User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:05 pm

Revelation wrote:
Seems we're (finally?) getting some insight into how Boeing sees all of this in https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomp ... 69f6107121 from Loren Thompson, who tells us why he's qualified to tell us how unconcerned Boeing is about this deal:

However, many observers still don't grasp how unconcerned Boeing is about the pending partnership. Because Boeing is a longtime contributor to my think tank, I have been able to develop a fairly precise picture of how senior management views the proposed transaction. In brief, here's why Boeing isn't worried at all.

Nice that he gets that out of the way right up front, isn't it? :biggrin:

A lot of the arguments are the ones suggested here already, such as Trump will still support Boeing and airplanes produced at the Alabama FAL will still be subject to tariffs for years to come.

Some red meat quotes:

Even if the impending demise of the Airbus A380 superjumbo was not impairing its balance sheet, the European plane maker is facing heavy headwinds. The way Boeing execs see it, Airbus is buying itself further headaches by taking on the CSeries as part of its portfolio. Boeing and Airbus in the past have avoided offering planes with seating capacity barely above that of regional jets.

And:

The fact that Bombardier was willing to give away ownership of its premier product line underscores why Boeing wasn't interested in doing a deal when it kicked the tires at Bombardier two years ago. There just isn't much there worth having.

And the summation:

And that's before you get to all the political controversy that will surround Quebec seeing its billion-dollar stake in CSeries shrink from 49% ownership to 19%. No government would accept such a deal unless it had received assurances that local jobs will not go away. CSeries production will continue to occur mainly in Canada, and given all the subsidies, CSeries duties will remain in place in the U.S. -- by far the plane's most important market. So of course Boeing isn't worried about arch-rival Airbus tying itself to Bombardier. Quite the opposite: some Boeing executives are delighted, believing it has made yet another strategic misstep.

Not a convincing piece at all, IMHO.


As long as the deal between Airbus and Bombardier has not been finalized (and it won't be until mid-2018 or so), nobody knows what kind of impact CSeries might have on future aviation. So it strikes me that people are already writing articles like "Boeing should not be worried", especially when nobody (including Airbus and Bombardier) knows what the final details of this deal will be.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Jamie514
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:15 pm

It strikes me as weird that articles like “Here’s why Upper Boeing isn’t worried at all” are being written in the face of them undercutting the competition by abusing their domestic status to evade dumping law and then complaining that the resulting lowball deal the competition makes at same price point months later is dumping.
 
thumper76
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:33 pm

bigjku wrote:
thumper76 wrote:
The whole reason why BBD had to sell 50.01% of the cseries was because BBD did not have the financial backing to push the aircraft into all important markets. The nearly 300% tariff was a move by Boeing ment to kill any chance of getting the US market. Airbus has the financial backing needed to get the US market by ensuring that it can get to the WTO. If the US does not listen to the WTO rulings then the cseries is the least of our worries.


You do realize that at the WTO the C-Series is going to get clobbered by Brazil right? The only problem is that it will take a decade to get there.

It will be interesting to see if everyone still holds WTO rulings as manadate here in the next year or so.

Your opinion is noted! I dare say the WTO might have a less lopsided view of the current situation. Just curious if the WTO finds in favour of Airbus will all previously paid tariffs have to be reimbursed?
 
User avatar
Ab345
Posts: 1048
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:34 pm

This RFP for example is a standard case of how Airbus saving the CSeries can turn up a sale where it would have been questionable at best a few weeks ago.

Bangkok Airways is evaluating the Airbus A319neo, Boeing 737 Max 7 and the Bombardier CS300 for its fleet renewal and expansion needs.

These aircraft, which will be taken in a mix of acquisitions and leases, will replace its fleet of 15 A319s.

Wiesner says that while the CSeries is lighter than the A319neo and the 737 Max 7, bringing about fuel savings, it will bring with it the complexity of adding a new aircraft type to the boutique carrier's fleet.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-442458/

So in my understanding:
-> We like the CS300 more, but it is complex to bring a new type.

I don't see the MAX7 having a chance here especially when they already fly the 319, but a few weeks ago Airbus would try and undercut Bombardier by trying to sell the A319neo or A320neo. Now they can keep the airline in the Airbus camp and try and make the fleet changing a bit more seamless? Of course it is too early for integration procedures but I think this RFP is a classic example of how this could work better for them.
 
stranger706
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 5:34 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:45 pm

Either Mobile is going to ramp up past rate 4 for 321s or they are already planning for C series production, because they are clearing and grading land right next to the FAL for more hangars/buildings.

I’ll see what I can find out.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:55 pm

Ab345 wrote:
This RFP for example is a standard case of how Airbus saving the CSeries can turn up a sale where it would have been questionable at best a few weeks ago.

Bangkok Airways is evaluating the Airbus A319neo, Boeing 737 Max 7 and the Bombardier CS300 for its fleet renewal and expansion needs.

These aircraft, which will be taken in a mix of acquisitions and leases, will replace its fleet of 15 A319s.

Wiesner says that while the CSeries is lighter than the A319neo and the 737 Max 7, bringing about fuel savings, it will bring with it the complexity of adding a new aircraft type to the boutique carrier's fleet.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-442458/

So in my understanding:
-> We like the CS300 more, but it is complex to bring a new type.

I don't see the MAX7 having a chance here especially when they already fly the 319, but a few weeks ago Airbus would try and undercut Bombardier by trying to sell the A319neo or A320neo. Now they can keep the airline in the Airbus camp and try and make the fleet changing a bit more seamless? Of course it is too early for integration procedures but I think this RFP is a classic example of how this could work better for them.


If Bangkok's primary concern about the C series is the complexity about adding a new aircraft type to then the Airbus deal is going to do little to change that. Although Airbus might be less willing to discount on the A319neo now I wouldn't rule out them still being aggressive and trying to get Bangkok Airways to upgauge to larger A320neos. Sales deals right now are likely a little up in the air. Remember the deal isn't closed yet, and it is expect to take 6-12 months to do so. Until it does Airbus has to be careful...BBD and the C series is right now still a competing entity and not part of the Airbus fold.
 
