Singapore Airlines Reconsidering A380?

smokejumper · Post by **smokejumper** » 13 Dec 2006, 21:11

SIA's patience is running short.
See:
http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Docume ... 3D94CDFF8F

DFW · Post by **DFW** » 13 Dec 2006, 22:20

I wonder what precipitated these comments from SIA. Why publicly express frustation now, rather than after the last announcement of delay by Airbus several months ago? I can't see SIA cancelling any A380s. Delay maybe, but not cancel.

I think SIA is just posturing. For what, I don't know.

By the way, SIA is my favorite airline.

cageyjames · Post by **cageyjames** » 14 Dec 2006, 02:46

It isn't like they'll get replacement aircraft from Boeing before they'd get their A380s. They are stuck and that might be the frustration.

CX · Post by CX » 14 Dec 2006, 17:19

I think the CEO of SIA said something like this a few months ago that they might do something about the 9 A380s they ordered on top of their 10. They just said the 747-8i is not really under consideration, and i seriously don't believe 773ER can better "replace" the A380 than the 747-8i... but i must agree that further delay to the A380 will piss all its customers and if that happens it will be surprising if no one cancels.

OO-TUC · Post by **OO-TUC** » 15 Dec 2006, 11:33

Maybe SIA did get signals from Airbus that there is an another delay of the A380's is coming...and sent out a public warning now...?

smokejumper · Post by **smokejumper** » 16 Dec 2006, 21:40

It is interesting that so little new news about the A380 situation has been released. Perhaps all is OK and perhaps some other problems linger. One that comes to mind is weight. Very little has been reported on the weight status of the A380. The plane is large and a few grams here and there keep adding up.

Ruscoe · Post by **Ruscoe** » 17 Dec 2006, 03:45

I think it is all posturing from Singapore.
With the LOI for the 350's and extra 380's they really have got Airbus where they want them already. The posturing is for Boeing not Airbus.
IMO they are posturing for a lower price and I think the most likely, depite all their comments to the contrary, is that if they can get 748I at the right price they will buy them.

Ruscoe

TexasGuy · Post by **TexasGuy** » 17 Dec 2006, 05:34

Ruscoe wrote:I think it is all posturing from Singapore.
With the LOI for the 350's and extra 380's they really have got Airbus where they want them already. The posturing is for Boeing not Airbus.
IMO they are posturing for a lower price and I think the most likely, depite all their comments to the contrary, is that if they can get 748I at the right price they will buy them.

Ruscoe

I agree.

bits44 · Post by **bits44** » 17 Dec 2006, 15:35

This article reveals that the problems extend beyond just wiring, the political infighting has continued, and still hampers efforts to resolve the redesigning of the wiring. It makes me wonder why they are still using two different software systems that can't talk to each other properly? which was the root cause to begin with.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ ... siness-hed

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 17 Dec 2006, 17:09

bits44 wrote:This article reveals that the problems extend beyond just wiring, the political infighting has continued, and still hampers efforts to resolve the redesigning of the wiring. It makes me wonder why they are still using two different software systems that can't talk to each other properly? which was the root cause to begin with.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ ... siness-hed

Very "revealing" article..Doesn't look good at all... Thanks for sharing .

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 17 Dec 2006, 19:00

cageyjames wrote:It isn't like they'll get replacement aircraft from Boeing before they'd get their A380s. They are stuck and that might be the frustration.

And I would not only put all the blame with Airbus, as I would enlarge the title of this item: Singapore AL Reconsidering A380? to Singapore Reconsidering Singapore ALL?
They had put high hopes in the Pacific routes via Australia, to stay ahead of global aviation progress percentage.
The QF buy out or sell, which ever you prefer, put an end (for the moment) to these and other predatory dreams and expectations.
The Chinese Singaporian dragon is turning around in circles with only its aviation tail to bite....
So they do not need so much A380 now.
It is indeed a dictator's frustration...
Their economy is one that "attacks and kills others for food".
The A380 would have been their new claws.
Singapore (SG) Capital: Singapore with a population of about 4.200.000 ( Less than eg independent Flanders

) as 'home' market has to acquire its traffic, passengers and cargo, from other markets, that is evident.
As the link shows, Singapore has to attract still more and more passengers to their shopping malls. That means volume.

(Singapore loves success. Singapore claimed eight golds in a record total haul of 27 medals at the Asian Games in Doha. See what in what categories... Gold is gold)

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 18 Dec 2006, 01:41

SN30952 wrote:
cageyjames wrote:It isn't like they'll get replacement aircraft from Boeing before they'd get their A380s. They are stuck and that might be the frustration.
And I would not only put all the blame with Airbus, as I would enlarge the title of this item: Singapore AL Reconsidering A380? to Singapore Reconsidering Singapore ALL?
They had put high hopes in the Pacific routes via Australia, to stay ahead of global aviation progress percentage.
The QF buy out or sell, which ever you prefer, put an end (for the moment) to these and other predatory dreams and expectations.
The Chinese Singaporian dragon is turning around in circles with only its aviation tail to bite....
So they do not need so much A380 now.
It is indeed a dictator's frustration...
Their economy is one that "attacks and kills others for food".
The A380 would have been their new claws.
Singapore (SG) Capital: Singapore with a population of about 4.200.000 ( Less than eg independent Flanders ) as 'home' market has to acquire its traffic, passengers and cargo, from other markets, that is evident.
As the link shows, Singapore has to attract still more and more passengers to their shopping malls. That means volume.

