harpic this is typical of any large project.
So how could Airbus make such a strategic error? The answer is that it is, as the man said, a classic Euro-scheme. No ordinary company, responsible to ordinary shareholders, would hazard its capital on such a risky project as the A380.
It seems as if the author has not read about ther 747? Boeing 'bet the farm' and very nearly lost. They had PanAm with them and they won trhough. I expect that the A380 will do likewise. The differance is that, 40 years on, the costs, regulatory issues, technology, stakes and publcity are 100% higher. I pick the figure as a mere example, it could well be 1,000% higher.
Forty years ago, business reporting was not so public but, due in part to the expansion of share ownership, many more people are interested. Also, business, governments and national prosperity have become very much more closely linked. The news media now report business matters in a totally different way. For example, the the main TV/radio news bulletins carry the daily close of the UK and US stock markets, as well as currency variations. There are other factors too, of course, such as the EU itself but Boeing did not have anything like the same level of public scrutiny.
I would imagine that from first test flight to being sure that the 747 was a success must have been ten years or more? Fortunately for people selling articles to magazines (be they right wing like
The Spectator or any other) most folks are interested in the short term only. By the way, this is not an aplogy of the stupid and selfish behaviour of the senior mgmt of EADS and Airbus.
Let us not forget that Boeing said that there was no market for a machine of the A380 size. Now the 748i is going to be larger than anything they have done before. Catch up time?