WaywardMemphian
Posts: 1410
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 9:05 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:40 pm

Boeing might have have had an argument if Bombardier alone had shifted the FAL to Wichita for the Delta order. But...here Airbus has taken a majority stake and it is basically their plane now. They have already a manufacturing presence for assembly of commercial aircraft in the US and this just allows thme to fill out that facility to it's full potential. All they have to show is that more than Delta's C-Series will be produced and exported from there and this is all mute.

Boeing's shinanagans via the new tanker for the UASF will haunt them for decades to come with Airbus switching that facility to commercial use. The Dollar is 20 cents lower than the Euro again, make the planes there much cheaper to produce than in Europe.

That article is garbage because Boeing would not have reacted the way they did when it was announced if they were not concerned. It's now face saving mode for getting out flaneed on the battlefield.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:36 pm

WaywardMemphian wrote:
Boeing might have have had an argument if Bombardier alone had shifted the FAL to Wichita for the Delta order. But...here Airbus has taken a majority stake and it is basically their plane now. They have already a manufacturing presence for assembly of commercial aircraft in the US and this just allows thme to fill out that facility to it's full potential. All they have to show is that more than Delta's C-Series will be produced and exported from there and this is all mute.

Boeing's shinanagans via the new tanker for the UASF will haunt them for decades to come with Airbus switching that facility to commercial use. The Dollar is 20 cents lower than the Euro again, make the planes there much cheaper to produce than in Europe.

That article is garbage because Boeing would not have reacted the way they did when it was announced if they were not concerned. It's now face saving mode for getting out flaneed on the battlefield.


I think even than the argument of Boeing would have weak, if BBD would have started to produce the CS100 and CS300 in Wichita. BBD has a long established presence in Wichita producing whole frames, even if it is only business jets.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:38 pm

WaywardMemphian wrote:
Boeing might have have had an argument if Bombardier alone had shifted the FAL to Wichita for the Delta order. But...here Airbus has taken a majority stake and it is basically their plane now. They have already a manufacturing presence for assembly of commercial aircraft in the US and this just allows thme to fill out that facility to it's full potential. All they have to show is that more than Delta's C-Series will be produced and exported from there and this is all mute.

#1401 above quotes @washingtonflyer explaining the legal mechanism that is available to say that Airbus is a BBD affiliate and the FAL is simply a way to evade the tariff.

Things do not necessarily work the way you and many other posters keep saying they do.

The Alabama FAL does not necessarily end the tariff war.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:39 pm

stranger706 wrote:
Either Mobile is going to ramp up past rate 4 for 321s or they are already planning for C series production, because they are clearing and grading land right next to the FAL for more hangars/buildings.

I’ll see what I can find out.


The current FAL in Mobile is build for up to 8 frames per month. They could of course build more peripheral buildings used for outfitting or painting.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:43 pm

Revelation wrote:
WaywardMemphian wrote:
Boeing might have have had an argument if Bombardier alone had shifted the FAL to Wichita for the Delta order. But...here Airbus has taken a majority stake and it is basically their plane now. They have already a manufacturing presence for assembly of commercial aircraft in the US and this just allows thme to fill out that facility to it's full potential. All they have to show is that more than Delta's C-Series will be produced and exported from there and this is all mute.

#1401 above quotes @washingtonflyer explaining the legal mechanism that is available to say that Airbus is a BBD affiliate and the FAL is simply a way to evade the tariff.

Things do not necessarily work the way you and many other posters keep saying they do.

The Alabama FAL does not necessarily end the tariff war.


In my opinion does @Washingtonflyer present the Boeing case. I assume that he is an able and knowledgeable lawyer, but does he have a neutral view of the case?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:58 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
In my opinion does @Washingtonflyer present the Boeing case. I assume that he is an able and knowledgeable lawyer, but does he have a neutral view of the case?

As usual we should debate the content not the person. Questioning someone's neutrality doesn't add anything to the conversation, IMHO, because there's no such thing as a totally neutral person.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
WaywardMemphian
Posts: 1410
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 9:05 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:59 pm

This quickly shifted from Canadian and Irish Jobs to a whole lot of existing and potential US jobs. Boeing will lose. This is #Winning for Trump. Mobile has hosted several of his rallies, he'll love to make another announcing this. Trump went right after Boeing on Air Force 1 costs when elected, it's more about what will make him look good than helping Boeing. Too many of you don't understand Trump.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:07 pm

stranger706 wrote:
Either Mobile is going to ramp up past rate 4 for 321s or they are already planning for C series production, because they are clearing and grading land right next to the FAL for more hangars/buildings.

I’ll see what I can find out.


Is this in the direction of the delivery center; besides the (completion) hangar?
Google maps link
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2419
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:00 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
With an USA content of more than 50%, assembled in the USA, the CS100 and CS300 will be defined as an USA manufactured aircraft.

As has been posted here before, US assembly becomes irrelevant if is is being used to circumvent the tariff, which this clearly is.


Of course manufacturing is set up in the USA to circumvent or lower tariffs. The only other reason is to be able to compete for military or government contracts in the USA. Why otherwise move production to the USA?
It has even been on the Trump agenda for many industries, bring your manufacturing to us, otherwise we will put tariffs on you. A highly protectionist agenda. It would be strange for the USA to torpedo that agenda, when somebody actually moves production to the USA. The point were it is defined if a product manufactured in the USA or not, is local content. You can not discuss that point, only how much local content is needed.


I agree. It's ridiculus to maintain tariffs if the planes rolling out of the FAL in Alabama are just as American as the ones rolling out of the FALs in South Carolina.

President Trump's agenda is jobs, jobs, jobs. Alabama is a Trump stronghold, and if Airbus wants to expand and hire there - to make Made in America airplanes - you bet there will be political pressure to hold those tariffs back.

Pushing those insane tariffs will only start a trade war between the US-Canada-EU/UK triangle. Nobody wins.
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:10 pm

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/c-serie ... -1.4370696

The Canadian government supposedly "pushed" Bombardier towards Airbus after Bombardier was considering China.


