User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:54 am

1900Driver wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
Jetsouth wrote:

I believe that you may be wrong, because tariffs apply to partially assembled aircraft coming in to the US. As the fuselage and other parts are partially assembled parts of the plane that are manufactured in various countries around the world that would be imported into the US for assembly, it would appear that the only way to avoid tariffs is if the plane and all its parts are manufactured and assembled in the US. I guess it all depends on what the definition of "partial assembly" is.



I don't know if anyone noticed, but the Commerce Dept. generously reduced the tariff to 292%, compared to the previously announced 299%.


Is that supposed to be a joke?


No, Wilbur Ross was feeling generous this past week. I was expecting that he'd increase the tariffs further, just because he can.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:06 am

LockheedBBD wrote:
1900Driver wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:


I don't know if anyone noticed, but the Commerce Dept. generously reduced the tariff to 292%, compared to the previously announced 299%.


Is that supposed to be a joke?


No, Wilbur Ross was feeling generous this past week. I was expecting that he'd increase the tariffs further, just because he can.


He's doing a pretty good job of showing everyone he can do whatever he wants.

https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-rel ... umping-and

Investegator, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner all in one. Ok, maybe he leaves the execution to CBP...
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:08 am

wrongwayup wrote:
He's doing a pretty good job of showing everyone he can do whatever he wants.

https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-rel ... umping-and

Investegator, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner all in one. Ok, maybe he leaves the execution to CBP...



:checkmark: :checkmark:
It seems that you are correct.

Self-Initiates Historic Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations on Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:47 am

If Boeing new it was negotiating buying another maker of regional jets at the same time it was pushing tariffs on a future competitor it looks even worse.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 6:28 am

Leeham has uploaded post-hearing briefs from all parties involved: https://leehamnews.com/2017/12/28/post- ... rade-case/

Quite interesting to read the arguments from all perspectives.
 
 
WIederling
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:16 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
jumbojet wrote:
Why not just build it in Toulouse?


It would be subject to tariffs.


There is treaty stuff around that says commercial airplanes are not taxed in US <> EU trades afaik.
( same for financing via ExIm or similar arrangements. no Airbus sales financed in the US, no Boeing sales financed in the EU.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
sxf24
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:01 pm

PW100 wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
BlueSky1976 wrote:
Some characters here are so fixated on hope for enforcing the tariffs they forget to read their conditions with a bit of understanding the actual text.


Meanwhile other enforcing that Bombardier did not practice dumping ...


Seems that Boeing started the dumping by selling 737s at ATR prices to United.

Thus, ironically, it was Boeing dictating market value for the C-series . . .


Selling at low prices in your home market is not dumping. Nor is selling at a low price that is above the cost of production.

If Bombardier sold the C-Series to Air Canada and Delta at the same price without triggering a forward loss there’d be no case of dumping.
 
WIederling
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:11 pm

sxf24 wrote:
If Bombardier sold the C-Series to Air Canada and Delta at the same price without triggering a forward loss there’d be no case of dumping.


With the order size related rebates structure there is no meaningful comparison between Canada and the US.
This will stay a Trumped up undeclared but blatant commercial war activity. MAGA
Murphy is an optimist
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:58 pm

Let's say that Boeing will lose more with this complaint than what it expected to gain.

It accelerated the Airbus / BBD partnership. It will provide Airbus an efficient product line up starting at 100 seats, GTF powered. Future narrowbody developments will focus on a A320.5+, A321+ and A322.

This will force Boeing to spend way more R&D $ (and earlier) than expected, just to stay relevant in the narrowbody market.

Boeing will lose more Canadian sales (Canada spends way more with Boeing than what Boeing spends in Canada). Let's say that Canada has now more reasons to see what's available in Europe (with better hope of win-win / balanced relations than with the US).

Boeing might also lose opportunities in UK.

This hypocrite action also opened the Pandora box and could now trigger similar measures (from Europe, UK, Canada, China and Russia) against any future Boeing programs. We all know how subsidized was the B787, which was then sold below costs...

