3 ms·

The military activities of Airbus are much smaller than their civil revenues. You got it reversed. See their financial statements [1], defense and space is 15~2

The military activities of Airbus are much smaller than their civil revenues. You got it reversed. See their financial statements [1], defense and space is 15~20% of the revenue in normal years (and not all of it is military). On the other hand, Boeing does make a lot more revenue than Airbus on military contracts [2]. It seems to be around 34%, and double the amount at ~$26bn for Boeing vs ~$12bn for Airbus. [1] https://www.airbus.com/investors/financial-results-and-annual-reports.html https://www.airbus.com/investors/financial-results-and-annua... [2] https://investors.boeing.com/investors/financial-reports/default.aspx https://investors.boeing.com/investors/financial-reports/def...

paganel 6y ago
I don't think those revenue percentages are representative of the true character of both Airbus and Boeing, which I personally see as military companies first, and if they happen to also be dominant in the civilian industry (hence extending their owners' economic power without the use of actual weapons) then it's all for the best, otherwise it will do. I'd say that Airbus is even more military-complex-based than Boeing, as its CEO is selected by the French and German governments combined, private shareholders be damned. There's also yesterday's speech by French president Macron, saying that Europe needs "to end military dependence on US" [1]. There's no other company in Europe than can better achieve that goal other than Airbus (especially today, when air superiority is paramount in almost any conflict, see the present war between Armenia and Azerbaijan) [1] https://www.nationalreview.com/news/macron-calls-on-europe-to-end-military-dependence-on-u-s/ https://www.nationalreview.com/news/macron-calls-on-europe-t...
- benhurmarcel 6y ago
  > I personally see as military companies That might be your personal view but that's clearly opposite of both the numbers and the company's history. They made themselves on airliners. >its CEO is selected by the French and German governments combined Yes Airbus is controlled politically, although much less than in the past since states sold a lot of their stock, but that has nothing to do with having military activities. Orange is controlled by the French state, and yet they don't do military activities. Airbus is controlled by 4 states, but it's not particularly linked to their minority of military activities. > French president Macron, saying that Europe needs "to end military dependence on US" [1]. There's no other company in Europe than can better achieve that goal other than Airbus Actually France bases most of its military aeronautics on Dassault, not Airbus. Airbus actually has very little military activity in France, it's mostly in Germany, Spain, and the UK.

paganel 6y ago

I don't think those revenue percentages are representative of the true character of both Airbus and Boeing, which I personally see as military companies first, and if they happen to also be dominant in the civilian industry (hence extending their owners' economic power without the use of actual weapons) then it's all for the best, otherwise it will do. I'd say that Airbus is even more military-complex-based than Boeing, as its CEO is selected by the French and German governments combined, private shareholders be damned. There's also yesterday's speech by French president Macron, saying that Europe needs "to end military dependence on US" [1]. There's no other company in Europe than can better achieve that goal other than Airbus (especially today, when air superiority is paramount in almost any conflict, see the present war between Armenia and Azerbaijan) [1] https://www.nationalreview.com/news/macron-calls-on-europe-to-end-military-dependence-on-u-s/ https://www.nationalreview.com/news/macron-calls-on-europe-t...

benhurmarcel 6y ago
> I personally see as military companies That might be your personal view but that's clearly opposite of both the numbers and the company's history. They made themselves on airliners. >its CEO is selected by the French and German governments combined Yes Airbus is controlled politically, although much less than in the past since states sold a lot of their stock, but that has nothing to do with having military activities. Orange is controlled by the French state, and yet they don't do military activities. Airbus is controlled by 4 states, but it's not particularly linked to their minority of military activities. > French president Macron, saying that Europe needs "to end military dependence on US" [1]. There's no other company in Europe than can better achieve that goal other than Airbus Actually France bases most of its military aeronautics on Dassault, not Airbus. Airbus actually has very little military activity in France, it's mostly in Germany, Spain, and the UK.