Bombardier had considered a Chinese partnership as early as 2015, after talks about a possible merger with Airbus became public and fell apart. This year, as negotiations with Boeing over a C Series partnership faltered and concerns about the future of the program mounted, Bombardier's interest in a deal with China intensified, two sources said. Bombardier approached Boeing last spring, three of the sources said. Bombardier offered Boeing a stake in the C Series under similar terms to those later offered to Airbus, two of the sources said.

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s. That once again Bombardier's focus back on a deal with the Chinese — until Ottawa pressed the case for discussions with Airbus over the summer.

Officials from Airbus and Bombardier soon began what would be a series of meetings at restaurants in Paris, London and Munich. The meetings involved only four people — the two CEOs along with another executive from each company.

A representative of the Canadian government did not attend.





They also expressed uneasiness about what some saw as inadequate Chinese safeguards against intellectual property theft. In a series of calls with Bombardier in August and September, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains and Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, as well as senior officials in Trudeau's office, urged Bombardier to contact the European company, the two sources said. "From the federal government's point of view, anything was better than a link-up with China," according to an Ottawa source. Inside Bombardier, however, executives worried that talks with potential Chinese partners were not moving quickly enough, according to sources.

The prospect of such a deal raised concern within the Canadian government, two of the sources said, where officials believed jobs or technology could be "siphoned away" to China.

Last edited by LockheedBBD on Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3246
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:18 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/c-series-bombardier-airbus-1.4370696

The Canadian government supposedly "pushed" Bombardier towards Airbus after Bombardier was considering China.


Bombardier had considered a Chinese partnership as early as 2015, after talks about a possible merger with Airbus became public and fell apart. This year, as negotiations with Boeing over a C Series partnership faltered and concerns about the future of the program mounted, Bombardier's interest in a deal with China intensified, two sources said. Bombardier approached Boeing last spring, three of the sources said. Bombardier offered Boeing a stake in the C Series under similar terms to those later offered to Airbus, two of the sources said.

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s. That once again Bombardier's focus back on a deal with the Chinese — until Ottawa pressed the case for discussions with Airbus over the summer.

The prospect of such a deal raised concern within the Canadian government, two of the sources said, where officials believed jobs or technology could be "siphoned away" to China.

They also expressed uneasiness about what some saw as inadequate Chinese safeguards against intellectual property theft. In a series of calls with Bombardier in August and September, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains and Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, as well as senior officials in Trudeau's office, urged Bombardier to contact the European company, the two sources said. "From the federal government's point of view, anything was better than a link-up with China," according to an Ottawa source. Inside Bombardier, however, executives worried that talks with potential Chinese partners were not moving quickly enough, according to sources.




No, no, no, I just read through 9 pages of thread that plain stated that Boeing would never be offered a deal like this, and that Boeing is the devil. Boeing would have noooooo idea a deal like this could ever take place. :P
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:23 pm

william wrote:

No, no, no, I just read through 9 pages of thread that plain stated that Boeing would never be offered a deal like this, and that Boeing is the devil. Boeing would have noooooo idea a deal like this could ever take place. :P



It looks like for whatever reason, Boeing decided that a JV wasn't worth the trouble/effort/money, but Airbus decided to give it a try. Only the future will tell us who made the better decision here. :)
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1298
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:36 pm

william wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/c-series-bombardier-airbus-1.4370696

The Canadian government supposedly "pushed" Bombardier towards Airbus after Bombardier was considering China.


Bombardier had considered a Chinese partnership as early as 2015, after talks about a possible merger with Airbus became public and fell apart. This year, as negotiations with Boeing over a C Series partnership faltered and concerns about the future of the program mounted, Bombardier's interest in a deal with China intensified, two sources said. Bombardier approached Boeing last spring, three of the sources said. Bombardier offered Boeing a stake in the C Series under similar terms to those later offered to Airbus, two of the sources said.

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s. That once again Bombardier's focus back on a deal with the Chinese — until Ottawa pressed the case for discussions with Airbus over the summer.

The prospect of such a deal raised concern within the Canadian government, two of the sources said, where officials believed jobs or technology could be "siphoned away" to China.

They also expressed uneasiness about what some saw as inadequate Chinese safeguards against intellectual property theft. In a series of calls with Bombardier in August and September, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains and Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, as well as senior officials in Trudeau's office, urged Bombardier to contact the European company, the two sources said. "From the federal government's point of view, anything was better than a link-up with China," according to an Ottawa source. Inside Bombardier, however, executives worried that talks with potential Chinese partners were not moving quickly enough, according to sources.




No, no, no, I just read through 9 pages of thread that plain stated that Boeing would never be offered a deal like this, and that Boeing is the devil. Boeing would have noooooo idea a deal like this could ever take place. :P

The difference, as I understand it, is that Boeing started the tariff case after talks with BBD fell through. I suspect there would now be political pressure not to deal with Boeing, in light of the DOC case.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:42 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
william wrote:
No, no, no, I just read through 9 pages of thread that plain stated that Boeing would never be offered a deal like this, and that Boeing is the devil. Boeing would have noooooo idea a deal like this could ever take place. :P


It looks like for whatever reason, Boeing decided that a JV wasn't worth the trouble/effort/money, but Airbus decided to give it a try.

Your previous post is quite direct about the reasoning:

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s.

To me, the other very interesting quote is:

"From the (Canadian) federal government's point of view, anything was better than a link-up with China,"

So the choices were A or B and not C. B said no, then A said yes.

LockheedBBD wrote:
Only the future will tell us who made the better decision here. :)

:checkmark:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:44 pm

Revelation wrote:
WaywardMemphian wrote:
Boeing might have have had an argument if Bombardier alone had shifted the FAL to Wichita for the Delta order. But...here Airbus has taken a majority stake and it is basically their plane now. They have already a manufacturing presence for assembly of commercial aircraft in the US and this just allows thme to fill out that facility to it's full potential. All they have to show is that more than Delta's C-Series will be produced and exported from there and this is all mute.

#1401 above quotes @washingtonflyer explaining the legal mechanism that is available to say that Airbus is a BBD affiliate and the FAL is simply a way to evade the tariff.