In my opinion, the overwhelming power of lobbies in the US is actually detrimental to the overall economic interests of that same nation.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3018
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:52 pm

sxf24 wrote:
PW100 wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:

Meanwhile other enforcing that Bombardier did not practice dumping ...


Seems that Boeing started the dumping by selling 737s at ATR prices to United.

Thus, ironically, it was Boeing dictating market value for the C-series . . .


Selling at low prices in your home market is not dumping. Nor is selling at a low price that is above the cost of production.

If Bombardier sold the C-Series to Air Canada and Delta at the same price without triggering a forward loss there’d be no case of dumping.


By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market . . . which to some extent is true, but to some extent is not of course. Mainly because it ignores the industry problem of high up-front cost - both in terms of R&D, and in terms of high initial production cost starting up the industrialization of series production. Guess at what stage the C-series is . . .

If Bombardier wants to sell on US market, they had/have no choice and go along with market price. Market price, which was also set by Boeing's UA deal, selling an airframe in a market segment a full step lower than its natural habitat . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
WIederling
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 6:52 pm

PW100 wrote:
By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market


Boeing will show you that every frame was booked with the same cost. ( the benefit of program accounting.)

But I am sure that ANA or JAL may well have paid less then any US airline?
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3018
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 7:30 pm

WIederling wrote:
PW100 wrote:
By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market


Boeing will show you that every frame was booked with the same cost. ( the benefit of program accounting.)

But I am sure that ANA or JAL may well have paid less then any US airline?


Funny how dumping now becomes defined by the accounting method . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 896
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:09 pm

WIederling wrote:
Boeing will show you that every frame was booked with the same cost. ( the benefit of program accounting.)


Smoke + mirrors = magic!
 
sxf24
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:22 pm

WIederling wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
If Bombardier sold the C-Series to Air Canada and Delta at the same price without triggering a forward loss there’d be no case of dumping.


With the order size related rebates structure there is no meaningful comparison between Canada and the US.
This will stay a Trumped up undeclared but blatant commercial war activity. MAGA


There’s no such thing as rebates in aircraft sales. Airlines may receive credits to use for good and services, but that’s accounted in the sale price. It is improper under all accounting rules to sell an airplane at a high price and then give cash back to the airline without discounting the price.

PW100 wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
PW100 wrote:

Seems that Boeing started the dumping by selling 737s at ATR prices to United.

Thus, ironically, it was Boeing dictating market value for the C-series . . .


Selling at low prices in your home market is not dumping. Nor is selling at a low price that is above the cost of production.

If Bombardier sold the C-Series to Air Canada and Delta at the same price without triggering a forward loss there’d be no case of dumping.


By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market . . . which to some extent is true, but to some extent is not of course. Mainly because it ignores the industry problem of high up-front cost - both in terms of R&D, and in terms of high initial production cost starting up the industrialization of series production. Guess at what stage the C-series is . . .

If Bombardier wants to sell on US market, they had/have no choice and go along with market price. Market price, which was also set by Boeing's UA deal, selling an airframe in a market segment a full step lower than its natural habitat . . .


The market price for a 737-700 and C-Series may be similar. The important distinction is that Bombardier allegedly sold the C-Series to Delta af a price below what it sold the C-Series to Air Canada. If Boeing sold any aircraft to AC or WestJet for less than what a US customer paid and less than what it cost to produce, Boeing would also be guilty of dumping.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2679
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:31 pm

PW100 wrote:
By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market . . . which to some extent is true, but to some extent is not of course. Mainly because it ignores the industry problem of high up-front cost - both in terms of R&D, and in terms of high initial production cost starting up the industrialization of series production. Guess at what stage the C-series is . . .


Thats not true at all. Boeing could justify the sales price based on many different factors. You can sell at a loss without meeting the requirements for "dumping".

