ninetykman
New Member
When AVRO Arrow plane was destroyed, 000s of Canadian Aerospace Engineers ended up working in USA and laid the foundation a great industrial complex. I hope we do not repeat the same mistake.
|
|
|
The Future of Bombardier
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
BurlOak
Senior Member
Who was that rash and irresponsible government that wouldn't allow the C series to land at YQT? That was a huge blow to BBD.
dowlingm
Senior Member
don't think the people of Thunder Bay are going to accept blame for Bombardier's aviation struggles...
For those who say "Canada should fight" - if the US can screw over Airbus with Europe behind it, it can screw over BBD with only Canada and the UK supporting it.
jordanmkasla2009
Active Member
The US didn't get away with screwing Airbus over... regardless of that Canada has more dispute resolution mechanisms than Europe does. For what it's worth, hypocrisy doesn't get you very far when it comes to charging duties because the foreign company is government subsidized when your own company is more subsidized than the foreign one.
smallspy
Senior Member
dowlingm
Senior Member
I would argue the outcome of the KC-X tanker competition says otherwise.
Ask softwood producers how well those work.
rbt
Senior Member
Mechanisms vary by trade agreements, and softwood is excluded from most trade agreements with the USA.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Received the largest prop plane order in their history today
kEiThZ
Superstar
I really wouldn't worry too much. Sure, losing the US market was a blow. And I'll go over the dirty tricks below. But for Bombardier itself? They made that deal months before the airplane entered service with any customer. The uncertainty of how the plane would do had potential customers being hesitant and Bombardier struggling to gain traction. Since then, the CSeries has done spectacularly in service. 97% dispatch rate. That's amazing for a new airplane. And fuel burn coming in 3% better than brochure numbers. A 1% reduction in fuel burn might be worth in the high six figures. 3%? Incredible. And also unheard of to achieve in months after launch. So Bombardier will sell those airplanes. Possibly for even more than what Delta was going to pay for them. The only issue is getting locked out of the US market.
Now about that ruling. What a steaming load..... To begin with let's recall that Delta never asked Boeing to bid the 737-700 because they considered that airplane too big. Boeing then offered up used 717s, a plane they have not made in a decade. Bombardier was desperate to get a deal after Boeing sold airplanes at or under cost to United and cut Bombardier out. So BBD did the same for the Delta deal.
Boeing now complains to the ITC. The ITC, in its investigation has to decide if a 140 seat 737-700 (itself superceded by the 737-7 MAX) is substitutable with a 110 seat CS100. How does the ITC go about doing this? By asking "other importers". Who are the other importers? Delta's competitors. So the ITC went to Delta competitors and asked them if Delta got an unfair deal. And asked them if the airplane was substitutable. Of course, they told the ITC that the planes are substitutable. You can replace three 100-seater flights with two 150-seater flights. Which is true in theory, but in practice Delta wanted a 100 seater airplane to open up new long, "thin" routes from its hubs. These are smaller centres which may warrant only 2 flights a day to Atlanta or New York or Detroit or LA. The ITC's substitutability test ignores several things like the desire to have more frequencies, the cost to run larger aircraft with more empty seats and the higher threshold to open up new markets.
Gets worse. Boeing asked for a 79% tariff. The commission calculates 219%. How'd they do that? They argued that the entire equity stake from the Quebec was a subsidy and cash infusion, while neglecting that a successful CSeries makes that stake worth far more than what the government paid.
If this tariff stands, there are options. And I hope the govenrment goes through with several retaliatory measures:
1) Let Air Canada know, in no uncertain terms, that if they don't adjust their 737 MAX order, the Middle Eastern carriers will be allowed in.
2) Increase NAV Canada fees for American carriers transiting Canadian airspace. The FAA will retaliate. But that only impacts 10% of Canadian airline traffic. On the other hand, the Americans will pay more for every flight heading to Asia and Europe.
Now about that ruling. What a steaming load..... To begin with let's recall that Delta never asked Boeing to bid the 737-700 because they considered that airplane too big. Boeing then offered up used 717s, a plane they have not made in a decade. Bombardier was desperate to get a deal after Boeing sold airplanes at or under cost to United and cut Bombardier out. So BBD did the same for the Delta deal.
Boeing now complains to the ITC. The ITC, in its investigation has to decide if a 140 seat 737-700 (itself superceded by the 737-7 MAX) is substitutable with a 110 seat CS100. How does the ITC go about doing this? By asking "other importers". Who are the other importers? Delta's competitors. So the ITC went to Delta competitors and asked them if Delta got an unfair deal. And asked them if the airplane was substitutable. Of course, they told the ITC that the planes are substitutable. You can replace three 100-seater flights with two 150-seater flights. Which is true in theory, but in practice Delta wanted a 100 seater airplane to open up new long, "thin" routes from its hubs. These are smaller centres which may warrant only 2 flights a day to Atlanta or New York or Detroit or LA. The ITC's substitutability test ignores several things like the desire to have more frequencies, the cost to run larger aircraft with more empty seats and the higher threshold to open up new markets.
Gets worse. Boeing asked for a 79% tariff. The commission calculates 219%. How'd they do that? They argued that the entire equity stake from the Quebec was a subsidy and cash infusion, while neglecting that a successful CSeries makes that stake worth far more than what the government paid.
If this tariff stands, there are options. And I hope the govenrment goes through with several retaliatory measures:
1) Let Air Canada know, in no uncertain terms, that if they don't adjust their 737 MAX order, the Middle Eastern carriers will be allowed in.
2) Increase NAV Canada fees for American carriers transiting Canadian airspace. The FAA will retaliate. But that only impacts 10% of Canadian airline traffic. On the other hand, the Americans will pay more for every flight heading to Asia and Europe.
jordanmkasla2009
Active Member
jys
Active Member
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
I've had Bombardier on my stock watch list for a year now (I bought and sold some 15 years ago). I still contend that as an investor Bombardier is a place where money goes to die. That said it could have some utility for fun short-term trading either up or short. Not easy to predict though because the main underlying fundamentals of the stock price have more to do with politics and geo-politics then the financials of the company. Meaning bet on Bombardier as a bet on political outcomes, the kind of order headlines other forum members posted are near irrelevant to the company's worth.
crs1026
Senior Member
Amen to that.
It all depends on your investment strategy. There are plenty of little spikes that would have turned a profit on a very short term and well timed sell transaction.
But as a long-term investment? It's like the Captain of the Titanic saying "Ice melts but steel doesn't, so we just gotta wait this out"
- Paul
Attachments
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Looks like the Q400 biz is going to dumped https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/10/16/bombardier-looking-to-sell-q400-business-report.html
Let's get it out of Quebec hands. My vote is sell it to Viking, makers of the former deHavilland's best selling aircraft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_Air But they'll need a big financial backer for that.
Let's get it out of Quebec hands. My vote is sell it to Viking, makers of the former deHavilland's best selling aircraft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_Air But they'll need a big financial backer for that.
Neither will Ontario and the Feds, who've also invested in the Downsview operation.
Amare
Senior Member
This company has been mismanaged so badly is actually just ridiculous. The Q400 and CRJ was, for a long time, the aerospace side's bread and butter. They neglected them so much and failed to make modest improvements to both programs to increase the economics of flying both types of aircraft, and instead focuses all of their attention on the C Series.
Let Airbus take it over and everyone will see the stunning turnaround.
Let Airbus take it over and everyone will see the stunning turnaround.