Seeking Alpha

GarryGR

GarryGR
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View GarryGR's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Boeing workers approve contract securing new 777X for Seattle [View news story]
    From some of what I've read, it appears that some of the older union members thought their pensions would be axed, if the contract was approved. An article today (1/3) quoted an employee who's retiring soon as saying that he got the impression, from the local IAM, that his pension would be gone, if the contract was approved! Man, how could they be so uninformed? And, if the local IAM was intentionally promoting that impression, that's disgusting.

    Thank God, cooler heads prevailed. You'd think with recent union fiascos, such as the UAW and GM & Chrysler, people could recognize reality, but, alas, apparently many never will. Reminds me of a Winston Churchill quote: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter".
    Jan 4, 2014. 04:34 AM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing-union talks over 777X labor deal collapse [View news story]
    I'm guessing Boeing may well be taking the long view, which is that they have to address the IAM propensity for strikes. There's only one way to do that; move as much work as possible and as quickly as possible, to Right to Work states. The IAM keeps displaying their eagerness to go on strike, by their attitude. And, apparently, the IAM is unable to recognize that the costs to Boeing of their strikes, makes the costs of moving that much more probable.

    As to the pension issue; there are very few workers anymore who have a pension. Like it or not, they are a thing of the past. Pensions provided by companies were always dependent on a company's willingness and ability to pay them. Insisting on having the IAM pension is of little value to workers who do not have a job.
    Dec 13, 2013. 04:55 AM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing Was Crushed During FIA 2014 [View article]
    The order numbers have not correlated with the financials but Airbus has had great success in getting the business press to cover it as if they did, often calling them sales and/or citing orders when referring to Airbus as the largest aircraft manufacturer, even though standard measurements for size comparisons, showed the opposite (revenue and market capitalization).

    As others have pointed out, Airbus always works feverishly to beat Boeing at the Farnborough Airshow as well as any of the big airshows. This year, it was particularly obvious that Airbus had been saving order announcements for the Farnborough Airshow, having fallen ridiculously far behind Boeing, in their totals for the year. Even with that much larger tally at Farnborough, Airbus still has fewer orders than Boeing! But, hey, once again, Airbus got the favorable coverage it so covets! ;-)

    In my opinion, putting a value on the orders is not very useful for any EADS or BA investor. How about the value of that 2007 order for 70 A350s that were cancelled this year or the six A350 order switched to the A330neo s? Airbus has had an unusually large number of cancellations this year although some cancellations are normal. Aircraft customers are ordering planes for delivery many years out, so the likely hood of there being cancellations is high.

    Until we know how many of the orders on the books are to be delivered this year, next year, etc., i.e. how many planes Airbus and Boeing are going to deliver each year going forward (when they receive payment for those orders), these order numbers are not very meaningful. Unfortunately, that's not likely to happen. It will be a long time before the Airbus A350 production rate will match the 787 rate. Consider that Airbus has beaten Boeing's yearly order totals most of the time for more than a decade now. But Boeing has been delivering more planes since 2012 and is likely to continue that, for a number of years going forward. If aircraft orders were as relevant as in other businesses, that would not be the case. In the past, the business press has commonly referred to Airbus as the largest aircraft producer, based on the order numbers, even though the normal “size” measurements, did not support that. But, that's why Airbus loves these airshows and the order numbers so much. ;-)

    By the way, I don't want to leave the impression that I "hate" Airbus; I think they've done really well and build great planes, as does Boeing. But their success in portraying themselves as much more successful than Boeing via their hype surrounding their order numbers, does annoy me! ;-) You might have guessed that! ;-)