In this case we know pretty well it *IS* dumping because they wouldn't even try to justify the sales price. They could have simply shown that they would have lost less money by selling the planes than not building them, and it would have ended there. If they can't even toss numbers around that would show that, they shouldn't have made the deal. Don't forget they can use the potential future income from product support to help justify the current sales. (sell/give razor handle at a loss, make profit on the blades)
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 9:55 pm

sxf24 wrote:
The important distinction is that Bombardier allegedly sold the C-Series to Delta af a price below what it sold the C-Series to Air Canada.

Well no kidding Delta is paying less per plane as they are taking the cheaper CS100 and a paper derated version at that and Air Canada is taking the more expensive and larger CS300
sxf24 wrote:
If Boeing sold any aircraft to AC or WestJet for less than what a US customer paid and less than what it cost to produce, Boeing would also be guilty of dumping.

And I’m sure Air Canada is paying less per 737-8 than some of the customers in the US. The dirt cheap price and the removal of 20 E190s is the only reason they didn’t get A320s.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:12 pm

PW100 wrote:
WIederling wrote:
PW100 wrote:
By that metric, the first 400 787 were dumped on the market

Boeing will show you that every frame was booked with the same cost. ( the benefit of program accounting.)
But I am sure that ANA or JAL may well have paid less then any US airline?

Funny how dumping now becomes defined by the accounting method . . .

Or whether you have a product manufactured at home that conceivably competes with the import?

To put it another way; there are over 200 countries worldwide where Airbus, Boeing, BBD, or Embraer, can all discount their aircraft until they are literally giving them away. As long as the country receiving these humungous discounts doesn't have a domestic aircraft manufacturer of it's own, this discounting is perfectly valid. The only countries protected by anti-dumping legislation are ... the ones that don't need much help. (USA, Canada, Brazil, and whatever European countries can claim to produce Airbus) (*)

(*) I was once assured that the UK was not protected, because it only made components, not the whole aircraft. This I also found somewhat bizarre, but this isn't about what is best for the customer; it's all about protecting vested interests. :hissyfit:

Please - somebody tell me I've got it all wrong.
There are two things that happen when you get old.
1. You start to lose your memory.
2. What was I saying again?
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3018
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:26 pm

Well, I don't really want to go into the dumping discussion, since as an avition nerd I really don't care.

Selling price of the C-series in the US is not determined inside a vacuum. I just wanted to point out that the infamous UA 737 deal was a (rather important) factor in the dynamics of setting the market price for the C-series. That deal could not be ignored by Bombardier if they wanted to sell on the US market. And that, I find rather ironic . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
sxf24
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 12:53 am

767333ER wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
The important distinction is that Bombardier allegedly sold the C-Series to Delta af a price below what it sold the C-Series to Air Canada.

Well no kidding Delta is paying less per plane as they are taking the cheaper CS100 and a paper derated version at that and Air Canada is taking the more expensive and larger CS300
sxf24 wrote:
If Boeing sold any aircraft to AC or WestJet for less than what a US customer paid and less than what it cost to produce, Boeing would also be guilty of dumping.


And I’m sure Air Canada is paying less per 737-8 than some of the customers in the US. The dirt cheap price and the removal of 20 E190s is the only reason they didn’t get A320s.


Delta is taking both variants.

Boeing can sell at varying prices, although I’m sure that United, AA and Southwest pay less than AC.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8079
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 1:20 am

sxf24 wrote:
767333ER wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
The important distinction is that Bombardier allegedly sold the C-Series to Delta af a price below what it sold the C-Series to Air Canada.

Well no kidding Delta is paying less per plane as they are taking the cheaper CS100 and a paper derated version at that and Air Canada is taking the more expensive and larger CS300
sxf24 wrote:
If Boeing sold any aircraft to AC or WestJet for less than what a US customer paid and less than what it cost to produce, Boeing would also be guilty of dumping.


And I’m sure Air Canada is paying less per 737-8 than some of the customers in the US. The dirt cheap price and the removal of 20 E190s is the only reason they didn’t get A320s.


Delta is taking both variants.

Boeing can sell at varying prices, although I’m sure that United, AA and Southwest pay less than AC.



