AerCap Holdings NV (AER) 2025 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good day, everyone, and welcome to the AerCap's Q1 2025 financial results. Today's conference is being recorded, and a transcript will be available following the call on the company's website.

大家好，歡迎關注 AerCap 2025 年第一季財務業績。今天的會議正在進行錄音，會議記錄將在會議結束後發佈在公司網站上。

At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Joseph McGinley, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

現在，我想將會議交給投資者關係主管約瑟夫‧麥金利 (Joseph McGinley)。先生，請繼續。

Thank you, operator, and hello, everyone. Welcome to our first-quarter 2025 conference call. With me today is our Chief Executive Officer, Aengus Kelly; and our Chief Financial Officer, Pete Juhas.

謝謝接線員，大家好。歡迎參加我們的 2025 年第一季電話會議。今天和我一起的是我們的執行長 Aengus Kelly；以及我們的財務長 Pete Juhas。

Before we begin today's call, I would like to remind you that some statements made during this conference call which are not historical facts may be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statements.

在我們開始今天的電話會議之前，我想提醒大家，這次電話會議中所做的一些非歷史事實的陳述可能是前瞻性的陳述。前瞻性陳述涉及風險和不確定性，可能導致實際結果或事件與此類陳述中表達或暗示的結果或事件有重大差異。

AerCap undertakes no obligation other than that imposed by law to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect future events, information, or circumstances that arise after this call. Further information concerning issues that could materially affect performance can be found in AerCap's earnings release dated April 30, 2025. A copy of the earnings release and conference call presentation are available on our website at aercap.com.

除法律規定外，AerCap 不承擔任何義務，公開更新或修改任何前瞻性陳述以反映本次電話會議後出現的未來事件、資訊或情況。有關可能對業績產生重大影響的問題的更多信息，請參閱 AerCap 2025 年 4 月 30 日發布的收益報告。收益報告和電話會議簡報的副本可在我們的網站 aercap.com 上取得。

This call is open to the public and is being webcast simultaneously at aercap.com and will be archived for replay. We will shortly run through our earnings presentation and will allow time at the end for Q&A. (Event Instructions)

本次電話會議向公眾開放，並在 aercap.com 上同步進行網路直播，並將存檔以供重播。我們很快就會完成我們的收益報告，並在最後留出時間進行問答。（活動須知）

I will now turn the call over to Aengus Kelly.

現在我將電話轉給 Aengus Kelly。

Thank you for joining us for our first-quarter 2025 earnings call. We are pleased to report another strong quarter of earnings for AerCap, generating GAAP net income of $643 million and earnings per share of $3.48, adjusted net income of $679 million, and adjusted earnings per share of $3.68. Given these strong results, we have increased our 2025 full-year EPS guidance and announced a new $500 million share repurchase program.

感謝您參加我們的 2025 年第一季財報電話會議。我們很高興地報告 AerCap 又一個季度的強勁盈利，GAAP 淨收入為 6.43 億美元，每股收益為 3.48 美元，調整後淨收入為 6.79 億美元，調整後每股收益為 3.68 美元。鑑於這些強勁的業績，我們提高了 2025 年全年每股收益預期，並宣布了一項新的 5 億美元股票回購計畫。

Our airline customers around the world remain focused on locking in capacity despite the ongoing uncertainty regarding tariffs and trade. This is evidenced by our 99% utilization rate and 84% extension rate in the period.

儘管關稅和貿易方面仍存在不確定性，但我們遍布全球的航空公司客戶仍專注於鎖定運能。我們在此期間的利用率為 99%，延期率為 84%，證明了這一點。

Today, I'd like to share a number of operational highlights with you from the first quarter that gives you a better sense to the level of activity taking place each day at AerCap. On the passenger side, we continue to see strong bids for our assets with a couple of notable deals on the 787s in particular. There, we are seeing strong demand both for remarketing aircraft and the broadening of the user base more generally. And I'll give you a couple of examples.

今天，我想與大家分享第一季的一些營運亮點，讓大家更了解 AerCap 每天的活動量。在乘客方面，我們繼續看到對我們資產的強勁競標，尤其是 787 的幾筆引人注目的交易。在那裡，我們看到了對再行銷飛機的強勁需求以及更廣泛的用戶群的擴大。我給你舉幾個例子。

In Q1, we managed the successful transition of three mid-life 787s between two customers in Europe. They were on time and on budget, and we were able to increase the rents and improve the credit, highlighting the demand for these aircraft.

第一季度，我們成功完成了兩家歐洲客戶之間的三架中期 787 飛機的交接。他們按時按預算完成了任務，我們能夠提高租金並改善信用，從而凸顯了對這些飛機的需求。

We also executed a 787 sale leaseback at attractive pricing with a new customer where the airline was keen to partner with AerCap specifically. Airlines know that when they are partnering with AerCap, they have that added oversight and trust, and that brings them validation in the marketplace.

我們還與一位新客戶以極具吸引力的價格簽訂了 787 售後回租協議，該航空公司非常渴望與 AerCap 合作。航空公司知道，當他們與 AerCap 合作時，他們會獲得更多的監督和信任，從而獲得市場認可。

On the narrow-body side, we also agreed the extension of 26 mid-life aircraft with a North American customer, keen to lock in that capacity for a further six years. This is a live example of the contrast between the monthly gyrations you may see in any given airline's schedule capacity or indeed their stock price with a long-term mindset that airline fleet managers are required to adopt.

在窄體飛機方面，我們還與北美客戶達成了延長 26 架中期飛機的合同，並希望在未來六年內鎖定這一運力。這是一個活生生的例子，它顯示了任何一家航空公司的航班時刻表容量或股價的月度波動與航空公司機隊管理人員必須採取的長期思維之間的對比。

On the engine side, you'll note that we ordered 268 new LEAP engines in 2024 as part of a deal with our joint venture, SES, where we take one-third of these engines and SES take two-third. We are making good progress on this front with over 120 of these engines already delivered, 60 more expected this year and 50-plus next year.

在發動機方面，您會注意到，作為與合資企業 SES 達成協議的一部分，我們在 2024 年訂購了 268 台新型 LEAP 發動機，其中我們佔三分之一，SES 佔三分之二。我們在這方面取得了良好的進展，已經交付了 120 多台發動機，預計今年將交付 60 台，明年將交付 50 多台。

This highlights the difference between ordering aircraft from the OEMs today, which would be likely to deliver in 2030 and beyond versus ordering engines. Engines have a much lower lead time, making them an attractive avenue to deploy capital, particularly when you have the infrastructure of AerCap. So I think it's worth spending some time talking about how we continue to expand our operational capacity on the engine side, in line with our growing fleet.

這凸顯了今天從原始設備製造商訂購飛機（可能在 2030 年及以後交付）與訂購引擎之間的差異。引擎的交付週期要短得多，使其成為一種頗具吸引力的資本配置途徑，特別是當您擁有 AerCap 這樣的基礎設施時。因此，我認為值得花一些時間來討論如何隨著我們不斷增長的機隊規模繼續擴大引擎方面的運作能力。

We now operate from 27 partner MROs around the world, located close to our key customers. This is in line with our expansion in LEAP leasing but also supports other engine types like the GenX, GE90 and CFM56 engines and is focused on lease returns and portfolio optimization.

目前，我們在全球擁有 27 家合作 MRO，靠近我們的主要客戶。這符合我們在 LEAP 租賃方面的擴張，但也支援其他發動機類型，如 GenX、GE90 和 CFM56 發動機，並專注於租賃回報和投資組合優化。

These centers carry out a range of light MRO tasks like borescope inspections, top case module swaps, QEC installations and preservation services. This really adds to the industrial capability our customers have come to expect from AerCap and provides a significant amount of information on trends, costs, and outcomes which can be used across our various business lines.

