Boeing vs Airbus

With only a few large companies across the globe (Boeing, MD, and Airbus), the commercial aircraft industry essentially exhibits the qualities of an oligopolistic competition with intense rivalry. Here is an analysis of competition in the commercial aircraft business using Porter’s Five Forces.

Boeing pursues Product Differentiation strategy in order to create competitive advantage over Airbus. Boeing differentiates its products by increasing number of seating capacity, engine capacity, innovating new winglet designs and by manufacturing wide range of products in respect to the change in market

Given the competitive dynamics in the commercial aircraft industry, it is not likely that Airbus could have become a viable competitor without subsidies. These dynamics include investment costs in the billions for research and development of a new airliner, long break-even times, significant experience curve on the manufacturing side, and the highly volatile demand for aircraft. Due to a lack of market share, if Airbus entered the market without this support they would have suffered many years of losses resulting in a possible bankruptcy. However, Airbus credits its success to a good product and a good strategy instead of

From a ground handling point of view the MDC product is far better then Boeing's. The DC-9/MD-80/MD-90/717 requires minimal ground equipment. The cargo bin doors are located very low to the ground not requiring a belt loader. All of the ground service ports are easily accessible without ladders. The 737's potable water panel is out of reach of alot of people, and it is next to impossible to load the aft cargo bin of a 737 without a belt loader. Ground power hookups for the MDC product are logically on the port side where the jetway comes up to, but Boeing still seems to want to put theirs on the starboard side... A 737 requires a push back tug, (yes frontier and other airlines have been known to power back 737s) but for the most part a pushback

The risk of entry into the airline industry by potential competitors is low due to the “liberalization of market access, a result of globalization. According to the IATA (International Air Transport Association), about 1,300 new airlines were established in the last 40 years,” (Cederholm, 2016). The cost structure of businesses in an industry is a determinant of rivalry. In the Airlines Industry, fixed costs are high, because before the organization can make any sales, they must invest in air crafts, fuel and service employees. These items come attached with hefty price tags. Industries that require such enormous amounts of start-up capital as predicted by many analysts

Boeing’s position as a mature, well-established, and financially stable firm provides it with many competitive advantages. First and foremost, Boeing has been manufacturing airplanes for one hundred years, contributing to significant brand recognition and loyalty within the customer base.

Airbus had a reputation for innovative design and technology. All Airbus planes employed “fly-by-wire” technology that substituted computerized control for mechanical linkages between the pilot and the aircraft’s control surfaces. This technology combined with a common cockpit design permitted “cross crew qualification” (CCQ) whereby pilots were certified to fly similar aircrafts, thus offering flexible scheduling in flight crews on various models, leading to better pilot utilization and lower training costs. These features helped explain why Airbus had received over half of the total large aircraft orders for the first time in 1999. However, despite the gains in market share, Airbus still did not have a product to compete with the monopoly of Boeing’s 747 in the VLA market.

Boeing being the market leader for almost a decade as a manufacturer of large commercial aircraft and had also reached economies of scale, the need to sustain its market share it presumed that “customers might demand for new”. Any potential growth was only through taking super leap and making VLCT jumbo aircraft which needed

At that point, Boeing was already in the VLA market with their flagship 747-400. The Board has a goal: “to return Boeing to the top Quartile of companies both in profitability and in total return to shareholders… Shareholder value is the single most important measure of our long term success”. It is too risky to develop a competing super jumbo jet to compete with Airbus A3XX or Boeing’s own 747 which is already in the market. Cutting prices on the 747 will also result lower profit of

Market Share Airbus will launch their new large, long distance plane A380 in 2006. This plane can be a dreadful competitive product to Boeing. If Boeing falls behind regarding innovations, fuel efficiency and other attributes of a long haul airliner, it will soon lose its market share. In order for Boeing to compete in the aviation industry, it is crucial to take on some risk and develop this new 7E7 project. This helps the company to fight against its competitors and recover from the slump in the industry.

In its published Current Market Outlook (CMO), Boeing forecast a much smaller VLA market despite general agreement on overall growth with GMF. Boeing predicts the total market demand for VLA aircraft is 330 over the next 20 years. In addition, the most of the demand for the lager planes would not materialize for at least ten years. If the predicted market demand is true, there is no way for Airbus to reach the breakeven point. It is most likely Airbus will run out of the business if it commits build A3XX. In this case, Boeing could ignore the A3XX and concentrate on its existing product line. That is to say, Boeing had an opportunity to enhance profitability on its existing products while Airbus was tied up developing the A3XX.

Dominating the commercial aircraft market for decades, Boeing is considered to be the most highly competitive U.S aerospace industry. “U.S. firms manufacture a wide variety of products for civil and defense purposes and, in 2010, the value of aerospace industry shipments was estimated at $171 billion, of which civil aircraft and aircraft parts accounted for over half of all U.S. aerospace shipments. The U.S. aerospace industry exported nearly $78 billion in products in 2010, of which $67 billion (or 86% of total exports) were civil aircraft, engines, equipment, and parts” (Harrison, 2011). However, its position of influence has lessened in recent years. This is due to its main competitor, Airbus, who in recent years has made significant

The Boeing corporation had been a very successful company in the mid-1990s. At the time, it dominanted the market in commercial aviation with an additional thriving sideline in the military and space contracts market. Boeing faced and then overcame a huge number of challenges but also took advantage of many opportunities that were offered up by the aerospace market in the late 1990s. The company faced a number of challenges. In wake of he the first Gulf War, the incumbent economic slowdown severely decreased the market demand. Also, the Boeing encountered stiff competition from the company Airbus which many experts have attributed to heavy subsidies by European government that gave the company an unfair advantage market advantage. For instance, in 1999, Airbus outsold Boeing for the first time in the company's history and delivered to the market more airplanes than the Boeing company did in

The main objective of Boeing's strategy is to analyze the commercial aircraft industry, to understand the demand that is present, and to formulate a solution that will fulfill that segment. Currently, there are only two major players in the global market: Boeing and Airbus. Boeing is widely known as the "free market" champion, while Airbus represents the "not-so-free" approach of the European Union's organized and government subsidized

Developing the World's Largest Commercial Jet In this case, we will be analyzing strategic interaction between Airbus and Boeing, the two leading producers in the global commercial aircraft industry. In particular, we will be considering Airbus' proposed launch of the A3XX, their entry into the intercontinental jumbo jet segment, and Boeing's potential competitive responses to this entry. We will attempt to answer the questions: Should Airbus enter the jumbo jet segment? If so, how?