Originally Posted by
SeenItAll
If economics were not important to airlines, why are they so hell-bent on shrinking legroom, raising baggage and other fees, charging you for food in-flight, etc.? So they can afford to pay $50 million to repair an airplane for that they could replace for $15? I don't think so.
As explained in the previous posts, it's not the total cost of the repair that's relevant here, it's the contribution that individual parties (in particular BA) that's important.
Clearly Boeing and GE aren't about to buy BA a replacement aircraft (even if it only costs $15
), but it's equally obvious that they are both going to contribute towards the cost of getting the aircraft flying again. Much of that cost will, of course, be labour and based on past experience a significant part of the work will be done by a Boeing team.
So BA, or its insurers, will end up being on the hook for far less than the amount quoted (and $50 million is a ridiculously high estimate anyway).