這些中心執行一系列輕型 MRO 任務，如內視鏡檢查、頂殼模組更換、QEC 安裝和保存服務。這確實增強了我們的客戶對 AerCap 所期望的工業能力，並提供了大量有關趨勢、成本和結果的信息，這些信息可用於我們的各個業務線。

Turning to Milestone, we continue to see opportunities in the helicopter business. As an example, in Q1, we agreed to purchase and leaseback of five new Leonardo AW189 helicopters with a new customer, Equinor Energy, a leading supplier of energy to Europe and the largest oil and gas operator on the Norwegian Continental Shelf.

談到 Milestone，我們繼續看到直升機業務的機會。例如，在第一季度，我們同意與新客戶 Equinor Energy 購買並回租五架新的 Leonardo AW189 直升機，Equinor Energy 是歐洲領先的能源供應商，也是挪威大陸架最大的石油和天然氣營運商。

This deal involving a long-term lease of new technology equipment to a new customer and is a good example of the industry changing toward a direct model, i.e., leasing to the end user. This structure replicates similar deals we completed with Var Energi, another listed Norwegian oil company, for two AW189 super-medium helicopters around the same time.

該交易涉及向新客戶長期租賃新技術設備，是該行業向直接模式（即租賃給最終用戶）轉變的一個很好的例子。這個結構與我們大約在同一時間與另一家挪威上市石油公司 Var Energi 完成的兩架 AW189 超中型直升機的交易類似。

So in summary, the AerCap platform is strong and continues to perform well, finding new and complementary way to support our customers across all our business lines. We expect demand to remain robust for the foreseeable future.

總而言之，AerCap 平台非常強大且持續表現良好，找到了新的互補方式來支援我們所有業務線上的客戶。我們預計在可預見的未來需求仍將保持強勁。

With that, I'll now hand the call over to Pete to review the financials and the outlook for 2025.

說完這些，我現在將電話交給皮特回顧一下財務狀況和 2025 年的前景。

Thanks, Gus. Good morning, everyone. Our GAAP net income for the first quarter was $643 million or $3.48 per share. The impact of purchase accounting adjustments was $43 million for the quarter or $0.23 a share. The net tax effect of these was $6 million or $0.04 a share.

謝謝，格斯。大家早安。我們第一季的 GAAP 淨收入為 6.43 億美元，即每股 3.48 美元。購買會計調整的影響為本季 4,300 萬美元，即每股 0.23 美元。這些的淨稅收影響為 600 萬美元或每股 0.04 美元。

As a result, our adjusted net income for the first quarter was $679 million or $3.68 per share. There were three main drivers that affected our results for the first quarter. First, our net maintenance contribution, which is maintenance revenue less leasing expenses, was $82 million this quarter on an adjusted basis. That's higher than the $30 million to $40 million net contribution that we see on average mainly due to lower leasing expenses this quarter. But as I've mentioned many times in the past, these numbers tend to move around a lot from quarter to quarter based on maintenance activity levels.

因此，我們第一季的調整後淨收入為 6.79 億美元，即每股 3.68 美元。影響我們第一季業績的主要因素有三。首先，本季我們的淨維護貢獻（即維護收入減去租賃費用）以調整後的基礎計算為 8,200 萬美元。這高於我們平均看到的 3,000 萬至 4,000 萬美元的淨貢獻，主要原因是本季租賃費用較低。但正如我過去多次提到的那樣，這些數字往往會根據維護活動水平在每個季度之間發生很大變化。

Second, net gain on sale of assets was $177 million for the first quarter. We sold 35 of our owned assets for total sales revenue of $683 million. That resulted in an unlevered gain on sale margin of 35%, which is equivalent to a multiple of 2.3 times book value. As of March 31, we had $525 million worth of assets held for sale.

其次，第一季資產出售淨收益為1.77億美元。我們出售了 35 項自有資產，總銷售收入為 6.83 億美元。這導致無槓桿銷售收益利潤率達到 35%，相當於帳面價值的 2.3 倍。截至 3 月 31 日，我們持有待售資產價值 5.25 億美元。

Third, our other income was $105 million, which is higher than normal. During the quarter, we received shares related to an airline bankruptcy claim and also received some insurance proceeds related to a total loss on an aircraft. The combined impact of both of those on other income was around $30 million.

第三，我們的其他收入為1.05億美元，高於正常水準。在本季度，我們收到了與航空公司破產索賠相關的股份，也收到了與飛機全損相關的一些保險收益。這兩項對其他收入的綜合影響約為 3,000 萬美元。

Our liquidity position continues to be very strong. As of March 31, our total sources of liquidity were approximately $20 billion. That includes slightly over $1 billion worth of cash and $11 billion of revolvers and other committed facilities.

我們的流動性狀況依然非常強勁。截至 3 月 31 日，我們的總流動資金來源約為 200 億美元。其中包括價值略高於 10 億美元的現金和價值 110 億美元的循環信貸及其他承諾信貸。

Our sources-to-uses coverage ratio was 1.8 times, which amounts to excess cash coverage of around $9 billion. Our leverage ratio at the end of the quarter was 2.4:1, which is similar to last quarter. Our operating cash flow was approximately $1.3 billion.

我們的來源與使用覆蓋率為 1.8 倍，相當於超額現金覆蓋率約 90 億美元。我們本季末的槓桿率為2.4：1，與上一季相似。我們的經營現金流約為13億美元。

During the quarter, we were upgraded to BBB+ by Fitch in March. So we are now rated BBB+ across the board with all three rating agencies. We also completed $1.5 billion of financing during the quarter. We bought back 5.7 million shares during the first quarter for a total of $558 million. In addition to this, we bought 4.7 million shares in April for $445 million, taking advantage of the recent market volatility.

在本季度，惠譽於 3 月將我們的評級上調至 BBB+。因此，我們目前在三大評級機構中均獲得了 BBB+ 評級。我們也在本季完成了 15 億美元的融資。我們在第一季回購了 570 萬股，總計 5.58 億美元。除此之外，我們也利用最近的市場波動，在 4 月以 4.45 億美元的價格購買了 470 萬股。

So that takes us to just over $1 billion of share repurchases so far this year. With the $300 million of capacity remaining from our previous authorization, plus the $500 million authorization that we announced today, that gives us $800 million of available capacity.

因此，今年到目前為止，我們的股票回購總額已超過 10 億美元。加上我們先前授權的剩餘 3 億美元產能，加上我們今天宣布的 5 億美元授權，我們擁有 8 億美元的可用產能。

As Gus mentioned, we're raising our full-year 2025 adjusted EPS guidance to a new range of $9.30 to $10.30. That includes approximately $0.80 of gains on sale that we had in the first quarter, but it does not include any gains on sale for the remainder of the year.

正如 Gus 所提到的，我們將 2025 年全年調整後每股收益預期上調至 9.30 美元至 10.30 美元的新範圍。其中包括我們第一季獲得的約 0.80 美元的銷售收益，但不包括今年剩餘時間的任何銷售收益。

We've had a strong start to the year in terms of net maintenance contribution and other income. However, we are seeing some delays in our 777 freighter conversion program. We've incorporated all of this into our updated guidance. Taking all of that into account, we expect to be in the top half of that range for the full year. But as you know, there is considerable uncertainty in the overall macroeconomic and market environment.

就淨維護貢獻和其他收入而言，我們今年開局強勁。然而，我們的 777 貨機改裝計畫出現了一些延誤。我們已將所有這些內容納入我們更新的指南中。考慮到所有這些因素，我們預計全年業績將處於該範圍的上半部。但大家也知道，整體宏觀經濟和市場環境仍存在著很大的不確定性。

In closing, AerCap continued to perform very strongly during the first quarter. We continue to be in a position of strength with a strong balance sheet, low leverage, and strong liquidity. We've taken advantage of the recent market volatility to buy back over $1 billion worth of stock so far this year. And as Gus mentioned, today, we have announced a new $500 million share repurchase program to be deployed during the remainder of this year.

