View Full Version : GE and P&W premium over RR
Foxdeux
7th Jun 2016, 16:59
Just came across this article and it mentioned that planes equipped with either GE or P&W engines command a $7 million premium compared to planes equipped with RR Trents. Is there a specific reason for this?
Why a Boeing 777-9X Costs $400 Million (NYSE: BA) - 24/7 Wall St. (http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defense/2016/05/30/why-a-boeing-777-9x-costs-400-million/)
Non-Driver
8th Jun 2016, 10:40
Iron control of the aftermarket maintenance. RR don't allow anyone else to play. Unless you're a first run operator where you can negotiate a long-term deal then you're better off with the other two who don't control it quite as tightly and at least give a semblance of choice.
Zaphod Beblebrox
8th Jun 2016, 11:42
One possible reason could be in the aftermarket support area. Boeing has a world-wide reputation as does General Electric and Pratt & Whitney. Over the years these companies have proven their ability to reach and support aircraft in remote areas of the world. Their world-wide network is part of their sales appeal.
That might be part of the reason they can command a greater price in the market place.
underfire
9th Jun 2016, 04:12
It is only on one specific aircraft, not 'planes' (so far)...I think that the RR suffers from degradation issues in use, far more than the others.
More telling is that the 777X is not selling.
rog747
9th Jun 2016, 07:42
one example of poor resale is RR powered 767-300's
they cannot have winglets fitted due the heavier RB211's
but on the other hand PW powered 767-200's were not good on resale and Braathens could not sell their unwanted pair to Britannia who had CF6 powered a/c
767 not really relevant , only one customer BA , so in world terms a micro fleet.and comparing trents with RB211's is like comparing CF6's with GE90's.....