    By the way, in an article in the Seattle Times (Airbus logs more Air Show deals; Boeing still leads in orders ...), the net order totals are: Boeing 783 net firm orders for the year and Airbus has 648. Another interesting number is the discounts given to aircraft customers: "Airbus announced 496 total orders and commitments, worth $75 billion at list prices, or about $33 billion after standard discounts, using Avitas estimates. Boeing announced 201 total orders and commitments, worth $40 billion at list prices, or about $20". Interesting because occasionally an Airbus partisan will claim that the only way Boeing can compete with Airbus is by selling their planes at a higher discount than Airbus, but these estimates show a 56% discount on the Airbus orders and a 50% discount for the Boeing orders. Obviously, the list prices aren't that meaningful! ;-) But, there’s a really big difference in the average price of a plane. Using these estimates,: Airbus: $66.5 million ; Boeing: $99.5 million!
    Aug 4, 2014. 06:34 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • For Boeing, Multiple Contraction Is Possible [View article]
    Is your analysis methodology unusual, i.e. uncommon? I'm wondering how it is that all the analysts following Boeing on NASDAQ rate BA a hold or Buy, with the consensus being Buy and the 12-Month Price Target consensus being $160. Where, in your opinion, are they going wrong?
    Oct 7, 2014. 03:26 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing -1% as McCarthy calls for letting U.S. Export-Import Bank expire [View news story]
    The countries supporting Airbus, as well as Airbus --- not to mention thomas 85225 ;-) --- must be thinking, WOW, could they really be that stupid?! Are they really going to allow us this advantage with our EX/IM banks supporting Airbus plus the 60 or so other countries doing the same?

    Another case of absolutism trumping sound reasoning! Heaven help us with this kind of "leadership" in congress. These people still seem to believe that the US is an island, unaffected by what other countries do. Hopefully the sane members of the house will reverse this stupid approach. Airbus is probably thinking, "WOW, we didn't even have to lobby to get this wonderful gift from the US congress"!

    Of course, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy got elected, the "folks" voted for him! Reminds me of one of Winston Churchill's quotes: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter". Or George Burns saying, "It's no surprise that things are so screwed up; everyone that knows how to run a government is either driving taxicabs or cutting hair"! ;-) But, McCarthy and his supporters don't even recognize the sarcasm in what Burns said; they just think, "Yah, how true - how true"! ;-(

    What I've read is that the EX/IM bank costs the US taxpayer nothing and actually has never had a default on a loan for buying a Boeing plane but instead paid "profits" into the US Treasury. So, what exactly is the case for not funding the EX/IM bank, other than the absolutist Libertarian believe that government can do no good - something no other country believes, by the way. Certainly not the countries supporting Airbus.
    Jun 24, 2014. 12:38 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing machinists begin casting historic vote on labor deal [View news story]
    The IAM already lost one bet, the bet that Boeing would not move 787 work out of WA. Airbus, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, et al picked Right to Works states, AKA non-union states, for their manufacturing sites. Contrary to what some have said about those state's workers, I've not heard of quality problems with the cars being built there. Matter of fact, they are considered to be high quality vehicles.

    Today's reality is not favorable to unions. As long as companies can pit states against each other, competing for jobs, especially in this economy, unions have a big problem. Ignoring the reality does not help union workers. Unions need to work to address the reasons they're in decline. Working to weaken the company does not help the company's workers.

    It's not as if Boeing is a terrible company to work for; you can do a lot worse. Boeing has no problem finding workers.
    Nov 13, 2013. 06:50 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Reuters: Boeing unions seek conditions on $8.7B in tax credits [View news story]
    There's certainly bad blood between the Boeing unions and Boeing. But, it seems the union would cut their nose off to spite their face! How in the world does it help a company's employees to make their employer less profitable? Yah, let's do everything possible to reduce my employer's profits and then maybe they'll share that er ah smaller profit with us!

    We live in a time when labor needs some very intelligent representation; corporations have very smart people running the business. I don't see that in most unions, unfortunately for the working folks. ;-(
    Jan 21, 2015. 10:27 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing: Take Profits Now [View article]
    Orders are not a good measure for comparing Boeing and Airbus. Airbus has made it a top priority to win that race and will do almost anything to win. Normally, one would expect a company consistently winning more orders to also be relatively more profitable and delivering more product than their competitors. But, in the decade leading up to 2012, Airbus built up a much larger order backlog than Boeing. And yet, in 2012 and again in 2013, Boeing delivered more planes than Airbus did!

