Why Airbus Failed to Capitalize on the 737 MAX Fiasco

The MAX is back, and with it Airbus's once in a lifetime chance to punish Boeing disappears. How did they squander this golden opportunity?
If you enjoy these videos and want to help me make more, please consider joining our Patreon:
/ cobyexplanes
Thanks so much to my "First Class" patrons Vicky Bagwalla, Dnesscarkey, and EliAviation. To learn more about Vicky's company Cloud Managed Networks, Dnesscarkey's Anti Spam Wordpress Plugin, & Eli's Aviation Channel, check out the links below!
Cloud Managed: cloudmanaged.ca/
EliAviation: / @eliaviator
WP Armour Anti Spam Wordpress Plugin: dineshkarki.com.np/wp-armour-...
Thanks so much to ‪@FRAproductions‬, ‪@eyetrapper‬, and @MirAviation for generously providing footage for this video. Go check out their channels for more A+ plane spotting content.
Also huge thanks to my friends over at ‪@PlanesWeekly‬ for providing great footage of their own. They're excellent plane spotters, and I recommend checking out some of their content below:
• St. Maarten CLOSE UP! ...
• Close up! EasyJet A320...
Also if you stuck around to read all this stuff, SURPRISE! Merch is coming out next week - you're gonna want to watch out for Friday's video ;)
__________________________________________________________________________________
The 737 max has been an unmitigated disaster for Boeing. Its pair of high-profile crashes, and the investigations that followed, may irreparably tarnish Boeing’s sterling reputation. But last week, the Max program took a big step forward, finally receiving the go ahead to start carrying passengers once more.
While this marks a new chapter for Boeing, it also closes a door for Airbus. During the year and a half in which the Max remained grounded, Airbus had a once in a lifetime chance to steal away long-time Boeing customers and assume a commanding position atop the world’s greatest duopoly.. But, for the most part, Airbus squandered this golden opportunity. Let me explain...
#Boeing #737max

[@cobyexplanes]

Sound off down below: are you guys ready ty fly on the MAX right now, do you plan on waiting and seeing, or will you never fly on the jet again?

[@alphamalegold1]

I'm waiting - better safe than sorry

[@alphamalegold]

Yaaaaa.....no

[@deeser]

Nope. The crashes exposed too much of what is currently wrong with Boeing's business culture. Give it a year, or two, before they get my trust back

[@pilotpeter8850]

I'm only flying on it once I see Boeing's CEO ride on board

[@ilikebobfish2238]

yeah I would 100% fly on the 737 Max

[@peterkotara]

Back orders. Airbus cant just pull jets out of its ass. Saved you 10 minutes.

[@markodom3841]

Maybe they are pulling them outta ....... at least if they try, that would be a bigger QC risk than Boeing’s hurrying to get the Max on the market to compete with the Neo. Haste makes waste for anyone who tries it.

[@peterkotara]

@@markodom3841 Squeeeezing them out.

[@rickfeng4466]

A320 capacity was limited but A220 production could have increased and eat away 737 market share.

[@tonydecastro6340]

exactly. he assumes that Airbus could deliver on orders taken from the 737 max just like that when there is already a huge backlog!!! the airlines of course are grandstanding, using Airbus to get Boeing to cut its price. and voila, Boeing, in order to preserve market share, is now selling its already produced but non-performing aircraft sitting in storage places at much lower prices.

[@redtailarts101]

I raise you: They didn't capitalize on the MAX fiasco because they aren't monsters who will capitalize and make money off of people's deaths. Airbus does not consider the 737 MAX a win for them, they consider it a tragedy and a loss for the families.

[@peterdegelaen]

Apart from all the reasons you are giving, there is one more very simple reason: Airbus absolutely didn't want to take advantage of the Max's grounding. They simply don't have the capacity to boost their production to cover for possible Max replacements. They knew Boeing would come back at some time and the huge investment that would be needed to be able to cover for these possible additional orders, would only be useful for a very limited period. It would just not be worth it.

[@Drobbik]

this is very much true, there is a limit to how much of the max's fleets you can replace with one jet

[@sedrakpc]

Absolutely true, there is not much a competition between Boeing and Airbus. As an ex Boeing engineer I was always welcomed in Toulouse and Hamburg factories like their. And last time I was there they where working on plains from 9year ago backlog. As I remember for A320 family backlog is 4 time more than production for last 10 years. They will be happy to use any other plain issues for marketing, but not 737.

[@rscott2247]

I think Airbus was also busy getting the A220 for an efficient production run.

[@karimabdulmajid8060]

I mean he did hint about this throughout the whole video

[@anteeko]

Well the A320 production was maxed'out... Airbus couldn't take advantage of the situation in any significant way..

[@hddhdhxhxb1793]

“Maxed’out” I see what you did there

[@captainCaybrew]

They can still secure more orders even if production is at maximum.

[@mbenidze]

@@captainCaybrew usually not possible unless an airline is willing to wait 8-10 years on deliveries.

[@matteofalduto766]

@@mbenidze Generally 8-10 years for an airline is not that much. They plan their fleet upgrade way in advance. When they receive a brand new aircraft, they already know when and how to retire it.

[@mbenidze]

@@matteofalduto766 If you've followed recent orders, they are usually not 8-10 years ahead in general. A portion of the order can be down that far (especially when ordering a brand new airplane which is still in development) but usually not the case for single-aisle jets which airlines would want to receive in 3-5 year's time.

[@bonelesswatermelon420]

In my take, I think Airbus may had also taken a more risk averse approach during the time of the Max grounding. Had they been too aggressive and tried to "take" the whole of Boeing's sales share, they would also end up falling from a higher height during the aviation downturn, resulting to a bigger loss due to a larger excess in aircraft building capacity. IMO, they played their cards right and didn't fly too close to the sun.

[@charlesharper2357]

More important to maintain quality than to grab more than you can handle.

