January 22, 2007
Boeing Drops the Hammer

Recent news about Boeing has demonstrated the prudent choice Washington state made to adjust public policy affecting the business community to keep the company's airplane assembly operating locally.

As observers expected, Boeing topped Airbus for airplane orders in 2006. More importantly, the advantage was accomplished with superior sales for the more profitable wide-body classes, with the 777, 787, and 747 outdistancing the A340, A330/A350, and A380 respectively.

Why does an advantage in those classes matter? Because even while Airbus was delivering more planes in 2006, Boeing delivered planes of higher value because of its advantage in those larger planes. Boeing and Airbus went nearly plane for plane in deliveries and orders in 2006 for their highest volume sellers, the 737 and A319/A320 respectively, but that narrow-body class produces a small profit-per-plane for both companies. The true business advantage is in superiority of the larger plane classes.

Such an understanding of the finances of the industry is even more relevant given Airbus' ongoing problems. The financial impacts of continued delays in the A380 are more severe than expected, meanwhile Airbus has to struggle to raise the capital necessary to produce the A350, their competitor to the 787. Yet, even if the A350 is developed on schedule it will still only come into service in 2013, a full five years after the 787's projected first delivery.

Even with such advantages, pressure is still on Boeing to deliver the 787 on time, and to stay in front of Airbus as it responds to Boeing's gains (just as Boeing had to respond to Airbus' ascendancy in the 1990's). If the 787 were to run into difficulties, the consequences would be immediate (witness today's stock market news about Boeing).

In the meantime, Boeing's recent accomplishments bode well in the long-term for local aerospace employment, including an increase in Boeing suppliers locating nearby to meet the needs of Boeing's latest models. It also serves as a reminder that working with the business community to ensure a competitive playing field for Washington state is a good thing. In Boeing's case that has in recent years included reform of the state's unemployment insurance system and B&O tax credits for the aerospace industry. There was gnashing of the teeth in some quarters when those policies were approved, but they sure look like wise choices now.

****

Footnotes:

Here are full 2006 order breakdowns for Boeing and Airbus (scroll down to "Airbus Orders").

Those interested in national commentary on Boeing's success in a globalized economy can find thoughts from George Will here.

Posted by Eric Earling at January 22, 2007 08:26 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Those of us in the areospace industry commonly view Airbus as being in a death spiral. Boeing just flat out played Airbus with airplane designs, press releases, and marketing. The A380 was a disasterous concept from the get-go, and only a fool would have bet on the revival of the business model that would make it sell.

It will be interesting to see if the A380 will be cancelled or not. Either way, with the pitiful sales it still has on the books it's a money pit for Airbus that will take a very long time to recover from.

Posted by: H Moul on January 22, 2007 08:47 AM
2. Imagine where Boeing would ge now if the company didn't have to pay 38 different B&O taxes every day.

Posted by: Walters on January 22, 2007 09:15 AM
3. The Toulouse Goose is cooked!

Posted by: JDH on January 22, 2007 09:17 AM
4. Eric noted:

''In Boeing's case that has in recent years included reform of the state's unemployment insurance system and B&O tax credits for the aerospace industry. There was gnashing of the teeth in some quarters when those policies were approved, but they sure look like wise choices now.''

But we're never safe from attempts to ''revisit'' those important gains. Example that I am familiar with, as an active member of the Washington Farm Bureau: Attempts in the Legislature last session to ''whack RETRO''. It didn't pass last time; who knows if the leftie (D)s will try same thing again this time.

Posted by: Methow Ken on January 22, 2007 09:22 AM
5. Walters, but why do I still have to pay all these taxes when Boeing doesn't?

Posted by: swatter on January 22, 2007 09:23 AM
6. Swatter, Fortunately, only businesses pay B&O taxes. All those other taxes you currently enjoy are generally voted in by Liberals both in the legislature and in general elections. (Remember the Monorail tax? Or how about that new, increased gas tax?) Reducing taxes on any business will increase growth and jobs.

Posted by: Walters on January 22, 2007 10:00 AM
7. Walters, I may post a lot, but I really do run a real business.

Posted by: swatter on January 22, 2007 10:15 AM
8. "Reducing taxes on any business will increase growth and jobs."

Or for a small business, at least allow an owner to make a little extra scratch.

Posted by: Easycure on January 22, 2007 10:16 AM
9. Pity that Boeing doesn't have to collect sales tax... isn't it?

Posted by: Hinton on January 22, 2007 11:14 AM
10. If they did, they wouldn't have any sales to tax. They are priced within 8% of Airbus.

Posted by: Right said Fred on January 22, 2007 11:21 AM
11. I predicted that the Airbuses would drop from the skies back when I worked contract at Boeing in 97-99. Any technology the French build looks good at first and then falls apart in a few years. Remember when they sold all those Pugeot sedans in the US? Appealed to a lot of Mercedes buyers...but then, did you notice that almost everyone of them on the road spews a plume of soot and smoke?

No, the frogs should stick to producing good cheese, great wine and hot women.

Posted by: John Bailo on January 22, 2007 11:30 AM
12. Boeing is just the Republican's vision of the 'free-market'. Large corporations like Boeing get tax breaks and campaign contributions flow freely.

Posted by: M&M on January 22, 2007 11:37 AM
13. libs hate that Airbus didn't beat Boeing's pants. why? the usual self-hate of America.

i'm convinced global 'enlightened' libs wanted to point to (their perennial love) of united but vastly different Euro countries and habits, "prove" that socialism & high taxes actually work, and just plain thumb their nose at the capitalist work & profit ethic as a thing promoting general good for all.

it wasn't about a plane or America's success--it was about a "goose" by the global left to our arse that didn't happen.

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on January 22, 2007 11:48 AM
14. Speaking of free flowing campaign contributions:
WEA, unions, lawyers.

Gosh - what a surprise! Groups that like a campaigns ideas support them! It seems hard to believe.

The only tax breaks libs believe in are the taxes that break the "filthy rich"

I can't help but see the interesting contrast between the French with their A380 and the Boeing 787. The socialist state believes in the 'mass-transit' concept of bringing everyone to a MAJOR hub and transporting them from there, compared to the 787 concept of smaller planes going from point A to point B non-stop, without having to go through a hub to change trains/busses/planes.

Which is winning?

Posted by: Right said Fred on January 22, 2007 12:02 PM
15. All the better the big fat doughboy stays on the ground in the Euro. Needs to drop a few pounds. It wobbles and weaves on landing. Hear, hear for Boeing. Love free enterprise. If ever it makes it debut, the big fat dough boy will be on my list of no fly airliner. Oh, but it will have it's ups and downs.

Posted by: Clusiana on January 22, 2007 12:22 PM
16. M&M, I think Boeing is the Democrats' version of free enterprise. Boeing gives a ton of money to Democrats; I don't know of many Rs that get the goods.

Posted by: swatter on January 22, 2007 12:26 PM
17. Swatter, I think Boeing learned their lesson about campaign contributions when they saw what happened to Microsoft during the Clinton years.

Posted by: Doc-T on January 22, 2007 01:15 PM
18. swatter,
Boeing gives tons of money to both sides. More to the Democrats since they are in power.
The point is that Republicans constantly talk about the 'free-market' and then give tax breaks to large corporations.

Posted by: M&M on January 23, 2007 11:33 AM
19. mandm, Grrrrr!!!!! You contradicted yourself in your three sentences.

Boeing gives more money to the Ds because they are in power, but the Rs give them tax breaks when they are not even in power?

Posted by: swatter on January 23, 2007 03:54 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?