Re: Subsidies ...

From:         bosc@perige.eis.enac.dgac.fr (Jean-Francois Bosc)
Date:         29 Feb 96 02:04:13 
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.160@ohare.Chicago.COM>, rdd@netcom.com (Robert Dorsett) writes:

[...]

Just a few short answers:

 - Being a consortium of companies is one of the major PROBLEMS that
Airbus is currently addressing. It generates lack of coordination and
extra costs. The benefits are for the member countries (in terms
of employment), not for Airbus itself.

 - Most (if not all) of the government financial helps to Airbus are
actually _loans_ that Airbus _is_ paying back. Public helps are now
controlled by the European Commission, and direct funding is
forbidden except in special cases under strict conditions (e.g.
Air France recently).

 - As somebody already said, the current low rate of the US $ _is_
some form of government support. Moreover our presidents are not used
to act like commercial travellers for our companies, and anyway
their arguments can't have the same weight.

 - About the military argument, we don't have here such a large market
like in the US, where our companies could make sufficient benefits.
Moreover I don't think the US government would buy foreign weapon
systems, even if they were better. Several european countries still
do that. Of course you can argue that US systems _are_ better, but ... :-)


JF

--
Jean-Francois Bosc (bosc@eis.enac.dgac.fr)
Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation Civile
TOULOUSE, FRANCE