You're forgetting one thing. Aircraft acquisition cost is not the only thing to look at. Sure, the A320 may be 1/2 the cost of the 737 BUT what about operating costs? It's conceivable that an aircraft costing twice as much as another aircraft would actually be cheaper to operate in the long run. (Before anybody complains, I'm using the A320/737 ONLY AS EXAMPLES, not real life situations) David R http://home.attbi.com/~damiross http://home.attbi.com/~damiross/books.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas Schnell" <dks28@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 20:03 Subject: Re: [AIRLINE] More 737 stuff Is that true? Assume you and I are starting a new airline. From our perspective, the 737NG and A19/320 are largely interchangeable, especially because we have no existing fleet to worry about for commonality purposes. If Airbus is selling their product at $50 and Boeing is selling theirs at $100, the choice becomes pretty simple. (jetBlue, in fact, was certain that they would be purchasing 737NGs until they got the final bids from Airbus and Boeing.) If we change the facts a bit, so that Airbus is selling their product at $95 and Boeing is selling again at $100 (and the $5 difference is attributable solely to the extra cost of a CFM engine), think about the pressure Boeing will put on CFM to lower engine prices to make the plane competitive. Plus, GE does not get to set prices willy nilly on the CFM 56--it must answer to Snecma as well.