As has already been mentioned, this subject has been hammered to death on other threads.
In this case I think Notso may have his head in the sand and Panda is wearing his/her rose tinted glasses!
Boeing actually got it right. They did a study of the market and came to the conclusion that whilst a very big aircraft would be desireable for a few routes by a few operators the market would never be big enough to sustain a large enough order to break even, certainly not in competition with anyone else. This conclusion was also influenced by the fact that many Boeing customers were already showing signs of ditching their B744s and moving to a versatile range of B777. Boeing decided to approach Airbus and offer a consortium for VLA which Airbus rejected. Boeing then pulled out and left Airbus to go it alone.
139 orders before the first aircrarft flies isn't really as significant as it may seem given todays financial environment. Operators are cashing in on major discounts that are currently being offered in order to satisfy THEIR needs, they don't actually give a stuff if Airbus breaks even just so long as Airbus honour their contracts and support the aicraft they deliver. Contracts that will have been very carefully written/agreed to by the operators.
The A380 is a very, very long way from break even at the moment and the 139 orders may well represent around 60% of total demand, should this be the case then Airbus will be in a financial quagmire.
It is a very misleading argument to compare the introduction of the A380 with the B747 since the B747 was, without doubt, a quantam leap, unlike the A380 which although undeniably huge is more akin to the difference between, say, a DC8-50 series and a DC8-70 series and the DC8-70 series was an acquired taste with quite limited appeal.