Things do not necessarily work the way you and many other posters keep saying they do.

The Alabama FAL does not necessarily end the tariff war.


If the just put the plane together in 5 pieces, no it doesn't. There will be some level of work required that will put them below the tariff threshold. And I am sure Airbus and BBD are working on figuring out exactly what that is.

Boeing boosters want us to conflate the fact that major subassemblies are subject to tariff with the idea that any and all assembly is subject to tariff. That's clearly not true.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:48 pm

Ab345 wrote:
This RFP for example is a standard case of how Airbus saving the CSeries can turn up a sale where it would have been questionable at best a few weeks ago.

Bangkok Airways is evaluating the Airbus A319neo, Boeing 737 Max 7 and the Bombardier CS300 for its fleet renewal and expansion needs.

These aircraft, which will be taken in a mix of acquisitions and leases, will replace its fleet of 15 A319s.

Wiesner says that while the CSeries is lighter than the A319neo and the 737 Max 7, bringing about fuel savings, it will bring with it the complexity of adding a new aircraft type to the boutique carrier's fleet.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-442458/

So in my understanding:
-> We like the CS300 more, but it is complex to bring a new type.

I don't see the MAX7 having a chance here especially when they already fly the 319, but a few weeks ago Airbus would try and undercut Bombardier by trying to sell the A319neo or A320neo. Now they can keep the airline in the Airbus camp and try and make the fleet changing a bit more seamless? Of course it is too early for integration procedures but I think this RFP is a classic example of how this could work better for them.


I wonder how much early delivery comes into play. They could get a CS300 next year. Not so for A320 family order.
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:53 pm

Revelation wrote:


Then, if it's not worth having, why is Boeing telling us that they are going to continue to spend the big dollars on legal fees to pressure the Trump administration to prevent it from gaining a US market? If the jet barely bigger than a regional jet has no market, why spend so much money trying to kill it?



I think all the pieces of the puzzle are coming together. Bombardier offered to sell the CSeries to Boeing. Boeing said no. Boeing thought that Bombardier was going to sell to China (as we learned in yesterday's Globe and Mail article), so Boeing pursued the tariffs in response to a potentially much greater threat from China?
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3326
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:56 pm

ytz wrote:
Ab345 wrote:
This RFP for example is a standard case of how Airbus saving the CSeries can turn up a sale where it would have been questionable at best a few weeks ago.

Bangkok Airways is evaluating the Airbus A319neo, Boeing 737 Max 7 and the Bombardier CS300 for its fleet renewal and expansion needs.

These aircraft, which will be taken in a mix of acquisitions and leases, will replace its fleet of 15 A319s.

Wiesner says that while the CSeries is lighter than the A319neo and the 737 Max 7, bringing about fuel savings, it will bring with it the complexity of adding a new aircraft type to the boutique carrier's fleet.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-442458/

So in my understanding:
-> We like the CS300 more, but it is complex to bring a new type.

I don't see the MAX7 having a chance here especially when they already fly the 319, but a few weeks ago Airbus would try and undercut Bombardier by trying to sell the A319neo or A320neo. Now they can keep the airline in the Airbus camp and try and make the fleet changing a bit more seamless? Of course it is too early for integration procedures but I think this RFP is a classic example of how this could work better for them.


I wonder how much early delivery comes into play. They could get a CS300 next year. Not so for A320 family order.


Airbus could offer a CS300+A320NEO package to replace their A319 and A320 fleet. Nothing in their existing network is beyond CS300 range... nothing seems to be over 1200nm? Plus Bangkok Airways changed types from the 717 to the A319 easily enough, i doubt it's really a huge concern as the article makes it out to be.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
stranger706
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 5:34 pm

Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:01 pm

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
Is this in the direction of the delivery center; besides the (completion) hangar?
Google maps link


It’s next to the delivery center. Kind of between the main fal building and delivery center.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:07 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
ytz wrote:
Ab345 wrote:
This RFP for example is a standard case of how Airbus saving the CSeries can turn up a sale where it would have been questionable at best a few weeks ago.

Bangkok Airways is evaluating the Airbus A319neo, Boeing 737 Max 7 and the Bombardier CS300 for its fleet renewal and expansion needs.

These aircraft, which will be taken in a mix of acquisitions and leases, will replace its fleet of 15 A319s.

Wiesner says that while the CSeries is lighter than the A319neo and the 737 Max 7, bringing about fuel savings, it will bring with it the complexity of adding a new aircraft type to the boutique carrier's fleet.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-442458/

So in my understanding:
-> We like the CS300 more, but it is complex to bring a new type.

I don't see the MAX7 having a chance here especially when they already fly the 319, but a few weeks ago Airbus would try and undercut Bombardier by trying to sell the A319neo or A320neo. Now they can keep the airline in the Airbus camp and try and make the fleet changing a bit more seamless? Of course it is too early for integration procedures but I think this RFP is a classic example of how this could work better for them.


I wonder how much early delivery comes into play. They could get a CS300 next year. Not so for A320 family order.


Airbus could offer a CS300+A320NEO package to replace their A319 and A320 fleet. Nothing in their existing network is beyond CS300 range... nothing seems to be over 1200nm? Plus Bangkok Airways changed types from the 717 to the A319 easily enough, i doubt it's really a huge concern as the article makes it out to be.

Bangkok Airways is a fairly small airline. I'm not sure they would be interested in a CS+A320(+ATR) split, all of which are different types. That is probably the root of their "new type" concern (i.e. CS good aircraft but doesn't currently offer growth to replace PG's A320 or go larger).
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:20 pm

http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t- ... l-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s.

While Boeing (BA.TO) welcomes competition, he repeatedly said during a quarterly conference call Wednesday that all players need to play by the same rules. Boeing says that won't let it escape duties.

Boeing says it always evaluates its strategic options and the CSeries deal doesn't change that.

Muiulenburg says, “We have a strong strategy in place. We don’t need to change the path".
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:46 pm

Polot wrote:
northstardc4m wrote:
ytz wrote:

I wonder how much early delivery comes into play. They could get a CS300 next year. Not so for A320 family order.


