Air Canada consider "C" Series purchase

[Rubberbiscuit]

From the Calgary Herald:

Air Canada says it will give serious consideration to Bombardier Inc.' s new CSeries aircraft when the time comes to replace its ageing fleet of narrow-body planes.

Not only would such an order be a big boost for Bombardier's new 110-to-149-seat aircraft program, it would rekindle a once-cozy relationship that has been on the rocks for five years since the country's largest carrier opted to replace its regional fleet with planes built by Bombardier's Brazilian rival, Embraer.

Air Canada has become a kingmaker with new aircraft programs. Its purchase of the Airbus A320 in the late 1980s helped swing the momentum toward the European planemaker and away from its Chicago-based rival, Boeing Co., whose planes Air Canada flew at the time.

In 2005, when the carrier switched back to Boeing with its wide-body replacements, it gave a much-needed boost to the fledgling 787 Dreamliner program. The same can be said of the Embraer 195. After Air Canada purchased it in 2004, the Brazilian planemaker experienced a surge of orders for its regional aircraft.

"We always follow developments in the industry with interest," said Peter Fitzpatrick, Air Canada spokesman. "When the time comes for us to purchase new aircraft, we will certainly consider the CSeries along with other types of aircraft."

After completing its wide-body replacements and refurbishments, Air Canada's next step will be to replace its A320s and A319s, which have an average age of 16 years and 11 years, respectively. Most aircraft have a lifespan of 20 to 25 years, which means both planes will likely need to be replaced within the next decade. But both Airbus and Boeing have said they won't have a narrow-body update on the market until at least 2020, which might give the CSeries, which is expected to enter service in 2013, an edge over its larger competitors.

"It certainly gives Bombardier a head start on the smaller end of the narrow-body operators," said Chris Murray, CIBC World Markets analyst. "If you're going to be flying the 100-to-145-seat range, then the CSeries is something you at least have to consider."

In addition, with Lufthansa firming up its order for 30 CSeries aircraft earlier this week, a lot of the risk associated with the program has been lifted, he said.

But Mr. Murray noted some carriers, such as Southwest Airlines, which flies a single fleet of Boeing 737 narrow-bodies, have indicated they will be looking for larger aircraft in updating their fleets. Boeing and Airbus have said they will likely go larger than their existing 150-seat-plus, single-aisle aircraft with their next planes.

[TAWS]

Nice move on their part...Order say 50 aircraft from Bombardier and when the real tough times happen you have a nice political chip to play in the big poker game. If Quebec is on your side... all is good. After all, we're right up Air Canada's alley...this province runs a deficit like no other and keeps on ticking!

[tonysoprano]

.....or maybe it's just a great, fuel-efficient, money-saving, smart, passenger-appealing, good-for-Canada, good-for- Quebec, good-for-Air Canada, Airbus-replacing, brand new, Canadian-made aircraft. Had we chosen more Emb's, the other half would be criticizing us for buying foreign. Right? Maybe. I dunno. I'm just guessing. Tell ya what, let's pull AC and Bombardier the hell out of Quebec and make you happy.

[Jaques Strappe]

Nice move on their part...Order say 50 aircraft from Bombardier and when the real tough times happen you have a nice political chip to play in the big poker game. If Quebec is on your side... all is good. After all, we're right up Air Canada's alley...this province runs a deficit like no other and keeps on ticking!

Amen brother. That is exactly how I read that article. I actually wondered if it was written by Air Canada. All politics aside however, if the airplane actually comes out as spec, which they never do, it would be a nice machine and great replacement.

[Old fella]

.....or maybe it's just a great, fuel-efficient, money-saving, smart, passenger-appealing, good-for-Canada, good-for- Quebec, good-for-Air Canada......"


Sixty years ago this year.... The Avro Jetliner!!!

[tonysoprano]

Jauques.

Amen brother. That is exactly how I read that article.

Of course you do. So tell me brother, is this really about politics? Does AC really need Bombardier to survive? Was it politics when we chose your Jungle Jet? If so, I'm curious, what "game" was AC playing? Nope, I don't believe this has anything to do with politics. Truth is, there is no replacement for the A320 right now. For once Bombardier may have gotten it right.

[Jaques Strappe]

Tony

It would appear that you are perhaps upset about my post and have possibly taken it as a slight towards Air Canada. Step back for a moment and look at the facts. Air Canada has suddenly announced, ( immediately after Lufthansa announces firm orders, this giving the program a green light ) that it needs to replace the 20 year old Airbus fleet and these decisions are typically made five years in advance. I am in no way saying that the product won't be a good one nor that Air Canada needs Bombardier. What Air Canada needs, if the shoe fits, is someone to finance it.