[@leebee1100]

Omg I could not have worded this better. Honestly I strongly disagree that airbus dropped the ball. They didn’t wave their hands and yell LOOK AT ME BOEING SUCKS! and make a grab for all the moneys most likely because they’re decent human beings and don’t want to profit off of or be associated in any way with the literal hundreds of deaths tied to the 737-8 MAX f*ck up. Cody. Zoom out dude. Maybe it’s an American thing to point to a tragedy with several hundred deaths and question why nobody swooped in and made millions off it. It seems like a lot of people have already forgotten and forgiven that 346 people paid for Boeing’s savage, penny pinching, corruption. Nobody should be making money off of those lives.

[@kevinh3979]

@@leebee1100 Wow, what a naive comment. "most likely because they are decent human beings..." Did you miss the part about massive amounts of bribery?

[@markhagger7939]

Hmmm - have to disagree with your conclusions. You've completely missed the fact that airlines often can't switch manufacturers without significantly increasing their costs. Just re-training flight crews alone will take time and expense, not to mention all the changes required to ground handling, maintenance etc. Add to the fact that airlines with orders are involved in complex contractual relationships with Boeing and the switch to another airframe manufacturer at such short notice is just not as easy as you suggest. Finally to "capitalise" on Boeing's misfortunes, implies that Airbus would have to make Hay on the fact that the Boeing plane was in some way inherently unsafe. To start such mud-slinging would undermine passenger confidence in flying and no-one in the industry wants that.

[@TimKotolenko]

I normally agree with you but in this case I think you missed a point. Airbus did not fail to use this opportunity. Some of the things you mentioned are correct but I am not sure they ever wanted to fully capitalize on it. If most Boeing costumers started ordering Airbus planes instead that would mean that Airbus would have to spend billion of euros to upgrade the production facilities and hire many new employees. That would leave the company too exposed in case the aviation growth slows down as it did this year. So in retrospect it was a good decision on their part to keep the liquidity. Another important factor is the cost that occurs when airline is switching the airplane maker (spare parts, trainings ... ). Airbus also have other plane models such as 220 family that are bringing a lot of money to the company unlike Boeing at this point in time. This is just my opinion of course. :)

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

typical Airbus fans Bois explains a lot usually nothing

[@TimKotolenko]

@@theepicfailgamer6317 what exectly did u want to say with your comment? Yeah I prefer Airbus over Boeing true but that has nothing to do with what I wrote 😀

[@thomaskettunen3699]

Also why would airbus sell 200+ A320s for huge bulk discounts when they can charge almost list price? The backlog is full no reason to dig into profits

[@drevildog1]

I have wondered about that too. The aviation market is such a roller-coaster ride, where aot of airlines got caught in the trap by expanding too quickly. And the manufacturer is in no better position.

[@clmk28]

You are absolutely correct. Furthermore it is not in the best interests partners in a duopoly to under cut each other.

[@Sanginius23]

First, they said the Max is grounded for some weeks, then a few months, then til Summer, then end of 2019, then starting 2019, then spring 2020, then summer 2020 etc. Nobody expected that the Max was grounded for 20 months..

[@charlesharper2357]

Nobody knew what a POS it really was.

[@vulc1]

"Nobody expected that the Max was grounded for 20 months" Exactly, hence the saying--hindsight is 20/20!

[@GH-oi2jf]

I didn’t. I thought critics were “piling on,” by complaining about wiring, the number of AoA sensors, the engine location, and other nonsense.

[@charlesharper2357]

@@GH-oi2jf It wasn't and isn't nonsense. The fact of the matter is that the MAX had a lot of things grandfathered in that wouldn't be allowed on a new design.

[@deeser]

Nope. Disagree with you here. Southwest was never going to switch from an all Boeing operation to a mixed or all Airbus one. It would have resulted in huge side costs (training, retooling, IT upgrades etc etc etc) that would have negated any benefits. The only reason they said that was to scare Boeing into giving them better deals on future plane orders; which worked.

[@vashonm]

Not really they couldn’t ramp up and they had a backlog, then covid19 they would have had to lay everyone off. Better than spending money upgrading the factories and staff.

[@itstomatogear6806]

Congratulations 🎉👏 of being the top comment 👍😁 (as of now 😈)

[@michaelamvm6187]

@@itstomatogear6806 Plus the costs of retraining pilots and mechanics.

[@shreyanshyadav3285]

He does not like airbus🤣

[@noahbowie5985]

It also looks really shitty as they would have essentially used hundreds of dead people as a tool to make more money.

[@noahbowie5985]

@@shreyanshyadav3285 yeah he's very biased towards Boeing.

[@roadrunner6224]

They have orders for the next decade and purposefully didn’t try to take over the market when they had the opportunity prior to the 737 Max launch, because if they take over the market Boeing is forced to develop an entirely new plane, which again forces Airbus to do same thereby wasting billions. Seems like you don’t understand how a duopoly works.

[@thomaskettunen3699]

Exactly, Airbus is selling aircraft for top dollar at the moment with thousands of orders. Why sell hundreds of aircraft you can't produce with huge bulk discounts. Boeing is gonna bankrupt itself with its pricing.

[@jasoncrelopia821]

If I can play monopoly, why go duopoly? It's just because Airbus can't do. They have production problems. Their supply chain is far inferior than Boeing's. Boeing will come back sooner or later, trust me

[@thomaskettunen3699]

@@jasoncrelopia821 Well, Airbus has production capacity problems more than production problems. The stuff rolling off the production line is a-ok. For airlines (and passengers) it is way better if Boeing stays in business as we get cheaper flights. Monopoly is never good for the consumer

[@roadrunner6224]

@@jasoncrelopia821 because it´s illegal and while making the legal aspect stick would be difficult it would certainly piss off the US government which again would cost money.

[@jasoncrelopia821]

@@roadrunner6224 agree ultimately it's very hard to play monopoly in this area as national security is also involved. But my point is if you can take up 70% of the market and you don't try hard, this is not how market economy works. Airbus just simply can't do it by their capacity, not by some political design as some people here guessed

[@Juanceesaint]

This time i will disagree to Coby Explain... Airbus decided not capitalize as they prefer quality and they dont want to have so much backlog.