Airbus could offer a CS300+A320NEO package to replace their A319 and A320 fleet. Nothing in their existing network is beyond CS300 range... nothing seems to be over 1200nm? Plus Bangkok Airways changed types from the 717 to the A319 easily enough, i doubt it's really a huge concern as the article makes it out to be.

Bangkok Airways is a fairly small airline. I'm not sure they would be interested in a CS+A320(+ATR) split, all of which are different types. That is probably the root of their "new type" concern (i.e. CS good aircraft but doesn't currently offer growth to replace PG's A320 or go larger).


I wonder for some of these airlines if CASM is close enough that they see benefit in replacing 70 seater turboprops with fewer 120 seater CS100s.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:49 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s.

While Boeing (BA.TO) welcomes competition, he repeatedly said during a quarterly conference call Wednesday that all players need to play by the same rules. Boeing says that won't let it escape duties.

Boeing says it always evaluates its strategic options and the CSeries deal doesn't change that.

Muiulenburg says, “We have a strong strategy in place. We don’t need to change the path".


The deal is not actually finalized. So why would they adjust strategy? But there's no way they aren't gaming this out in their boardrooms. Because even if the tariffs tie up the US market, Airbus could use the CSeries to compete in the other 70% of the world. And the rest of the world is growing a lot faster than the US.
 
User avatar
Heavierthanair
Posts: 954
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 11:20 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:02 pm

G'day

http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t- ... l-1.895551

As for Boeing not changing strategy I see them to continue their accusations about illegal (foreign? alien?) subsidies and not made in the US of A, both likely to be upheld by the U.S. Commerce Department with a 300% import duty on the planes :crazy:

Boeing in no way can compete in that market segment and with the economics that the CSeries offer. Boeing's "new" version of the 737 - 7 MAX, being a simple shrink of the 737 - 8 MAX can hardly compete with the Airbus' 319 NEO, itself not being the most efficient offering in that size segment.

I do not see the U.S. Commerce Department 300% tariffs on CSeries restricting sales, the issue being ramping up production to meet market requirements. The small 100 to 150 seat plane market elsewhere is big enough to absorb the maximum possible CSeries production output without the potential 30% market for this size of aircraft in the US.

Under the umbrella of Airbus I see the CSeries range becoming the standard "small" aircraft with the A320 and more so the A321 covering the larger requirements.

If the U.S. Commerce Department upholds its 300% import duty that the B company counts on essentially locks out US airlines from acquiring efficient aircraft in that size segment.

So much for free markets and D..... America First

Cheers

Peter
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879 - 1955)
 
many321
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 6:15 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:05 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s".


737max 7 'winning' that gave me a good chuckle. Talk about being in denial. Airbus, at least acknowledges the lack of sales with the A319neo and wanting to shift focus with the CS300 once the deal goes through.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1298
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:32 pm

many321 wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s".


737max 7 'winning' that gave me a good chuckle. Talk about being in denial. Airbus, at least acknowledges the lack of sales with the A319neo and wanting to shift focus with the CS300 once the deal goes through.

I know Charlie Sheen was 2011, but you’d think the CEO of a large corporation would make better language choices.
 
many321
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 6:15 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:33 pm

aerolimani wrote:
many321 wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"



737max 7 'winning' that gave me a good chuckle. Talk about being in denial. Airbus, at least acknowledges the lack of sales with the A319neo and wanting to shift focus with the CS300 once the deal goes through.

I know Charlie Sheen was 2011, but you’d think the CEO of a large corporation would make better language choices.


:lol: exactly.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:47 pm

FG: Bombardier fires back after Moody's downgrade says:

The credit rating company lowered its rating for Bombardier to B3 from B2, while also downgrading its outlook for the company from "stable" to "negative", Moody's says in a 24 October research paper.

"The downgrade reflects our expectation that Bombardier's leverage will remain high through 2019 and its ability to generate positive cash flow in that year has headwinds related to the potential delay of CSeries plane deliveries," Moody's analyst Jamie Koutsoukis says in the paper.

Of course BBD disagrees with Moody's, and even Moody's says the CS deal is a good thing, but:

"The structure of the partnership reflects the low value of the CSeries currently and calls into question Bombardier's future in the commercial aircraft space," Moody's says.

Moody's questions Bombardier's ability to break even in 2018 or 2019, and its ability to refinance debt that begins maturing in 2019.

As expected the investment community isn't happy with BBD's side of the deal and its long term future in commercial aviation.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4636
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:08 pm

calls into question Bombardier's future in the commercial aircraft space," Moody's says.


Calls into question? WTF, there’s no question, BBD will be out of the commercial aircraft space when AI buys in 7 years. It’ll have to be a giant success, so giant, BBD can buy out AI. If it fails, CSLP will be bankrupt, likely taking down BBD unless the rest of the business booms. In either case, BBD is out of CA.

GF
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 3306
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:29 am

Revelation wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Revelation wrote:
As has been posted here before, US assembly becomes irrelevant if is is being used to circumvent the tariff, which this clearly is.


Oh come on! This is not a case of bolting on the wheels and calling it "final assembly". This is "clearly" a genuine FAL which will produce aircraft more made-in-USA than Boeing does.

What you're arguing is that simply by being (falsely) accused one time you may *NEVER EVER* be allowed to comply, ever again, no matter what you do.

That's silly.

I'm not arguing, I'm just repeating what was said earlier.

It's a bit more nuanced than what either of us state:

washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


This was posted earlier in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1376389&start=1300#p19907231

If you've been reading along, @washingtonflyer is a lawyer working on trade issues so knows a lot more about it than most of us do. Trade issues are going on all the time. Someone earlier posted a list of all the actions Canada has started and of course the US one must be even longer. This one popped up on our radar because we're avgeeks, but there's all kinds of actions going on all the time and all kinds of rules to deal with circumvention. As usual, once something goes into the legal "sausage factory" you have no idea what will come out.