Who in today's climate, is going to lend Air Canada any more money? Do you think the government would like to see a major Quebec employer expand and hire as a result of a contract award? Do you think that perhaps, the government would be willing to guarantee loans to see this happen? Should Air Canada award such a contract to another Canadian company, do you think it makes the possible demise of Air Canada more difficult for politicians? Do you not think that Air Canada sees that as an opportunity?

Cmon brother, this is business and politics is alive and well in taking advantage of an opportunity. Personally, I think it was a hand well played. We shall see what comes of it.

[tonysoprano]

JS.

What Air Canada needs, if the shoe fits, is someone to finance it.

We are not talking about today. We're talking about five years down the road, minimum. Who will own AC at that time? Will they need any government assistance to buy airplanes? And if so, who cares? Why so cynical? If the deal helps people put food on the table, I'm all for it.

Who in today's climate, is going to lend Air Canada any more money?

Geeze I don't know but apparently we recently managed to secure a few hundred million to help get over a hump.

Do you think the government would like to see a major Quebec employer expand and hire as a result of a contract award?

I don't have a problem with that, do you?

Do you think that perhaps, the government would be willing to guarantee loans to see this happen?

Again, you're assuming something that may not be required. If it is, are you against this?

Should Air Canada award such a contract to another Canadian company, do you think it makes the possible demise of Air Canada more difficult for politicians?

The demise of AC will not be stopped by a contract with Bombardier or any aircraft manufaturer. You have a very simplistic mentality Jaques..

Do you not think that Air Canada sees that as an opportunity?

Personally no. And if what you say is true, I don't have a problem with it as you do. My point is you seem to have a problem with your employer getting a good deal that might benefit you. Politics is the way business is done sometimes. Whether you like it or not, it influences the very nature in which AC and others do business for better AND for worse. Like it or not it is a fact of life. You are choosing to be cynical about it. I say if it's good for my employer, it probably is good for me.
AC is your employer. Do you have a problem with AC having an "opportunity".

Cmon brother, this is business and politics is alive and well in taking advantage of an opportunity. Personally, I think it was a hand well played. We shall see what comes of it.

Agreed. Actually, tell you what. I predict we won't see these airplanes. That's right. I think Jazz will get them.

[Old fella]

If you gents would just step back a minute and take note the “shelf life” or “best before” date of politicians/political parties/various ideologies is rather short as compared to Air Canada - ditto CBC - you have your answer. Both institutions have been around 70 odd years, it’s the Canadian psyche

[Jaques Strappe]

Tony

Do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing? For someone who claims to have been around the aviation world for as long as you have, I sometimes question the maturity of your posts.

[tonysoprano]

No Jaques. I just think you're wrong on this one. You seem to have a problem with your employer doing anything. They just can't make you happy.

[TAWS]

Tony,

I don't think that you can argue that if Air Canada is serious about buying a huge order of Bombardier aircraft that there could be political pressures put on the government, from say, 50 elected members of the Bloc who have a huge say in the house. They've said it many times that their mandate is to always "to provide the best interests of Quebec"

If Air Canada sees themselves going down the tube this could be a way to get some government backing to keep the mothership afloat. I am sure the rest of the taxpayers in Canada aren't interested in bailing out Air Canada in any sort of way...but that isn't the Bloc's interest. Job security and money for Quebec through Bombardier contracts is.

The government will end up backing down, and Quebec and Air Canada win.

TAWS

[tonysoprano]

TAWS.
Only my opinion but:
a)AC bought Embraers despite political opposition. This tells me AC purchased a product because it was the right business decision. If AC was ass-kissing the people of Canada (or Quebec) they would have bought Bombardier instead of Embs. That product (RJ 705) just didn't fit the plan at that time. The replacement of the Airbus right now only has two choices, B737NG and Bombardier C-series. I'm sure as in the past, AC has crunched some numbers and so far, Bombardier makes more sense.
b)The fate of AC does not require the help of any aircraft manufacturer or provincial government. It may not require any government intervention at all. If it does, it won't be Quebec or Bombardier saving us but rather the Government of Canada with the consent of all Canadians, not just Quebecers.
And finally, assuming your (and Jaques ) theory is true, what is the problem with it? Companies do what they have to do to stay in business. You guys (and I could be wrong) are make it sound like AC is about to commit some crime. Again, I will say that AC does not count on Bombardier or Quebec for any favors in order to survive. It will survive simply because AC does what it does and is what it is.

