Re: Rolls-Royce Pratt & Whitney Merge

From:         rna@gsb-mailhost.stanford.edu (Robert Ashcroft)
Organization: Graduate School of Business, Stanford University
Date:         13 Oct 95 01:30:31 
References:   1 2 3
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1995.1588@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
Andrew Chuang <chuanga@wis.com> wrote:
>R-R's RB211-524 and Trent may not do as well as the PW4000 or the CF-6,
>but the few customers that use the -524/Trent are extremely healthy
>airlines (for example, Cathay Pacific and British Airways).  The RB211-535
>has 75-80% of all the B757 customers and between 55%-60% of all the
>installed engines on the B757.  Furthermore, R-R has a much more mature
>marketing than Pratt in the industrial applications of their turbo fan
>engines (which account for a significant amount of R-R's business).  In
>the past few years, I believe R-R's profits are comparable to Pratt's.
>Furthermore, France's SNECMA has terrible financial results, but it does
>not stop GE from doing business with SNECMA (and CFMI is very successful).

You can't draw an equivalence between RR and SNECMA---SNECMA is still
under government control, and by a government that clearly won't let
it fail.  RR is another story.  I think there would be huge political
ructions if RR failed, but in the end the British govt would probably
let it go.

RNA