The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Message
Author
User avatar
lionheart27
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:46 am

The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#1 Post by lionheart27 » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:17 pm

Just wanted to chime in on this topic and what people think.

Why is it so hard for us to compete in this market?
Boeing is doing so well locally and internationally this seems to be Bill Gates style of business.
Isn't this more about the competition between Embrarer and Bombardier as they make similar size market models?
I've read the articles on Trudeau, the Super Hornets and Boeing going to war like Tony Montana!
Embrarer doesn't seem to be sought after by Boeing regarding their stake in all this. Wasn't Embrarer backed this way?
I don't think Boeing cares if we buy super hornets or not so that's not the play here.
Canadian companies have saturated the market with the 737 series so why is Boeing complaining?
That leaves the only market to Canadian Bombardier the Q's. The lackluster sales on the CSeries is hurting the company.
We need international sales on the Cseries to compete with Embrarer.
Maybe more appealing cost effective contracts with partners in Europe and the UK is the answer?
Anyone......Buehler?
Please opinions only!
---------- ADS -----------
"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops boy"
"Up the Irons"

goingnowherefast
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#2 Post by goingnowherefast » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:43 pm

I think Boeing is more worried about a future "CS500", "CS700", etc. Going back to the Airbus A300, Boeing wasn't too concerned as it was some weird European twin-engine wide body plane. Clearly they should have been.

As for Boeing and Embrarer, is it possible to stretch a 195 to comfortably seat as many as a 737-800? I don't think the E195 offers much competition to even the smallest 737.

Bombardier should take it as a huge compliment to the CS series. Boeing is considerably more upset about the CS100/CS300 than they are about the Embrarer E-jets.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
sanjet
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:54 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#3 Post by sanjet » Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:18 pm

You have to remember how much the defence contracts at Boeing are worth from US and other foreign governments. As much as we think it's just business, there is a lot of "push" in the background for Boeing to get these contracts, these defence contracts are huge and subsidize the rest of the company. I can assure you, most airliners sold at Boeing are at a loss or very close to break even, defence contracts are where the profit margins at.

Bomabardier simply don't have these high margin sales so they have to compete in a different way: a better product. Boeing knows the c-series could become a major player if it doesn't intervene, they are not going to just sit at the sides like they did with airbus in the 80's...

After a few hundred c-series orders on the book, they have years of production, so they are no longer in a rush for selling more c-series at negative margins.

That being said, Bombardier needs a better PR department (executive pay raises, late trains for Toronto, etc....)
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#4 Post by rookiepilot » Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:57 pm

sanjet wrote:
That being said, Bombardier needs a better PR department (executive pay raises, late trains for Toronto, etc....)
They don't need a better PR dept. Gosh it seems some Canadian companies have quite enough PR departments. It's the rest of the company that needs attention.

I don't understand why it isn't obvious how incompetent this company is, to everyone. They are currently sueing their major train customer (Metrolinx) for not rewarding them with new business, due to their own incompetence on the bungled train contract! :roll: :roll: :roll:

Just DO YOUR JOB. Bizzare how saying this is SO hysterically offensive to the snowflakes!

This company deserves to die. I'm tired of supporting them, and their rich pay packages, with my money.

We all know of course, if this was an Alberta company, it would be long, long gone. No federal money for the west, but we must mollycoddle Quebec.
---------- ADS -----------

teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#5 Post by teacher » Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:34 pm

goingnowherefast wrote:I think Boeing is more worried about a future "CS500", "CS700", etc. Going back to the Airbus A300, Boeing wasn't too concerned as it was some weird European twin-engine wide body plane. Clearly they should have been.

As for Boeing and Embrarer, is it possible to stretch a 195 to comfortably seat as many as a 737-800? I don't think the E195 offers much competition to even the smallest 737.

Bombardier should take it as a huge compliment to the CS series. Boeing is considerably more upset about the CS100/CS300 than they are about the Embrarer E-jets.
Boeing is actually on record saying this exact thing that they are attacking Bombardier in order to prevent it from building a larger CSeries. They want to cut them off before they grow like Airbus did.

