Bombardier shares are now trading for less than $1. They admitted at a recent investors meeting in Wall Street that the CSeries will be unprofitable for 5 years (reading between the lines: likely more than that). At the same time they probably have a growing pool of idle engineers and other expertise that can be let go with severance charges or be kept to at a marginal cost to stretch the CS300. The 150 to 200 seat market has over 20 times to backlog compared to the 100 to 149 seat market. So even if BBD goes straight head to head against A&B, the market size for the CS500 is four times bigger. The Federal government wants a business case before helping out BBD with any more cash. Can the CS500 be it? I think so. At this point they have very little to lose and much more to gain. Any thoughts?

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter):

Trading for BBD stock was $0.77 CAD, that roughly $0.55 USD... ouch    

BBD is behind the ball on not only the 100 to 149 market but also the regional market. Embraer came in struck once with the E-JET and now they will strike again with the E2. No response from BBD.

If on paper the CS500 can have superior economics to the NEO & MAX by a wide enough margin then they should pull the trigger. If not they should hold off for the sake of the company, till CS100 & CS300 can provide positive cash flow. They will never be able to compete with Boeing or Airbus on pricing. So this could be opening pandora's box.

Well, I believe the intent was to gain some initial customers and let the CSeries become mature before taking on the C500. That being said, you are probably right in that if the C500 were already part of the stable the line of aircraft would be much more appealing to carriers looking for such an aircraft.

At the moment the problem though is CASH. Without an influx of cash they cannot sustain the personnel in order to engineer, design and certify the C500. With a program already highly in debt and bleeding cash the need for cash is imperative. Also, the program as a whole has to gain some higher profile customers willing to take on a new single aisle aircraft. They need a carrier like Delta, Qantas, Lufthansa, Emirates, even its own home carrier, Air Canada to lend credit to the program! Coupled with all the issues directly associated with the CSeries program BBD as a whole is suffering from a CRJ program that has reached its limits and is losing orders left and right to E-Jets and others such as Sukhoi in some areas and will lost to the MRJ in the future as well. The CRJ gravy train has pulled out of the station and is headed directly over the cliff. The red bleeding funnel of downward spiral into the abyss is unfortunately a cruel unrelenting b*t*h. I hope BBD can pull out of this quagmire but it may require a partner in order to do so. I would not be surprised to see somebody like COMAC or longshot Embraer step in and buy out the CSeries. Hope not and hope to see the CSeries in DL livery!!

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 1): If on paper the CS500 can have superior economics to the NEO & MAX by a wide enough margin

iT probably won't, but should be more than OK

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 1): They will never be able to compete with Boeing or Airbus on pricing

But BBD might be able to compete on delivery slots and an optimized family for the 110 to 180 seat range versus 150-220 seat range by A&B

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 1): So this could be opening pandora's box.

Yeap. But they seemed to have opened it with the CS100/CS300 anyhow. CS500 has a much bigger market hole to fill

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 2): Also, the program as a whole has to gain some higher profile customers willing to take on a new single aisle aircraft

Agreed and maybe they have some in the works

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 2): The CRJ gravy train has pulled out of the station and is headed directly over the cliff.

Along with the Q400.

[Edited 2016-02-08 19:00:40]

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): CSeries CS500 - What's To Lose?

Um, the CS100, maybe?

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): So even if BBD goes straight head to head against A&B, the market size for the CS500 is four times bigger.

At least! If Bombardier wants to get in to that market, the CSeries, as amazing as it is, needs to be pretty incredible.

I still think the CSeries is viable and needs time, but the CS100 and CS300 should be handled first before throwing any more money into it for another variant.

Should Bombardier do it? Yes. Where is the investment capital to keep the engineers paid?

I am a fan of the C-series. But Bombardier refuses to spend money early on fly by wire debugging until they were paying a 'marching army' and burned up their cash.

The small delays due to the engine seal hurt, but wasn't the root cause.

Lightsaber

It's easy to start a discussion about if and when BBD should put money into a CS500 variant, but the bottom line at the moment is that the company does not have money to even think about doing this, nor will they have this money for a good number of years to come.

A recent article: The inside story behind the bungled Bombardier C Series

BTW, I didn't write the article.   Considering that the author isn't an aviation journalist it isn't a bad article. But putting all the blame at Jr.'s feet is giving Jr. too much credit. Papa screwed things up, too! People have just forgotten about them.

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 2): At the moment the problem though is CASH

Maybe BBD should seriously consider getting into the military contractor arena. Didn't Canada just opt out of the F35? Canada has a history of making amazing aircraft and an awesome engineering pool. BBD could do a lot of good for Canada by getting into space and defense.