最後，AerCap 在第一季持續表現強勁。我們持續保持優勢地位，擁有強勁的資產負債表、低槓桿率和強大的流動性。今年迄今為止，我們已經利用最近的市場波動回購了價值超過 10 億美元的股票。正如 Gus 所提到的，今天，我們宣布了一項新的 5 億美元股票回購計劃，將在今年剩餘時間內實施。

And with that, operator, let's go to Q&A.

接線員，下面我們進入問答環節。

(Operator Instructions) Terry Ma, Barclays.

（操作員指示）巴克萊銀行的 Terry Ma。

Gus, so you noted the engine and helicopter opportunity in your prepared remarks. Last year, you also kind of highlighted a number of bilateral transactions you executed with customers. I'm just curious if you kind of expect more of those opportunities to come to the market, just given the tariff uncertainty and how that kind of ranks relative to helicopters and engines.

格斯，你在準備好的發言中提到了引擎和直升機的機會。去年，您也強調了與客戶執行的許多雙邊交易。我只是好奇，考慮到關稅的不確定性以及相對於直升機和發動機的排名，您是否預計會有更多這樣的機會進入市場。

I would expect, given the scale of the company and the reach we have around the world, be it on aircraft, helicopters ranges, that we should see one or two more bilateral negotiations. Yes, you're right, I mean, the engine situation is created by the, I suppose, quasi-industrial infrastructure we have and our experience in supporting the engine OEMs. You saw also a sale leaseback on the 787 that we did that was on a bilateral basis for an airline. So I do think that the current situation may throw up additional opportunities, and we keep working hard for them.

我預計，考慮到公司的規模以及我們在世界各地的影響力（無論是在飛機還是直升機領域），我們應該會看到一到兩次雙邊談判。是的，你說得對，我的意思是，引擎的情況是由我們擁有的準工業基礎設施和我們支援引擎 OEM 的經驗所創造的。您還看到了我們為航空公司進行的 787 售後回租，這是雙邊交易。因此我確實認為當前的情況可能會帶來更多的機會，我們會繼續為此努力。

Got it. That's helpful. And then maybe just on the buyback, you guys kind of leaned into it, reauthorized another amount, but you didn't actually kind of increase your EPS guidance for the year ex gain on sale. Is that just completely offset by the freighter conversion delays you kind of called out? And any way to kind of quantify that?

知道了。這很有幫助。然後也許只是在回購方面，你們有點傾向於此，重新授權了另一個金額，但實際上並沒有增加今年的每股收益指引（不包括銷售收益）。這是否完全被您所指出的貨機改裝延誤所抵銷了？有什麼方法可以量化這一點嗎？

Sure, Terry. So I can go through that. So basically, we increased the full-year guidance by $0.80, which was the amount of gains on sale in the first quarter. We did have a strong quarter. That was driven primarily by two things. One was the higher net maintenance contribution; the other was higher other income.

當然，特里。所以我可以經歷這一切。因此，基本上，我們將全年指導價提高了 0.80 美元，這是第一季的銷售收益金額。我們確實度過了一個強勁的季度。這主要由兩件事推動。一是淨維護費用貢獻較高；另一個是其他收入較高。

And the higher maintenance was a result of lower leasing expenses in the quarter, mainly lower transition costs, lower top-up expenses, lower lessor contributions, all of those things. Some of that's due to timing, but we're generally seeing lower transition costs because of the high number of airline extensions that we're having.

維護費用增加是由於本季租賃費用降低，主要是過渡成本降低、補充費用降低、出租人貢獻降低等因素。部分原因是由於時間安排，但由於我們擁有大量航空公司的延期，因此我們通常看到較低的過渡成本。

In other income, we had a couple of onetime items, recoveries from airline bankruptcy from a few years ago and insurance proceeds on a total loss aircraft. So those were the things that made the first quarter higher than expected.

在其他收入中，我們有幾個一次性項目，幾年前航空公司破產後的恢復收入以及一架全損飛機的保險收益。這些都是導致第一季業績高於預期的原因。

As we look out for the full year, I do think that we're going to be in the top half of that range. Yeah, the freighters, we'll see some of those moving out of this year. But ultimately, I think these other positives more than offset that factor. But we didn't narrow the range really because there is more uncertainty out there. But as it stands today, we're pretty comfortable we'd be in the top half.

展望全年，我確實認為我們將處於該範圍的上半部分。是的，我們將看到一些貨輪在今年退出市場。但最終，我認為這些其他積極因素足以抵消這個因素。但我們並沒有真正縮小範圍，因為還有更多的不確定性。但就目前的情況來看，我們很放心能夠進入前半部。

Moshe Orenbuch, TD Cowen.

Moshe Orenbuch，TD Cowen。

Great. Gus, maybe to come back to the two areas that you cited, the engines and helicopters. Can you kind of tell us how much -- given how much excess capital you've got, how much do you think you can deploy in those businesses kind of over the next year or two?

偉大的。格斯，也許我們應該回到您提到的兩個領域，即發動機和直升機。您能否告訴我們—考慮到您擁有的過剩資本，您認為在未來一兩年內您可以在這些業務中投入多少資金？

Well, first of all, we don't mind where we deploy the capital. The critical element is, is this going to be accretive to our shareholders? We have never been here to grow for the sake of growth, but if attractive opportunities come up, I mean, we have ample amounts of capital.

嗯，首先，我們不介意把資本部署到哪裡。關鍵因素是，這是否會為我們的股東帶來增值？我們從來不是為了成長而成長，但如果出現有吸引力的機會，我的意思是，我們有充足的資本。

And certainly, with the headroom that we have, we could easily deploy just in this year alone an additional about $4 billion piece if we desired. And that's only in this year. So if we look at a multiyear capacity to absorb additional assets, you're into double-digit billions. So that isn't in any way going to limit us.

當然，憑藉我們現有的空間，如果我們願意的話，光是今年我們就可以輕鬆部署額外的約 40 億美元。而這還只是今年的情況。因此，如果我們看一下多年吸收額外資產的能力，那麼你將達到數十億美元。所以這不會以任何方式限制我們。

Our limiting factor as it comes to growth is profitability. We are here to make money. That's it, on a risk-adjusted basis. And so drive that ROE, that's the key. That's why we're here. And so transactions that will enhance the ROE on a risk-adjusted basis for the business, there's no limit to what we can do, I feel, in terms of size.

我們成長的限制因素是獲利能力。我們來這裡是為了賺錢。經過風險調整後，就是這樣。因此，推動 ROE 是關鍵。這就是我們來這裡的原因。因此，我認為，就規模而言，我們可以進行的交易沒有限制，只要這些交易能夠在風險調整後提高企業的 ROE。

Got you. Okay. And, Pete, you alluded to the answer to this about the leasing expenses kind of in the last answer. So talking about the fact that some of it was a result of kind of more renewals as opposed to kind of switching airlines.

明白了。好的。皮特，你在上一個回答中提到了有關租賃費用的答案。所以，事實上，部分原因是續約較多，而不是更換航空公司。

I'm hoping you could kind of just flesh that out a little bit, like are there any other things that have caused these particular renewals to be low leasing cost because it seems like that process of having a high level of renewals is likely to continue, certainly through this year and maybe even into next. So can you just talk about that and what that might mean for leasing expenses as we go through '25?

