Pierre Beaudoin is stepping down as president and chief executive officer while his father, Laurent, is retiring as chairman and there are plans afoot for the possible sale of some business units. Former United Technologies Corp. executive Alain Bellemare is set to replace Pierre Beaudoin on Friday.

Very very good news for BBD.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...hief/article22940688/?click=sf_rob

Alain Bellemarre profile on Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/profile/alain-bellemare/

Here is the 2014 financial results PR

http://www.bombardier.com/en/media-c...&f-type=all&show-by-page=50&page=1

Definitely necessary. Regardless of what happens regarding sales and programs, it is clear that investors had lost confidence in Beaudoin; probably quite a long time ago. Bellemare looks to be a good candidate with his experience at UTC and PW.

The key is what changes will he make.

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 3):

ACE Operating System most likely?

(ha, sorry, UTC joke  

Quoting queb (Reply 1): Here is the 2014 financial results PR

Getting thorough coverage...

WSJ: Bombardier Unveils New Leadership as Founding Family Steps Back

FP: Bombardier Inc CEO Pierre Beaudoin steps down in major shakeup at struggling plane maker

Globe: Pierre Beaudoin steps down as chief in dramatic Bombardier shakeup

Star: Bombardier makes dramatic changes at the top as challenges loom

If this were a US company, I'd be sure trains would be spun off from planes soon.

Well the markets did not buy the announcements. The stock dropped 11.5%. There was nothing new in the financials that was unexpected. Even though Pierre Beaudoin is stepping down as CEO, the Beuadoins are still in the board and as executive chairman. Nothing really new here as far as i can see in allowing the new (outsider) CEO the true freedom to do his job as he sees fit. Reminds me of the Paul Tellier short lived era.

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 6): If this were a US company, I'd be sure trains would be spun off from planes soon.

They've long made the pitch and it's sensible that they need both to ensure that there's capital to develop on both sides. If they had spun off trains, they'd be dead right now trying to develop the CSeries.

In essence, Bombardier uses its Transportation division the way Boeing uses its military division to provide a cushion.


Beaudoin was a disaster for shareholders though...

[Edited 2015-02-12 17:06:40]

Quoting YTZ (Reply 8): In essence, Bombardier uses its Transportation division the way Boeing uses its military division to provide a cushion.

Actually it is the Business Aircraft division that fuels Aerospace and cushions the company. Projects like CSeries are mostly funded by debt and the cash generated by the Business Aircraft division. Commercial Aircraft (CRJs and Q's) are very low margin. The (rail) Transportation division is also very low margin business. Much of free cash generated at Transportation goes in the next contract they bid for development, bid costs, and bonding. The train business is becoming less and less lucrative for Western players. Alstom is doing poorly. CAF in Spain and Ansaldo Breda Italy are virtually out of business. Only Siemens and BBD are surviving. Why? The Chinese acquired all the technology and are now playing outside their home market. For BBD the rail division simply does not generate enough cash for other money loosing divisions of BBD.

[Edited 2015-02-12 17:37:20]

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 7): Even though Pierre Beaudoin is stepping down as CEO, the Beuadoins are still in the board and as executive chairman.

Though he is busy pulling the knives out of his back...  

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 7): Nothing really new here as far as i can see in allowing the new (outsider) CEO the true freedom to do his job as he sees fit. Reminds me of the Paul Tellier short lived era.

There are a few differences. After spinning off BPR and trying to establish some "real" corporate governance, the family got rid of Tellier. Now, it is the "fils" that has been selling off bits and pieces to generate cash (and be able to pay the "clan's" dividend), so there really isn't anything left now for Bellemare to sell off.  

Quoting YTZ (Reply 8): they'd be dead right now trying to develop the CSeries.

Just a "small" increase in the capex... from the original $3.4 at launch to $5.4 today - and counting.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 8): Beaudoin was a disaster for shareholders though...

Honestly, I am amazed at how long it took for people to realize it... and the frailty of the company. The signs were all there.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 10):

This is overdue. I looked at the business jet market in detail and it scares me how many Bombardier aircraft will not be competitive in 2020.

Lightsaber

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 7): Well the markets did not buy the announcements. The stock dropped 11.5%

That dropped might be related to those that kept the stock for its dividend and dropped it after it was cancelled.