The CSeries is sold out until 2019/2020. It's better than anything Boeing and Airbus have and they are threatened by it.
---------- ADS -----------
http://www.collegeofpilots.ca/

Transonic
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:56 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#6 Post by Transonic » Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:02 pm

rookie pilot wrote: We all know of course, if this was an Alberta company, it would be long, long gone. No federal money for the west, but we must mollycoddle Quebec.
No, it wouldn't be. If Alberta had a strong aerospace company it would receive the same treatment. Digging something out of the ground for the sole reason to burn it is very different than building a jet aircraft. A strong aerospace industry is unique only to a small handful of countries.
---------- ADS -----------

Zaibatsu
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#7 Post by Zaibatsu » Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:15 pm

There isn't a large aerospace company on the planet that didn't require tons of public dollars to be viable and their certainly have been many spectacular failures in that regard.

I'm not sure what makes Bombardier and Canada so special that way when you have MD who failed because the US government cancelled defence contracts and LM who left civil aviation entirely because they couldn't hack it in the private sector.
---------- ADS -----------

212wrench
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:14 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#8 Post by 212wrench » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:46 am

Transonic wrote:
rookie pilot wrote: We all know of course, if this was an Alberta company, it would be long, long gone. No federal money for the west, but we must mollycoddle Quebec.
No, it wouldn't be. If Alberta had a strong aerospace company it would receive the same treatment. Digging something out of the ground for the sole reason to burn it is very different than building a jet aircraft. A strong aerospace industry is unique only to a small handful of countries.
Well Alberta doesn't have the strong aerospace company because they are all in Quebec. Rookie hit the nail on the head!
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#9 Post by rookiepilot » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:23 pm

Transonic wrote:
rookie pilot wrote: We all know of course, if this was an Alberta company, it would be long, long gone. No federal money for the west, but we must mollycoddle Quebec.
No, it wouldn't be. If Alberta had a strong aerospace company it would receive the same treatment. Digging something out of the ground for the sole reason to burn it is very different than building a jet aircraft. A strong aerospace industry is unique only to a small handful of countries.
You're implying rather strongly the west is incapable of starting a complex business apart from natural resources. I wouldn't agree with that.

There is no doubt that aid to BBD is all about where they are located in the country. I'd submit any 6th grader even knows that about Canada. Look at the tax proposals our fair haired leader is coming out with. Carbon taxes, and the pending small business tax changes that take from western Canada (family owned farms) to be able to give to Quebec (BBD).

Its obvious and blatant. And I don't even currently live in the west, and I see it.
---------- ADS -----------

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4236
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#10 Post by trey kule » Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:26 pm

Our sock puppet prime minister and his gang need Quebec votes to stay in power. Alberta, for them is a write off. So Alberta can pay Quebec to keep them in power. Not a new thing.

And not just Bombardier.. Look at govt contracts...the big ones like defense industries.

I just wish I could own a company where I could use taxpayers dollars to pay myself a huge bonus.
Or go on a quarter million dollar Xmas holiday on the taxpayers' credit card.

I would even to be willing to stand up with a straight face and demand the evil rich start paying their fair share.
---------- ADS -----------

Zaibatsu
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#11 Post by Zaibatsu » Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:52 pm

Makes me glad I left Alberta.

Never has there ever been a province of such perpetual whiners. They forget that BC pays and doesn't complain and forget that Manitoba takes in their fantasies of western separatism.

Why don't they have an aerospace industry? Because they have no motivation or foresight to do so. Why would they when they have oil. The closest thing they have to one is Viking and it's from BC.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 558
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#12 Post by confusedalot » Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:26 pm

I am from Quebec and I don't like the situation at all. Strong words I know, rather see BBD gone and see taxpayer money well spent for a change. (We all know that will never happen anyway).