我希望您能稍微詳細說明一下，例如是否還有其他因素導致這些特定續約的租賃成本較低，因為看起來高水平續約的過程可能會持續下去，肯定會持續到今年，甚至可能持續到明年。那麼，您能否談談這一點以及這對我們經歷 25 年的租賃費用意味著什麼？

Sure, Moshe. So as a general matter, when you're extending with the existing lessee, then the transition costs are going to be lower because you don't have to do anything to move it, right? The aircraft stays where it is. And so generally speaking, that's going to lower leasing expenses. So that was part of it this quarter.

當然，摩西。因此，一般來說，當您與現有承租人續約時，過渡成本會更低，因為您不需要做任何事情來轉移它，對嗎？飛機停留在原地。一般來說，這將降低租賃費用。這就是本季的一部分。

And then the rest of it, I'd really say, was due to timing. We did see, I mean, just kind of lower activity on the maintenance side as well. And that's one of the reasons why you also saw like maintenance rights amortization, for example, was much lower this quarter, lower than normal. So I think it reverts back to kind of regular levels. I mean, as a general matter, I would say if you think of net maintenance contribution, I'd say, $30 million to $40 million a quarter is probably a good guide.

而其餘部分，我想說，都是因為時機問題。我們確實看到，維護方面的活動也有些減少。這就是為什麼你會看到本季的維護權攤銷額比正常水平低得多的原因之一。所以我認為它會恢復到正常水平。我的意思是，一般來說，如果你考慮淨維護貢獻，我會說，每季 3000 萬到 4000 萬美元可能是一個很好的指導。

Jamie Baker, JPMorgan.

摩根大通的傑米貝克。

This is actually the first AerCap call I've ever done from Europe and I totally get the timing now. I love it. So Gus, on tariffs, look, it's a zero-sum game, okay? Somebody ends up paying and it might not be AerCap. And Mark and I get that. Maybe it's the airlines, maybe the OEMs ultimately accept lower margins.

這其實是我第一次從歐洲接到 AerCap 的電話，現在我完全掌握了時間。我喜歡它。所以，格斯，就關稅而言，你看，這是一場零和遊戲，好嗎？最終會有人付錢，但付錢的人可能不是 AerCap。馬克和我明白這一點。也許是航空公司，也許是原始設備製造商最終接受較低的利潤。

But at the end of the day, higher costs, it means less growth. So maybe it does drive the business to mid-life or less expensive aircraft at the margin. I mean it's -- I've seen that suggested by some appraisers. Any thoughts on that?

但最終，成本越高，成長就越少。因此，它或許確實會推動飛機業務朝中年飛機或更便宜的飛機方向發展。我的意思是──我看到一些評估師提出過這樣的建議。對此有什麼想法嗎？

Well, I think you're right in what you say, Jamie, that ultimately, someone has to bear an additional cost on the system. Now who that will be and the allocation of that between the ultimate consumer, and the OEMs, the airlines ourselves, we'll have to wait and see. And certainly, from AerCap's perspective, as it relates to our current contracts with the OEMs, we have fixed caps of escalation in place. So on these contracts, it won't affect us.

嗯，傑米，我認為你說得對，最終，有人必須承擔系統的額外成本。現在，誰將承擔這項責任，以及最終消費者、原始設備製造商和航空公司之間如何分配責任，我們只能拭目以待。當然，從 AerCap 的角度來看，由於這與我們與 OEM 簽訂的現有合約有關，因此我們已經設定了固定的升級上限。因此，就這些合約而言，它不會影響我們。

Now that being said, though, what do we know at the moment? Well, we know there are tariffs on aircraft going into the United States. We know there are tariffs on aircraft going into China. So they're known. They're not having a significant impact as yet, but it's very early in the game.

話雖如此，但我們目前知道什麼呢？我們知道，進入美國的飛機需要繳關稅。我們知道進入中國的飛機需要繳關稅。所以他們是知名的。它們目前尚未產生重大影響，但遊戲才剛開始。

Ultimately, if the Europeans retaliate and match the US tariffs and then run a more global basis, we will see, as you say, used aircraft values increase. We will see, in China, I would imagine that the pressure valve they can use is to take the age limitation of leased aircraft.

最終，如果歐洲人採取報復措施並與美國徵收關稅，然後在全球範圍內實施，我們就會看到，正如你所說，二手飛機的價值會增加。我們將會看到，在中國，我想他們可以使用的壓力閥就是限制租賃飛機的機齡。

Over half the fleet in China is leased. They have an age limitation of 20 years. If you were to remove that limitation in China and certain other countries in emerging markets in Asia, what you would find then is that demand for new aircraft would be dampened because that is a lot of aircraft that would not leave the market and would stay in service.

中國超過一半的車隊都是租來的。他們的年齡限制為20歲。如果取消中國和亞洲新興市場中某些其他國家的這項限制，你會發現，對新飛機的需求將會受到抑制，因為許多飛機不會離開市場，而是繼續服役。

However, all that being said, Jamie, I think my hope and I think everyone's hope in the industry is that we have had a tariff-free industry between Europe and the US and several other countries under the 1979 agreement. And if we could bring more countries into that, such as China and India, that would be an even bigger win for US industry. And we all hope something like that can be achieved.

然而，傑米，話雖如此，我認為我的希望以及業內每個人的希望是，根據 1979 年的協議，我們在歐洲和美國以及其他幾個國家之間實現免關稅產業。如果我們能讓更多的國家參與進來，例如中國和印度，那對美國工業來說將是更大的勝利。我們都希望這樣的目標能夠實現。

Yes. Well, and I guess that is sort of my follow-up, Gus, because maybe the end game is that aircraft are simply too important to the global economy to be subject to tariffs. Do you know of any examples where the headlines scream tariffs, but the reality is that aircraft and parts are carved out? I'm just wondering if there's any precedent for such an outcome. That's all.

是的。好吧，我想這就是我的後續問題，格斯，因為最終的結果可能是飛機對全球經濟太重要了，以至於不能被徵收關稅。您是否知道一些例子，頭條新聞大肆宣揚關稅，但實際情況是飛機和零件卻被排除在外？我只是想知道是否有這樣的結果的先例。就這樣。

Certainly. Well, I think, look, there are discussions ongoing, we understand, in China between the airlines and the regulators. And hopefully, this will lead to aviation aerospace being exempted.

當然。嗯，我認為，據我們了解，中國航空公司和監管機構之間正在進行討論。希望這將導致航空航太業獲得豁免。

But I think, Jamie, what would be a tremendous achievement for the administration is if they could significantly enhance the 1979 agreement, so that it doesn't just incorporate 34-odd countries, mainly North America and Europe, but also bring in heavyweights such as China and India, where there are small tariffs in China at the moment, 5%. Before, there were always small tariffs before. The recent ones are 5% in a narrow-body, 1% on a wide-body.

但是傑米，我認為，如果政府能夠大幅加強 1979 年協議，使其不僅涵蓋 34 多個國家（主要是北美和歐洲），而且還能吸收中國和印度等重量級國家，那麼這對政府來說將是一個巨大的成就，目前中國的關稅較低，為 5%。之前一直都有小額關稅。最近的數據顯示，窄體客機的起飛重量下降了 5%，寬體客機的起飛重量下降了 1%。

I think that will be a tremendous win for the administration because the US has a massive trade surplus in aerospace with the rest of the world. It's high-tech engineering and manufacturing, great paying jobs, and I think to expand the potential for that would be a tremendous achievement by the administration if it could be done to bring in those other countries into that zero-tariff agreement.

我認為這對政府來說將是一個巨大的勝利，因為美國在航空航太領域與世界其他國家有著巨大的貿易順差。這是高科技工程和製造業，高薪工作，我認為，如果能夠擴大這一領域的潛力，讓其他國家加入零關稅協議，那麼對政府來說將是一個巨大的成就。

Hillary Cacanando, Deutsche Bank.