Dash9

BBD is looking to possibly raise $ by issuing new stock at a discount to the current share price, according to one daily.

Not a good way to treat existing shareholders.

Are they issuing them to existing shareholders?.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 13):

It is that or liquidation. Bombardier's current products must be replaced or refreshed at a rapid rate. The G280, Embraer 500, Cessna Latitude/Longitude, G500, and G600 all targeted Bombardier's lineup. The Dassault 5X also weakens a niche. Categories that Bombardier dominated the last few years they will not be competitive once the new planes are established.

Take the L85. It was supposed to be first to market vs. the EMB. 500 and Latitude. Now I doubt it will happen which means the Challenger 650 (and 350) will forfeit market to the more competitive new entrants. The G280 has already shown it is a force to reckon with at this price point.

The G500/G600 targets the Global express 5k and 6k as well as Dassault's older products. The 3rd P42 and 5X will have too many customers look elsewhere first in this profitable niche.

The Lear 25 was punted from the market due to Embraer and Cessna. Too many other Bombardier products will be too unless replaced or updated soon.

Bombardier is engineering to out of date standards. Only drone makers are sloppier. I do think the Global 8k will do well, but that is due to GE more than Bombardier.

The C-series definition was sloppy. I shouldn't have been surprised by the delays. But I was an enthusiast. I still think the concept is great. Execution...

When will Bombardier re-engine the (wing?) Global 6k? If not Gulfstream and Dassault say thank you.

I'm amazed at the pace the mid and super-midsize business jet market technology is advancing. Then again, I've never seen this level of money invested into the engines... The combination of engine, wing, materials (new aluminums advanced for the 787/A350 and high temp for engines), and airframes (thanks to robotic welding) has moved this category forward. Bombardier needs cash to adapt.

Lightsaber

Well, they decided a long time ago that staying relevant would only be achieved by developing a new plane, and not only by updating their current offerings. It's a huge gamble, of course, and we've yet to see whether it will pay off. At the least, I'd say that it's such a huge gamble that even if the CSeries is eventually successful, BBD have a few more years to wait before they can redirect some engineering to other projects. That's what the LJ85 should teach them: they don't have enough (resources?) to work two major projects at the same time. I'm not sure just how much the CSeries development is sloppy itself. It's a completely new plane, and their biggest ever. It's definitely not been easy sailing, but if it ends up being a quality product, will it really be a complete failure? From what we know so far, I'd say that BBD's biggest issues in the past few years are in terms of upper management decisions, and not engineering. It's the upper management, Beaudoin & co. that should have realized much sooner that two major projects was simply not possible.

Quoting Quantos (Reply 16): BBD have a few more years to wait before they can redirect some engineering to other projects.

The issue is the number of new airframes entering the market. Learjet has been hurt in a major way due to the competition between Embraer and Cessna. That competition is now growing into territory where the challenge to Bombardier was the sovereign. Sales show the 6XX series was preferred. But there is a reason I listed airframe versus airframe.

Look at where Bombardier is making their money:
http://www.gama.aero/media-center/in...ical-databook-and-industry-outlook
download the file (something was happening tonight if you just click on the new 2014 file).

Learjet75
Challenger 3XX
Challenger 6XX
But mostly the Global express 6k/5k (80 airframes in 2014!!!)

Everything else for Bombardier is pretty much done in the business jet market and the Q400 and CRJs 'limp along' at best.

New competition is going to hurt the 3xx and 6xx family (Embraer 450/500, G280, Cessna Latitude).
The Global express is thriving both due to the boom in super-Midsize demand, but also due to Dassault having a HUGE drop in trijet deliveries, including the 7X (I didn't expect THAT!) and the G450/G550 aging out of being competitive (in particular the G450 lacking any short field performance kit or even features to add such a kit). But what happens when the 5X, G600/500 hit the market? These are airframes squarely aimed at the current Global express family. A refresh is required. Without that... a drop.

I do believe the Global 8k/7k will do well. (I list the shrink 2nd as sales are usually a fraction (about 25%) of the larger airframe.

The surge in deliveries due to refreshed/new frames will end in only a few years (business jets, unless they are category changers, require a refresh every 4 or 5 years a la the Challenger 6xx family).

Quoting Quantos (Reply 16): but if it ends up being a quality product, will it really be a complete failure?