As many before have said, it's not about money, it's about the prestige of having a canadian aerospace industry to play with the big boys. And sadly, all of the big boys the world over are subsidized one way or the other by taxpayers.

canada the good......... :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

FishermanIvan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#13 Post by FishermanIvan » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:04 pm

Zaibatsu wrote:Makes me glad I left Alberta.

Never has there ever been a province of such perpetual whiners. They forget that BC pays and doesn't complain and forget that Manitoba takes in their fantasies of western separatism.

Why don't they have an aerospace industry? Because they have no motivation or foresight to do so. Why would they when they have oil. The closest thing they have to one is Viking and it's from BC.
Nail on the head here. I don't miss Alberta at all.
---------- ADS -----------
Ryan

rigpiggy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2183
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:17 pm
Location: west to east and west again

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#14 Post by rigpiggy » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:54 pm

Zaibatsu wrote:Makes me glad I left Alberta.

Never has there ever been a province of such perpetual whiners. They forget that BC pays and doesn't complain and forget that Manitoba takes in their fantasies of western separatism.

Why don't they have an aerospace industry? Because they have no motivation or foresight to do so. Why would they when they have oil. The closest thing they have to one is Viking and it's from BC.
I seem to remember that bristol aerospace lost out to a quebec company.

Oh and BC does complain, just not as loud!

Zaibatsu don't let the door hit you on yer way out, you probably won't be missed
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#15 Post by Old fella » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:10 pm

Government..... err tax dollars in the aviation industry. Well now a good example of that is the now defunct Concorde, built with very much assistance from both French and British state owned aerospace manufacturers and bought by (at the time state owned airlines BA and AF) as the only purchased operators. Braniff leased a few from BA/AF to flog around continental USA in early 80's but lasted only a very short time- months maybe.. All countries that have an aerospace industry provide assistance in all shapes and forms. Anybody remember the Canadair CL-600 issue late 70's early 80's and the "tax dollars"......

This thread is nothing new, just the generational differences of the common-taters....

Carry on.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#16 Post by rookiepilot » Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:42 am

You guys are missing the point to some degree. BBD is incompetent in their TRAIN business to a huge degree, (just read @ metrolinx ) and the government is effectively bailing that out as well. The rot is far more than aerospace.

They make money on their skidoos, and rec gear. Did well with biz jets. Why not stick with what is working?
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
YYZSaabGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 686
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:32 am
Location: On glideslope.

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#17 Post by YYZSaabGuy » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:54 am

rookiepilot wrote:They make money on their skidoos, and rec gear. Did well with biz jets. Why not stick with what is working?
Nope: Bombardier Recreational Products (Ski-Doos, Can-Am motorcycles (ATVs and Spyder Roadsters), Sea-Doos, SportBoats, Evinrude Outboard Motors, and Rotax) was spun off by BBD 14 years ago to Bain Capital, the Caisse, and Beaudoin family members.
---------- ADS -----------

Gino Under
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#18 Post by Gino Under » Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:21 pm

rookiepilot

The intellectual deficiencies in your commentaries regarding Bombardier as a company, corporate citizen and Canadian taxpayer, (not to mention their history and significance to Canadian aerospace) are blatantly obvious. Surely you can come up with something of greater intellectual interest, stimulation, substance, and value?

Metrolix is anything but their biggest customer. And, in case you need a reminder, there are two sides to this dispute. It is very simplistic to conclude that only one of these two parties is to blame for the fiasco. However, I should point out that you consistently fail to point this out in any of your vitriol.

By the way, Boeing has to take their complaint against Bombardier to the U.S. Commerce Department because none of their complaint is relevant to the WTO. It's about the U.S. domestic market and threats from outside that market. Their beef has as much to do with the looming potential for Comac, Sukhoi, Mitsubishi and Embraer sales as it does Bombardier. I doubt Bombardier sold Delta aeroplanes at anything but an agreed-to price. Just like any other sales negotiation. If the price was below cost it would have been the same approach Boeing took to sell their 787. Simply stated, because of the threat C series poses to Boeing 737 sales, they're doing what they need to do. That's all.