    As to the A350, Airbus's initial A350 offering was publicly ridiculed by one or the largest aircraft customers, because is wasn't competitive with the 787. Airbus went back to the drawing boards but decided not to match all the innovations in the 787, fearing a much to long lead time for the 787. Airbus is hoping to produce 4 A350s by the beginning of 2015 (end of 2014) while Boeing is currently producing 10 B787s / month and expects to increase that rate, going forward. Airbus partisans expected Airbus to sell lots of A350s at the last Dubai air show; Airbus even did a A350 fly by, to help sell the A350. But then Boeing sold more 787s than Airbus sold A350s.

    It seems like Airbus is always going to overtake Boeing; but, of course, that'll happen sometime in the future, like maybe 2012 and 2013. OOPS, what just happened! ;-)
    Jan 21, 2014. 12:52 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Headwinds For Boeing [View article]
    Equity Whisper, you are aware, are you not, that there are many analysis following Boeing and giving their recommendations on Boeing? For example, of the 21 analysts on the BA NASDAQ list, 16 say strong buy, 1 says buy and 4 say hold. There are zero underperforms or sells. Yet you make no mention of why you believe all those analysts who disagree with are wrong? They also have reasons for their views. The majority is not always right but it would be much more interesting to hear why their analysis, in your view, is wrong.

    You lost me when you sited the order numbers. It's pretty well known that Airbus will do almost anything to beat Boeing in the yearly orders race, especially the Paris Air Show. Airbus claimed a higher yearly orders total nine out of 10 years leading up to last year, 2012. Normally, one would expect that Airbus would certainly deliver more planes than Boeing in 2012 based on that huge order advantage, but NOPE, they didn't. And it looks like Boeing will deliver more planes than Airbus this year and probably next year as well. After all, Boeing is building 7 (or more?) 787s per month now and expects to be building 10 per month by the end of the year, with probably increased rates after that. Airbus "hopes" to be building 4 A350s a month by the start of 2015 (one model, the one currently in flight test).

    So why do you use those controversial order numbers (controversial because of Airbus’s antics). Without knowing how many of those orders are to be delivered in each successive year, what use are they? At least, you could check them against the financial numbers; if you did, you might be surprised! They give a very different picture than the order numbers do. The financial numbers are real; the order numbers, not so much.

    You could be right, but I’m not selling BA based on the arguments you made here. You need to address the arguments made by all those many-many analysts listed on the NASDAQ and many other sites, in a much more convincing way, to change my mind.
    Jul 23, 2013. 01:06 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Analyst foresees disappointing Q1 earnings, FY 2015 deliveries for Boeing [View news story]
    Well, as usual, BA has been volatile and i saw no news as to why! First I've heard as to why it's had a number of down days, although there was one big jump up the other day, almost $4. It's just amazing (not to mention annoying) how hysterical and irrational the market can be! ;-(
    Apr 1, 2015. 05:00 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing Skyrockets On Earnings, Why Didn't It Crash This Time? (Part 2) [View article]
    Airbus wound up with some 70 delivery slots for the A350 because of the cancellation of an order for 70 A350s last year. That will allow them to delivery some of those A350s before Boeing could deliver 787s for any new order, as the Delta order illustrated. However, as Airbus has publically stated, ramping up the A350 production rate will be "challenging" and although, I'd read that they are currently producing 2 per month, I've also read that they plan on delivering 15 this year? At any rate, Airbus has a long ways to go before they will get the A350 production rate up to Boeing's 787 production rate, which is also scheduled to increase from the current 10/month. And, I don't believe the A350 matches the 787, so assuming Airbus wont sell the A350 with too big of a discount compared to the 787, I don't see the A350 matching the 787 sales.
    Feb 7, 2015. 06:03 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Solid Results For Boeing, Record Backlog Is 20x Quarterly Revenues [View article]
    All good news, and yet Boeing sank by $5.67/4.46% today, with over three times the average volume! ;-( After searching for some explanation for the decline and finding almost all good news, I finally found one source that said the market wasn't happy with the profit margin and the rate of progress on bringing down 787 costs. Well, somebody had to come with some explanation for such a huge move, right?! You'd think Boeing planes were falling out of the sky!

