Quite right. There's no reason to believe that there are elements of the new design that will be a lot more expensive on a variable basis (i.e. each unit of LED lighting versus flourescent, and so on). It's not quite as bad as the pharmaceutical business, but still there are huge costs up front in R&D that impact profitability as much or more than the actual cost of making one plane, or one pill.

Specifically, Airbus, by adapting an existing airframe, has a lot lower R&D cost for the A350 than does Boeing for the all-new 787. Boeing's bet only pays off if the new stuff inside the fuselage that they're paying to research and develop actually makes for a product with a meaningful competitive edge. If not, then Airbus made the right call by simply adapting an old design with a new wing and engines and paying less out in R&D costs.

So far based on the responses here, it looks like advantage: airbus.