Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which nations have negotiated the lowest reported unit price for the F-35 or Gripen E and what drove those discounts?
Executive summary
Available reporting in the provided files does not offer a definitive list ranking which nations secured the absolute lowest unit prices for the F‑35 or the Gripen E; instead, the sources show wide variation in reported headline “per‑aircraft” figures across deals and note that package content, offsets and political choices drive those differences (e.g., Colombia’s Gripen‑E headline of about $213M per aircraft and some F‑35 export contract figures near $208M) [1] [2]. Sources also report much lower advertised “headline” flyaway or list prices for fighters — Gripen E near $85M or other jets in the $70–100M band — but stress that final contract totals commonly include weapons, training, sustainment and industrial offsets that change unit‑cost comparators [3] [4].
1. Reported headline prices differ by source — no single lowest nation identified
Publicly reported “per‑aircraft” figures in these sources vary widely and are deal‑specific; for example, one analysis of Colombia’s 2025 Gripen‑E deal quotes roughly $212.9M per jet including weapons and support [1], while other contemporary summaries place some Gripen E “advertised” headline prices near $85M for certain customers [3]. A separate defence article cites F‑35 export contract reporting that put a unit near $208.3M in a 2023 Czech contract, yet also shows large variance among platforms [2]. The available reporting does not compile a consistent ranking of nations by lowest negotiated unit price (not found in current reporting).
2. Why headline unit prices are poor apples‑to‑apples measures
All sources stress that “unit price” numbers depend heavily on what’s bundled: weapons, ground systems, training, spare parts, logistics support, and offsets. The Colombia example explicitly shows a €3.1B package for 17 Gripen E/F that produces a $212.9M per‑aircraft figure once full deal content is included — a number that surpasses some other fighters’ flyaway estimates because Bogotá sought industrial sovereignty and comprehensive support rather than the cheapest flyaway jet [1]. Industry summaries likewise caution that advertised “flyaway” or list prices (e.g., Gripen E ~ $85M) are often lower than contract totals that include lifecycle and sovereign‑offset elements [3] [4].
3. Political and industrial offsets are primary drivers of discounts or premiums
Where deals depart from headline list pricing, it is often because governments and manufacturers negotiate industrial participation, technology transfer and local jobs as part of the package. The Colombia case signals a deliberate premium for “industrial sovereignty through Swedish offsets” and regional interoperability rather than pursuing the lowest unit cost [1]. The CBC piece about Canada’s 2025 procurement context shows Saab pitching large Canadian job promises as part of its Gripen offer — illustrating how industrial benefits can be traded against price [5]. Those offset demands can raise unit‑price totals, while conversely, buyers accepting limited offsets or buying large lots can sometimes obtain lower per‑aircraft figures (available sources do not quantify a lowest such discounted nation).
4. Scale, timing and political leverage change bargaining outcomes
Sources imply that purchase scale and geopolitical alignment affect pricing: larger buys and close political ties to a supplier can improve leverage, while urgent or politically sensitive sales may reduce it. The F‑35 program’s broad multinational buys and U.S. political controls mean some export pricing reflects coproduction, sustainment commitments and program‑wide economies, which can push reported contract numbers into the low‑hundreds of millions per aircraft in export announcements [2]. Conversely, smaller or single‑unit exports with heavy local offsets — like some Gripen negotiations — may look more expensive per unit once all elements are included [1].
5. Conflicting price signals in secondary reporting — interpret with care
Independent price lists and program‑wide lifecycle estimates diverge: one price summary places modern fighters commonly between about $85M and $120M per unit in headline acquisition bands, while other contract‑specific reporting cites figures above $200M per jet once support is included [3] [4] [2]. That conflict in the sources underscores why you cannot reliably say “Country X paid the lowest F‑35/Gripen E price” absent full contract line‑item disclosures (not found in current reporting).
6. What would be needed to determine the “lowest negotiated unit price”
To identify the lowest negotiated per‑aircraft price across nations you would need standardized, itemized contract data showing flyaway cost, weapons and sensors, training, spare‑parts and sustainment commitments, and any offset/industrial agreements for each buyer. The current set of sources provides contract totals and advertised list prices but not the standardized, itemized comparisons required to declare which nation negotiated the lowest true unit price (not found in current reporting).
Bottom line: current reporting in the provided sources shows big variation in headline and contract unit figures and points to offsets, industrial policy and package content — not simple sticker prices — as the real drivers of discounts or premiums [1] [3] [4] [2] [5].