:rolleyes:
Gino
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#19 Post by rookiepilot » Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:45 pm

Gino Under wrote:rookiepilot

The intellectual deficiencies in your commentaries regarding Bombardier as a company, corporate citizen and Canadian taxpayer, (not to mention their history and significance to Canadian aerospace) are blatantly obvious. Surely you can come up with something of greater intellectual interest, stimulation, substance, and value?
Ok. I vote with my own dollars, as does the entire private sector, and I would never, ever, ever put one investment dollar into this walking disaster of a company, with a grossly overpaid management and a voting structure completely abusive to shareholder rights.

You dispute any of this? Even a moderate shareholder (I can't imagine why they hold the stock) like Ontario Teachers agrees.


https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/report ... ndmail.com&


Just look at a long term stock chart of BBD, sport, then one of Boeing. Or Siemens, if trains are your yardstick, instead. Case closed. All the verdict I ever need.

Not one private investment firm would give BBD a dime, hence they cry to the government. They should die a merciful death.

You disagree, Gino? Put your own retirement dough into the stock, if you feel so strongly.

Fill your boots, champ. Invest with the Canadian flag on your sleeve.

I see your eye roll. :rolleyes:
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by rookiepilot on Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4236
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#20 Post by trey kule » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:13 pm

If anyone would bother to do a bit of research , they would see both Bombardier and Embrarer have had trade disputes over subsidies against each other. Rulings against both of them.

Prime Minister sock puppet actually claimed at one point Boeing was suing the Canadian Government...something he walked back on. This is a trade dispute that he has made a political issue.

Makes him look the champion of Canada. Gets Quebec votes. And diverts attention away from his current tax grab..

If Canada does not get F18s, what is the alternative? The F35s he fought against?
Or maybe we could provide our military with rainbow coloured c172s, flown only by women, alphabet genders or visable minorities. Diversity is so important
---------- ADS -----------

Mach1
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:04 am

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#21 Post by Mach1 » Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:37 pm

Transonic wrote: No, it wouldn't be. If Alberta had a strong aerospace company it would receive the same treatment.
Ha, ha, ha, ha!!! Funniest thing I have heard all month. Warn a guy before writing stuff like that.
Zaibatsu wrote: Never has there ever been a province of such perpetual whiners. They forget that BC pays and doesn't complain and forget that Manitoba takes in their fantasies of western separatism.

Why don't they have an aerospace industry? Because they have no motivation or foresight to do so. Why would they when they have oil. The closest thing they have to one is Viking and it's from BC.


Ha, ha, ha, ha!! Second funniest thing I've heard this month. The hypocrisy is so delightful because it's like you're not even aware you are doing it.
trey kule wrote: Prime Minister sock puppet actually claimed at one point Boeing was suing the Canadian Government...something he walked back on. This is a trade dispute that he has made a political issue.

Makes him look the champion of Canada. Gets Quebec votes. And diverts attention away from his current tax grab..

If Canada does not get F18s, what is the alternative? The F35s he fought against?
Or maybe we could provide our military with rainbow coloured c172s, flown only by women, alphabet genders or visable minorities. Diversity is so important
Now this is actually pertinent to the OP's question. What a great way for the Hair of the North to extract himself from a sole sourced contract explicitly designed to make sure that the Air Force never receives any new planes... spend all the budget on a second aircraft type of which you buy so few as to be completely ineffective and prevent any other purchase of further planes, receive no economic/industrial offset and not have to hold your open and fair competition for a new plane (the full white elephant program). All while making it Boeing's fault and garnering votes in QB. It's politically smart and if it gets us, as tax payers, out of buying sole sourced, non-bid for Super Hornets and actually results in a proper competition and bid for new fighters then I'm all for it. 18 Super Hornets is hardly worth their time and effort so Boeing loses nothing if we don't buy them. If they hobble BBD even a little bit, it buys Boeing the time they desperately need to design a whole new 737 replacement and still have some market left to sell it in when competing against the world in general. It's all a game. Crush all competitors, no matter how large or small... let no one compete against you ever. It's the capitalist way. As for Boeing, they'll huff and they'll puff but nothing will happen other than a bunch of lawyers on both sides of the border will make a lot of money.
---------- ADS -----------
I'm going to knock this up a notch with my spice weasle. Bam!