希拉蕊·卡卡南多，德意志銀行。

I think in the last couple of weeks, we've seen airlines in the US pulling their guidance, cutting capacity, given the uncertainty in the market and the softness that they've seen in domestic bookings. I know you said that demand remains strong. But I was wondering if you could kind of talk about what are some of the metrics or indicators that would get you kind of more concerned about demand trends going forward.

我認為在過去幾周里，我們看到美國的航空公司由於市場不確定性和國內預訂疲軟而撤回了他們的預期並削減了運力。我知道您說過需求依然強。但我想知道您是否可以談論哪些指標或指標會讓您更加關注未來的需求趨勢。

Hillary, you're right. I mean the carriers -- first of all, it's a global market. The US is only 22% of it, give or take. So you got to put that in context. And other parts of the world, there has been a significant tailwind against falling yields. And that is weakness in the fuel price and weakness in the dollar. They rarely go in the same direction. We generally see crude and dollar go in the opposite direction. So that has been a tailwind that has insulated non-US dollar-denominated economies, which is the vast majority of the world from slowdowns in yields.

希拉里，你說得對。我的意思是營運商——首先，這是一個全球市場。美國祇佔其中的 22% 左右。所以你必須把它放在上下文中。在世界其他地區，收益率下降的勢頭明顯強勁。這就是燃料價格和美元疲軟的原因。他們很少朝同一個方向走。我們通常看到原油和美元走向相反的方向。因此，這就像一股順風，使非美元計價的經濟體（佔世界絕大多數）免受收益率放緩的影響。

But turning to your point in the US, yes, we do see weakness in the economy cabin in the US, and you're seeing airlines adjust capacity. But that's adjusting capacity for a three-month or six-month, nine-month period. When we are looking at fleet decisions with airlines, we're looking at 15-year decisions, 20-year decisions.

但談到您在美國所持的觀點，是的，我們確實看到美國經濟艙的疲軟，而且您看到航空公司正在調整運力。但這是針對三個月、六個月或九個月期間的調整容量。當我們與航空公司一起考慮機隊決策時，我們考慮的是 15 年、20 年的決策。

And as I just referenced in my prepared comments, earlier in the quarter, we extended 26 mid-life aircraft in the US and these aircraft are over 15 years of age. So they're looking at long-term extensions, six years, because they need to know they have the capacity for the longer term. You can't turn on a dime when it comes to planning your aircraft fleet.

正如我剛才在準備好的評論中提到的那樣，在本季度早些時候，我們在美國延長了 26 架中年飛機的使用壽命，這些飛機的機齡均超過 15 年。因此，他們正在考慮長期延期，六年，因為他們需要知道他們是否有能力進行長期延期。在規劃飛機機隊時，你不能輕易改變主意。

Airlines are often buffeted by short-term gyrations in the global economy. But longer term, they have to know what seats they need and build to that. So because of that, we're not seeing any reduction in demand at the moment.

航空公司常受到全球經濟短期波動的衝擊。但從長遠來看，他們必須知道自己需要什麼席位，並據此進行建設。因此，我們目前沒有看到需求有任何減少。

Got it. Great. That's really helpful. And then one of the questions I've been getting from investors is just regarding your portfolio, right now, I think it's about 75% new tech at the moment. And I guess over the course of the next few years, I would assume the proportion of the new tech will get bigger. So I've been getting questions from investors, you've been doing so -- like your gain on sale number has been great because you've been able to sell this older portfolio because of your barbell strategy, fleet strategy.

知道了。偉大的。這真的很有幫助。然後，投資人向我提出的一個問題就是關於你們的投資組合，目前，我認為大約 75% 是新技術。我認為，在未來幾年內，新技術的比例將會越來越大。所以我一直在收到投資人的提問，你一直在這樣做——例如你的銷售收益數字一直很高，因為你能夠透過你的槓鈴策略、艦隊策略來出售這個舊的投資組合。

And I think the question is, what happens when you increase the number of new tech in your portfolio? Does that strategy go away? How do you think about the, I guess, your portfolio going forward?

我認為問題是，當你增加投資組合中的新技術數量時會發生什麼？這個策略會消失嗎？我想，您對於未來的投資組合有什麼看法？

Well, Hillary, that's the thing about the barbell, you're always looking way into the future. When we get to the end of this decade when we'll be out of the older tech, we will have 787s that are 18 years old, we'll have Neos that will be 15 years old. So they will then be our mid-life craft.

好吧，希拉里，這就是槓鈴的意義所在，你總是在展望未來。當我們到達這個十年的末期時，我們將淘汰舊技術，我們將擁有 18 年機齡的 787 飛機，我們將擁有 15 年機齡的 Neos 飛機。所以它們將成為我們中年時期的工藝品。

Where, I've always said, you don't want to be is at the end of this decade with 15-year-old 777-300ERs, 737s, A320s and 330s. You want them gone. And you want them to have had the foresight to position the business for future demand way into the future. You can't be looking short term in this industry, just like indeed, we referenced about the airlines.

我一直說，你肯定不想看到本世紀末還有已經服役 15 年的 777-300ER、737、A320 和 330。你想讓他們離開。您希望他們具有遠見，能夠根據未來的需求定位業務。你不能只關注這個行業的短期前景，就像我們提到的航空公司一樣。

We can never get caught up on the short-term gyrations of, yes, there's an amazing bid tomorrow for a 15-year-old A320 and start buying those in -- or a 10-year-old A320, excuse me, and start buying them in because demand will fall off for one of that age. So I think when we look in the several years' time, a significant portion of our portfolio will be in that 15-year range, but it will be the newer generation of the technology. And that's been how we've shown that barbell approach or the sunset-sunrise approach to how the portfolio has been developed since 2012.

我們永遠不會陷入短期波動，是的，明天有一架 15 年機齡的 A320 飛機的驚人出價，然後開始購買——或者一架 10 年機齡的 A320 飛機，對不起，然後開始購買，因為對這種機齡的飛機的需求將會下降。因此，我認為，當我們展望未來幾年時，我們投資組合的很大一部分將處於 15 年的範圍內，但它將是更新一代的技術。這就是我們自 2012 年以來對投資組合發展所採用的槓鈴方法或日落日出方法。

That's very clear. Okay. So by barbell, you're not meaning like you're going to sell an aircraft because it turns like 10 years old or something. I see what you mean. You're looking at the new tech inside it (multiple speakers)

這非常清楚。好的。所以，你說的槓鈴，並不是說你要賣掉一架飛機，因為它已經有 10 年的歷史了。我明白你的意思。你正在看裡面的新技術（多位發言者）

No. It's got to be far more nuanced and thoughtful than that.

不。它必須比這更加細緻入微、更加深思熟慮。

Catherine O'Brien, Goldman Sachs.

高盛的凱瑟琳·奧布萊恩。

You already touched on what you're seeing from the airlines in the prepared remarks and just now with Hillary and it sounds like airlines even in North America are still business as usual on looking to secure capacity from your fleet and order book.

您已經在準備好的發言中以及剛才希拉里講話中談到了航空公司的情況，聽起來即使是北美的航空公司仍然照常營業，希望從機隊和訂單中爭取到運力。

But we've had quite a few US airlines talk about retiring more aircraft than planned a couple of months ago, totally understand they're a fraction of the global industry. Based on this quarter's gain, doesn't seem like it so far, but are you seeing any impact to demand for your own fleet from buyers? Can you just remind us who the complexion of the buyers of your aircraft sold has been of late?

但幾個月前，我們已經聽到不少美國航空公司談論退役比計劃更多的飛機，我們完全理解他們只是全球航空業的一小部分。根據本季度的收益，到目前為止似乎還沒有出現這種情況，但您是否看到買家對您自己的車隊的需求受到了影響？您能否提醒我們一下，最近購買您飛機的買家都是什麼樣的？

I think, look, I mean, as I said, it's very important to realize the US is 22%, 23% of the global market. That's it. It's important, but it's not the driving force. And so while we will -- you said rightly that some US carriers are going to retire some aircraft, I think it's important, what aircraft are they retiring? Are they CRJs? I know in one airline, it's [30] E1s. I don't care.

