moves out of Europe - to the rest of the world, including some US locations.

Either they do that, or no one will be able to afford anything made in Europe.

airbus is seriously considering putting a new factory in new mexico, USA. maybe it is time for the EU to stop subsidizing them.
That's funny. Boeing is being criticized for manufacturing some of the 7E7 in Japan. Maybe offshoring is cyclical.

airbus is seriously considering putting a new factory in new mexico, USA. maybe it is time for the EU to stop subsidizing them.
I agree. An action like that should be punished.