CIAO DATE: 02/05/08
![European Affairs](/olj/sites/ea.gif)
European Affairs
Volume 8, Number 1 - Spring 2007
Flying it In
Robert Herzstein
Full Text
Boeing versus Airbus: The Inside Story of the Greatest International Competition in Business
By John Newhouse, Knopf, 272 pages
Reviewed by Robert Herzstein
“Politics is like baseball: You have to be
smart enough to understand the
game, but dumb enough to think it’s
important.”
—Eugene McCarthy
In the large civil aircraft industry,
too, you have to be a player, or a semi obsessive
fan, to appreciate the day-today
moves and posturing within the big
airplane producers and the hundreds of
companies and government entities that
interact with them.
Its current ups and downs have been
in the headlines. After a decade when
Airbus seemed to be overtaking Boeing,
the European consortium hit such turbulence
that CEO Louis Gallois said in
March that “the last year has been the
worst in the company’s history.” It is the
latest twist in a long-running, often confusing
saga for those who have to follow
the plot via spotty reporting in the
media. Still, no one is likely to be so
dumb as to miss the importance of this
high-stakes game of technological and
marketing gambles—involving one of
the leading U.S. exporters and the EU
poster company for transnational champions.
On the European side, national
and governmental pressures and rivalries
impede the commercial decision-making
and competitiveness of a company with
owners (and plants) in several different
countries. On the U.S. side, governments
seem to be looking the other way while
company executives pursue short-term
profit goals that may impair the important
public interests imbued in their enterprise.
But most of us need a guide, with insider
access, to understand the significance
of the twists and turns on the playing
field. In this book—his second, after
This Sporty Game, on the high-stakes
dog-fight between the two companies
that manufacture and sell the world’s
main big commercial passenger and
cargo jets—John Newhouse serves as an
able escort and commentator in this
complex industry.
Newhouse seems to know everyone
in the business who has something to
say, and they trust him enough to say it
to him. His book contains a lot of “inside
baseball” reporting, based on dozens of
careful interviews. It will be fascinating
to the insiders. Even if more detailed in
places than some of us might want, this
slice of contemporary history will persuade
us that, by George, the game really
is important, and we can’t but admire the
people who play in it.
Non-insiders who stay with the story
—and that’s not too hard in this readable
and short book—will be rewarded. Most
of the tales about executive rivalries,
merger negotiations, airline financial
crises, and government procurement
scandals play out in the context of some
really big policy issues. There is also
some rich case material for students of
business management—notably corporate
culture among the American companies
that have been merged to create
the contemporary Boeing and trans-national
frictions in European conglomerates.
Here are a few topics that will stimulate
non-insiders to stay with the book
—and want to learn more:
• When the old and revered Boeing
company merged in the early ’90s
with McDonnell Douglas, there was
a colossal culture clash. Boeing was
forced to learn cost-control, but it
seems to have suffered an erosion of
integrity, with the result that a top level
executive went to prison for
corrupting Pentagon contracting officials
and the company was indicted
for stealing a competitor’s documents
in a rocket-contract proposal.
Some aircraft company executives, it
seems, are dedicated to the long term
interests of their company and
their industry—as called for by the
nature of the industry. Others are
dedicated to their own advancement
and the near-term payoff on their
stock options. Lessons in the vital
role of corporate culture are frequent
and vivid.
• What resources—financial, human,
and political—does a company need
to survive in an industry where designing
and launching a new airplane
requires a bet of billions of
dollars that may not be recovered
(and maybe a profit earned) for ten
or twenty years, if at all? Newhouse
introduces his readers to the interactions
among aircraft designers, financiers,
engine makers, labor
unions, airline operators, airline customers
(with their changing habits),
airport operators (who must invest
billions to have runways and terminals
suitable for new aircraft models),
and the politicians, who can’t
resist intervening to gain or protect
factory jobs, airport hubs, export
earnings and other rich stakes on the
table in this industry.
• The author delves (sometimes at
greater length than seems necessary)
into the inside workings of the shifting
array of airline companies whom
the airplane-makers must rely on as
customers. What manufacturer
would relish having to deal with
these chronically under financed and
often dysfunctional operations, that
go from one “cycle of misery” to another,
with myriad labor problems,
high capital costs and intense competition?
We are treated to a 1996
comment by the executive vice president
of Northwest Airlines:
“I think historically, the airline business
has not been run as a real business.
That is, a business designed to
achieve a return on capital that is then
passed on to the shareholders. It has…
been run as an extremely elaborate
version of a model railroad, that is,
one in which you try to make enough
money to buy more equipment.”
• The most important and least examined
question affecting this industry
is the role of governments. Newhouse
presents a lot of interesting
and tantalizing information.
First, there is the issue of government
subsidies. Beginning with World
War II, Boeing has developed advanced
aircraft technology through its work on
airplanes and space products for the
Pentagon, NASA and others agencies.