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

double standard excuse

[@dave8599]

airbus did offer quality bribes.

[@farhan3296]

to the people out here who just came out of their mothers' womb, bribing in big procurement is a common practice in most Asian countries. Doesn't matter how good your product is, you still gotta put it some 'speed money' to the procurement officers, for you to seal the deal.

[@farhan3296]

@@77l96 still better than flying on a self certified coffin 🥱

[@Racko.]

I Agree with Cody, the entire situation surrounded Airbus Backlog, not really quality

[@charlesharper2357]

Huh? Do you think that you can just ramp up production that fast? It's not like putting on a second shift at an auto plant.

[@davidcole333]

I think you just bitch slapped every auto plant worker everywhere out there.

[@charlesharper2357]

@@davidcole333 Don't understand how supply chains work? Most parts in aircraft have to be carefully inspected individually and certified...most parts in auto plants don't. Most jobs in auto plants are semi-skilled and can be ramped up quickly...most aviation jobs can't. Most importantly, autos get through a production line in 17-18 hours...planes don't.

[@djposhea]

"French airplane maker"? Surely you meant, European airplane maker?

[@davidcole333]

Considering the location of Airbus HQ, I'd say that qualifies them as a "French" airplane maker.

[@djposhea]

@@davidcole333 I don't know which part of the world you are in. However, Airbus is a pan-european project. Everything about it is deeply rooted in politics and a very long history of inter-european wars. I say this with the best intention in the world and in a nice way, it ain't French, make no mistake about it. (FYI. I'm Irish.)

[@Raffix394]

Actually the HQ is in the Netherleands. Blagnac, Greater Toulouse, France (main office) Leiden, Netherlands (headquarters) Madrid, Spain (international office)

[@djposhea]

I just checked 'Companies Registration Office' in Dublin, Ireland. Their finance and leasing division is run from there (Ireland is a hub and world leader for aircraft leasing). A couple of dozen companies registered under the 'Airbus' brand, so God knows how many others are also registered.

[@johnhenry6762]

Monsieur, le blame goes to le founder, not le members. " Capitaine, round-up le usual suspect."

[@jaredjeffs]

It’s always a bad idea to capitalize on your competition’s mistakes because it will usually come back to bite you. And also, if you do that, your competition will do the same to you when you get in trouble.

[@redtailarts101]

Exactly! Especially in this scenario. Imagine what people would have thought if Airbus saw these deaths as an opportunity. They'd be getting slammed for being evil and insensitive, because this Boeing mistake cost lives

[@user-zz6iv2ou6f]

Airbus has orders filling their books and is operating damn near capacity with the resources they have. Aerospace is a slow moving industry. It wasnt a squandered opportunity, it realistically just wasn’t going to be possible for them to expand or doing anything significant to capitalize. “Dropped the ball” is misleading and indicative of someone who doesn’t understand the pace of the industry and/or hasn’t worked in it.

[@toquelau5715]

I'm not an aviation/aerospace professional or an expert, but in my experience with SCM, international trading and manufacturing, procurement of adequate suppliers of raw materials, parts and componentry is always a challenge, often being the limiting factor in production output (perhaps more so than FAL space and staffing, I'm not sure). If this is already an issue in other less-techy industries, I can only imagine how crazy it must be for aerospace, where parts need to be crafted to insane tolerances, abide to many testing constraints just to be certified as a supplier - not yet even considering their limitations with their own supplier procurement. There's also the difficulties in coordinating hundreds of companies in dozens of countries, often with language, customs delays and other barriers, besides transportation itself. The planning to ship large parts such as wings require careful planning of port crane handling, road closures with local traffic authorities, and others. All in all, it's easy for the blame to fall on Airbus, but just like with engines, the fault could be on the supplier side. What Airbus can do, cashflow nonwithstanding, is develop some of the componentry in-house, or procure for additional/alternative suppliers (which I'm sure it already does).

[@todortodorov940]

Exactly. Aurbus is not McDonalds, where you hire some guys from the street, 30 mins education and they are fully operational at the grill flipping burgers. Aircraft manufacturing is not an assembly line process. Every step is done by hand, and due to the nature of the product, every step must be quality ensured, often very rigorously. This knowledge is of course documented, but as with every complex system, it takes time to read the documentation and fully understand it. But what is worse, there are some things that cannot be documented; there are some nuances that cannot be written on paper. Those things are learned only by experience. And this applies to the entire supply chain, which Airbus has lass control over. As sad as it is [that Airbus did not wipe out Boeing], I understand that they chose to play safe and not cut corners as the American colleagues did.

[@manuelnitschinger9803]

Airbus couldn't turn the MAX disaster into a big expansion of their own production as simply this isn't possible within this short period of time. But if it would have been the other way around, Boeing wouldn't have been able to do so...

[@thomaskettunen3699]

I mean they have 8 years of backlog, A320s are in such a high demand that Airbus does need to sell hundreds of them to boeing customers with huge bulk discounts. They charge top rate for a top product (compared to max). They simply could not sell more, hardly a loss for Airbus...

[@davidcole333]

So, the 737 has been around since the 60s. When the A320 has been around 60 years, then talk smack.

[@charlesharper2357]

@@davidcole333 Having the oldest plane is nothing to brag about. Using an obsolete airframe was what caused the crashes...and the ensuing economic disaster.

[@thomaskettunen3699]

@@davidcole333 You are acting like an obsolete airframe and wing design is a good thing. The biggest reason the A320 is better is because it is designed in the 80s while 737 is a 50s design. That 30 year gap is very large. The 737NG should have been the end of it...

[@claudiojunior9962]

The 737 MAX spent almost 2 years being revised after the crashes, with engineers looking for every detail that could led to a problem and fixing it. It probably is the safest airplane to fly right now.

[@kencarp57]

Boeing: “The MAX is cleared to FLY again!” Airlines: “We have no customers and we’re losing our PANTS.”

