Re: ATR-72's and Airbuses

Date:         06 Jan 97 01:41:45 
From:         jfmezei <nospam.jfmezei@videotron.ca>
Organization: SPC
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

John Clear wrote:
> As usual, you dont see the differances in scale.  A $3.5billion subsidy
> for the A330/A340 development (mentioned in an earlier post in this
> thread), plus whatever amounts they received earlier, is ALOT more then a
> couple of $100mil grants.

The european governments provided REPAYABLE loans for the RESEARCH
portion of the
various aircrafts, up to the A321 which was entirely funded internally
(well, since it is a derivative of the 320, the costs are much less!).
check out
http://www.airbus.com , they have a whole section on this very question.

What you should count as a subsidy is not the loan amount, but any
difference in debt repayment interests.

> As usual, you conviently forget that all the Airbus partners have some
> degree of military/space/other civilian contracts, so saying only US
> companies have that benefit is just plain not true.

It would be interesting to compare the differences in scale of the US
military industry, or to be fair, the USA government military/space
spending, and that of
their european counterparts. If the USA insists on bragging about having
the world's biggest and strongest army/navy, it should also accept that
it also is the one spending the most on such activities.