Often, as Newhouse recounts, it has been
able to transfer this technology to its
civilian airliners. Its very promising new
787 Dreamliner (the production run is
sold out through 2010) will have a radically
new, lightweight fuselage, frame
and key wing sections made with carbon-
fiber reinforced plastic—sophisticated
composites that Boeing developed
extensively during its experience with
the B-2 stealth bomber program.
Unhappy with the dominance of
American aerospace companies, the
smaller European companies and their
governments formed a conglomerate of
their own in 1970, Airbus Industrie, and
they have subsidized it for decades
through capital infusions, grants and
loans. Without such subsidies, it is unlikely
that there could have been any foreign
competition for Boeing. Both Boeing
and Airbus also receive financial
support from state and local governments
where they operate. The Japanese
government is also subsidizing, apparently
heavily, a significant part of the 787
being produced in Japan.
In a chapter ably titled “Folly and
Hypocrisy,” Newhouse summarizes the
subsidies practices and the quixotic effort
to regulate them through a decision
of the World Trade Organization’s Dispute
Settlement Body. (There’s ample
material for another book on that
topic.)
Next, there is government-controlled
purchasing. In China, perhaps the biggest
future market for civil aircraft, the central
government decides whether an airline
buys from Airbus or from Boeing.
“China always places political concerns
first when making big orders for aircraft,”
an Air China official states. This reality
draws the U.S. and European governments
into the business of seeking to influence what should be a commercial decision
on which future airliner to buy.
And this massive purchasing power puts
the Chinese government in a position to
demand that the airplane companies give
Chinese companies a piece of the action
in aircraft production.
Then there is the question of national
security. The U.S. government regards
the aircraft industry, and Boeing
specifically, as an important resource for
military and space technology and
equipment. Does it care that Boeing is
transferring some of the latest, government-
sponsored, technology to three
major Japanese companies who will
make some of the most crucial parts?
That 70 percent of the new airplane will
be made abroad and simply “snapped together”
in Seattle in three days? Or that,
as a Boeing engineer points out, “over
time, institutional learning and forgetting
will put the suppliers in control of
the critical body of knowledge, and Boeing
will steadily lose touch with key
technical expertise?”
The military security question
merges with that of economic security.
Boeing is America’s largest exporter, a
very large employer, purchaser of tens of
thousands of components and developer
of technology that is fed into the whole
supply chain. Yet its executives, especially
when spurred by stock options to
improve the earnings and the stock
price, have chosen to relocate the business—
or much of it—abroad. They
could have financed the 787 through
U.S. capital markets, but Japanese government
financing made it cheaper to
put much of the key production offshore,
so they took that course. The book
quotes a senior executive with a major
Boeing supplier commenting on the new
generation of Boeing executives:
“There’s no passion. They would be
just as much at home with Procter &
Gamble making soap.”
These executives took advantage of
the drop in airline traffic following 9/11
to slash 30,000 Boeing employees, so
that, as Business Week commented,
“[with] the window of opportunity
opened by the layoffs, Boeing could be
transformed into a global enterprise
that’s much less dependent on the U.S.
for both brawn and brains.”
Should the U.S. government be indifferent
to whether large aircraft production
remains a major U.S. industry? The
Europeans clearly care about having a
major domestic manufacturer supplier
and have made Airbus their national
champion. The Japanese government is
supporting its heavy industrial companies
to become important players and views
aircraft production with special interest
because of the number of technologies it
spawns. U.S. officials are unable to acknowledge
that they have an industrial
policy, though they more or less carry one
out de facto through military and space
contracts. They probably would not put
up with Boeing moving its whole production
line abroad, but they apparently are
not reacting to the outsourcing of core
competencies to accomplished global
competitors in Japan. In the rush to compete,
even Airbus may follow suit. Industry
experts speculate about a future large
aircraft industry based in Asia, with participation
by Korea, China and Japan.
Different governments have different
notions of what they should be doing to
influence the civil aircraft industry. The
U.S. seems to feel it should keep its hands
off; but that does not mean it should keep
its eyes closed. European officials sometimes
put their heavy hands on, for the
wrong reasons. Japanese officials have a
more nuanced, long term approach. They
are “widely thought to put aerospace at
the top of the industrial pyramid—ahead
of electronics and automobiles—because
it is judged to have the largest potential
for benefiting other industries.” Newhouse’s
extensive interviews regrettably
do not include discussions with government
officials here or abroad about what
their role is and what they think it should
be. Perhaps this is a job for a more policy-
oriented author. In the meantime,
Boeing versus Airbus serves as an elegant
job of reporting by the trusted pro who
knows this industry best.
Robert Herzstein, a former U.S.
Under-Secretary for Trade in the
Commerce Department, wrote about
Airbus and Boeing in European Affairs
last year, in issue no. 1 & 2, volume 7.