It will still be a compelling product. But the 'old school' definition of the ICDs for the C-series with new technology showed a miss-understanding in the development process of a software controlled airframe. This was seen in the CRJ-1000 and is part of the issue with the L85. The C-series will work, but Bombardier is unlikely to keep their position in business jets versus the Falcon 5X, G600/500, Embraer 500/450, and G280. The market has shifted due to new entrants. The 'first mover' advantage means we won't see the results for a few years, but when it happens, productions volumes plummet.  


Note: I skipped discussing how the Learjet 75 will have to compete with the Embraer 450. IMHO it is telling that the delays in the Learjet 75 resulted in quite a few orders. This tells me customers are considering their options.

Lightsaber

Quoting queb (Thread starter): they'd be dead right now trying to develop the CSeries

According to FlightGlobal, "The CSeries was simply a mistake that Bombardier could not afford to make."

When a respectable publication such as FlightGlobal makes such a statement, along with so many other indications that the CSeries became a liability to Bombardier, it's hard not to see how potential customers are getting cold feet. I wouldn't be surprised to see some current orders cancelled.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 7): Reminds me of the Paul Tellier short lived era

While Bellemere seems to be the absolutely best pick, he will likely be curtailed by the "family", who has not given up the reins.

Quoting rjetrider (Reply 18): According to FlightGlobal, "The CSeries was simply a mistake that Bombardier could not afford to make."

In the long run, I think the C-series will benefit Bombardier. Not the current shareholders however...  

Lightsaber

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 11): This is overdue.

Yes, but it is a bit like closing the barn door after the colt has bolted.  

Quoting rjetrider (Reply 18): I wouldn't be surprised to see some current orders cancelled.

The joke is that almost half of the "firm" orders that BBD keeps spouting will never be delivered.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 19): In the long run, I think the C-series will benefit Bombardier. Not the current shareholders however...

I have to admit that it is a pleasure seeing your migration towards the "light"...  

Quoting planemaker (Reply 20): I have to admit that it is a pleasure seeing your migration towards the "light"...

When Bombardier tried to pass off years of delay due to a 2 month delay created by the oil seals... It had me look more in depth.

The reality is Bombardier aerospace is surviving thanks to the Global express (someone tell me why the Falcon 7X suddenly is doing so poorly...). But that frame is about to run head into the gulfstream G600/500:
http://www.gulfstream.com/aircraft/gulfstream-g600

The reality is Gulfstream let the G450/G550 segment go while focusing on the G650 (a wise business decision, FWIW). Now they are rounding back with the THREE P42 models (1st G600, 2nd G500, 3rd a ~$35 million plane with I assume a reuse of G400). This will put Bombardier in a challenging spot with the GE6000/5000, but they should do fine with the GE8000/7000. But what will they do with the Challenger line with the G280/Embraer 500/Cessna Latitude/Longitude? The cheese is being moved...

Lightsaber

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 19): In the long run, I think the C-series will benefit Bombardier. Not the current shareholders however...

Quoting planemaker (Reply 20): I have to admit that it is a pleasure seeing your migration towards the "light"..

I'm not quite ready to jump on the CSeries is a failure bandwagon quite yet, but BBD seems to be in a bit of a catch 22...everyone wants to wait for in service data before ordering, but nobody wants to be the first to put it into service. And Bombardier's PR team has been abhorrent at best. (remember firs"everything is fine, first flight on schedule" up until something like two weeks before, and then they announced another big delay)

I still have hopes for the aircraft, but it almost seems Bombardier is actively trying to set themselves up for failure.

I also agree with the sentiments of many other posters regarding Bombardier's rapidly aging product line.

Bombardier made their bed by continually stretching the CRJ and Dash. Now those products are coming up to their end of life, with no replacement in sight, and this has been a long time coming. I think Bombardier should have seen the writing on the wall when AC ordered the E170 and E190 back in 2004(I think it was '04 anyways)

Problem for Bombardier, is they currently lack resources to make any sort of moves. They need to hope the CSeries picks up, hope WS Encore and QK keep exercising Q400 options, and some more American carriers pick up CR7s and CR9s, to at least keep cashflow coming in.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 20): I have to admit that it is a pleasure seeing your migration towards the "light"...