Personally, I think Boeing is being pretty foolish to try to resolve this via the legal system. The previous rounds of WTO rulings should tell it that it'll be a long, drawn out, expensive process that may or may not produce a favorable result.

The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:47 am

LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/c-series-bombardier-airbus-1.4370696

The Canadian government supposedly "pushed" Bombardier towards Airbus after Bombardier was considering China.


Bombardier had considered a Chinese partnership as early as 2015, after talks about a possible merger with Airbus became public and fell apart. This year, as negotiations with Boeing over a C Series partnership faltered and concerns about the future of the program mounted, Bombardier's interest in a deal with China intensified, two sources said. Bombardier approached Boeing last spring, three of the sources said. Bombardier offered Boeing a stake in the C Series under similar terms to those later offered to Airbus, two of the sources said.

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s. That once again Bombardier's focus back on a deal with the Chinese — until Ottawa pressed the case for discussions with Airbus over the summer.

Officials from Airbus and Bombardier soon began what would be a series of meetings at restaurants in Paris, London and Munich. The meetings involved only four people — the two CEOs along with another executive from each company.

A representative of the Canadian government did not attend.





They also expressed uneasiness about what some saw as inadequate Chinese safeguards against intellectual property theft. In a series of calls with Bombardier in August and September, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains and Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, as well as senior officials in Trudeau's office, urged Bombardier to contact the European company, the two sources said. "From the federal government's point of view, anything was better than a link-up with China," according to an Ottawa source. Inside Bombardier, however, executives worried that talks with potential Chinese partners were not moving quickly enough, according to sources.

The prospect of such a deal raised concern within the Canadian government, two of the sources said, where officials believed jobs or technology could be "siphoned away" to China.


I'm wondering if the Canadian government was also pressured by the US government to steer Bombardier away from China. It's a complicated web with economic and technological interests that aren't necessarily out in the open for all to see.
A313 332 343 B703 712 722 732 73G 738 739 741 742 744 752 762 76E 764 772 AT5 CR9 D10 DHH DHT F27 GRM L10 M83 TU5

AA AI CO CL DE DL EA HA KL LH N7 PA PQ SK RO TW UA YR
 
Noshow
Posts: 1299
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:51 am

Might make sense as the Airbus deal seems to include the Mobile production site expansion. So while the deal might harm the 737 MAX it supports US jobs in the south and elsewhere.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:09 am

ThePointblank wrote:
Revelation wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:

Oh come on! This is not a case of bolting on the wheels and calling it "final assembly". This is "clearly" a genuine FAL which will produce aircraft more made-in-USA than Boeing does.

What you're arguing is that simply by being (falsely) accused one time you may *NEVER EVER* be allowed to comply, ever again, no matter what you do.

That's silly.

I'm not arguing, I'm just repeating what was said earlier.

It's a bit more nuanced than what either of us state:

washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


This was posted earlier in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1376389&start=1300#p19907231

If you've been reading along, @washingtonflyer is a lawyer working on trade issues so knows a lot more about it than most of us do. Trade issues are going on all the time. Someone earlier posted a list of all the actions Canada has started and of course the US one must be even longer. This one popped up on our radar because we're avgeeks, but there's all kinds of actions going on all the time and all kinds of rules to deal with circumvention. As usual, once something goes into the legal "sausage factory" you have no idea what will come out.

Personally, I think Boeing is being pretty foolish to try to resolve this via the legal system. The previous rounds of WTO rulings should tell it that it'll be a long, drawn out, expensive process that may or may not produce a favorable result.

The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.


Additional to that, engines and avionics are produced in the USA and are therefore not imported.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:06 am

ThePointblank wrote:
The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.

Yes, all it means is that it's not as automatic as some make it out to be, it's more nuanced. It seems likely that Boeing can keep a large amount of uncertainty on the program by dragging out the procedure and then appealing any outcome they don't like.

It also points out the fact that the less finished the parts are that arrive in Mobile the less likely they are to be subject to tariff, but the less finished the parts are the less they need workers in Quebec which is going to make things difficult for the BBD/QC half of the partnership.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1849
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Breaking: Airbus and Bombardier Announce C Series Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:50 am

VV wrote:
No, seriously I do not see any impact on the 737 MAX, not even on the 737-7.
If I was aware the CS300 being offered with up to 160 seats? Oh damn yes!
But I do not think an airline would want it.

So can you explain me why Boeing bothered in the first place when BBD was still alone?

If the CSeries marketed by Airbus would have "no impact" on the MAX, how on earth could the selling "attempts" by BBD alone have impacted Boeing?

IMO it is very hard to provide a credible answer to this question other than "Boeing did fear an impact back then, and has to worry even much more now".


VV wrote:
It is even very good for 737 MAX and E-Jets E2. This is one of those very rare moves that makes everyone happy.

Boeing seems to be working hard to hide that happiness...


Revelation wrote:
#1401 above quotes @washingtonflyer explaining the legal mechanism that is available to say that Airbus is a BBD affiliate and the FAL is simply a way to evade the tariff.

Things do not necessarily work the way you and many other posters keep saying they do.

The Alabama FAL does not necessarily end the tariff war.

So the tariff prevents US jobs?

And - the tariff punishes foreign built stuff (in principle ok), but fixing the "foreign built"-part does not change that?

And - how would Boeing e.g. evade a similar 300% tariff slapped by the EU on 787 or 777X sales? In the end there is real competition between these two an own-built Aircraft in Europe.

IMHO this is not game Boeing can win and draw any benefit from it, that would not be countered by even larger damages. Not until now and not if they continue that course.


LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s.

While Boeing (BA.TO) welcomes competition, he repeatedly said during a quarterly conference call Wednesday that all players need to play by the same rules. Boeing says that won't let it escape duties.

Boeing says it always evaluates its strategic options and the CSeries deal doesn't change that.

Muiulenburg says, “We have a strong strategy in place. We don’t need to change the path".

Boeing seems to recite their own slogans after the NEO was launched but before its success became obvious. How will it sound after the CSeries will start winning significant orders from Asia?

