Being late for entry into service is not so bad. Boeing heard it from its arch rival Airbus minion since 2007. Boeing's 7 Late 7 became the mantra. However, we here, at the scallywag post can't even rhyme with the A320NEO with some sort of "late slogan". The remainder of the day will be dedicated for just rhyming with NEO. Because it really stinks that Airbus is two weeks late and not three years late, it raises the ire of something stinky. The A320-B.O. does almost fit while rhyming with NEO. If you don't take a bath on your Airbus stock then B.O. is succinct and it can cure the B.O. of lateness, if only by two weeks.
Remember the 787 was an all-new plastic airplane and the A320 B.O. is a metal replica of its vaunted single aisle swag. Oh come on Airbus! Laugh a little, live a little, being late really stinks if the A320 B.O. is late being delivered in the second week of January 2016. After-all Airbus had plenty of time making the B.O. slide out the door during 2015. The single aisle gap will narrow by a fortnight for the Max introduction and entry into service date. How important is it to be on time? Not very, in the scheme of things, and only if you complain about a competitor who tried to do so much more with its 787 compared with the A320 B.O. lateness.
Remember Boeing wasn't building an all new aircraft, it was also rebooting a whole company with a common theme, concerning every type matters. The 737, 767, 777 and 747 will have advanced architecture beyond what the former aircraft had before the 787 started and now all will fly like a 787. The 787 was about Boeing stealing the march at every level not just on one aircraft. It took an additional three years to realign Boeing's design and technology advances now used in every new aircraft design, including the MAX and the KC-46.
So a two week B.O. delay is nothing to crow about, but does deserve a wily smirk and a chuckle just for old times’ sake.