WTO brands Airbus subsidy illegal

Playing with the rules is the most important safeguard needed to maintain fair competition. The recent decision of the World Trade Organization is a milestone in the competition between the two sides of the Atlantic.
What could be the reason for such a critical case to be deliberated for six years?
Is the current market share of Airbus a direct result of the allegedly disputed funding?
What would be the exact impact of that funding on the efficiency of Airbus family of aircraft?
Is it safe to assume that Airbus has been able to achieve the current status irrespective of the funding dispute?

Date: 02 July 2010 commenting on http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/

Losing the backlog?

Their statements are inversely pari passu with the current economic condition. The statements are meant just to serve public relations only. Seemingly, the crash of AF447 earlier this month forced Airbus’s CEO to adopt a bold stance toward mass media.

Date: 23 June 2009 commenting on http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/