I predict, they will have to change their strategy, cancel the MOM and carry for the bottom of their product range. For the MOM the CSeries will be what the NEO was for the NSA. All the MOM talk now is not much different than all the NSA talk was back then. Underestimate the competition and overconfidence in the 737.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:58 am

Revelation wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.

Yes, all it means is that it's not as automatic as some make it out to be, it's more nuanced. It seems likely that Boeing can keep a large amount of uncertainty on the program by dragging out the procedure and then appealing any outcome they don't like.

It also points out the fact that the less finished the parts are that arrive in Mobile the less likely they are to be subject to tariff, but the less finished the parts are the less they need workers in Quebec which is going to make things difficult for the BBD/QC half of the partnership.


I think you get it the wrong way around. Aircraft parts do not fall under the same HS as an aircraft, so they fall under different duties. It must be shown that this aircraft parts are in reality an aircraft that falls under the defined case that puts 300% duties on that aircraft. Looking at if this parts coming from Canada they have to look at if this parts constitute a big enough part of the finished airplane to be declared an airplane. As an example the car without rims and tires against a body of a car without engine, doors, seats and other important parts of the drive train. In this point percentage of the finished product come strongly into place.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3246
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 1:17 pm

ytz wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
http://www.bnn.ca/boeing-says-it-won-t-adjust-strategy-because-of-airbus-c-series-deal-1.895551

"Boeing says it won't adjust strategy because of Airbus CSeries deal"


Boeing chairman, president and CEO Dennis Muilenburg says its family of 737 planes is winning, including the smaller Max 7s.

While Boeing (BA.TO) welcomes competition, he repeatedly said during a quarterly conference call Wednesday that all players need to play by the same rules. Boeing says that won't let it escape duties.

Boeing says it always evaluates its strategic options and the CSeries deal doesn't change that.

Muiulenburg says, “We have a strong strategy in place. We don’t need to change the path".


The deal is not actually finalized. So why would they adjust strategy? But there's no way they aren't gaming this out in their boardrooms. Because even if the tariffs tie up the US market, Airbus could use the CSeries to compete in the other 70% of the world. And the rest of the world is growing a lot faster than the US.


And to think Boeing almost bought into the CS series.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/c-serie ... -1.4370696

"With discussions stalled, Bombardier approached Boeing last spring, three of the sources said. Bombardier offered Boeing a stake in the C Series under similar terms to those later offered to Airbus, two of the sources said.

The U.S. company agreed to study the proposal, but eventually decided against it based on its experience with a troubled purchase of Canadian aerospace assets in the late 1980s. That once again Bombardier's focus back on a deal with the Chinese — until Ottawa pressed the case for discussions with Airbus over the summer."
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:09 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
Revelation wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:

Oh come on! This is not a case of bolting on the wheels and calling it "final assembly". This is "clearly" a genuine FAL which will produce aircraft more made-in-USA than Boeing does.

What you're arguing is that simply by being (falsely) accused one time you may *NEVER EVER* be allowed to comply, ever again, no matter what you do.

That's silly.

I'm not arguing, I'm just repeating what was said earlier.

It's a bit more nuanced than what either of us state:

washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


This was posted earlier in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1376389&start=1300#p19907231

If you've been reading along, @washingtonflyer is a lawyer working on trade issues so knows a lot more about it than most of us do. Trade issues are going on all the time. Someone earlier posted a list of all the actions Canada has started and of course the US one must be even longer. This one popped up on our radar because we're avgeeks, but there's all kinds of actions going on all the time and all kinds of rules to deal with circumvention. As usual, once something goes into the legal "sausage factory" you have no idea what will come out.

Personally, I think Boeing is being pretty foolish to try to resolve this via the legal system. The previous rounds of WTO rulings should tell it that it'll be a long, drawn out, expensive process that may or may not produce a favorable result.

The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.
\

In general, I agree with you. The question then becomes what does BBD and Airbus devise as the tipping point between an assembly and an aircraft. Remember the scope says "The scope includes all aircraft covered by the description above, regardless of whether they enter the United States fully or partially assembled." How partially assembled constitutes an aircraft? Completed fuselage? Sections not joined? Thats a legal and factual question that causes a lot of uncertainty.

That being said, I would obviously caution folks to ignore discussion of HTS numbers when it comes to AD/CVD scope. Every AD/CVD order contains the following language: "Although these HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive."
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:16 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
The difference is that the assemblies coming into the US for a Mobile-produced C-Series are far less complete than a whole aircraft is. A fuselage section, or a set of wings does not have the same essential character a whole aircraft has, which changes the HS code the products are classified under.

What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.

I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.

Legally, aircraft parts and sub assemblies fall under one HS code, while whole aircraft fall into another. The difference is the essential character of the items in question; what is the primary function of the product in question? Is it an airplane, or is it airplane parts? If the defining characteristic of an airplane is a powered, fixed-wing aircraft that is propelled forward by an engine of some type, then aircraft fuselages and wings do not count as an airplane; they are aircraft parts.

Yes, all it means is that it's not as automatic as some make it out to be, it's more nuanced. It seems likely that Boeing can keep a large amount of uncertainty on the program by dragging out the procedure and then appealing any outcome they don't like.

It also points out the fact that the less finished the parts are that arrive in Mobile the less likely they are to be subject to tariff, but the less finished the parts are the less they need workers in Quebec which is going to make things difficult for the BBD/QC half of the partnership.


I think you get it the wrong way around. Aircraft parts do not fall under the same HS as an aircraft, so they fall under different duties. It must be shown that this aircraft parts are in reality an aircraft that falls under the defined case that puts 300% duties on that aircraft. Looking at if this parts coming from Canada they have to look at if this parts constitute a big enough part of the finished airplane to be declared an airplane. As an example the car without rims and tires against a body of a car without engine, doors, seats and other important parts of the drive train. In this point percentage of the finished product come strongly into place.


