Hb88 predicts 787 delay

Who really cares? Until there is an actual Boeing statement about delays, it's all speculation resulting in the usual knee-jerk reaction for tilting at a sacred cow or alternatively more groundless speculation based on rumours. For my part, word around is a delay of minimum 6 mo. But it's a rumour. Big deal. Patience and all will come out eventually. I personally expect FF will be on time, but EIS will indeed be delayed.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3232063/#38

787 Development costs

Bair said Boeing is above its internal development cost targets, but the program is still below what was promised the board of directors when the business case for it was made and approved. Boeing has not said how much it is spending.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/294997_787rollout07.html

December 7, 2006

Fitch Ratings

The A380 has been partially financed by government
launch aid, offsetting some of Airbus’ exposure to the
program. Although technically a loan, the launch aid
is tied to deliveries of the aircraft type for which the
aid was furnished. As a result, Airbus’ obligation for
this loan is tied to the success of the program
reducing the effect that the failure of the A380 would
have on liquidity. Because of this repayment
structure, Fitch does not treat launch aid as debt.
page 5&6
http://www.leeham.net/filelib/fitchnov06.pdf

p2p

1) Smaller, long range A/C with good CASM allow point-to-hub traffic, as you say, but therefore reduce the demand for slots at the 2nd hub that those passengers were previously flying through. So for example Portland to Narita reduces demand for Portland - San Francisco - Narita. San Fransico transfer traffic is reduced. A general increase in point to single hub traffic, bypassing the second hub, will reduce transfer traffic at hubs, and therefore open up slots.
2) Hub-hub-hub can be reduced to hub-hub, opening up slots. For example, a Denver to Narita flight will reduce demand for Denver-San Fran-Narita, reducing transfer traffic through San Fran. Or Pittsburgh to London reduces the demand for Pittsburgh - JFK - London. JFK transfer traffic is eased.
3) Secondary hub - to - secondary hub or point - to - secondary hub will reduce slot demand on the previous hub-to-hub routes. Eg: A flight from Portland to Osaka or Kansai will take the pressure off of San Francisco or Seattle and Narita. (Decentralization). Similarily, Toronto to Birmingham takes the pressure off of Toronto-LHR-Birmingham. Transfer traffic at LHR is eased.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3197713/#63

Airbus orders

Go to the link below, and on the left, under "Key Documents" click on O&D 1974-2005. This will open an Excel document that will I think provide you the answer to your question.
http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/orders_and_deliveries/