我認為，正如我所說，認識到美國佔全球市場的 22% 至 23% 非常重要。就是這樣。這很重要，但這不是驅動力。因此，雖然我們會——您說得對，一些美國航空公司將退役一些飛機，但我認為重要的是，他們將退役哪些飛機？它們是 CRJ 嗎？我知道有一家航空公司有 [30] 架 E1。我不在乎。

It could be very old 757s. They're not relevant. These are 25-year plus aircraft. We're not seeing 18-, 19-year-old aircraft being retired and quite the opposite. I just announced there that we extended 26 aircraft in the US market, and they were close to that 18, 19-year-old. So people can say these things, we're retiring aircraft, true, but it could be aircraft that were on the way out anyway inevitably. So I wouldn't read too much into that.

它可能是非常老舊的 757。它們不相關。這些飛機已經服役 25 年多了。我們並沒有看到 18、19 年的飛機退役，事實恰恰相反。我剛剛宣布，我們在美國市場增加了 26 架飛機，這些飛機的機齡接近 18、19 年。所以人們可以說這些話，我們正在退役飛機，這是真的，但這些飛機也可能是已經不可避免地要退役的。所以我不會對此進行過多的解讀。

And Catie, in terms of the split of sales this past quarter, so it's about a quarter to airlines, about a third to other lessors and about a third to investors and then the remaining 5% or so was to part out end-of-life sales.

Catie，就上個季度的銷售分成而言，大約四分之一分配給航空公司，大約三分之一分配給其他租賃商，大約三分之一分配給投資者，剩下的 5% 左右則用於報廢飛機的銷售。

Great. Gus, I thought your long-term take on what would happen if tariffs on aviation stayed in place on CNBC is very interesting, just in terms of airlines need to adjust orders to avoid tariffs over the longer term. In the shorter term, how does this impact lessors? My understanding is it sounds like you're not on the hook for any tariffs, if airlines are typically the importers of record even in an operating lease situation.

偉大的。格斯，我認為你在 CNBC 上對航空關稅持續存在將會發生什麼情況的長期看法非常有趣，只是航空公司需要調整訂單以避免長期關稅。從短期來看，這對出租人有何影響？我的理解是，如果航空公司通常是記錄的進口商，即使在經營租賃的情況下，你也不需要承擔任何關稅。

But over the next couple of years, if the airlines in the US need more Boeing lift shorter term or vice versa for European airline, could the lessors step in and help with that, not to discount the disruption and added cost that would mean for the impacted airlines, but just thinking through some of the puts and takes?

但在接下來的幾年裡，如果美國的航空公司在短期內需要更多的波音飛機，或者歐洲航空公司需要更多的波音飛機，那麼租賃商是否可以介入並提供幫助，而不是低估這對受影響的航空公司可能造成的混亂和增加的成本，而只是考慮一下其中的一些利弊？

Sure. Well, there are three sources of aircraft in the world for an airline. There's Boeing, Airbus, and the leasing market/the used aircraft market. So if we do have, as I said on the CNBC interview, tit for tat and the Europeans raise tariffs, the Chinese raise tariffs, the US continues with the tariffs, we will ultimately see -- absent Boeing and GE and Honeywell moving production offshore to Europe and to China, we're going to see a retrenchment of Boeing sales to focus on the US, and we're going to see Airbus then take most of the rest of the world.

當然。嗯，世界上對於航空公司來說有三個飛機來源。有波音、空中巴士和租賃市場/二手飛機市場。因此，正如我在 CNBC 採訪中所說的那樣，如果我們真的針鋒相對，歐洲提高關稅，中國提高關稅，美國繼續徵收關稅，我們最終將看到——如果波音、通用電氣和霍尼韋爾不將生產轉移到歐洲和中國，我們將看到波音的銷售縮減，而將重點放在美國，而我們將看到空中巴士佔據世界其他大部分地區。

So that's one outcome. But then the other scenario is that if you eliminate -- and in my discussions with the governmental officials, what I have said is if you do put in tariffs, okay, suboptimal, but make sure that you don't tariff the used aircraft market, so that the consumer, say, be it in the US or in Europe or in China, for that matter, does not get punished. The bill for the consumer is minimized.

這就是一個結果。但另一種情況是，如果你取消——在我與政府官員的討論中，我說的是，如果你確實徵收關稅，好吧，這不是最理想的，但要確保你不會對二手飛機市場徵收關稅，這樣消費者，無論是在美國、在歐洲還是在中國，都不會受到懲罰。消費者的帳單被最小化。

If you were to tariff, for example, used Airbus and new Airbus in the US, that means that there's a smaller supply of aircraft available to US carriers, which will mean less seats. Now if you let used aircraft in, you're not helping or hurting Airbus in any way, shape, or form. Airbus have manufactured those aircraft, they're gone.

例如，如果你對美國的二手空中巴士和新空中巴士進行關稅調整，這意味著美國航空公司可用的飛機供應量會減少，也意味著座位數會減少。現在，如果你讓二手飛機入境，你就不會以任何方式、形式或形式幫助或傷害空中巴士。空中巴士公司製造了這些飛機，但它們已經消失了。

The same is true on the other side. In this worst-case scenario, the Europeans should allow European carriers to access used Boeing airplanes. Because they're not in any way helping or hurting Boeing by taking used aircraft. But if they don't take the used aircraft, they're hurting their own consumers more.

另一邊也是同樣如此。在這種最壞的情況下，歐洲人應該允許歐洲航空公司使用二手波音飛機。因為他們收購二手飛機不會為波音帶來任何幫助或傷害。但如果他們不接收二手飛機，那麼對他們自己的消費者的傷害就會更大。

The Joe public in the street is going to pay more for tickets if governments restrict the supply of aircraft to just new from one manufacturer. So I would hope that that is the way it will play out, which, I guess, if we go to -- there's a lot of negatives in that whole scenario. Of course, we hope that never happens, but at least there should be good demand for our metal.

如果政府將飛機供應限制為僅由一家製造商提供新飛機，那麼普通民眾將支付更高的票價。所以我希望事情會這樣發展，我想，如果我們去的話——整個場景中有很多負面因素。當然，我們希望這種情況永遠不會發生，但至少我們的金屬應該有良好的需求。

Kristine Liwag, Morgan Stanley.

克莉絲汀‧利瓦格，摩根士丹利。

So maybe two questions. I mean, Gus, on this tariff discussion, look, it seems like the rhetoric around it is more negative, but the way I see it is that historically, Boeing was kind of the tip of the trade spear for the US. And if these countries want to actually look at the deficit, maybe buying more aircraft would be an easy way to do that. I mean aerospace defense is a net exporting industry for the US.

所以也許有兩個問題。格斯，我的意思是，在這次關稅討論中，你看，似乎周圍的言論更加消極，但我認為，從歷史上看，波音公司是美國貿易矛頭的先鋒。如果這些國家真的想解決赤字問題，也許購買更多的飛機是一個簡單的方法。我的意思是航空航天防禦是美國的淨出口產業。

So I was wondering, in that context, if countries want to buy more aircraft, what's your role in that? And because ultimately, it's got to be the country who's importing it. Would they increase lease from you because it's still manufactured in the US? Would that solve some of that trade deficit issue? Would you be able to step in or do you anticipate higher demand for sale leasebacks if that were to materialize?