Shhhhh. Delta doesn’t want the ITC to know they’re taking both variants.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:15 am

sxf24 wrote:
767333ER wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
The important distinction is that Bombardier allegedly sold the C-Series to Delta af a price below what it sold the C-Series to Air Canada.

Well no kidding Delta is paying less per plane as they are taking the cheaper CS100 and a paper derated version at that and Air Canada is taking the more expensive and larger CS300
sxf24 wrote:
If Boeing sold any aircraft to AC or WestJet for less than what a US customer paid and less than what it cost to produce, Boeing would also be guilty of dumping.


And I’m sure Air Canada is paying less per 737-8 than some of the customers in the US. The dirt cheap price and the removal of 20 E190s is the only reason they didn’t get A320s.


Delta is taking both variants.

Boeing can sell at varying prices, although I’m sure that United, AA and Southwest pay less than AC.

And if they are they haven’t disclosed it and have certainly not disclosed any pricing as as far as Boeing and the ITC know, it isn’t the case. It’s foolish to compare the price of the CS100 to the CS300 even when the party ordering the CS100 might convert some to CS300s. I’m not so sure an airline such as WN or AS would get better pricing than AS because they wouldn’t nearly have the tough competition from Airbus there, United back when they ordered the 737 max originally was a similar case. WN definetly was not going to take Airbuses nor was AS even if they said they considered them. AC was set on getting Airbuses and yet Boeing won the RFP because of extremely low pricing.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
sxf24
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:45 am

767333ER wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
767333ER wrote:
Well no kidding Delta is paying less per plane as they are taking the cheaper CS100 and a paper derated version at that and Air Canada is taking the more expensive and larger CS300


And I’m sure Air Canada is paying less per 737-8 than some of the customers in the US. The dirt cheap price and the removal of 20 E190s is the only reason they didn’t get A320s.


Delta is taking both variants.

Boeing can sell at varying prices, although I’m sure that United, AA and Southwest pay less than AC.

And if they are they haven’t disclosed it and have certainly not disclosed any pricing as as far as Boeing and the ITC know, it isn’t the case. It’s foolish to compare the price of the CS100 to the CS300 even when the party ordering the CS100 might convert some to CS300s. I’m not so sure an airline such as WN or AS would get better pricing than AS because they wouldn’t nearly have the tough competition from Airbus there, United back when they ordered the 737 max originally was a similar case. WN definetly was not going to take Airbuses nor was AS even if they said they considered them. AC was set on getting Airbuses and yet Boeing won the RFP because of extremely low pricing.


Delta has disclosed that they’ve bought CS-300 and the pricing is certainly know.

You’re assessment of airline pricing and negotiating leverage is fairly far off. The price AC paid for its MAX is not lower than WN or AA.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:03 am

sxf24 wrote:
767333ER wrote:
sxf24 wrote:

Delta is taking both variants.

Boeing can sell at varying prices, although I’m sure that United, AA and Southwest pay less than AC.

And if they are they haven’t disclosed it and have certainly not disclosed any pricing as as far as Boeing and the ITC know, it isn’t the case. It’s foolish to compare the price of the CS100 to the CS300 even when the party ordering the CS100 might convert some to CS300s. I’m not so sure an airline such as WN or AS would get better pricing than AS because they wouldn’t nearly have the tough competition from Airbus there, United back when they ordered the 737 max originally was a similar case. WN definetly was not going to take Airbuses nor was AS even if they said they considered them. AC was set on getting Airbuses and yet Boeing won the RFP because of extremely low pricing.


Delta has disclosed that they’ve bought CS-300 and the pricing is certainly know.

You’re assessment of airline pricing and negotiating leverage is fairly far off. The price AC paid for its MAX is not lower than WN or AA.