Mick G
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 7:21 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#22 Post by Mick G » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:00 pm

212wrench wrote:
Transonic wrote:
rookie pilot wrote: We all know of course, if this was an Alberta company, it would be long, long gone. No federal money for the west, but we must mollycoddle Quebec.
No, it wouldn't be. If Alberta had a strong aerospace company it would receive the same treatment. Digging something out of the ground for the sole reason to burn it is very different than building a jet aircraft. A strong aerospace industry is unique only to a small handful of countries.
Well Alberta doesn't have the strong aerospace company because they are all in Quebec. Rookie hit the nail on the head!
You might want to do a little more research. Viking is indeed based in BC, however they are also set up in Calgary with very large plans to scale up in Alberta.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#23 Post by rookiepilot » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:40 pm

I'm sure any other company in BC or Alberta would get away with paying their top execs, -- or trying anyway -- a 32 million pay package while taking hundreds of millions of our money.

And some of you defend this? Beyond bizzare.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombard ... -1.4052533

This isn't cancelled BTW. Only deferred.

They claim this is necessary to retain "top talent" to "soon" transform Bombardier into a "25 billion dollar company".

What are they smoking? I want some. And generally in life, you get paid the big bucks, After you deliver. Not in Quebec though, and not with my money, apparently.

Bombardier, is currently worth a measly 4 billion dollars.

For context, Siemens of Germany, is worth 94 billion. A tad more. They get by with paying their CEO 2.3 million euros, base salary. Probably a bonus somewhere.

Boeing is worth 154 billion. CEO did get 29 mill, which is a lot, but a lot more defensible than BBD.

Look, I'm sure the C Series is great. I'd LOVE to see it succeed. Simple. Fire the whole board, whole management team, bring in some serious operators -- maybe from Boeing? instead of the usual cronies, they might have a chance.
---------- ADS -----------

Gino Under
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#24 Post by Gino Under » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:35 pm

I continue to invest in BBD. If their stock reaches 4 bucks I'll have made back most of my oil patch losses.
I don't rely on investment advice from the likes of The Motley Fool when it comes to BBD. I know better management and excellent product when I see it.
Bombardier and Siemens are in discussions regarding a joint venture in the rail sector.
J Dawg isn't that popular in Quebec. Neither is the Liberal Party, federal or provincial for that matter.
J Dawg should stay out of the dispute. He certainly shouldn't try to use the Air Force as a bargaining chip.
BBD have their own corporate lawyers who know the aviation industry, its regulations, and international laws that govern it. They also know bribery is simply the accepted way of business in Azerbaijan as do every other competitor doing business there. I'm sure they know how best to represent the company in any trade dispute or criminal investigation without comments from the Ottawa peanut gallery.
One thing's for certain, BBD will have their day in front of the board and the outcome isn't guaranteed. Yet.
Any tariff on BBD C Series will likely be minor and isn't likely to affect sales in the U.S. anyway. Those who want this aircraft will still buy it.

Gino :drinkers:
---------- ADS -----------

Mick G
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 7:21 pm

Re: The Bombardier VS Boeing thing

#25 Post by Mick G » Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:49 am

trey kule wrote:If Canada does not get F18s, what is the alternative? The F35s he fought against?
Or maybe we could provide our military with rainbow coloured c172s, flown only by women, alphabet genders or visable minorities. Diversity is so important
The SAAB Gripen, the Dassault Rafale, the Eurofighter Typhoon to name a few.......
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”