I'm being specific as there is some encouragement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhxyLAEe5Rc&feature=youtu.be

But the current stockholders are hosed. (If I may use my high school slang.)
To get to some important milestones took far too long (flutter in particular). But that is done.
I'm a little disappointed the cold test was at only -30C. (Not enough Canada and Russia, so this will have to be redone.)
To be fair, prior reports noted this was initial cold testing (allows delivery to customers before the coldest part of next winter), but this video... is too optimistic there.

FTV3 (systems testing) is definitely behind schedule. More costs there...
FTV4 is doing fuel burn with announcements soon.    Remember I'm hearing great things about the engines.   


So I'm expecting further delays as Bombardier keeps proving they do not get today's system design concept (versus component design). It is a different mindset that too many of the 'old school' engineers just do not get, but it is required for today's efficiencies (and Fly by wire...).

Quoting diverted (Reply 22): but BBD seems to be in a bit of a catch 22...everyone wants to wait for in service data before ordering, but nobody wants to be the first to put it into service. And Bombardier's PR team has been abhorrent at best.

Well said. I agree with your sentiment. But financially, Bombardier is hurting short term which means new stock sales which will dilute current stockholders (and executive stock options) substantially.

Quoting diverted (Reply 22): I also agree with the sentiments of many other posters regarding Bombardier's rapidly aging product line.

The business jet fleet is near a peak. Due to resources consumed by the C-series, Bombardier will be in a bad spot, excluding the new Global 8k/7k, in 2020. They won't be dead, but they won't be #1 in shipments either (in 2020). Due to the long development timelines in this industry, their fate is easy to foretell. They really needed the L85 on time to fill a gap in their product line and instead they'll be after the Latitude which is 3rd to market. Not someone in any airplane category can afford to be... If there is a L85 (I see no business case to continue, IMHO).

Quoting diverted (Reply 22): Problem for Bombardier, is they currently lack resources to make any sort of moves.

The cost of poor discipline in the C-series and L85 programs. The next move should be a stealth engine upgrade to the Global 6k. Stealth so they do not pull a Sinclair (lose short term customers enticed by the upgrade). But all indications is that is on hiatus. It was going forward in 2014, but indications are it is pushed out and *might* even switch engine vendors.

Quoting diverted (Reply 22): to at least keep cashflow coming in.

   They also must find a way to re-activate Learjet's pulse once the L75 'pent up demand' is met.
http://www.gama.aero/media-center/in...ical-databook-and-industry-outlook

Note: Download, don't click when you pull up a report. On multiple computers just clicking on the 2014 link freezes up.
See page 15. Everything at Learjet *except* the Lear75/70 is done. Then look at Embraer's Phenom 300 sales and Cessna's M2 & CJ4. IMHO, they have taken from Bombardier the Learjet market (for good reason too). Although used prices indicate this market has a long way to go before it is healthy again.  

It will be interesting.

Lightsaber

the problem with Bombardier is that they have too many civilian aircraft programs in their portfolio that differ so greatly. Not even Boeing and Airbus face that situation.:
Learjet 70
Learjet 75
Challenger 300
Challenger 305
Challenger 605
GEX 5000
GEX 6000
GEX 7000
GEX 8000
CS100
CS300
CRJ700
CRJ900
CRJ1000
Q400
Waterbomber 415

That adds up to about 8 or 9 different program families competing in 8 or 9 different markets. It is difficult to be competitive in so many markets.

They realized this and they were ready to sell the QSeries (in steps) to the Russians. But that hit its course. I think Learjet is also in their target rationalization, along with the 415. Next/eventually would be the CRJs. They will keep the CSeries as they have too much invested in it, no one would buy a half baked product, and has the most potential if they can pull of a CS500.

I am not saying all this can be done, but I'd say its the best course to take.

Quoting diverted (Reply 22): Problem for Bombardier, is they currently lack resources to make any sort of moves.

Yes, they are in a tough situation. They would need to update several product lines, but have neither enough people nor the cash.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23): I'm a little disappointed the cold test was at only -30C. (Not enough Canada and Russia, so this will have to be redone.)

The A350 will surely have some repeat testing to do as well, as it was rather "mild" when it was in Iqaliut, somewhere around the mid twenties. But it's not a showstopper for initial certification.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23): further delays as Bombardier keeps proving they do not get today's system design concept (versus component design). It is a different mindset that too many of the 'old school' engineers just do not get, but it is required for today's efficiencies (and Fly by wire...).