(Singapore loves success. Singapore claimed eight golds in a record total haul of 27 medals at the Asian Games in Doha. See what in what categories... Gold is gold)

If you don't like the message....attack the messenger SIA.. Is that what you are trying to imply or am I missing something..?
"Timing" in a business plan is VERY important. Don't you think that such a delay of delivering the goods is not playing havoc with your business plan..????
What you are bringing into the equation is just a "diversion" of the real issue.. AIRBUS failed to deliver the goods on time....... and the answer to the issue is for sure not changing the title of this thread.. this has been tried before..
8)

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 18 Dec 2006, 19:13

Zenfookpower wrote:What you are bringing into the equation is just a "diversion" of the real issue.. AIRBUS failed to deliver the goods on time....... and the answer to the issue is for sure not changing the title of this thread.. this has been tried before.. 8)

That's what it is: Airbus failed to deliver the money making tools...

And Singapore AL Reconsidering A380?
I illustrated that with gold is gold at the Asian Games.
When they cannot win in a sport they will add a "discipline", where they can win. Chinese like games and gambles.
Ain't that the way they operate: Create their own league. Next it will be chinese sjoelbakken, if it brings them gold.
Before the Brittons brought in the Chinese labour to the rock, there were not much Chinese in the area. Then they took over the rock, got the Malays out, some chinese families then made themselves immensely rich and took power. Their aim is getting richer, by all means: gold is gold.
Is it that what you call their business plan? So be it...
But yes I do not like that message... because predating(3) on others is not the way I see a business plan. But that's just my point of view. You might of course differ.

predate - be earlier in time
predate - come before
predate - prey on or hunt for

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 18 Dec 2006, 19:21

SN30952 wrote:
Zenfookpower wrote:What you are bringing into the equation is just a "diversion" of the real issue.. AIRBUS failed to deliver the goods on time....... and the answer to the issue is for sure not changing the title of this thread.. this has been tried before.. 8)
That's what it is: Airbus failed to deliver the money making tools..........................

Airbus failed to deliver the money making tools.. That is IT.. all the rest is political/ethnic spin...
8)

DFW · Post by **DFW** » 18 Dec 2006, 19:24

SN30952, I'm disturbed by your comments.

Attacking an airline for what you're calling unethical business practices (putting it mildly) is one thing. Attacking a race as a whole is entirely different.

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 18 Dec 2006, 20:00

DFW wrote:SN30952, I'm disturbed by your comments.
Attacking an airline for what you're calling unethical business practices (putting it mildly) is one thing. Attacking a race as a whole is entirely different.

Attacking a race? Read my lines, DFW.
I said some families and an ideology... difference!
A dictator ideology.
I'm disturbed by your comments. You're putting words in my mouths, I never talked about race, DFW, I talked about some people, some ideology.
Ask (some!) people that left the city state and stay in your country... because that are the only ones that can speak out....
A member of such family stands on trial nowadays in Taiwan, not the least, the wife of the president.
Most of the Chinese there are victims of these (some!) families (people). You might call them clans.
If you are disturbed DFW, why by my comments and not by their ethical standards?

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 18 Dec 2006, 20:13

With all DUE respect, all your ethnic spin has NOTHING to do with the subject.. Why don't you let go..
I agree with DFW...I am not only disturbed with your initial comments, but find your continuous spin even more disturbing..

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 18 Dec 2006, 20:15

You talk like in Singapore. Put opposition in jail. Great. Good Nite.

smokejumper · Post by **smokejumper** » 18 Dec 2006, 23:50

Had Airbus delivered the A380 on time and meeitng all specifications, we would not be having this discussion now! The customer airlines have been VERY patient. They made plans for route expansion and capacity when they ordered the product, expecting the contractor to deliver on the contract.

When Airbus was late (the first time), they accepted it as an inevitable result of developing a new, large and, technologically advanced product. Airbus was not late one time, but two and possibly more (in the future). The airlines had to adjust their plans and make fleet adjustments.

Adding insult to injury, Airbus blamed the customers for the problems (too many different entertainment systems). Give me a break - the customers have acted much more reasonably than I would have.

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 19 Dec 2006, 01:05

SN30952 wrote:You talk like in Singapore. Put opposition in jail. Great. Good Nite.

Have a Merry Christmas and enjoy life...

Aviation24.be

Singapore Airlines Reconsidering A380?

Singapore Airlines Reconsidering A380?

Gold is gold

Re: Gold is gold

Re: Gold is gold

Re: Gold is gold