[TAWS]

AC bought Embraers despite political opposition. This tells me AC purchased a product because it was the right business decision.

That was then...this is now

The fate of AC does not require the help of any aircraft manufacturer or provincial government. It may not require any government intervention at all. If it does, it won't be Quebec or Bombardier saving us but rather the Government of Canada

It did before.....

And finally, assuming your (and Jaques ) theory is true, what is the problem with it?

If it involves taxpayers...alot.

[tonysoprano]

Ok, so what you're saying is, because this smells of "political incorrectness" and because AC might use this tactic for some kind of "survival scheme", they should completely avoid Bombardier and perhaps go talk to Boeing even though that airplane may not really suit our needs. You know, you are right. That really is the Canadian way. What the @#$! was I thinking? You guys had it right all along....how silly of me. Tell you what, let's just hope that whatever airplane replaces the Airbus is just as good as the Airbus and if AC needs some kind of survival plan it doesn't involve the taxpayer. On that I think we can all agree on.

[TAWS]

Ok, so what you're saying is, because this smells of "political incorrectness" and because AC might use this tactic for some kind of "survival scheme", they should completely avoid Bombardier and perhaps go talk to Boeing even though that airplane may not really suit our needs.

Air Canada has bought planes before for the wrong reason, that "did not suit their needs".

Tell you what, let's just hope that whatever airplane replaces the Airbus is just as good as the Airbus and if AC needs some kind of survival plan it doesn't involve the taxpayer. On that I think we can all agree on.

Agreed!

[tonysoprano]

e]The fate of AC does not require the help of any aircraft manufacturer or provincial government. It may not require any government intervention at all. If it does, it won't be Quebec or Bombardier saving us but rather the Government of Canada

It did before.....

When?

[TAWS]

When?

A quick google of Air Canada receives government money found this article....

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/20/busin ... gewanted=1

[tonysoprano]

That's it?...one thing your hard working research does not state is that funds were made available to all Canadian carriers. The small amount of cash was a drop in the bucket and probably should not have been accepted as it made absolutely no difference in AC's woes especially after the feds threw Canadian Airlines at us with a 4Billion dollar debt to go with it. Sorry TAWS, that's the best you can do? TAWS, AC does not need Bombardier or Quebec. AC needs good management and/or ownership. I happen to think that that will be explored way before any political rescue plan is considered, especially if the Conservatives are in power. But if being cynical makes you feel better, go ahead. maybe someday you can comeback and say "I told you so Tony".

[Airband]

When?

At the same time WestJet did.

[tonysoprano]

When?

At the same time WestJet did.

Thanks man. I didn't want to get into that cause one of my colleagues would have accused me of being a WJ basher.

[Jaques Strappe]

No Jaques. I just think you're wrong on this one. You seem to have a problem with your employer doing anything. They just can't make you happy.

Tony, once again you are putting words in my mouth. I never said I had any issue with it. I actually said it was a hand well played. The only one who seems to have a burr up his ass about all of this, is you. As you know, the company took a lot of heat for buying Embraers and if you bother to read my other posts throughout this forum, you will see that I have actually defended the company on this before by stating that it is constantly being interfered with by the government. As the article itself states, by proposing a possible purchase of the C series, many fences will be mended, what the F#$k do you think that means Tony? You guessed it, politics.

Why do you think there was ever a merger? Political interference perhaps? The airline is a political football, always has been, always will be and if management can use that to their advantage from time to time, then good on them.

If you want to debate an issue, that is fine, I will respect your opinion but don't put shit in my mouth that didn't come out of it.

[tonysoprano]

As you know, the company took a lot of heat for buying Embraers and if you bother to read my other posts throughout this forum, you will see that I have actually defended the company on this before by stating that it is constantly being interfered with by the government.

So what was political about that? The right airplane for the job is all I see. And maybe Jaques, just maybe that's all there is to this C-series. Just because some journalist is pushing shit in your mouth doesn't mean you have to swallow it bro. Mending political fences is a good thing and I think we are agreeing on that. But please don't tell me that that's what's going to save your job and mine. The problem, if you don't know, is not going to be solved with government rescue. Mending fences with Quebec and Ottawa is a drop in the bucket. Our leaders need to be changed. But you know that already.

[TAWS]

So Tony, did they or did they not take government money?

The small amount of cash was a drop in the bucket

So far Ottawa has given Air Canada about 78 million Canadian dollars

78 million...a drop in the bucket

[tonysoprano]

78 million...a drop in the bucket

No. Shoving a 4billion dollar debt down our throats was. I guess you missed the part about the other carriers getting some help.