US Dept of Commerce slaps 220% tax on Bombardier c series
“So, Bombardier and Quebec just gave Airbus a controlling half of a multi-billion dollar investment in return for management expertise?”
Now watch out for the next ‘defensive’ move. An agreement on some ‘cheap’ second hand Rafale aircraft to offset the company purchase, and also defend against any price increase in the recent F18 deal?
Or even Rafales positioned in Canada to be used for NATO training / aggressor tasks, (they have the airspace); this would also contribute to the % spend required by NATO.
Minimise loss of ‘Trump’ face, because more production jobs have been brought into the US ...
Keep your enemies close, your friends even closer.
Now watch out for the next ‘defensive’ move. An agreement on some ‘cheap’ second hand Rafale aircraft to offset the company purchase, and also defend against any price increase in the recent F18 deal?
Or even Rafales positioned in Canada to be used for NATO training / aggressor tasks, (they have the airspace); this would also contribute to the % spend required by NATO.
Minimise loss of ‘Trump’ face, because more production jobs have been brought into the US ...
Keep your enemies close, your friends even closer.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a glorious day it is.
Bombardier should have been able to sell the excellent aircraft.
For different reasons it did not.
There was a good chance it would have ended up like the Fokker 70 and 100.
Or the Dornier 728.
But no, Boeing came to the rescue! Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!
Bombardier should have been able to sell the excellent aircraft.
For different reasons it did not.
There was a good chance it would have ended up like the Fokker 70 and 100.
Or the Dornier 728.
But no, Boeing came to the rescue! Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!
Thread Starter
It's the sort of business event that happens where the lawyers get too strong a hold on a company. They have felt that a significant competitor can be addressed not by developing adequate products of their own, but by stiffing their competitor with legal manoeuvring and buttering up their own regulators. The legal team probably felt they had delivered a real coup when they persuaded the DoJ to give their judgement, little realising what Airbus and Bombardier were doing behind the scenes, because this deal was NOT started only after the DoJ judgement.
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Uk
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not completely clear cut.
There's laws in the US about switching the place of manufacture to avoid tariffs that airbus/bombardier will have to circumnavigate but im sure if some journos know about this their lawyers will have scoped it out already.
This is a win win, bombardier gets to have a jet in the market, support from a big player and airbus gets to let someone else take all the risk to bring a product to market and then acquire a stake for very little risk in what has the potential to be a very very successful aircraft, once it's proven that its in demand and operating well.
The sticking it to Boeing bit will just be the cherry on top.
This is a win win, bombardier gets to have a jet in the market, support from a big player and airbus gets to let someone else take all the risk to bring a product to market and then acquire a stake for very little risk in what has the potential to be a very very successful aircraft, once it's proven that its in demand and operating well.
The sticking it to Boeing bit will just be the cherry on top.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: on a blue balloon
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is brilliant on the part of Airbus. They will decide future C-series pricing.
Airbus will look at what's good for themselves, not Bombardier or Quebec.
Like Boeing with the MD series, the weak product line will not be allowed to
threaten the master's profitability.
If keeping the C-series alive suits Airbus it will survive. If not, it will not.
Airbus will look at what's good for themselves, not Bombardier or Quebec.
Like Boeing with the MD series, the weak product line will not be allowed to
threaten the master's profitability.
If keeping the C-series alive suits Airbus it will survive. If not, it will not.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This class sure is busy. Can the following aircraft hope to compete with the C Series:
- hypothetical relaunch of the B717
- NAC F130 (the often promised relaunch of the F100 that has not materialized yet)
- Embraer E190
- Mitshubishi Regional Jet
- Sokhoi Super Jet
- The Chinese Jet
- hypothetical relaunch of the B717
- NAC F130 (the often promised relaunch of the F100 that has not materialized yet)
- Embraer E190
- Mitshubishi Regional Jet
- Sokhoi Super Jet
- The Chinese Jet
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once the assembly line is established in Mobile, the tax treatment will be exactly the same as for A320s and A321s already assembled there so the financial and legal aspects are already well understood. Actual manufacturing jobs will likely stay in Canada and N Ireland provided those are efficient plants - and they will now have Airbus's know-how to ensure that they are. With Airbus's supply-chain power and a ramp-up in production as a result of increased sales which the Airbus link will bring, production costs will fall. The prospects for this aircraft family are transformed by this development and the ramifications for Airbus and Boeing are enormous.
Watch for Boeing to raise anti-trust issues - their last hope!
Watch for Boeing to raise anti-trust issues - their last hope!
Thread Starter
It is ironic that, having created uncertainty by saying the Airbus UK plant in Broughton was somehow at risk due to Brexit, they suddenly end up adding to their UK plants instead.
Is there any synergy between Broughton and Belfast in wing design and manufacture ? Ironically, 60 years ago, the Belfast plant (then Shorts) was a subcontractor to the Broughton plant (then De Havilland) for the production of Comet fuselages.
Is there any synergy between Broughton and Belfast in wing design and manufacture ? Ironically, 60 years ago, the Belfast plant (then Shorts) was a subcontractor to the Broughton plant (then De Havilland) for the production of Comet fuselages.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any synergy between Broughton and Belfast in wing design and manufacture ? Ironically, 60 years ago, the Belfast plant (then Shorts) was a subcontractor to the Broughton plant (then De Havilland) for the production of Comet fuselages.
However, I guess we should remember that, insofar as I understand it, Airbus aren't buying the factories - just a majority share in one of the products made in them. The Canadian and Belfast plants will still be building other Bombardier aircraft parts too. Still, they should benefit from Airbus's expertise.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 50
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USA Today article:
The move by Bombardier could possibly circumvent duties being imposed on the C Series. The C Series headquarters will remain in the Montreal area but a second assembly line for the 100- to 150-seat plane will be set up at Airbus' facility in Mobil, Alabama, so the plane can be sold in the United States.
Enders said the talks started in August and were not motivated by what competitors are doing. He rejected a deal to acquire the C Series three years ago but said circumstances have changed, saying the plane is now certified and receiving rave reviews.
Airbus is not assuming any debt as part of the deal and it has an option to buy out Bombardier after 7-1/2 years and the Quebec government in 2023.
The move by Bombardier could possibly circumvent duties being imposed on the C Series. The C Series headquarters will remain in the Montreal area but a second assembly line for the 100- to 150-seat plane will be set up at Airbus' facility in Mobil, Alabama, so the plane can be sold in the United States.
Enders said the talks started in August and were not motivated by what competitors are doing. He rejected a deal to acquire the C Series three years ago but said circumstances have changed, saying the plane is now certified and receiving rave reviews.
Airbus is not assuming any debt as part of the deal and it has an option to buy out Bombardier after 7-1/2 years and the Quebec government in 2023.
This is now a matter of will Boeing be lucky, yes, lucky enough to sell aircraft within the USA. They're on the very cusp of exiting the global single aisle market. If the US government doesn't play hardball with AirBardier, Boeing's long term single aisle market presence within America is under serious and deadly threat.
With zero public announcement of a 737 replacement airlines will increasingly wonder why Boeing are still pushing a design with its origins in the 1950s. Boeing needed to replace it all the way back in 1992, but didn't. This deal is the future which that laziness has earned them.
Develop, or die. It applies to every company of every size. Even Boeing.
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Uk
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This deal also brings political leverage in airbus favour. It can be spun as bringing jobs to the US and supporting US airlines in ensuring they have a market leading product at a competitive price, a product "'made in America" to boot.
All the these jobs earned and secured without risking Boeing jobs as they don't operate in this market.
It will be interesting to see how the current US administration plays this. Leaving well alone would be best, but I imagine the Donald will try to take credit. To not support this deal will be to risk jobs, something he's staked his presidency on.
All the these jobs earned and secured without risking Boeing jobs as they don't operate in this market.
It will be interesting to see how the current US administration plays this. Leaving well alone would be best, but I imagine the Donald will try to take credit. To not support this deal will be to risk jobs, something he's staked his presidency on.
re the NI dimension, it great to see jobs saved there and of course they will have their own special brexit deal (ie they will basically stay in the Eu under another name so they should be secure)
A big big lesson here
Could the UK stick it to Boeing and the US Govt like pan European giant AB with all of the strength of the EU behind it, not in a million years.
A big big lesson here
Could the UK stick it to Boeing and the US Govt like pan European giant AB with all of the strength of the EU behind it, not in a million years.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: between the lines
Age: 44
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very interesting and a bit surprising.
Is it really necessary that Boeing themselves played it badly? Were they maybe accustomed to certain proceedings (well standards) when lobbying an administration? Could it be just possible that they relied on established trade interest representation, rather discrete, pragmatic, and behind the scenes - but got caught out by the ways of the incumbent administration.
Second, if the AB-BBD deal was already being worked on earlier (August), and thus not a reaction to the tax - was that tax conversely a reaction to the emerging deal, an attempted deterrent? Means (and political determination) for the underlying business intelligence would surely be present.
Now for AB, the jury is out whether they are rather interested in keeping a competing C-Series in check, or in strenghtening their own product line with an efficient modern product at the low capacity end. The mentioned buy-out options may indicate that the C-Series could live long and prosper as future A100, A130, A150 ... and AB has no pressure to decide on that for years to come. They can comfortably watch what the competition does, e.g. going clean-sheet for a competing design, much like in the case of the NEO/MAX. That flexibility is quite an advantage.
Is it really necessary that Boeing themselves played it badly? Were they maybe accustomed to certain proceedings (well standards) when lobbying an administration? Could it be just possible that they relied on established trade interest representation, rather discrete, pragmatic, and behind the scenes - but got caught out by the ways of the incumbent administration.
Second, if the AB-BBD deal was already being worked on earlier (August), and thus not a reaction to the tax - was that tax conversely a reaction to the emerging deal, an attempted deterrent? Means (and political determination) for the underlying business intelligence would surely be present.
Now for AB, the jury is out whether they are rather interested in keeping a competing C-Series in check, or in strenghtening their own product line with an efficient modern product at the low capacity end. The mentioned buy-out options may indicate that the C-Series could live long and prosper as future A100, A130, A150 ... and AB has no pressure to decide on that for years to come. They can comfortably watch what the competition does, e.g. going clean-sheet for a competing design, much like in the case of the NEO/MAX. That flexibility is quite an advantage.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With zero public announcement of a 737 replacement airlines will increasingly wonder why Boeing are still pushing a design with its origins in the 1950s. Boeing needed to replace it all the way back in 1992, but didn't. This deal is the future which that laziness has earned them.
Develop, or die. It applies to every company of every size. Even Boeing.
The fact is that Airbus is one big gov subsidized behemoth. With that in mind it's easy to "justify" their losses with the A380, etc. ...
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact is that Airbus is one big gov subsidized behemoth.