[@adb012]

That's why the MAX is more important than ever. If you have a 373-800 and a 737-MAX-8 that is 15% more fuel-efficient, and you have PAX to fill only one of them. which one would you rather fill?

[@mv-db4463]

And again the "mouth breathers" are showing their ignorance. The US broke the ONE MILLION passengers yesterday (Friday 11/20/2020) and the last 30 day passenger Traffic is 800,000 per DAY. So your dopy uninformed comments ring UN-true as most "jingoistic" moo-moo's just keep repeating garbage and not caring about the facts. Check out the TSA passenger throughput website link: www.tsa.gov/coronavirus/passenger-throughput

[@charlesharper2357]

@@adb012 And what happens when people refuse to get on the MAX? I will never fly on one just out of general principle...Boeing needs to be punished for putting profits before safety.

[@barackobama3698]

And you think other passengers will follow your suit in not flying on the MAX? We’re talking about Americans here, your average passenger can’t tell the difference between an Airbus and a Boeing aircraft. They’ll think the 737 max is a normal 737 and get on anyways. I highly doubt the 737 MAX will cause less passengers, even if it does it’ll blow over eventually and airlines will be making some nice profit as there able to buy these max aircrafts for cheap while getting a efficient, modern aircraft. I’m not supporting Boeing in any way and I hope this whole fiasco taught them a lesson, but I don’t think passenger activity on a 737 max will alter much.

[@charlesharper2357]

@@barackobama3698 We'll see...I realize there are lots of idjits in America...Trump is proof of that...but hopefully enough people boycott them to make a difference.

[@redpilledbachelor7776]

737 max grounded Airbus rubbing their hands: I'm going to end this man's career Covid 19: I don't think so.

[@u2santi]

What about the A220 program eating into it? I like your videos but this one is click bait.

[@thomaskettunen3699]

Yeah the A220 is affecting the A319NEO orders.

[@Racko.]

How is it clickbait? He pretty much explained the A220 part, which is doing more damage to Airbus and Boeing's small 737-7Max and A319NEO than anything else

[@u2santi]

It is because he’s selling the facts in a very sensationalist way. He talks about bribes and airlines not wanting to be associated with the manufacturer due to this but the A321 XLR is a resounding success for example, or the A220. Why doesn’t the scandal affect those models then? Then he mentions issues with the engines again, as if it was Airbus’ fault. The A320 family had a gigantic backlog and it’s true that Airbus can’t make enough of them and that’s the main issue, carriers can’t wait 8 years, even if they wanted to.

[@Racko.]

@@u2santi The entire take away from the video is airbus was unable to capitalize on the Boring fiasco is because they also had too many hurdles to deal with before they can do anything next, then COVID came. And he did talk about the engine issues, he even said it’s not their fault but it clearly impacted delays to their jets, the A320NEO production line is sold out, and airlines on the Max can’t simply jump ship to airbus because it’s entire said than done, it’s why they waited instead. If they jump ship to airbus it’ll be deadly costly and will take much longer considering the decade backlog. Airbus is aware of this just like airlines.

[@u2santi]

@@Racko. of course, but there’s ways of saying putting things, and the way he created the narrative is sensationalistic and makes it sound like Airbus was useless.

[@michaelshore2300]

NOT French European. Wings Britain, Tail Spain / Holland, Body /Assembly Germany, Improper payment ?? Lockheed model.

[@gustavoalbano8593]

I think you're missing a big reason why most of the exclusive boeing airlines won't switch to airbus: crew Training, maintenance, spare parts, pilot typeratings. And also orders for new models are placed years before actual production begins.

[@pinheirokde]

This is completely silly, Airbus production capability was already absolutely maxed out. What were they going to sell? plains to be delivered in 15 years?

[@robinmorgenstern9927]

IAG never actually placed an order for the MAX. All they did was sign a letter of intend.

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

keep believing dat kid !

[@mbenidze]

Yeah. Interesting to see if that order ever materializes. It was a really strange move by IAG given that BA, Iberia, Vueling, Air Lingus all have A320 families. Seems like an unreasonable cost for training and maintenance capacity.

[@sime918]

WW was staging a show to see who would bite the dust.

[@tedjohnson9329]

The kiss of death is a letter of intent.

[@jamesnicholls9969]

thats right they only signed an intent to buy B737 planes no mention of the max. also Walsh is a Boeing 737 pilot so of course he will buy boeing

[@ericmadison4653]

There two factors that are keeping me from flying 1. The pandemic 2. Don't really trust the max just yet

[@kencarp57]

I’ll fly anywhere, on any plane! As long as I don’t to leave the house...

[@ConcordeError404]

Coby Explanes: Airbus has not been able to capitalise on the 737 Max A320neo series: Am I a joke to you?

[@diandykoolman4769]

Airbus : its not my plane that crashed twice and damage my reputation

[@electricheartpony]

Yeah, he mentioned the neo already.

[@alexs3187]

There are many reasons why not. 1. Production Capacity 2. You have to play nice when you are in a duopoly. You scratch each other’s backs and prevent more competition. A short term gain (that you can’t fulfill) is not worth a long term loss. 3. You need the competitor to keep all your suppliers and potential suppliers in business. You don’t want your suppliers to become a monopoly. But you also need the entire industry to thrive. 4. It’s bad business, and it’s transparent.

[@CustardInc]

So many falsehoods in this video. The only true part is the size of the order book at Airbus and the fact that there was corruption You discarded the pandemic Acknowledged the A320neo engine issues but still blamed them on airbus Said Airbus missed their target by a wide margin - they had a target of 800, they delivered 800. Once Pratt and Whitney fixed their engines, the planes, which had been manufactued at the planned rate, were good for delivery. Quoted a non-existent IAG MAX order (it was never firmed and expired after a year) Add on top of that non-factual issues, like Southwest saying they'd consider going elsewhere. Of course they'd threaten to go elsewhere, they always do. Same with Ryanair. They say they'll leave Boeing to get better prices. There have been more reports recently of SW ordering the A220, it never ends. Airbus were never going to get an order out of them. Include that Airbus don't want to advertise off the back of the deaths of hundreds of people. You didn't include the US government implementing a billions of dollars of tariffs on Airbus products. You can call it a series of missteps, but anyone remotely familiar with the A320neo family could've seen the backlog and said there's not much Airbus can do. Basically none of this is to do with stuff Airbus did in 2019-2020 - it's either external factors (pandemic, tariffs, etc), Airbus' actions from before the MAX grounding (corruption), or the fact that Airbus can't deliver 1000 A320s a year(???)