所以我想知道，在這種背景下，如果各國想要購買更多的飛機，您在這方面扮演什麼角色？因為最終還是要由國家來進口。因為它仍在美國製造，他們會提高你的租金嗎？這能解決部分貿易逆差問題嗎？如果這種情況發生，您是否能夠介入，或者您是否預計售後回租的需求會更高？

Well, I think it's more of the former rather than the latter because Boeing doesn't have many slots this side of 2030. So I think the leasing industry and certainly AerCap would want to step in and assist in any way we could the administration achieve its targets and work with Boeing to make sure that to the extent aircraft off our skyline would help resolve trade issues, we would definitely step in to make that happen one way or the other.

嗯，我認為前者比後者更佔優勢，因為波音在 2030 年前沒有太多空檔了。因此我認為租賃行業，當然還有 AerCap，都願意介入並以任何方式協助政府實現其目標，並與波音公司合作，確保飛機從我們的天際線上消失的程度有助於解決貿易問題，我們一定會介入，以某種方式實現這一目標。

And I would imagine the other leasing companies will be similarly supportive because, of course, airlines can order aircraft for post-2030 delivery. That's a long way off, though. I think the US would want to see something quicker than that, and that's where the lessors could be very helpful.

我想其他租賃公司也會給予類似的支持，因為航空公司當然可以訂購 2030 年後交付的飛機。但這還有很長的路要走。我認為美國希望看到更快的進展，而這正是租賃公司可以提供很大幫助的地方。

Great. And on your commentary on the Shannon Engine Support business, really caught my attention. Can you first discuss exactly what is it you're doing? What are you responsible for versus Safran and your 27 MRO partners? This engine module approach, especially in the CFM56, has been pretty attractive for some players with pretty fat margins. Could you discuss the economics of this JV and how large this could be for you?

偉大的。您對香農引擎支援業務的評論確實引起了我的注意。能先討論一下您具體在做什麼嗎？與賽峰集團及其 27 家 MRO 合作夥伴相比，您的職責是什麼？這種引擎模組方法，尤其是在 CFM56 中，對於一些利潤豐厚的參與者來說非常有吸引力。您能否討論一下該合資企業的經濟效益以及其規模對您來說有多大？

Well, I mean the way it works is we are just part of the aftersales service that's provided by the OEM. So if an airline signs up for, say, a CFM product, it will be our obligation when the engine comes off wing to have the spare engine on site, on time, on spec for the airline that has the off engine to go to the shop for repair. So we'd have to get it there. We have to take it back off the airline. We'll have to make sure whatever maintenance is done is done quickly, is done to specification, that it's ready to go out again to the next customer. So it's part of providing the aftersales service to the OEM customer.

嗯，我的意思是，它的工作方式是我們只是 OEM 提供的售後服務的一部分。因此，如果一家航空公司簽約了 CFM 產品，那麼當發動機脫翼時，我們就有義務按時、按規格將備用發動機送到現場，以便發動機脫翼的航空公司前往維修廠進行維修。所以我們必須把它送到那裡。我們必須將其從航空公司撤回。我們必須確保所有維護工作都能夠快速完成、符合規範，並準備好再次交付給下一位客戶。所以這是向 OEM 客戶提供售後服務的一部分。

And that involves -- I think last year, we did over 1,200 engine movements, I believe, which is quite a lot. That's three-plus every single calendar day that we're moving engines around the world to support the aftersales program. And that's why you need such a big global network. And you have to have engines stationed in differed pools around the world in order to facilitate that. You have to have very significant in-house logistics expertise.

這涉及到——我想去年我們進行了超過 1,200 次引擎調動，這是相當多的。這意味著我們每天有三天多的時間在世界各地運送引擎以支援售後計畫。這就是為什麼你需要如此龐大的全球網路。為了實現這一點，你必須在世界各地不同的池中部署引擎。您必須擁有非常豐富的內部物流專業知識。

Can you imagine moving a $20 million asset 1,200 times in a given year four times a day -- three, four times a day? That takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure, knowledge and systems to do that. So that's the primary thing we do as it relates to your talk about engine repairs, module repairs. Look, I think any well-run business will be doing that anyway.

您能想像在一年內每天四次、三四次地轉移價值 2000 萬美元的資產 1200 次嗎？要做到這一點需要大量的基礎設施、知識和系統。因此，這是我們所做的主要工作，因為它與您談論的引擎維修、模組維修有關。聽著，我認為任何經營良好的企業都會這麼做。

Stephen Trent, Citi.

花旗銀行的史蒂芬‧特倫特。

Actually, as a follow-up to my counterpart from Morgan Stanley about the Shannon Engine JV. When you guys also think about your CapEx kind of going forward, should we expect a shift in the blend of purchases of helicopters and engines relative to plane purchases? Or do you think we'd see sort of a similar mix to what it has been in recent quarters?

實際上，這是對摩根士丹利同行關於香農發動機合資企業的後續跟進。當你們考慮未來的資本支出時，我們是否應該預期直升機和引擎的購買組合相對於飛機的購買組合會改變？或者您認為我們會看到與最近幾季類似的組合嗎？

Look, helicopters will always be on a dollar basis, a very small proportion of what's going on. But I think aircraft will far dominate any CapEx program going forward. We have had a surge in engine CapEx. That's driven by the fact that the 737 MAX and the A320neo are hitting higher levels of production, thereby requiring higher level of sparing.

你看，直升機永遠都是以美元計算的，這只佔目前採購總額的一小部分。但我認為，飛機在未來的任何資本支出計畫中都將佔據主導地位。我們的引擎資本支出激增。這是因為 737 MAX 和 A320neo 的生產水準正在提高，因此需要更高水準的備用。

I don't think we -- that isn't a run rate, I would say, for a level of engine CapEx that we have had, but we will always have a level of engine CapEx. You can generally think about spare engines as somewhere around, if there are, say, 4,000 MAX aircraft in the world, that's 8,000 engines.

我不認為——我想說，對於我們已經擁有的引擎資本支出水平來說，這不是一個運行率，但我們將始終擁有一定水平的引擎資本支出。一般來說，你可以認為備用引擎的數量大約為，如果世界上有 4,000 架 MAX 飛機，那就是 8,000 台引擎。

There will generally be a spares requirement for 15% of that, so that's 1,200 LEAP-1Bs. If there's 8,000 neo, say, 2:1, that's 2,400 would be needed in the world, a total of 3,600 that would build up over the course of the next five, six years. A portion of those will be held by the airlines. We will be by far the biggest proportion of that globally. Obviously, we already are. Even if we didn't buy any more, we'd still be the biggest player for the next 10 years.

通常，其中 15% 需要備用零件，即 1,200 台 LEAP-1B。如果有 8,000 個 neo，比如說 2:1，那麼全世界就需要 2,400 個 neo，總共需要 3,600 個 neo，這些 neo 需要在未來五、六年內逐漸累積起來。其中一部分將由航空公司持有。我們將佔據全球最大份額。顯然，我們已經這樣做了。即使我們不再購買，我們在未來 10 年內仍將是最大的參與者。

Super helpful, Aengus. Appreciate it. And just a quick follow-up. I think I thought I heard you guys mention basically, I believe, an 84% renewal rate on aircraft leases. Could you refresh my memory, first, if I heard it correctly? Could you give a high-level view on how that's evolved over the last couple of quarters? Has it sort of gone up? Or is it about the same?

非常有幫助，Aengus。非常感謝。這只是一次快速的跟進。我想我聽到你們提到過，基本上，我相信，飛機租賃的續約率為 84%。首先，如果我沒聽錯的話，可以幫我回想嗎？您能否從宏觀角度談談過去幾季的情況如何？有沒有漲一些？或者說是差不多一樣的？

Historically, going back over a long time, it would have been 50%-odd, but over the last few years, it's trended around 90%-odd. Now this quarter, it was a little bit lower than 90%, but still extraordinarily high by historical standards. And that's because, as I called out, we moved certain aircraft during the quarter, we decided not to extend. We moved 787s from one customer to another. And because of that, we were able to increase the credit and increase the lease rentals also.