    I'd expect the bottom line, real numbers to trump potential speculative numbers, but 'guess I'd be wrong! Crazy market! ;-( Somehow, the "shorts" managed to get the upper hand while us "buy & hold" folks lost our shorts! ;-) At least it wasn't some story about Airbus trouncing Boeing; those seem to have finally been put to rest - with a few notable partisan exceptions, of course! ;-)
    Oct 22, 2014. 04:46 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Airbus outdoes Boeing at Farnborough [View news story]
    To some, Airbus's stock price decline in the last 5 days, doesn't make sense, based on the results of the orders taken in at this airshow. Airbus loves the orders hype, particularly at these really big airshows. Airbus was far behind Boeing in orders, going into this airshow and finished still behind Boeing, for the years totals. It's well known, by anyone familiar with the Boeing Airbus aircraft business, that Airbus delays announcing orders until there's a big airshow, when possible, so they can get the great press coverage they get when the beat Boeing's airshow numbers. Another success for Airbus at this airshow. However . . .

    The order numbers are a very shallow metric for comparing Boeing and Airbus. Airbus has put great importance on winning the yearly orders race for over a decade now, and has won the majority of those races. But, in this business, an order is not a sale, although much of the shallow "business" reporting would lead you to believe they're equal. Consider the 2007 order for 70 A350s, which were cancelled this year. That certainly wasn't a sale. Customers make a very small down payment to hold their position in the production schedule and only pay the bulk of the cost when the plane is delivered. Investors know this and therefore discount the hype surrounding the orders game played by Airbus. Having beaten Boeing the majority of the times for more than a decade now, the casual observer would probably be quite surprised to find out that Boeing has delivered more planes than Airbus since 2012 and will probably continue to do so for a number of years to come.

    How could it be more obvious that an order is not a sale?! In the past 5 days, with all the hype surrounding Airbus orders at this airshow, Airbus stock has declined over 5%. Boeing's' is also down, but less than 1%. So you can see that despite the Airbus order hype, the market is unimpressed. Those are the folks who put their money where their mouth is and they didn't buy into the hype. ;-)

    As to subsidies, Thomas forgot to mention that the WTO found that the subsidies to Airbus were much larger than Boeing's. And, the strange thing is that Airbus has complained about the subsidies Boeing gets from the US states competing for their business but then Airbus has a similar competition for their A320 manufacturing site in the US. They were all too happy to accept whatever "subsidy" they could get from a US state! But, i guess that's different! ;-)
    Jul 18, 2014. 06:36 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boeing -2.3% following downgrade, Airbus order cancellation [View news story]
    Thomas hits multiple sites, check out this one: Boeing Shares Suffer with Cantor's Surprise Loss http://bit.ly/1ne3jgP for more oldies but goodies. ;-)
    Jun 15, 2014. 04:16 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Airbus estimates more than 1,000 A330neo sales [View news story]
    Repeatedly making statements like "the 787 has only deliver 140 since 2003" clearly shows an irrational bias. The 787 program has certainly had a lot of problems; there's no need to imply that Boeing has been delivering 787s since 2003 to make the numbers look even worse than they are! Boeing didn't manage to deliver a 787 until late 2011 and that was the only 2011 delivery; deliveries didn't really get going until 2012 and then, of course, there were the months long delay resulting from the battery fires. Boeing is still struggling to get the delivery rate up to where it wants it to be, but the 787 definitely is looking much better, with the production rate smoothing out at around 10 per month, now.

    While Airbus has consistently "reported" taking more orders than Boeing for over a decade now (11 out of 13 years, I believe), Boeing has been delivering more planes since 2012. Both Airbus and Boeing should have a number of good years, from here on out. But neither company is in any danger of being put out of business by the other. And, of course, the customers love having too strong competitors, especially when negotiating an aircraft order. ;-)
    Jun 5, 2014. 04:09 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
204 Comments
124 Likes