[@madoudia]

Thank you!

[@sunspot42]

Actually I’m not sure Southwest is bluffing anymore. I think they looked at the Dreamliner and Trent 1000 issues, looked at what happened with the Max and realized what an enormous risk running your entire airline on one model of plane is, and that they’ve been lucky they’ve never been burned before. The 737 is an obsolete dinosaur absolutely at the end of its run. The Max will be the last model, after which Boeing will be forced to developed a whole new airframe for the segment to compete with the Airbus 320 family. If I were Southwest, I’d be seriously reconsidering whether I want to be chained to a soon to be obsolete family of planes for the next decade, or just bite the bullet and begin to migrate to a modern platform - the 320 series - that likely still has two or three decades of improvements to come. Plus it would get them away from having all of their eggs in Boeing’s basket. Yes, there would be costs to operate two separate airframes, but they’ll be facing that anyhow in a decade or so as the 737 family comes to an end. More fuel efficient 320 series planes are almost certainly in the pipeline tho, and those could ultimately offset the cost of running two separate families of aircraft in the fleet.

[@theedorknyt6653]

@@sunspot42 I mean your missing a few things. Southwest doesn't do long haul. So dreamliner issues aren't going to concern it. Now let's also look at the statement that the 737 is at the end of it's run. You are right, it is. But then developing a new one. Especially if they did something like a carbon fiber body new small airplane. That would leave the 320 without any way to compete. It wouldn't even get decades of improvements. They would be forced to do something similar, and then current A320 customers might cancel orders.

[@sunspot42]

@@theedorknyt6653 The Dreamliner issues absolutely concern Southwest. They illustrate the dangers of being over reliant on a single manufacturer, as do the 737 Max issues. They dodged the Dreamliner bullet only because they don’t fly big jets. What if similar engine issues plague the new engines in the 737 Max next? They’d be royally and truly screwed.

[@sunspot42]

@@theedorknyt6653 There is no clean sheet replacement for the 737 coming for at least a decade, probably longer. The 320 series already offers superior performance to the 737 and it’s nowhere near the end of its lifetime as an airframe - numerous improvements could still be made, including mounting even larger fuel efficient engines. If Southwest sticks with Boeing only, they could find themselves literally decades behind their rivals - in particular JetBlue - when it comes to fuel efficiency while they wait for some 737 replacement to come from Boeing. And frankly given Boeing’s recent track record, I’m not too hopeful any new design from them will launch anywhere near on time and without major problems. If they move to the 320 family now, they’ll eliminate their dangerous reliance on Boeing, get better planes for at least the next two decades with superior fuel efficiency and lower operating costs, and also probably secure a sweet deal from Airbus for defecting.

[@awakening7251]

I figure, that with all the scrutiny, the Max is probably the worlds safest aircraft.

[@kleeblattchen38]

Not really... But as safe as any other aircraft currently...

[@vhaakmat]

It's not that simple. changing of airplanes means expensive and lengthy retraining of its pilots and maintenance crew. Alleged improper payments are a totally different issue. I have more faith in Airbus than Boeing at the moment

[@Kilosim]

ye

[@johnnyboythepilot4098]

Ditto

[@joeboygo]

Airbus simply had no capacity to produce more. It literally sold out of all the slots that any Boeing customers wanted.

[@mannim7143]

You forgot another point, and that is regulatory pressure. Airbus being based in the EU it is subjective to EU anti trust oversight, which is already less than happy with the factual duopoly for mid to large sized aircraft. Airbus taking over the most voluminous sector for new planes would have increased that pressure as well. And the example Siemens/Alstom merger that was stopped by the EU commission shows that they are happy to regulate even against what would be perceived to be a domestic champion. That and all the other points mentioned, Airbus did not fail in any ways, they did the right thing for themselves and the industry.

[@ljacobs357]

Airbus didn't squander anything. They couldn't meet demand and did not want to stick it to Boeing which would come back to haunt them. Unlike Boeing, perhaps they cared more about quality over quantity.

[@stephanembaye]

From Airbus colleagues, one of their parameters was to not let the MAX gap filled by a newcomer and especially a Chinese one. Airbus would have even prepared a plan to help Boeing to keep alive the orders unfulfilled in Europe. Better to keep a well known competitor than to let enter another one

[@Sanginius23]

You forgot to mention that in 2020 Boeing lost net 783 orders for the max while Airbus got +257 new ordes for the A-320 Family, some of long time Boeing clients like American

[@mylanmiller9656]

Airbus Has a problem with sweetening the deal to a point were they make little profit on an Aircraft to get a deal signed!

[@doggo64]

March 2019 - 737 MAX crash March 2020 - Aviation industry crash March 2022 - ............ Let's prey for best ( 777x will be released ) March 2030 - Aviation dies Hyperloop takes over

[@thetransponder7186]

Oh yeah. That hyperloop isn't going to take over anything at all

[@VGF80]

Hyperloop has too many hurdles. Some so hard it just isn't viable.

[@carlosandleon]

Hyperloop is not gonna take off in another 50 years

[@Kilosim]

lol

[@Dexter037S4]

@@carlosandleon *ever It's a scam.

[@dondepicaelpeje]

I was hesitant to fly in a Max till yesterday. When I hear the FAA director talking like a salesman about the 737 Max. Now I definitely wont put a foot on a Max until it flies a couples of years accident free.