從歷史上看，回顧很長一段時間，這個數字應該是 50% 左右，但在過去幾年中，這個數字趨於 90% 左右。本季度，這一比例略低於 90%，但以歷史標準來看仍然非常高。這是因為，正如我所說，我們在本季度移動了某些飛機，我們決定不再延長。我們將 787 從一個客戶轉移到另一個客戶。正因為如此，我們才能夠增加信貸並提高租賃租金。

So you don't always extend because you need to make sure you get paid. Certainly, as we referenced at the start of this call, extending reduces leasing expense. So that's an incentive for us to extend, but there has to be a trade-off there where we still get a fair rental. And on some 787s, we decided to pull them out and go elsewhere. And that was the right thing to do.

因此，你不必總是延長合同，因為你需要確保自己能得到報酬。當然，正如我們在本次電話會議開始時所提到的那樣，延長租賃期限可以降低租賃成本。所以這對我們來說是一個擴展的動力，但必須有一個權衡，以便我們仍然可以獲得公平的租金。對於一些 787 飛機，我們決定將它們撤出並轉移到其他地方。這是正確的做法。

But yes, if I look at the extension trends, it was 60% in '21, 65% in '22, 75% in '23, and 80% in '24, and it got up as high as 90% in some of the recent quarters. So that's the situation, evidence of demand.

但是，是的，如果我看一下延期趨勢，21 年為 60%，22 年為 65%，23 年為 75%，24 年為 80%，最近幾個季度甚至高達 90%。這就是情況，需求的證據。

Ron Epstein, Bank of America.

美國銀行的羅恩愛潑斯坦。

Gus, you spoke a little bit to this. What are you seeing in wide-body demand? I mean, when we look at the fleet, the fleet seems like it's aging. Are we moving up to a period where we really could see a surge in demand for wide-body?

格斯，你剛才談到了這一點。您認為寬體飛機的需求如何？我的意思是，當我們觀察船隊時，我們發現它似乎正在老化。我們是否正進入一個真正能夠看到寬體飛機需求激增的時期？

We've been seeing very strong demand for widebodies for quite some time, Ron. We were the first to see it, and we were calling it out several years ago because we're the biggest owner of widebodies in the world. And we could see that demand is coming, and it's unabated.

羅恩，我們已經看到對寬體飛機的需求非常強勁。我們是第一批發現這現象的人，幾年前我們就指出了這一點，因為我們是世界上最大的寬體飛機擁有者。我們可以看到需求正在湧現，有增無減。

As I just referenced, we pulled three 787-9 out of a customer recently and moved them to another customer with better credit and materially higher lease rentals. And if there was more widebodies in the world, which there aren't, you could shift them tomorrow morning. There's very strong demand for 787-9s, A350-900s.

正如我剛才提到的，我們最近從一位客戶手中撤出了三架 787-9，並將其轉移給了另一位信用更好、租金更高的客戶。如果世界上有更多的寬體飛機（但實際上並沒有），你可以在明天早上轉移它們。787-9、A350-900 的需求非常強勁。

Got it, got it. And what's your expectation for 777-9, the Xs, when they start coming out?

明白了，明白了。當 777-9 和 Xs 開始推出時，您有何期待？

I think it will be a very large aircraft. I believe it will be a very capable aircraft, very fuel-efficient aircraft. And once it's in service, you would imagine that, as it's the largest aircraft out there, that part of the market, it should dominate.

我認為這將是一架非常大的飛機。我相信這將是一架性能非常強大、燃油效率非常高的飛機。一旦投入使用，你可以想像，由於它是目前最大的飛機，因此它應該佔據該部分市場的主導地位。

Got it, got it, got it. And then kind of back to your commentary on the WTO agreement, is the industry actively lobbying right now? I mean, the automotive industry got really loud and vocal and lobbied pretty hard. Do you see that at all in the aerospace industry? I mean is broadly anybody lobbying on the hill to try to move things in a direction that would get us back to at least where we were and maybe even a better place?

明白了，明白了，明白了。然後回到您對 WTO 協議的評論，業界現在是否正在積極遊說？我的意思是，汽車業的呼聲非常高漲，遊說力道也非常大。您在航空航太產業中看到過這種情況嗎？我的意思是，是否有人在國會山莊進行廣泛遊說，試圖推動事態朝著至少能讓我們回到原來的狀態甚至更好的方向發展？

I believe so, Ron, I believe so. I mean, in large-scale manufacturing, this is where the US leads the world by a country mile. This is an industry the US should protect and try and grow.

我相信如此，羅恩，我相信如此。我的意思是，在大規模製造業方面，美國遙遙領先世界。這是美國應該保護並努力發展的產業。

And as I said in my comments earlier, Ron, that what would be an amazing win for the administration to accomplish is to bring more countries into that zero for zero tariff agreement, and that would really be quite the win, I would say, for US aerospace, for US manufacturing and the US worker.

正如我之前在評論中所說的那樣，羅恩，對於美國政府來說，能夠讓更多國家加入零對零關稅協議將是一個了不起的勝利，我想說，對於美國航空航天業、美國製造業和美國工人來說，這將是一個真正的勝利。

Yes. No, I agree completely. I just wonder if anybody is actually pursuing that right now. And then --

是的。不，我完全同意。我只是想知道現在是否有人真正在追求這一點。進而--

I believe they are.

我相信是的。

And then maybe one more question. And maybe this is a broad question, big question. Ultimately, does the 737 need to be replaced? I've had some debates with some investors say, no, it doesn't.

也許還有一個問題。也許這是一個很廣泛的問題，一個很大的問題。最終，737 是否需要被取代？我曾與一些投資者進行過辯論，他們說，不是這樣的。

No, it does not. There's no -- I mean, that's the point. The MAX 8 is a good airplane. You need to get the MAX 10, the MAX 7 into service so that it's a more -- it's a better competitor for the 320 family. But I mean, I just think if you were to go to any buyer of the Boardroom of a airline or a lessor today, if you're Boeing or Airbus, and say, I've got a new airplane for you. I'd say make sure the door doesn't hit you on the way out.

不，不是的。沒有——我的意思是，這就是重點。MAX 8 是一架好飛機。您需要讓 MAX 10、MAX 7 投入使用，以便它成為 320 系列更強大的競爭對手。但我的意思是，我只是在想，如果你今天去見任何一家航空公司或租賃商的董事會買家，如果你是波音或空客，並說，我有一架新飛機給你。我想說的是，確保出去的時候門不會撞到你。

You've got to get the existing aircraft you are building more reliable, more durable in service. That's all I care about. The ones you've built do not have the same reliability and durability as your previous generation. Please don't come in here and tell me you're going to have another swing. I want the stuff you've built to work better. That's what I want.

你必須讓你正在建造的現有飛機更加可靠、更耐用。這就是我所關心的一切。您所製造的產品不具備上一代產品的可靠性和耐用性。請不要進來告訴我你還要再打一次。我希望你建造的東西能更好地發揮作用。這就是我想要的。

And at this time, there are no callers in the queue. I'd like to turn the conference back over to Aengus Kelly for any additional or closing comments.

此時，隊列中沒有呼叫者。我想將會議交還給 Aengus Kelly，請他發表任何補充或結束評論。

Thank you, operator, and thank you, everyone, for joining us for our first-quarter earnings call. We look forward to speaking to you in three months' time.

謝謝接線員，也謝謝大家參加我們的第一季財報電話會議。我們期待三個月後與您交談。

That does conclude today's teleconference. We thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect.

今天的電話會議到此結束。我們感謝大家的參與。您現在可以斷開連線。