I’m not sure where your getting your information from, but from what I’ve heard from people at Delta and Air Canada not much of what you say is true and if it is it is one of those things that can’t be proven to us because it more or less confidential right now; however, for that to be the case you would have to be a Delta employee or know one to know that and if that’s the case then ok, but otherwise I’m not sure where you’d get these ideas from.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:05 am

YULspotter wrote:
So Being has decided to launch a PR campaign so Canadian's forgive them.

https://www.facebook.com/Boeing/videos/137394340339084/


It looks like Boeing has now shifted focus towards the UK, it's quite heartwarming actually:

https://twitter.com/BoeingUK/status/944 ... twterm%5E2

Based on the video, it does seem that Boeing is a bigger employer in the UK than Bombardier? If so, the UK government will need to tread lightly in their stance against the CSeries tariffs.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6727
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:24 am

LockheedBBD wrote:
YULspotter wrote:
So Being has decided to launch a PR campaign so Canadian's forgive them.

https://www.facebook.com/Boeing/videos/137394340339084/


It looks like Boeing has now shifted focus towards the UK, it's quite heartwarming actually:

https://twitter.com/BoeingUK/status/944 ... twterm%5E2

Based on the video, it does seem that Boeing is a bigger employer in the UK than Bombardier? If so, the UK government will need to tread lightly in their stance against the CSeries tariffs.


The video producers could do worse than check out their company's own website, I guess

http://www.boeing.co.uk/boeing-in-the-u ... he-uk.page

Boeing employs 2 200 people in the UK

http://uk.bombardier.com/en/about-us/bo ... untry.html

Bombardier Belfast employs 4 200 people in Belfast alone.
Bombardier Transportation employs another 3 500 people at 8 sites across the UK

Rgds
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1537
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:34 am

LockheedBBD wrote:
YULspotter wrote:
So Being has decided to launch a PR campaign so Canadian's forgive them.

https://www.facebook.com/Boeing/videos/137394340339084/


It looks like Boeing has now shifted focus towards the UK, it's quite heartwarming actually:

https://twitter.com/BoeingUK/status/944 ... twterm%5E2

Based on the video, it does seem that Boeing is a bigger employer in the UK than Bombardier? If so, the UK government will need to tread lightly in their stance against the CSeries tariffs.


That is not entirely accurate as far as I can see.

The information I have been able to find is that Boeing employs around 2000 people in the UK. They support around 12 000 jobs, but these I would guess these are for all aerospace companies that can bid for outsourced work. If Boeing were to withdraw their offer for work for partners in the UK I doubt all those 12 000 jobs would disappear overnight. Airbus will still require Rolls Royce engines.

Bombardier does supply 4000 jobs in Northern Ireland alone. So as far as I can see Bombardier has more than double the employees than Boeing and is thus more important. Take into consideration that the jobs are in a critical area for the UK as well. Losing say 4000 jobs in London would not have such a big impact as losing 4000 high skilled jobs in Belfast.

Boeing in the UK

US ruling on Bombardier risks thousands of Northern Irish jobs, Union claims

Edit: I see astuteman already posted the same information above.
 
trex8
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:17 am

enzo011 wrote:
[


Bombardier does supply 4000 jobs in Northern Ireland alone. So as far as I can see Bombardier has more than double the employees than Boeing and is thus more important. Take into consideration that the jobs are in a critical area for the UK as well. Losing say 4000 jobs in London would not have such a big impact as losing 4000 high skilled jobs in Belfast.


Plus the only reason Mays Conservative government is still in power is because they depend on the Democratic Unionist votes from N Ireland!
 
CX747
Posts: 5957
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:21 am

Discusses the unity between the UK and Boeing in regards to defense programs. One tidbit is Boeing going out of its way to assist the MoD after a major mistake on the MoD's part. Boeing stepped up and took it on the chin on behalf of the MoD to assist.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thereg ... _brouhaha/
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:24 am

CX747 wrote:
Discusses the unity between the UK and Boeing in regards to defense programs. One tidbit is Boeing going out of its way to assist the MoD after a major mistake on the MoD's part. Boeing stepped up and took it on the chin on behalf of the MoD to assist.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thereg ... _brouhaha/

The Register is nominally a British publication, and the named author also British, but parts of this article read like a Boeing publicity hand-out. There are little clues all through it, so read & enjoy, but don't by any means take it as totally balanced unbiased journalism.