[@martynbush]

Airbus is not a French airplane maker. It's a joint European company with final assembly done in France.

[@harryatay4218]

Really in depth interesting take on the situation! I've been watching you on and off for a while now and it puzzles me why you stand at an angle to the camera haha? for cinematic effect?

[@jenshedelund9617]

The duopoly works because Boeing and AIRBUS respect each other’s territory. They will compete for new customers but will tend not to go to aggressively after longtime customers. Boeing kept producing 737 MAX and I think most expected the plane to get back in the skies after a fix of some type. Boeing must have been convicted about that. All these planes would eventually enter the market. AIRBUS would have started a price war if they had attempted to fill the void. That would only have reduced profit margins and created a huge uncertainty in the market. The 737 Max scandal will benefit AIRBUS in a organic way, Airlines like SOUTH WEST are already considering if it would be beneficial having a more diversified fleet. The reputation of Boeing has suffered tremendously and will force them to sell planes with a smaller profit margin. British Airways was smart taking advantage of a situation where Boeing was forced to offer huge discounts. Market share is hugely overrated. The trick is to increase profit margins. All international companies have to deal with bribes. The trick is not to get caught. No airline executive is worried about that type of scandals and they have most likely been exposed to it in some form.

[@chefchaudard3580]

I would add that Boeing is offering a cheaper option with the 737, while the A320 is more advanced. Both companies are making money, a win win situation. For Airbus, catching Boeing market will force them to design a brand new aircraft. Boeing will spend billions, and Airbus will have to face a new competitor, more advanced, threatening their bestseller. Status quo is more profitable for both parts.

[@monibstar]

After pandemic yes would like to fly on the max :D to check it out...

[@ederss7]

Mentour Pilot has a very good video explaining why Max's orders have not been cancelled, and it has nothing to do with Airbus's actions.

[@1000CalorieSnackPack]

Thanks for putting all this into a 10 minute video and saving me from having to read 40+ articles on this.

[@northwestthrills3453]

I feel this video shied some light on Airbus's scandal's.

[@hectory79]

It did, while ignoring Boeing's at the same time.

[@northwestthrills3453]

@@hectory79 people already know about Boeings scandal's, making people believe airbus has none

[@brian5154]

Well reasoned, interesting and thought provoking. However, my bet is Airbus will pull ahead of Boeing slowely but surely. It has the perfect line up of products which Boeing has not. And Boeing still seems to be screwing itself (Embraer). The company appears to have very serious ethical problems. My bet is that more haste means less speed. AND, probably Willie Walsh and O'Leary got knock down prices which may well negatively affect Boeing in the long term. Lack of profit means lack of investment. Never forget that fleet commonality (Southwest) must play an important part in which aircraft is ordered. Airbus also has certain congenital problems in that the constituent bits of each aircraft come from all over the place, including the US, which also manufactures whole Airbus aircraft. AND Airbus still has to convert A380 production to A320 production. So, too early to ascertain things. And keep a careful watch on how people respond when told that they are flying on the MAX. Don't forget, not all the problems with the Max have been resolved. It is an inherently unsafe aircraft given the location of it's new larger engines. People may or may not know this. Let's wait and see. It could be that Boeing will struggle to exist in it's current format and without augmented state support. I'd put my money on Airbus winning big in the long term. Especially with the A321xlr; this aircraft should revolutionise air travel. Boeing recent mutterings about a new aircraft have a hint of desparation about them. Brian Oosterbeek Netherlands

[@firstlast-xn6ul]

It is not an inherently unsafe aircraft, but rather inherently unstable. Once computers were able to make decisions about controls faster than a pilot, designers started to rely on a software layer of interpretation rather than just relying on the pilot's inputs. If they make the control system more fault tolerant to the AOA sensor, educate the pilots, etc., As well as fixing other faults while they are there, it will be a good plane. That said, it seems like Boeing's software design philosophy and validation procedures are pretty effed up, as seen with 737MAX, CST100 starliner, etc.

[@dattaxpony920]

@@firstlast-xn6ul Boeing needs to find better computer geeks true. But Boeing has a new CEO that looks like he's thinking more long-term. After the MAX mishegas I can see Boeing trying to stop rushing to market and start listening to the engineers again. At least one can hope.

[@FernandoNuno100]

And another thing you probably don’t know. Airbus never wanted to capitalize the 737 max failure. Southwest said from the beginning that they will wait for the Max

[@scootertrash911]

Airbus has a ten year backlog of orders, they probably wish Boeing well,

[@Lee247Jamaica]

The 737 max was ungrounded 2 days ago American Airlines is gonna start back service with it

[@aviationchannel6204]

I'd like to fly on the MAX some time.

[@kevinh3979]

A year late, but I've flown on several 737 MAXs and these are very nice planes for sure.

[@devikakarmakar99]

Air bus 320 is a very good aircraft compared to the max 737 which has major technical issues and unsafe to fly though FAA has cleared it.

[@samsmithmx7607]

No I won't fly on a 737 MAX ever. I won't trade my life for a flight.

[@davidcole333]

Just limit your flights to airframe types that have never had an accident.

[@charlesharper2357]

@@davidcole333 Just limit your flights to planes that aren't absolute abortions meant to maximize profits over safety.

[@BlackKnight344]

Same here biggest heap of buggy crap to come out of Seattle since Windows 10. The 737 was a great family...but there are just to may bad choices in the design /or production issues for me to risk my life on one.. I am happy to pay more to fly an all Airbus airline which I thankfully have the option of .

[@charlesharper2357]

@@BlackKnight344 Sooner or later you've got to stop recycling old crap and start from scratch again. The 737 just doesn't have the ground clearance for the new engines.

[@ressljs]

I figure the Max will probably be fine after it underwent such a grueling recertification process. That said, I'll probably still avoid booking flights on them for a little while. For as much as I fly, I'm surprisingly jittery about it. If I flew on the Max day 1 of it's return, every bump of turbulence would have me freaking out. Is that irrational? Probably. But when your in a situation where you have zero control (like sitting in a flimsy metal tube 30,000 feet in the air), sometimes it's hard to be rational.