Plus it would be cool to see an Aero-neo with F22 engines!

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 3): But BBD might be able to compete on delivery slots and an optimized family for the 110 to 180 seat range versus 150-220 seat range by A&B

As great of potential that the CSeries has, there is a reason there is a duopoly in that range. The 737 and A32x are just too great. The only reason the DC-9/MD-80 did so well is because it was already existing. Then the A320 came with a huge punch, then the 737NG finished it off. Same with the BAC-111, Mercure, Tu-204 and even the 727; and the 757 killed the 707 and DC-8.

I want the C to succeed, but the realist in me is thinking it won't.

What is to lose? The company itself. It needs to pay off some of the R&D already invested, before investing more on the stretch. It will happen at some point if Bombardier stays afloat.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 9): The only reason the DC-9/MD-80 did so well is because it was already existing. Then the A320 came with a huge punch, then the 737NG finished it off.

The DC-9 did well because of its superior reliability and durability compared to anything else. The 737 did not kill it off, Boeing killed it off and refused to market it because doing so would be an admission that their own design is far worse than Douglas'. DC-9s don't lose fuselage skin in flight.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): At this point they have very little to lose and much more to gain.

They have everything to lose and, IMHO, very little to gain. The CS500 is a fading pipe-dream that will almost certainly never see the cold light of day.

BBD is a basket case of a manufacturer and regardless of how good the CS100/300 might be, major airlines will naturally be reluctant to take the risk that their shiny new planes might not get the support they need.

They should get the 100 and 300 in the air and see where it goes from there. I don't think BBD can be bothered now with a CS500.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 12): They have everything to lose and, IMHO, very little to gain.

Well.... if it pulls in orders, then they'd perhaps gain critical mass on numbers - which would be worth quite a bit in terms of assurance of ongoing support.


The mistake (well, yet another mistake) was made years ago (Gary Scott & Pierre Nepotism) in not doing the CS300 first. It would have made a couple of things easier:

1. Pass CS100 by comparison is more straightforward (reduced loads due to lighter plane).
2. Bypass CS100 and go straight to CS500 if that is the way the market leans (it did).

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 5): Where is the investment capital to keep the engineers paid?

The company is and will continue to be cash flow negative for years to come. The business plan at hand is not and will not work. The business jets alone will not save the company.

Quoting EnviroTO (Reply 10): What is to lose? The company itself. It needs to pay off some of the R&D already invested, before investing more on the stretch. It will happen at some point if Bombardier stays afloat.

It will not be paid off under the current plan. They will stay cash flow negative. That is why they are after government aid. Governments will not give aid and in return BBD layoff thousands. Better to spend $500 million to a billion stretching the CS300 by six rows or so. No layoffs. New business plan

Quoting scbriml (Reply 12): airlines will naturally be reluctant to take the risk that their shiny new planes might not get the support they need.

With a CS500 launch, airlines will have more confidence than they have now. They will see that BBD is not going to fold. Right now, it is not a flowery scene for the airlines as the planes are not selling and the company is running out of ideas.

Quoting LSZH34 (Reply 13): They should get the 100 and 300 in the air and see where it goes from there. I don't think BBD can be bothered now with a CS500.

They are in the air. The CS100 is certified and the CS300 should be certified later this year. Problem is that they are not losing orders to A & B as most people seem to think. The reality is that the sub 150 seat market is a niche market. The original thinking that airlines will replace aging MD-80s and 737-200s one to one with modern CSeries did not happen. They replaced them with A320s and B737-800s. Remember when Northwest Airlines with their massive DC-9s was destined to be a major CSeries customer? Never happened.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 14): Bypass CS100 and go straight to CS500 if that is the way the market leans (it did).

It was a dumb idea to launch the CS100. It is a niche plane and has one third the orders of CS300.

Quoting Quantos (Reply 6): nor will they have this money for a good number of years to come.

They diluted their shares late last year by raising more equity. Shareholders lost.
Then they tried to get "partners" (Chinese, Airbus, etc.). Did not work.
Then they tried to sell assets. That did not work either with their new structure.
The sales in 2015 did not happen (business plan not working)
They went to the last resort: governments and got them to be investors in return to giving up more equity as it became clear that with no more private investment interest, they need to turn to government aid. Now they can keep the work force, get more money, launch the CS500, and have a new business plan

Well at this point they need to look at it.

I know it would have been a stretch for them, but there was a huge opening left between the A321/B737-9 and the the 767/A330. A larger single seat, fuel efficient aircraft with range, ie the 757 replacement. The would not be competing with anyone.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 14): Well.... if it pulls in orders, then they'd perhaps gain critical mass on numbers - which would be worth quite a bit in terms of assurance of ongoing support.

Chicken and egg. They simply cannot afford to launch the CS500 becuase they're losing money. They're not selling the CS100/300 and, IMHO, a good few of the orders they're currently holding will not be delivered. It's now well over a year since the last sale.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 17): They simply cannot afford to launch the CS500 because they're losing money.

There is now talk of a reverse split since many funds have policies where they do not hold penny stocks. The share price may drop even more just on the basis of required fund sell-offs.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 17): IMHO, a good few of the orders they're currently holding will not be delivered.

Agreed. BTW, the latest public questionable is Gulf Air who was suppose to be the ME launch operator. At the end of January Gulf Air said that they are "reexamining" their CSeries order. They were suppose to receive their first frame in Dec 2013.

Is this a case of excellent, superb product being savaged by stupendously bad management?

Given the existence of the C-series program (and its good quality), how could management have executed it any worse?

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19): Given the existence of the C-series program (and its good quality), how could management have executed it any worse?

Good quality based on????

With not a single example in service any reference to quality either good or poor is purely conjecture. Based on past products and the delays and issues on this one, that's not necessarily a given.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...g-for-westjet-ceo/article28665984/

Look at history and the 717. Nice plane and I hope several hundred sell, but it needed to be bigger. Airlines are up sizing, getting the biggie fries.

Bombardier just is too late to the party. Why bring an aircraft slightly below the A320/B738 when the market asks for A321/B739 size aircraft?

A CS500 would just mean throwing still more good money after the lost one for the failed CS100 and CS300 projects.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 15): They are in the air. The CS100 is certified and the CS300 should be certified later this year.

Well yes, they are in the air, but there are many concerns and doubts about technical reliability / sustainability of the program that are preventing other airlines of ordering it. I don't count myself as one of those doubters, but after the B787 that's just the way it is with clean sheet aircraft designs in aviation. BBD had delays already and they should focus on a smooth entry into serivce first before bringing a possible CS500.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): even if BBD goes straight head to head against A&B, the market size for the CS500 is four times bigger

Irrespective of the market size, A+B between them have saturated the next 7-8 years of "next generation" demand with some 7 500 orders for the A320NEO and 737MAX.
Add to that some other fairly competent looking entrants in the shape of the C919 and MC21, which between them have 750 orders, and it looks like a pretty hostile environment for a new entrant, despite the market size.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 3): But BBD might be able to compete on delivery slots

What do you think is the earliest date that Bombardier could bring a CS500 to the market?
In meaningful numbers?
I suspect even the NEO could conjure up slots in that timeframe.

If BBD had started with the CS300 and 500, things might be different. But it feels to me like the bus has left the terminal on this one

rgds

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 22): Bombardier just is too late to the party. Why bring an aircraft slightly below the A320/B738 when the market asks for A321/B739 size aircraft?

To be a bit fair, when BBD were originally pitching the CSeries the market was different. There were still a decent number of older aircraft in the 100-150 seat range that might have been replaced with the CSeries. Plus, there wasn't the consolidation that we see today that accelerated the move up in aircraft size. And the single fleet LCCs and ULCCs increasing their marketshare. And the collapse in oil prices - it was at US$145 in July 2008 compared to $29 today. And the NEO, MAX and E2. And... and.. and... but at the end of the day the CSeries was basically a hail mary pass where BBD needed just about everything to fall their way... and it didn't.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 24): I suspect even the NEO could conjure up slots in that timeframe.

Or cheap used CEOs to bridge NEO delivery if they had to.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 8): Maybe BBD should seriously consider getting into the military contractor arena. Didn't Canada just opt out of the F35? Canada has a history of making amazing aircraft and an awesome engineering pool. BBD could do a lot of good for Canada by getting into space and defense.

Canada's newly-elected Liberal government campaigned on NOT purchasing F-35s. If they choose to stick with that, then I'm sure the F/A-18 Super Hornet is the favourite to be acquired, and they'll be built by Boeing in the US. Should the government choose to acquire Rafales, Gripens, or even Typhoons, there's a solid chance that BBD could be a player, including housing the FAL.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19): Given the existence of the C-series program (and its good quality), how could management have executed it any worse?

It seems to me that the engineers delivered the critical requirements that was put forward to them: fuel burn, emissions, and the performance specs. Where management may be to blames is underestimating the time and money that was required. They seem to also have over estimated the 110-150 seat market size. I think that for an all new clean sheet design, the time and money were pretty good when compared to other clean sheet designs in recent times (and much better than MRJ, COMAC, and Rusiian programs).

Quoting astuteman (Reply 24): Irrespective of the market size, A+B between them have saturated the next 7-8 years of "next generation" demand with some 7 500 orders for the A320NEO and 737MAX.