Again, dont focus on tariff classification. That's for regular duties (which there are none). AD/CVD is a different animal.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1929
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:20 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
What has gotten previous attempts at circumventing the legal difference into trouble was that in those attempts, the item in question was being imported into the US at a very close to finished state; I remember once instance where the importer tried to claim that a vehicle without its wheels and tyres did not count as a vehicle, and instead be classified as car parts. That failed.
Agreed :roll:

ThePointblank wrote:
I doubt Airbus would be importing almost complete C-Series sections from Mirabel that just need to be mated and finished in Mobile; I would imagine that they actually intend on an actual parallel production line to Mirabel, using unassembled components being shipped in from the various suppliers.
Agreed :checkmark:

Revelation wrote:
Yes, all it means is that it's not as automatic as some make it out to be, it's more nuanced. It seems likely that Boeing can keep a large amount of uncertainty on the program by dragging out the procedure and then appealing any outcome they don't like.
Agreed :checkmark:

Revelation wrote:
It also points out the fact that the less finished the parts are that arrive in Mobile the less likely they are to be subject to tariff,
Agreed :checkmark:

Revelation wrote:
but the less finished the parts are the less they need workers in Quebec which is going to make things difficult for the BBD/QC half of the partnership.
Er....um.....I'm not certain how that last part of your statement fits in the whole scheme?

The Quebec production line already exists, and all three parties involved (BBD, Quebec, Airbus) are committed to keep it that way. Nothing needs to change. If absolutely necessary, Quebec made C-series can be exported to the rest of the world, anywhere excluding the US.

Meanwhile, the new FAL at Mobile might be a direct equivalent to the Quebec FAL, if in it's current form the US content side of things (US components + Alabama labor) keeps all the parties that matter satisfied. (Boeing will never be satisfied, so I'm excluding them)

Alternatively, the Mobile FAL may feature some tweaks in order to increase the US content side of things. e.g. seat belts made in the USA instead of seat belts imported from China.
Either way, I don't see how your can make a statement that throws doubt on needing workers in Quebec. That just seems like wishful thinking.

Apart from that, it's good to see us reaching a degree of consensus for a change. :lol:
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:09 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Revelation wrote:
but the less finished the parts are the less they need workers in Quebec which is going to make things difficult for the BBD/QC half of the partnership.
Er....um.....I'm not certain how that last part of your statement fits in the whole scheme?

The Quebec production line already exists, and all three parties involved (BBD, Quebec, Airbus) are committed to keep it that way. Nothing needs to change. If absolutely necessary, Quebec made C-series can be exported to the rest of the world, anywhere excluding the US.

Meanwhile, the new FAL at Mobile might be a direct equivalent to the Quebec FAL, if in it's current form the US content side of things (US components + Alabama labor) keeps all the parties that matter satisfied. (Boeing will never be satisfied, so I'm excluding them)

Alternatively, the Mobile FAL may feature some tweaks in order to increase the US content side of things. e.g. seat belts made in the USA instead of seat belts imported from China.
Either way, I don't see how your can make a statement that throws doubt on needing workers in Quebec. That just seems like wishful thinking.

Apart from that, it's good to see us reaching a degree of consensus for a change. :lol:

I'm glad we're more in alignment.

I think we're just using different starting points.

My starting point is when QC made its investment in BBD, and back then it was thought all the FAL work would be done in QC. We've read here that CSALP was already planning for 2 FALs at YMX and the equipment is already on order. Now with the concern with the tariff issue and the new partnership, there is a good likelihood something is going to change, and if that change happens it's going to move work that originally was going to happen in QC to AL. Maybe in the long term the project will grow to the point that the net result is no change in QC work relative to the original plan, but I don't think we can assert that right now. Maybe the whole tariff issue will go away and there will be no need for a 2nd FAL.

As for what my hopes are, I hope the whole tariff issue goes away and CSALP can do what is in its best commercial interests. My opinion expressed earlier is that it'd be more efficient to have all the FAL work in one location so I'm certainly not against the workers of QC.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22660
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:56 pm

A scan of the news shows us the deal isn't helping BBD workers in the short term:

Bombardier to cut Belfast jobs a week after Airbus deal

And Boeing's PR machine is working to get its side out into the press:

Airbus' deal of the century may not be as great as it sounds

Some red meat:

For both Airbus and Boeing, it is important to be able to market a family of aircraft. Unfortunately, the C Series will be a stand-alone or orphan in the Airbus lineup, a hurdle it and Bombardier will have to overcome.

Seems the orphan angle will be Boeing's main talking point. They are even dragging the 717 back into the picture:

According to Keskar, one of contributing factors to the 717's demise was that it was an orphan in Boeing's lineup. Incidentally, the people who bought aircraft remain extremely happy with it and are looking to acquire more of them on the secondhand market.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1929
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
A scan of the news shows us the deal isn't helping BBD workers in the short term:

Bombardier to cut Belfast jobs a week after Airbus deal


The article actually wrote:
The latest job losses - which will be among support staff rather than those in manufacturing roles - come as part of the 7,500 redundancies around the world the Canada-headquartered business announced a year ago.

Does this mean it is still Airbus' fault?
Did Bombardier announce the job cuts a year ago because they brilliantly anticipated making a deal with Airbus at some point in the future?

Basically is this new News, or very OLD NEWS?

BTW - I'm not blaming you for The Telegraph headline - that is all their own work, trying to make a story where none exists.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:01 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Revelation wrote:
A scan of the news shows us the deal isn't helping BBD workers in the short term:

Bombardier to cut Belfast jobs a week after Airbus deal


The article actually wrote:
The latest job losses - which will be among support staff rather than those in manufacturing roles - come as part of the 7,500 redundancies around the world the Canada-headquartered business announced a year ago.

Does this mean it is still Airbus' fault?
Did Bombardier announce the job cuts a year ago because they brilliantly anticipated making a deal with Airbus at some point in the future?

Basically is this new News, or very OLD NEWS?

BTW - I'm not blaming you for The Telegraph headline - that is all their own work, trying to make a story where none exists.


It will be interesting to see where BBD sits when they release their financials. I suspect their cash position is really tough given the lack of C-Series deliveries. The real question to me will be how everyone involved deals with the issue if they can’t get to the point of finalization before BBD hits the ground.

They need things to go relatively smoothly over the next year plus.

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