[@MARBLEHEAD07]

Me: what's in my sandwich today? Mum: turkish airlines Me: NANI! Mum: 3:05

[@ashtronite895]

I don't really get it, sorry

[@MARBLEHEAD07]

@@ashtronite895 don't mind, just me trying to be funny.

[@kencarp57]

A Turkish sandwich on United bread!

[@kenmore01]

In all fairness, Coby was talking about orders not coming in which could happen immediately, not ramping up production quickly. Of course that would take years.

[@CuriosityVaultChannel]

Found your channel today, been bingeing it :p

[@hddhdhxhxb1793]

Bit of a disappointing video and you sound a bit like a Boeing fanboy tbh. Changing ac type is not something an airline decides overnight, those are made on a strategic level with long horizons. A grounding does not (and should not) impact their decisions on a large scale. And airbus’ order book was already filled for the coming years anyway at the start of the max grounding.

[@Blank00]

He's not biased. A few months ago, he made a video on why Boeing is to blame for the MAX crashes that caused the grounding.

[@tsh_teo]

LOOOL I like the 737 MAX but I will wait a bit to fly on it

[@mylanmiller9656]

I would have no problem Flying the MAX, I wouldn't Fly a bush league Air line with a pilot that got his wings yesterday! Give a bad aircraft to a inexperienced Pilot and you will have trouble.

[@Kilosim]

ya same

[@Onyx88]

It was primarily a software issue, I'd fly on the max today

[@johnhenry6762]

@Chad Wong I did mine. And I'm ready to board the improved Boeing 737Max!

[@workonesabs]

Airbus doesn't want to steal away custom. Ideally they only want 50% share and if they find themselves a leader, they find that their costs increase as their models that they researched and invested in get too far ahead of Boeing, and leaves them having to retire models even before their full profit potential fulfilled.

[@lukegriffiths6569]

Lol, this guy hasn't got a clue what he's making a video about 🤣🤣🤣

[@adoatero5129]

True. There was no "fail". This and many other presentations on this channel are pretty bad. The problem is that Coby mostly doesn't really know what he is talking about. He's a good at talking and hosting a show, though, so if you don't know how businesses in general and this industry in particular work, you may fall for it. I recommend for example the following sites for accurate aviation news and insights: leehamnews.com/ theaircurrent.com/ aviationweek.com/ www.aerotime.aero/ At Leeham News even most reader comments are more knowledgeable than the content on this channel. The channel would be better, if Coby would stick to news reporting. To do any meaningful analysis, you have to know and understand the subject really well. Even if you copy the analysis from other sites, you copy it wrong, if you don't understand what you are reading (unless you copy it word for word, of course).

[@LeemWills]

He really don't , he just making it up as he talks . He must if forget we had a pandemic

[@johntefan]

@@LeemWills for real haha

[@MrMofriz]

Airbus is not a french company. Its European my dear :)

[@mann2520]

Based in France

[@MrMofriz]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus

[@MrMofriz]

Based in many europeans countries.

[@MrMofriz]

Final assembly in toulous fr hamburg de

[@MrMofriz]

+ usa, canada and china.

[@texasabbott]

The A220 will go unnoticed on KZbin channels until it quietly takes over the continent's narrow-body market. However, Airbus is dragging its feet with the "A220-500", which could put an end to the MAX8 and replace Airbus' own A320neo, but freeing up production capacity to flood the market with the A321XLR.

[@aarondynamics1311]

What would be the advantage in replacing the A320neo? Yes, an A220-500 would have a small fuel burn advantage, but that comes at the cost of range and/or cargo capacity. Another thing, the A321neo is an incredibly flexible aircraft which is why airlines love it, and the A320neo benefits from a common type rating with the A321neo, which is partly responsible for its huge success. An A220-500 wouldn't have that benefit. I am not saying that the A220-500 is a bad idea, if done right it could complement the A320neo nicely serving routes shorter than what the A320neo was designed for as well as allowing current A220 operators such as AirBaltic to serve higher demand routes without needing to retrain pilots on a new aircraft type. I just don't think it should be an outright replacement for the A320neo

[@jonathanquielm3309]

I learn new vocabulary thanks to your videos. You use such formal language that is a pleasure to watch.

[@galacticgecko1144]

Ok, I'll let you explain.

[@deepmala2215]

Same

[@osasunaitor]

I'm new to this channel and so far I liked your latest videos, but this one has me disappointed... I mean, you (literally) used the words *"Failure. AIRBUS"* in the video thumbnail so I clicked expecting a big revelation, just to find out that you explain how it wasn't even Airbus's fault for the most part. This kind of clickbait-y content is not what I expected from this channel.

[@Stacie45]

From what I read at the time it didn't seem like Airbus leadership wanted to take over this segment of the market. They seemed comfortable with the status quo, the comfortable duopoly where Boeing and Airbus split up the global market roughly 50-50. There was plenty of work to go around, plenty of money to go around, they actually seemed to want Boeing to get back in the game sooner rather than later and just keep things humming along as they had been.

[@iangill8984]

I have not watched video or read the posts but here my thoughts before doing either. Airlines do tend to be A320 or 737 orientated. In my neck of the woods, Ryanair fly Boeing, Easyjet fly A320 family. Neither are likely to change because of the cost of re training pilots and maintenance staff along with increased inventory costs for spares etc. As it stands Airbus now has a 60% market share for firm orders in that segment according to pdxlight.com. The key thing point is whether Airbus can build enough to cope with any more demand. The pandemic has slowed things down across the world.

[@geincon]

Airbus can profit from the MAX Desaster also in the next years due to a decrease of trust into Boing...

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

typical trash talking Airbus fan bois

[@mikeblatzheim2797]

@@theepicfailgamer6317 Only one "fan boi" here, and I'll give you a hint: It's you.

[@abba3629]

First Learn the spelling of "Boeing".

