????最大的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手在自家后院設(shè)廠可能會(huì)讓波音感到“很受傷”,，不過(guò)從經(jīng)濟(jì)上看,，這也不是什么大不了的事。畢竟波音已經(jīng)失去了這些美國(guó)訂單,，所以這些飛機(jī)究竟是在美國(guó)還是在法國(guó)生產(chǎn),，也就無(wú)所謂了。

????波音真正應(yīng)該擔(dān)心的是，EADS可能可利用空客的擴(kuò)張,，加強(qiáng)對(duì)華盛頓的影響力,。畢竟說(shuō)到底，雖然民用航空對(duì)兩家公司也很重要,，但更重要的是國(guó)防和航天業(yè)務(wù),。對(duì)于波音來(lái)說(shuō)，它的兩種業(yè)務(wù)基本貢獻(xiàn)了相等的收入和利潤(rùn),。而EADS的國(guó)防和航天業(yè)務(wù)卻貢獻(xiàn)了總收入和利潤(rùn)的三分之二,，只有另外三分之一是來(lái)自空客的民航業(yè)務(wù)收入。

????波音和美國(guó)其他的軍火承包商之所以能主宰美國(guó)的軍火市場(chǎng)主要是因?yàn)樗麄兣c國(guó)會(huì)的軍火商利益代表保持著緊密的關(guān)系,。EADS也對(duì)美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)進(jìn)行游說(shuō),，推動(dòng)軍火合同，但它有一個(gè)致命的缺點(diǎn)——它在美國(guó)缺乏一個(gè)大型的生產(chǎn)實(shí)體,。波音和美國(guó)其它軍火承包商把大多數(shù)生產(chǎn)放在國(guó)內(nèi)進(jìn)行,，因此支持這些軍火合同就是支持為美國(guó)創(chuàng)造工作機(jī)會(huì)。

????于是EADS也變聰明了,，它意識(shí)到,，如果想在美國(guó)擴(kuò)張市場(chǎng)，就必須把生產(chǎn)設(shè)施遷移到美國(guó),。因此,，EADS2004年在密西西比為其歐洲的直升機(jī)部門開設(shè)了一家組裝工廠后，該公司在美國(guó)攻擊直升機(jī)市場(chǎng)上的份額翻了一番,。

????在直升機(jī)領(lǐng)域取得勝利后,，EADS又在另一個(gè)領(lǐng)域?qū)Σㄒ舭l(fā)起挑戰(zhàn)——這回是一張400億美元的美軍空中加油機(jī)訂單。EADS承諾將在莫比爾的新工廠生產(chǎn)這些加油機(jī),，可問(wèn)題是當(dāng)時(shí)這個(gè)工廠還沒立建立起來(lái),。但波音的工廠是現(xiàn)成的，波音計(jì)劃把產(chǎn)品線中的一款民航飛機(jī)改裝成空中加油機(jī),。經(jīng)過(guò)好幾年的角力,，EADS最終敗北，并且損失了數(shù)億美元,。

????在加油機(jī)合同中輸給波音的經(jīng)歷可謂十分慘痛,，換做其他公司，經(jīng)歷了這樣的失敗可能就直接放棄,，打道回府了,。但EADS是個(gè)百折不撓的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手。它知道,，它的軍用和民用飛機(jī)業(yè)務(wù)要想有所突破,，就必須在美國(guó)擴(kuò)大自己的市場(chǎng)份額。

????但光是口頭承諾開設(shè)工廠還不夠——這個(gè)工廠必須真正建立起來(lái)。把一份合同交給一個(gè)已經(jīng)投產(chǎn)的工廠,，保住幾千人的工作,，這在政治上的說(shuō)服力遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于把合同交給一個(gè)還沒建成、或者還沒招到工人的工廠,。

????通過(guò)在美國(guó)成立一家功能完備的生產(chǎn)工廠,，雇傭數(shù)以千計(jì)的美國(guó)工人，EADS搖身一變,，也成了一家“美國(guó)”工廠,。下一次與波音競(jìng)爭(zhēng)政府合同時(shí)，它的機(jī)會(huì)就會(huì)大得多,。消除了波音的“地利”優(yōu)勢(shì),，再加上對(duì)華盛頓的戰(zhàn)略游說(shuō)，EADS的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)地位將大大改善,。波音也要小心應(yīng)對(duì),，否則很快它就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，自己在兩大主要業(yè)務(wù)領(lǐng)域上都將處于守勢(shì),。

????譯者：樸成奎

????But while it may bruise Boeing's ego to have its biggest commercial aircraft competitor roll out new planes in its own backyard, it isn't that big of deal, financially speaking. After all, Boeing already lost those American orders, so it really doesn't matter if the planes are constructed in Mobile or in Toulouse.

????What Boeing should be worried about is EADS using this Airbus expansion to augment its influence in Washington. After all, while commercial aircraft is important for the two companies, their defense and space business is almost as, or even more important to their respective bottom lines. For Boeing, its revenues and profits are split nearly equally between the two business lines, while at EADS defense and space makes up two-thirds of its revenues and profits, with the other third coming from Airbus.

????Boeing and the other US defense subcontractors have been able to maintain their dominance over the US market by maintaining very close relations with their representatives in Congress. EADS also lobbies Congress and pushes for contracts, but it always had one fatal flaw – it didn't maintain a big manufacturing presence in the US. Boeing and other US subcontractors kept the bulk of their manufacturing at home, so a vote for them was a vote for US jobs.

????EADS got smart and realized that if it wanted to gain a bigger presence in the US it had to relocate its production facilities to the states. When it opened up an assembly plant for its Eurocopter helicopter division in Mississippi in 2004, EADS saw its US market share of attack helicopters double.

????High off its Eurocopter victory, EADS later challenged Boeing for a $40 billion contract to build refueling tanker aircraft for the US military. EADS promised to build its tanker in Mobile, but it hadn't built the facilities yet. Meanwhile, Boeing's facilities were already built - it planned to use a modified version of one of its commercial aircraft to do the job. After years of back and forth, EADS ultimately lost out to Boeing in a multi-year drama that cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars.

????The grueling experience competing with Boeing over the tanker contract would have been enough for most companies to simply give up and run back home. But EADS is a tough competitor. It knows that if it wants to push the needle in both it's commercial and defense businesses it has to build its market share in US.

????But promising to build a facility doesn't seem to be good enough -- it needs to built. The political drive to save thousands of jobs by handing a new contract to a facility that is already humming is far more powerful than handing the contract to a facility that has yet to be built or staffed.

????By establishing a full manufacturing plant now and employing thousands of American workers, EADS is setting itself up to be as "American" as Boeing the next time it chooses to bid on another government contract. Wiping out the national champion advantage, along with some strategic lobbying in Washington, should effectively level the playing field for EADS. Boeing would be wise to step up its game as it could soon find itself on the defensive on both of its main business lines.