C-Series still a possibility?
08-21-2017, 05:44 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2015
Posts: 262
C-Series still a possibility?
08-21-2017, 05:56 PM
#2
Squawking 2000
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Position: Skeptical
Posts: 737
Who are the Delta Bravos who get a raging erection at every possibility to forward internal information to the press? Did you not read this note at the bottom of every page?
One thing is certain: the more we leak this stuff (especially trivial things like this), the less information they will share.
The information contained in this publication may be confidential. Any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of this message is prohibited.
08-21-2017, 06:38 PM
#3
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
I flew with a eccentric guy about 15 years ago that seemed to know more about airline finance than anyone I ever met, even if he was full of it. He talked about aircraft cost on a per seat basis.
Boeing sold us 700's last year for 23M. 23M divided by 140 coach seats is 165,000 dollars per seat to buy the aircraft. Bombardier is trying to sell CS100's (100 seats) for somewhere around 80 million dollars. That is 800,000 dollars per seat. That is even more expensive than the 50 seat RJ's they sold us, which up to that time were the most expensive airline seats ever.
No matter that they burn 25% less fuel than a 737-700, paying 500% more for the seats on the airplane NEVER makes sense, financially.
Bombardier massively discounted the order for DAL, way below their cost to produce the aircraft, and then immediately wrote off 500m in losses on the order.
I think Boeing is hosed on the 7379 vs 321 comparison, but Bombardier is hosed 5x more as their costs to produce the CS series are wildly out of control. Unless they can "Pull a Tesla", and get the Canadian government to subsidize their money losing product, they are going to lose, and lose badly.
Boeing sold us 700's last year for 23M. 23M divided by 140 coach seats is 165,000 dollars per seat to buy the aircraft. Bombardier is trying to sell CS100's (100 seats) for somewhere around 80 million dollars. That is 800,000 dollars per seat. That is even more expensive than the 50 seat RJ's they sold us, which up to that time were the most expensive airline seats ever.
No matter that they burn 25% less fuel than a 737-700, paying 500% more for the seats on the airplane NEVER makes sense, financially.
Bombardier massively discounted the order for DAL, way below their cost to produce the aircraft, and then immediately wrote off 500m in losses on the order.
I think Boeing is hosed on the 7379 vs 321 comparison, but Bombardier is hosed 5x more as their costs to produce the CS series are wildly out of control. Unless they can "Pull a Tesla", and get the Canadian government to subsidize their money losing product, they are going to lose, and lose badly.
08-21-2017, 09:53 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 859
Interesting. Although your math is way off.
500% more on aircraft MAY be worse but if you save more than 57M over the life of the aircraft on fuel (remember its 25% less per ASM, less ASMs total so the overall reduction in fuel costs on the same route is closer to 50%) then yes, you do make more money.
for instance:
Widget a costs $100 but costs $10/hr to operate
Widget 2 costs $500 but costs $7.50/hr to operate
a 100 hrs $1100
2 100 hrs $1250
a 200 hrs $2100
2 200 hrs $2000
Don't write off the C-series due to sticker price. We have a large gaping hole in the middle of our fleet and it needs to be filled.
500% more on aircraft MAY be worse but if you save more than 57M over the life of the aircraft on fuel (remember its 25% less per ASM, less ASMs total so the overall reduction in fuel costs on the same route is closer to 50%) then yes, you do make more money.
for instance:
Widget a costs $100 but costs $10/hr to operate
Widget 2 costs $500 but costs $7.50/hr to operate
a 100 hrs $1100
2 100 hrs $1250
a 200 hrs $2100
2 200 hrs $2000
Don't write off the C-series due to sticker price. We have a large gaping hole in the middle of our fleet and it needs to be filled.
08-21-2017, 10:57 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 788
Boeing sold us 700's last year for 23M. 23M divided by 140 coach seats is 165,000 dollars per seat to buy the aircraft. Bombardier is trying to sell CS100's (100 seats) for somewhere around 80 million dollars. That is 800,000 dollars per seat.
No matter that they burn 25% less fuel than a 737-700, paying 500% more for the seats on the airplane NEVER makes sense, financially.
Bombardier massively discounted the order for DAL, way below their cost to produce the aircraft, and then immediately wrote off 500m in losses on the order.
No matter that they burn 25% less fuel than a 737-700, paying 500% more for the seats on the airplane NEVER makes sense, financially.
Bombardier massively discounted the order for DAL, way below their cost to produce the aircraft, and then immediately wrote off 500m in losses on the order.
Meanwhile, I will say one thing for our current management, I am extremely confident they will not pay the $80m sticker price for the C Series if they pursue a purchase. Kirby don't play that (see also - A350 purchase). BA brought up a complaint this Spring against Bombardier with the U.S. Dept of Commerce alleging that Delta is paying less than $20 mil a copy for theirs. Whatever Delta paid, I doubt we'd pay much more than DAL if we decided to buy them.
And now, I am eagerly counting down to David Puddy's latest CS-100/300 sales pitch! 3...2...1...
08-22-2017, 07:54 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 5,197
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