On the upside, whilst The Register is predominantly a technology news publication, Gareth Corfield does appear to have a genuine interest in aviation; perhaps he's even lurking here on a.net? Gareth - any comments?
There are two things that happen when you get old.
1. You start to lose your memory.
2. What was I saying again?
 
CX747
Posts: 5957
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:55 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
CX747 wrote:
Discusses the unity between the UK and Boeing in regards to defense programs. One tidbit is Boeing going out of its way to assist the MoD after a major mistake on the MoD's part. Boeing stepped up and took it on the chin on behalf of the MoD to assist.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thereg ... _brouhaha/

The Register is nominally a British publication, and the named author also British, but parts of this article read like a Boeing publicity hand-out. There are little clues all through it, so read & enjoy, but don't by any means take it as totally balanced unbiased journalism.

On the upside, whilst The Register is predominantly a technology news publication, Gareth Corfield does appear to have a genuine interest in aviation; perhaps he's even lurking here on a.net? Gareth - any comments?


The piece is very well written. Just because it doesn't push a narrative or position one likes doesn't make it a PR piece for someone else. This article shows the reality of the relationship, the current illegal dumping in question and how the two sides have worked together in the past and are linked to one another in the future.

It is quite eye opening for the general public to learn that Boeing stepped forward on behalf of the MoD after a huge mistake by the MoD on the Chinook program. That type of action and the relationships it fosters are not long forgotten.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Skywatcher
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 11:19 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:11 pm

Boeing simply distorts factual information and re-spins it as incredibly biased self-serving propaganda. I looked further into the Boeing claims of "Canadian jobs/billions injected into the economy etc." when they blitzed the Canadian media earlier this year. Complete fantasy.
It makes me wonder if paying huge legal fees and spending untold millions on distorted marketing propaganda actually works?
Wouldn't the money be better spent on aircraft development, lower sales prices or maybe lower subsidies?
 
User avatar
kmz
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:55 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:17 am

Somehow, I find the weight difference between the B737-700 and the CS300 less severe than anticpated when comparing an old an a new a/c design

Page 40 in https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... 122717.pdf

A/C OEW (lb)
CS300 81750
B737-700 83000
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:09 pm

kmz wrote:
Somehow, I find the weight difference between the B737-700 and the CS300 less severe than anticpated when comparing an old an a new a/c design

Page 40 in https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... 122717.pdf

A/C OEW (lb)
CS300 81750
B737-700 83000

{coughs}
A319 90000 lb
There are two things that happen when you get old.
1. You start to lose your memory.
2. What was I saying again?
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 896
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:38 pm

leghorn wrote:
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news18_e/ds535rfc_10jan18_e.htm
WTO complaint

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-42636205
British Politician basically says that US court isn't impartial and will act politically.
I have no idea if he is talking rubbish or not but we'll find out in 3 weeks time.


Is he Captain Obvious?
 
leghorn
Posts: 384
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:39 pm

https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news ... an18_e.htm
WTO complaint

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-42636205
British Politician basically says that US court isn't impartial and will act politically.
I have no idea if he is talking rubbish or not but we'll find out in 3 weeks time.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26969
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:23 pm

Canada fires back and filled a complaint at the WTO over Boeing.

Canada upped the ante in the Boeing-Bombardier C Series trade complaint today by filing one of its own against the US with the World Trade Organization.

This filing comes on the eve of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) staff report, due Friday, on whether Boeing was “harmed” by Bombardier’s near-miss in selling the CS100 to United Airlines and an order in 2016 by Delta Air Lines for 75+50 CS100s, with an option to covert some of the orders to the larger CS300.


Leeham
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/10/canad ... complaint/

Document
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... 011018.pdf
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 22334
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:28 pm

I hope they have lots of time.

Unlike US Commerce Department, the WTO moves at a glacial pace with decisions, many of which come to nothing at the end.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
janders
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:33 pm

Canada probably believes it will not prevail in the final ITC ruling, so is pursuing an alternate path. Though not sure what Canada will get out of a slow WTO process.

