Back to Squawk list
  • 28

Boeing-Bombardier Trade Dispute Heats Up at U.S. Hearing

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Boeing Co and Bombardier Inc went head to head on Monday over the U.S. planemaker’s claim that its Canadian rival used billions of dollars in illegal government subsidies to dump its newest jetliner in the United States at below cost. ( 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

I love Boeing but why not make a better airplane that businesses want to buy.
Ramer 2
Boeing miss-judged the market and Bombardier found a market niche they totally missed. Now, for the Big Wigs to save their jobs, are trying to have politicians and lawyers save them. Now they have also blown the Super Hornet contract.. dumb move; they should all be looking for new jobs.
joel wiley 14
"subsidies are illegal if they get it, but legal if we do" to paraphrase a Boeing attorney.
dardav 13
trillionaires vs billionaires - or maybe real housewives of subsidy ville, population 2
This makes more sense now... With Boeing wanting to buy Embraer. The pieces are falling into place.
clay daley -1
i'd like to get somebody not boeing or not bombardier to give the cost estimate to produce the new bombardier jetliner, because all we have now is he said, and he said. NOise, not facts. Give us facts and then lets look closer at this dispute.
canuck44 4
That is a number we will never get for it will be calculated as many different ways as there are parts in the aircraft. We will get all kinds of spam allocating various costs into R&D while others actually go to the price of a single aircraft. How do you prorate the R&D costs onto a single aircraft or write them off over for example 1000 units. Then they will "borrow" technology costs from existing systems and write them down a second time. How much of the C-100 costs will have already been paid to create and build the C-300 and eventually the C-500?

Likewise the "loan" from the feds and the stock purchase by the province. They can write a lot of savings off against the loan and purchase. The stock part has already gone up 15% so that is looking like a pretty good call. Both governments will have saved money in unemployment and welfare benefits, retraining etc.

Bombardier does not have Boeing's advantage that it can bury costs into military platforms. EADS now has that ability as well but not on the scale of Boeing's many years experience.
The irony? Who will benefit most from the increase of efficiency of the C-Series? The customers of US based Delta Airlines. I'll bet those customers will benefit far more than the one time benefit of the manufacturing job making just a few more (less efficient planes.)
canuck44 7
At the moment it appears the lawyers are benefiting the most.
fef99 8
The lawyers ALWAYS win.
A "loan" is something to be paid back, not a subsidy. Same goes for purchasing stock, it is a tangible asset that has value, again, not a subsidy since if one sells a share of stock, one gets money back.

A subsidy is something that does not require any form of payment back to those providing it.

For Boeing to complain about "subsidies", is chutzpah in the first degree.
At the same time, Boeing are in talks with Embraer...and perhaps that’s the deal they’re trying to protect by attempting to destroy competition in a particular sector they don’t currently compete in. Perhaps it’s time for Boeing to come up with a believable premise rather than simply relying on bluff and bluster to push an untenable argument.
travistx 2
Boeing gets massive handouts from the US Govt, so they really should just sit down and shut up. Either compete legitimately, or leave that sector of the market to someone else.
DanWardlaw -2
Illegal government subsidies... Well, no we know our liberal government is corrupt so it's always been "Illegal government subsidies"
A possible flaw in your argument. The legislature passes laws defining what is legal and illegal. If they say a subsidy is legislatively 'legal', how can it be illegal?
Boeing was emboldened by the Trump administration rhetoric, and the US Commerce Dpt will always rule in favour of a US company.Boeing didn't have to use logic or facts in their case. If I was BBD, I would have not even bothered showing up for the kangaroo court. The current administration has shown that unless the US gets a one sided "win" deal they are not open for normal trade.
As a Canadian I would fully support slapping 300% tariffs on any Boeing product being bought to the point it blocks the sale and simply say - take us to the WTO (in a few years). Yes I know AC and West Jet would scream, and show they should. But do a deal with Airbus and give them all your business for a competitive price.
Figured it wouldn’t take long to turn political. The US has taken hits for years on trade deals and we finally want deals that you say are one sided but, deals that actually benefit the US as well, and that’s a problem?! I haven’t followed this particular issue, but it cracks me up that people will turn any topic political and then blame trump. I personally could care less about the Boeing/ bombardier thing, but calling it trump rhetoric then saying you’d support said rhetoric if it were imposed on a US company importing to Canada is laughable, but typical of folks with skewed thinking.
Brilliant post. You admit you know nothing about it (which is pretty odd for a aero centric site) and then complain about my post as laughable. I'm happy for you that you can post without silly things like logic or knowledge get in your way. The decision was political and protectionist and perhaps if you go to most forums you would see that 95% agree that Boeing is in the wrong.
I said I haven’t lived my life following every detail nor did I state one side was wrong or right. The laughable part is you blaming trump or trump rhetoric then saying you’d support it. Again I stated I could truly care less about this issue just made me laugh reading your post and how one side your view is. That’s all. Not saying I’d change your mind or that I’m even trying just commenting on how your statement hit me. I didn’t even make statements about the issue per say, just made statements on how sillily you sound blaming trump for the issue, in my opinion. You state that I’m posting without knowledge or logic which is weird seeing how I only commented on your statement. Speaking on knowledge I’d love for you to share a non CNN link on how the trump administration is to blame for this.
It's funny how you try to change your quote from "I haven’t followed this particular issue..." to "I haven’t lived my life following every detail". I brought up the politics of it be cause it's political. I brought up Trump because he heads the current administration who has signalled to everyone else that he is fine with ripping up any and all trade agreements that don't favour the U.S. Go to and do a search of the threads regarding this dispute and you'll see all but the staunches Trump supporters that Boeing's case is pretty lame but will be covered by the current political climate. Many have surmised this wouldn't even have been brought if it wasn't for the Trump administration. Clearly you're one of these Trump devotees as you conclude CNN must be fake news (because Trump tells you so) ruling them out for a link to news.

I can go on, but I expect that with even a small bit of research on your part, even you might see this is the case.
If Bombardier got billions of dollars in illegal Leftist government subsidies, they deserve this. The Left usually cheats every way it can.
joel wiley -2
"The Left usually cheats every way it can"
I'm curious, does that make them tweedledum or tweedledee?


계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..