[@olympicnut]

I fly mostly with Southwest and have no problem if the 737 I get on is a MAX.

[@redheadedprincess100]

I flew when “all Boeing” was a marketing pitch for United

[@maxedww]

"Airbus had to halt all deliveries of Pratt and Whitney Neos". Disappointing exec level corruption aside this is the kind of safety conscious culture you want to see at an aero manufacturer.

[@CriticalRider]

You make it seem like it's easy for airlines to switch between Boeing and Airbus airplanes in less than a year... I'm pretty disappointed with this video of yours.

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

double standard Airbus trashes

[@e6o]

By a considerable distance, your least accurate video.

[@erojerisiz1571]

This is like the DC10 vs L1011 case all over again

[@rickblumenberg4183]

When will people stop referring to Airbus as a French company. It is a EUROPEAN joint venture - admittedly with headquarters in Toulouse/France!

[@TiberiusCat]

If the time comes when I can fly on a Max, I'll be fine with it. By this time, it must be the most carefully examined for safety of any modern commercial aircraft.

[@Hfonua]

a320: quality Max: quantity

[@davidcole333]

based on what?

[@audewilkin5659]

@@davidcole333 based on the MCAS

[@user-fn1xm3pq6t]

Airbus needs to figure out a way to crank aircraft like sausages.

[@bryan15505]

Your awesome! I Got to have those notifications on for your videos!

[@electricheartpony]

Since it was cleared to fly, I'm sure it's fine now. ^.^

[@kencarp57]

🥺

[@markosemene376]

I think Airbus was doing business with a humane face not rushing to capitalize on your competitors failing. Lives are involved here.

[@theepicfailgamer6317]

typical double standard Airbus fan braindeads

[@gasviation9077]

@@theepicfailgamer6317 typical monopoly bastards

[@grahamstubbs4962]

Airbus had no need to do anything. They could just stand there and watch the other guys fall off a cliff.

[@r.c.1881]

My guess is that Airbus couldn't, as you can't just pop out planes like they're candies to flood the market, while Boeing experiences his backlash. As others pointed out, Airbus already has a huge demand. But that is not to say that Boeing isn't going to take it's well deserved punishment. Airbus is in fact in the process of selling their A321XLR, which happens to be taylor-made for the so called middle-of-the-market(MOTM) segment. This segment has been partly left uncovered by Boeing, as they had only the 757 in there, whose production line has now long stopped. They thought they could justkeep themselves busy by trying to fight back the A350XWB on the higher end, and the A320neos on the lower end of the market. Fate apparently has chosen this MOTM segment as a high-potential segment in the post-COVID world, a place where to strive for dominance. And while Airbus is busy selling their brand new A321XLR to any possible player in that segment while expanding and fixing their facilities, Boeing is thinking abouth wether to re-engineer the 757, or substitute it with somenthing new altogheter. Either cases, it will enter the MOTM with both a timing handicap, and a reputational one too, courtesy of the 737 MAX's failure. I wouldn't be surprised if the A321XLR were to become a top seller, with Boeing scrambling to play catch-up. All told, that won't probably end the established Airbus-Boeing duopoly, but it will probably reverse their roles, with Airbus slowly, but solidly getting top producer.

[@BayAreaTraveler]

This is the reason why I trust Leeham News and Jon Ostrower for my aviation analysis rather than this channel. If I'm not mistaken even Airbus mentioned openly that it was not their best interest to take advantage of the situation.

[@cobyexplanes]

Cool

[@mikestone9129]

No way I would fly on the Max when it returns to service. At least not for a couple years.

[@massimechoub3343]

Agree, this plane is inherently flawed...his image is completely ruined sadly

[@Default78334]

Since both manufacturers have pretty hefty backlogs, the airlines figured that Boeing would probably have things figured out before it was time to take delivery of their orders. The alternative would be to go to the back of Airbus' line and wait even longer for the planes you need.

[@og_blue3925]

Love your channel

[@girikchokhani2449]

Also, what did the A320neo say to the 737 MAX? I MAXed you out of the market!

[@girikchokhani2449]

Great Joke!

[@campillo]

Everyone has its own opinion, but for sure we don't share the same one.

[@thegreenguy5555]

I actually like that they didn’t capitalize on the max. More competition good! Glad to see the max return to the skies

[@cnteutooni]

According to wiki, A320neo is the fastest selling commercial aircraft ever. Wouldn't really call that a failure. There are limits to scaling up production, so winning an even bigger chunk of the market is probably not possible in the short term. And in the long term, they can't rely on Boeing screwing up.

[@vieuxbal1253]

As always Coby, great video. I'm one of your greatest fans. With all due respect Airbus is not a "French jet maker", as you mentioned it at 1:54, but a European multinational aircfrat-manufacturing consortium. You made the correction at 6:50 when you say the "European jet maker". It's just a matter of being consistent. I'm sure it's a mistake.

[@marcusholmes7942]

I liked your videos up until this one. Hurt your credibility

[@joaograveto]

One thing is sure: Now everytime i will book an airticket in the internet i will check the airplane model and if its a Max, i will spend some time thinking about it before i buy this ticket

[@weirdcuberyt6900]

I think mentour pilot already explained this.

[@laracroft938]

DId you just call airbus French?

[@hectory79]

Seems willfully ignorant.

[@leedavis9085]

You talk some crap based on such a US Boeing bias, get your facts right on capacity, ownership of airbus, etc

[@marneus]

He doesn't even know that Airbus is not French.

[@matteofalduto766]

The aircraft industry is planned very much ahead in time, much more so than other industries. Airbus went for a safe, long-term sustainable growth path, rather than a risky short term cash grab. Especially since this is just a temporary accident affecting Boeing, not (possibly) a long term demise. If Boeing were to bounce back in some years with a new competitive design for a narrow-body aircraft, Airbus would have found themselves with a significant overcapacity that did not have yet time to repay for itself. Those kinds of investments are big and require decades to turn profitable.

[@djaneczko4]

Great video!