Might go hand in hand that Canadian government officials say there’s an increasing likelihood that U.S. will give six-months’ notice to withdraw from NAFTA which saw the Canadian dollar today as result.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:37 pm

Good luck Canada. WTO is indeed hardly a place to get any quick resolution.

Also interesting, all Canada is worried about is really the level of duties, not fact that US can place such duties.

Complaint main points:
> The Liquidation of Final Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties in Excess of WTO-Consistent Rates and Failure to Refund Cash Deposits Collected in Excess of WTO-Consistent Rates
> Retroactive Provisional Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties Determinations
> The US Treatment of Export Controls in Countervailing Duty Proceedings
> The Improper Calculation of Benefit in Countervailing Duty Proceedings involving the Provision of Goods for Less than Adequate Remuneration
> The United States' Effective Closure of the Evidentiary Record before the Preliminary Determination
 
Kilopond
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:08 am

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:10 pm

In this paricular case, the US are violating the rules they introduced themselves during the Doha round of the GATT. There should be absolutely no way for them to get away with this kind of an arbitrary, hostile trade war.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 22334
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:18 pm

I also think its a foregone conclusion Canada believes the ITC ruling will stand, so it not even waiting for the results before trying something else.
Though in the meantime, still does not solve the more immediate problem for BBD trying to sell planes to U.S. clients.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
YuriMG2
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:16 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:28 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
If Boeing new it was negotiating buying another maker of regional jets at the same time it was pushing tariffs on a future competitor it looks even worse.


The talk in Brazil is that this negotiation between Boeing and Embraer goes back to 2013 when the F18 was the favorite to win the FX-2 bid. That embraer wasnt that happy when the Defense chose the Gripen (big thanks to Snowden).
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 12149
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:31 am

Who would ever have thought the US not following their own WTO obligations. How many times have we seen that.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
janders
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:42 am

WTO process likely take atleast 3-years to play out


The real purpose of a challenge at the WTO would likely be to gain some leverage in order to come to a negotiated settlement with the United States, said Ian Lee, professor of business at Carleton University.
“If you go to the WTO, it’s likely not to get finality and resolution which could take a very long time anyhow, but it’s only to push the Americans back to the negotiating table to make a deal,” Lee said. “You use whatever tools are in your tool kit.”
But this dance can drag on for years, which could pose a problem for Bombardier as it tries to find buyers for the CSeries. “The real threat to Bombardier is are they going to be able to sign new contracts with people knowing this huge overhang exists over the company,” said Warner. “That’s the chilling effect the decision has on Bombardier.”


https://ipolitics.ca/2018/01/10/canada- ... ve-duties/
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
User avatar
neomax
Posts: 576
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:26 am

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:44 am

zeke wrote:
Who would ever have thought the US not following their own WTO obligations. How many times have we seen that.


Hundreds of times. This is not sarcasm. The US is by FAR the biggest violator of WTO obligations relative to the number of cases it loses. (ie. Not abiding by the decision of a case).
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 3278
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:44 am

zeke wrote:
Who would ever have thought the US not following their own WTO obligations. How many times have we seen that.


The rate of U.S. wins and losses in WTO disputes is pretty symmetrical.

“When the United States has been a complainant (as it has in 114 of 522 WTO disputes over 22 years — more than any other WTO member) it has prevailed on 91 percent of adjudicated issues,” he wrote. “When the United States is a respondent (as it has been in 129 cases — more than any other WTO member), it has lost on 89 percent of adjudicated issues.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/trump ... to-record/
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:54 am

Good, hope Canada and the WTO stick it to the government and Boeing.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
 
Andre3K
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 10:11 pm

Re: Canada files WTO complaint vs US over Boeing CSeries trade complaint

Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:04 am

Super80Fan wrote:
Good, hope Canada and the WTO stick it to the government and Boeing.


Maybe Boeing, but sticking it to the government would also be sticking it to the millions of innocent citizens that have nothing to do with all this.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: U.S. Dept of Commerce backs Boeing in dispute with Bombardier

Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:22 am

Certainly slow WTO process creates ongoing black cloud for BBD not only endangering orders but the companies finances.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos