logo
Boeing deliveries this year keep up with pre-blowout rates

Boeing deliveries this year keep up with pre-blowout rates

Miami Herald09-04-2025

Boeing delivered 41 airplanes last month, bringing its total deliveries for the first quarter of the year to 130, the company said Tuesday.
That's in line with its performance for the first two months of this year and the same time period in 2023, before an in-flight safety incident at the start of 2024 upended Boeing's production cycle and plunged the company into financial and reputational uncertainty.
More than a year ago, on Jan. 5, 2024, a panel blew off a Boeing 737 Max 9 plane while the aircraft was climbing into the air, leaving a hole in the side of the plane.
In the first three months of 2024, shortly after the panel blowout, Boeing delivered just 83 planes. In the first three months this year, as Boeing continues on its path to recovery, the company delivered 130 aircraft, matching the exact number of deliveries from the same time period in 2023.
Boeing has kept its delivery rate above 40 airplanes per month so far this year, recording 45 deliveries in January, 44 in February and 41 in March.
Separately, Boeing booked 192 gross orders in March, a sharp increase from the first two months of the year and significantly higher than the monthly March average of 78 orders.
Boeing booked 36 net new orders in January this year and 13 in February. All of the February orders were for the 737 Max.
The March orders include 88 orders for the 737 Max, 53 orders for the 787 and 51 orders for the 777 family.
The data Boeing released Tuesday does not include any potential impacts from President Donald Trump's tariffs, announced on April 2. The impact of those tariffs could appear later, though the company has said it does not expect it will be severely affected by the new duties because it sources a lot of parts from inside the U.S. and has a significant stock of inventory that it can rely on if needed.
Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg said last week at a Congressional hearing related to the panel blowout that 80% of the commercial airplanes Boeing delivers are sent outside of the United States so 'free trade is very important to us.'
Analysts, meanwhile, are concerned about the impact of tariffs on the aerospace industry overall, which relies heavily on a worldwide supply chain.
Agency Partners, a research firm based in the United Kingdom, said in a Monday note that 'such international dependency cannot be engineered out quickly, or perhaps ever.'
If the tariffs remain in place as is, the note continued, 'this could be more disruptive to aircraft manufacturing than the pandemic.'
Deliveries
Of the 41 deliveries last month, 33 were 737 Maxes, Boeing said Tuesday.
That's inching closer to the Federal Aviation Administration's production cap of 38 Max planes per month. But some of those 33 Maxes delivered in March may have been aircraft that were nearly done and waiting in the factory for some time before rolling out to customers. Boeing doesn't disclose the breakdown of those planes so it's hard to tell exactly how close Boeing is to the 38 per month threshold.
Ortberg reiterated again this month that the company would not seek permission to move the production rate above 38 planes per month until it was sure it could do so safely, using a series of metrics it laid out in a safety and quality plan submitted to the FAA.
'I'm not pressuring the team to go fast. I'm pressuring the team to do it right,' Ortberg said at a hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation to discuss company changes since the panel blowout.
Of the 33 Max planes delivered last month, Southwest and United both received six, while Alaska, American and aircraft leasing company BOC Aviation each received three.
In March, Boeing also delivered four 787s and four 777 freighters.
So far this year, Boeing has delivered 105 planes from the 737 family, including 104 Maxes, as well as 13 787 planes, five 767s and seven 777s.
Orders
Adjusting for strict accounting standards that move orders in and out of Boeing's extensive backlog and 29 cancellations, the company booked 161 net orders.
Its backlog grew from 5,528 at the end of February to 5,648 as of March 31st.
Of the 192 gross orders booked in March, BOC Aviation ordered 50 Max planes and Japan Airlines ordered 17. The other 21 Max orders are unidentified.
Korean Air placed an order for 20 777X planes and 20 787 widebodies. FedEx ordered eight 777 freighters. The remaining orders - three 777 freighters, 20 777X and 33 787s - are unidentified.
Through the end of March, Boeing recorded 241 gross orders. Adjusting for accounting standards and cancellations, it booked 221 net orders.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Should You Invest $1,000 in XRP Today?
Should You Invest $1,000 in XRP Today?

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Should You Invest $1,000 in XRP Today?

XRP has been a strong performer in the crypto sector since Trump won the election. The token's main use case is for cross-border payments. Ripple, the company behind XRP, has been very active this year in continuing to build out its business. 10 stocks we like better than XRP › Aside from Bitcoin, few cryptocurrencies have benefited more than XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) from President Donald Trump's election win back in November. Now the fourth-largest cryptocurrency in the world by market value, XRP has blasted more than 330% higher (as of June 5). Trump's win ushered in a new regulatory regime for cryptocurrencies, one less focused on caution and more focused on growth. The win also removed several regulatory headwinds for XRP. After experiencing such a strong run built on several strong catalysts, should you still invest $1,000 in XRP today? The big catalyst for XRP was getting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) off its back. In 2020, the SEC sued Ripple, the company behind XRP, as well as Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen and Ripple's current Chief Executive Officer Brad Garlinghouse, for selling XRP as an unregistered security back in 2013. Investors viewed the case as a big deal because it could have set a precedent for the SEC's regulatory jurisdiction over many cryptocurrencies. While Ripple appeared to get a partial victory in 2023 when a federal judge ruled that sales of XRP to retail investors did not constitute sales of unregistered securities, the SEC appealed the case. Only after Trump won the presidential election, eventually leading to the resignation of SEC Chair Gary Gensler, did the lawsuit eventually end, removing a big overhang for Ripple and XRP. With the lawsuit now in the rear view, Ripple has been able to focus on its cross-border payments business, which leverages XRP, to help businesses move money globally more efficiently. Furthermore, Ripple launched its own stablecoin, called RLUSD. XRP can also benefit from RLUSD because it serves as a bridge currency, helping people who want to transfer other currencies to RLUSD and vice versa. Ripple also paid $1.25 billion to acquire prime broker Hidden Road in one of the largest acquisitions made in the crypto industry. Management believes the move could accelerate institutional adoption. Ripple also said that Hidden Road will eventually move post-trade activity to the XRP ledger to streamline operations and reduce costs, aiming to make XRP's ledger the main blockchain network for institutional decentralized finance. Ripple could also potentially serve customers of Hidden Road seeking digital asset custody, similar to what a bank offers. Other potential catalysts include the future launch of spot price XRP exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which actually buy and store cryptocurrencies and then sell shares based on how much they own, with the goal of tracking a cryptocurrency's price. Ripple could also go public at some point. While Garlinghouse has said the company is not interested in doing this right now, it could still happen at some point. Cryptocurrencies are hard to value because they don't generate cash flow and earnings and trade heavily on momentum and on broader sentiment about the sector. The good news is that XRP has a compelling use case in its ability to process 1,500 transactions per second, making it an ideal blockchain and token for cross-border payments. The bad news is that there are competitors that can also process lots of transactions per second. But XRP is part of a growing ecosystem within Ripple, which now has its own stablecoin and a huge prime broker, on top of the existing bank clients. This could give XRP a leg up in becoming the preferred token for institutions conducting cross-border payments. For this reason, I think XRP is worth a small, speculative investment, but I wouldn't invest too heavily in the token just yet because it's still too volatile. Consider how much $1,000 means to you financially when investing in XRP. If it's a big part of your portfolio, it's prudent to invest less. If you can invest $1,000 and not worry too much about losing it, then definitely invest because, long term, XRP could have a ton of upside. Before you buy stock in XRP, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and XRP wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Bram Berkowitz has positions in Bitcoin and XRP. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and XRP. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Should You Invest $1,000 in XRP Today? was originally published by The Motley Fool Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten

Call with China's Xi, and Trump, Musk exchange fueled barbs during 20th week in office
Call with China's Xi, and Trump, Musk exchange fueled barbs during 20th week in office

Fox News

time31 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Call with China's Xi, and Trump, Musk exchange fueled barbs during 20th week in office

President Donald Trump and SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk engaged in a public feud Thursday (—) less than a week after the White House held a farewell press conference for Musk highlighting his contributions spearheading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk departed his tenure as a special government employee with DOGE May 30, but swiftly launched into criticisms of Trump's massive tax and spending package dubbed the "big, beautiful, bill." Tuesday, Musk labeled the measure a "disgusting abomination" because of reports it ramps up the federal deficit. On Thursday, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that Musk opposed the bill because it eliminates an electric vehicle tax credit that benefits companies like Tesla. But Trump said that provision has always been part of the measure. "I'm very disappointed, because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here, better than you people," Trump said in the Oval Office in a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "He knew everything about it. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem, and he only developed the problem when he found out that we're going to have to cut the EV mandate, because that's billions and billions of dollars, and it really is unfair." Musk immediately responded on X to Trump's statements, urging a removal of the "disgusting pork" included in the measure. He also said it was "false" that he was shown the measure "even once." The two continued to publicly spar against one another, with Musk asserting that Trump wouldn't have won the 2024 election if it weren't for his own backing. Meanwhile, Trump accused Musk of going "CRAZY" over cuts to the EV credits, and said that Musk was "wearing thin." Additionally, Trump told Fox News on Friday that "Elon's totally lost it" and was not interested in speaking over the phone with Musk, despite media reports suggesting the two would talk. Here's what also happened this week: Chancellor of Germany Friedrich Merz met with Trump at the White House Thursday, where the two discussed the war in Ukraine. While Merz asserted that the U.S. was in a powerful spot to bring a meaningful end to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, Trump offered that the world might need to "let them fight for a little while." "America is again in a very strong position to do something on this war and ending this war," Merz said. Merz said that Germany was willing to help however it could, and wanted to discuss options to partner with the U.S. to bring peace. Likewise, Merz suggested that European allies exert additional pressure on Russia to end the conflict. But Trump said that he told Putin in a recent call that perhaps both countries would need to feel the consequences of fighting more acutely, claiming he told Putin "maybe you're going to have to keep fighting and suffering a lot." "Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy – they hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart, they don't want to be pulled," Trump said. "Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart." Trump spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping Thursday to discuss trade negotiations between Washington and Beijing. "I just concluded a very good phone call with President Xi, of China, discussing some of the intricacies of our recently made, and agreed to, Trade Deal," Trump said Thursday in a Truth Social post. "The call lasted approximately one and a half hours, and resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries." Trump said the conversation focused "almost entirely" on trade, and that Xi invited the U.S. president and first lady Melania Trump to visit China. Likewise, Trump reciprocated and invited Xi and his wife, Peng Liyuan, to visit the U.S. The call comes nearly a week after Trump condemned China May 30 for violating an initial trade agreement that the U.S. and China hashed out in May. And on Wednesday, Trump said Xi was "extremely hard to make a deal with" in a Truth Social post. The negotiations from May prompted both countries to agree that the U.S. would lower its tariffs against Chinese imports from 145% to 30%, and China would reduce its tariffs against U.S. imports from 125% to 10%.

Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts -- but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain
Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts -- but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain

San Francisco Chronicle​

time35 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts -- but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain

WASHINGTON (AP) — The tax cuts in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act would likely gouge a hole in the federal budget. The president has a patch handy, though: his sweeping import taxes — tariffs. The Congressional Budget Office, the government's nonpartisan arbiter of tax and spending matters, says the One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by the House last month and now under consideration in the Senate, would increase federal budget deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. That is because its tax cuts would drain the government's coffers faster than its spending cuts would save money. By bringing in revenue for the Treasury, on the other hand, the tariffs that Trump announced through May 13 — including his so-called reciprocal levies of up to 50% on countries with which the United States has a trade deficit — would offset the budget impact of the tax-cut bill and reduce deficits over the next decade by $2.5 trillion. So it's basically a wash. That's the budget math anyway. The real answer is more complicated. Actually using tariffs to finance a big chunk of the federal government would be a painful and perilous undertaking, budget wonks say. 'It's a very dangerous way to try to raise revenue,' said Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model, who served in President George W. Bush's Treasury Department. Trump has long advocated tariffs as an economic elixir. He says they can protect American industries, bring factories back to the United States, give him leverage to win concessions over foreign governments — and raise a lot of money. He's even suggested that they could replace the federal income tax, which now brings in about half of federal revenue. 'It's possible we'll do a complete tax cut,'' he told reporters in April. 'I think the tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax.'' Economists and budget analysts do not share the president's enthusiasm for using tariffs to finance the government or to replace other taxes. 'It's a really bad trade,'' said Erica York, the Tax Foundation's vice president of federal tax policy. 'It's perhaps the dumbest tax reform you could design.'' For one thing, Trump's tariffs are an unstable source of revenue. He bypassed Congress and imposed his biggest import tax hikes through executive orders. That means a future president could simply reverse them. 'Or political whims in Congress could change, and they could decide, 'Hey, we're going revoke this authority because we don't think it's a good thing that the president can just unilaterally impose a $2 trillion tax hike,' '' York said. Or the courts could kill his tariffs before Congress or future presidents do. A federal court in New York has already struck down the centerpiece of his tariff program — the reciprocal and other levies he announced on what he called 'Liberation Day'' April 2 — saying he'd overstepped his authority. An appeals court has allowed the government to keep collecting the levies while the legal challenge winds its way through the court system. Economists also say that tariffs damage the economy. They are a tax on foreign products, paid by importers in the United States and usually passed along to their customers via higher prices. They raise costs for U.S. manufacturers that rely on imported raw materials, components and equipment, making them less competitive than foreign rivals that don't have to pay Trump's tariffs. Tariffs also invite retaliatory taxes on U.S. exports by foreign countries. Indeed, the European Union this week threatened 'countermeasures'' against Trump's unexpected move to raise his tariff on foreign steel and aluminum to 50%. 'You're not just getting the effect of a tax on the U.S. economy,' York said. 'You're also getting the effect of foreign taxes on U.S. exports.'' Smetters at the Penn Wharton Budget Model said that tariffs also isolate the United States and discourage foreigners from investing in its economy. Foreigners see U.S. Treasurys as a super-safe investment and now own about 30% of the federal government's debt. If they cut back, the federal government would have to pay higher interest rates on Treasury debt to attract a smaller number of potential investors domestically. Higher borrowing costs and reduced investment would wallop the economy, making tariffs the most economically destructive tax available, Smetters said — more than twice as costly in reduced economic growth and wages as what he sees as the next-most damaging: the tax on corporate earnings. Tariffs also hit the poor hardest. They end up being a tax on consumers, and the poor spend more of their income than wealthier people do. Even without the tariffs, the One Big Beautiful Bill slams the poorest because it makes deep cuts to federal food programs and to Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income Americans. After the bill's tax and spending cuts, an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget Model found, the poorest fifth of American households earning less than $17,000 a year would see their incomes drop by $820 next year. The richest 0.1% earning more than $4.3 million a year would come out ahead by $390,070 in 2026. 'If you layer a regressive tax increase like tariffs on top of that, you make a lot of low- and middle-income households substantially worse off,'' said the Tax Foundation's York. Overall, she said, tariffs are 'a very unreliable source of revenue for the legal reasons, the political reasons as well as the economic reasons. They're a very, very inefficient way to raise revenue. If you raise a dollar of a revenue with tariffs, that's going to cause a lot more economic harm than raising revenue any other way.''

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store