Perhaps the problems BBD encountered with the CRJ1000, which introduced for their first time a partial FBW, was an early indication for this... OTOH, that experience could have been used as a risk reduction and lessons learned for the CSeries, which it seems did not happen.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23): If there is a L85 (I see no business case to continue, IMHO).

I tend to agree but wonder what took them so long to cancel the program. From what I read in other threads, this could have been known some time ago, not now after you've burned through most of the program's money.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 25): The A350 will surely have some repeat testing to do as well, as it was rather "mild" when it was in Iqaliut, somewhere around the mid twenties. But it's not a showstopper for initial certification.

Agreed. I probably shouldn't have spoken as I did. I'm sure the planes and components could go colder due to qualification testing (liquid nitrogen). Many times the cold level is reduced. The extreme example is the DC-3!. The BT-67 even has a certificate where they can keep operating down to Antarctica so they can find out if the next colder temperature is too cold or not. (So they never have someone needing medical evacuation unable to be evacuated again.)

Not that I was expecting a -50C or lower certification.  

Quoting r2rho (Reply 25): OTOH, that experience could have been used as a risk reduction and lessons learned for the CSeries, which it seems did not happen.

Agreed. It is ok to learn you need to learn. It is not ok to ignore the lesson. Bombardier doesn't seem to get the 'systems of systems' engineering technique of today.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 25): From what I read in other threads, this could have been known some time ago, not now after you've burned through most of the program's money.

Yep... Oh well, Bombardier is where they are... Which is

Lightsaber

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 24): the problem with Bombardier is that they have too many civilian aircraft programs in their portfolio that differ so greatly. Not even Boeing and Airbus face that situation.: Learjet 70 Learjet 75 Challenger 300 Challenger 305 Challenger 605 GEX 5000 GEX 6000 GEX 7000 GEX 8000 CS100 CS300 CRJ700 CRJ900 CRJ1000 Q400 Waterbomber 415

Many of the models you mention are part of the same family and are essentially the same aircraft, much like the various 737 and A320 family models.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27): Many of the models you mention are part of the same family and are essentially the same aircraft, much like the various 737 and A320 family models.

Family #1:
Learjet 70
Learjet 75

Family #2
Challenger 300
Challenger 305

Family #3
Challenger 605

Family #4
GEX 5000
GEX 6000

Family #5 (new wing, new cockpit, FBW)
GEX 7000
GEX 8000

Family #6
CS100
CS300

Family #7
CRJ700
CRJ900
CRJ1000

Family #8
Q400

Family #9
Waterbomber 415

Boeing Civilian Aircraft Families 4: B737, B747, B777, B787
Airbus 4: A320, A330, A350, A380
ATR 1: ATR42/72
Embraer 5: E170/175/E190/195, Phenom 100, Phenom 300, Legacy 450/500, Legacy 600/650
Bombardier 9 ....

BBD are competing with all the above plus Gulfstream, Dassault, and Cessna. No other manufacturer has so many competitors as BBD does.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 28): Family #2 Challenger 300 Challenger 305

I assume you mean Challenger 350, which is a enhanced CL300. The CL300 is no more in the line-up.

In any case, for the sake of innovation and competition in a conservative duopolistic industry, I hope that BBD makes it out of this and the CSeries succeeds.
BBD took a big risk by betting on a then unproven engine from a then less trusted manufacturer, and broke an industry taboo by dipping a toe into A&B territory. If only out of poetic justice, such a bold move should be rewarded, not punished.

Without the CSeries we would not have NEO, without which we would not have the MAX, to which the other GTF-powered aircraft followed. But on top of that, I believe the CSeries can have a business case as well. BBD has made a lot of mistakes lately, but not more than Airbus with the A380 or Boeing with the 787. The difference is that they don't have the financial muscle or other top-selling programs to pay the bills in the meantime.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 20): The joke is that almost half of the "firm" orders that BBD keeps spouting will never be delivered.

With an order book so misleading, shouldn’t the Canadian equivalent of the SEC have something to say? I'd hate to be an investor buying Bombardier stock sometime during the past year when it looked like it could only go up. Any major cancellation will likely force it down below the already painful 30% drop this past month.