Saturated? I still think that there is much more opportunities for the CS500 market range than most people think. The neo and MAX will be heavier and converging to be optimized in the 160 plus seat range. BBD can have an optimized product range in the 110 to 180 seat range.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 24): Add to that some other fairly competent looking entrants in the shape of the C919 and MC21, which between them have 750 orders, and it looks like a pretty hostile environment for a new entrant, despite the market size.

Competent? Exactly where do you get your information from? Do you know how late those programs are? Comac can't even clone an A320? On top of all that, they have no competency (sales and market confidence) outside their regions?

Quoting astuteman (Reply 24): What do you think is the earliest date that Bombardier could bring a CS500 to the market? In meaningful numbers?

I'd say 3 years tops

Quoting astuteman (Reply 24): But it feels to me like the bus has left the terminal on this one

Tell that to Apple and Samsung when they were trying to get market share from Nokia. Tell that to Airbus when Boeing and MD were dominating the narrowbody market right up to the early 80's.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 27): Tell that to Apple and Samsung when they were trying to get market share from Nokia. Tell that to Airbus when Boeing and MD were dominating the narrowbody market right up to the early 80's.

There is absolutely no parallel between Apple or Samsung or Airbus with BBD. None.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): At this point they have very little to lose and much more to gain.

well yeah, other than the company and/or a lot of tax dollars.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 15): With a CS500 launch, airlines will have more confidence than they have now. They will see that BBD is not going to fold.

Why exactly will they have more confidence? Its still going to be an unproven airplane with basically no orders.
tossing as many types against the wall to get something to stick isn't how you build confidence. Matter of fact it just shows that they are desperate and less likely to make the big discounts B/AB and EMB are able to make.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19): Is this a case of excellent, superb product being savaged by stupendously bad management?

what points to this airplane being great?

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 27): Tell that to Airbus when Boeing and MD were dominating the narrowbody market right up to the early 80's.

not apples to apples.

Boeing and MD were trying to sell old products (737-3/4/5 and MD80s) which allowed Airbus to come into play with the 320, Boeing quickly responded with the 737NG and MD went bust. (and responded with the turd of a MD90, sorry MD fans)
The market needed stimulating, IMO. This time it doesn't.
This time Boeing and Airbus will have MAX and NEOs coming out by the time BBD gets the C500 going and a huge narrow body bubble with the newer NGs and CEOs.
It would be foolish for BBD to invest money into this game when they already can't sell the airplanes they have.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 27): I still think that there is much more opportunities for the CS500 market range than most people think.

Doesn't matter how big the market is.   

The CS500 doesn't exist and there are just two chances it will - slim and none. Slim just rode out of town.

From the other threads:

http://www.irishnews.com/business/20...rescue-bombardier-cseries--413395/

Quote: The 300 Series is probably just on the small side for what we could use for the likes of Heathrow and Gatwick. But one of the options we still haven't rule out is the possibility of using the aircraft on the London City airport, where we have a fleet of 18 Embraer aircraft.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...g-for-westjet-ceo/article28665984/

Quote: “We’re looking for bigger planes, not smaller planes, and the Bombardier C Series is too small,” Mr. Saretsky said. “It’s kind of the size we’re getting rid of,” he said, pointing to WestJet’s Boeing 737-700 models, 10 of which the airline just sold to Southwest Airlines Co. “These are 130-seat units going away and being replaced with 168-seat units and the trend is to larger [airplanes].” “I don’t know if they had dated market research or they didn’t talk to enough customers to know,” he said.

If BBD got conditional orders together on the basis of a CS500 launch, they could probably go to the Canadian and UK govts cap-in-hand justifying launch aid. Unfortunately it will take several billion dollars and several years to get a CS500 to market - particularly if they don't want to take a range hit (bigger wing). If they can accept a range hit by using the current wing as a basis (and just adding a few more plies to skin/spars to keep strain rate equivalence), then it *maybe* could be turned around (and flying) in 24-36 months.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 31): From the other threads:

The CSeries couldn't even beat the 737-700 in UA's 40 frame order for deliveries starting in mid-2017.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 32): The CSeries couldn't even beat the 737-700 in UA's 40 frame order for deliveries starting in mid-2017.

If UA are looking their 40 frames by 2018, there is no way the CSeries could match up.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 33): If UA are looking their 40 frames by 2018, there is no way the CSeries could match up.

Yes they could, Republic isn't taking delivery of any of their order. Bottom line, the CSeries couldn't beat the NG.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 34): Yes they could,

No, they couldn't.

Not without sacrificing pretty much every other firm order.

Quoting Tangowhiskey (Reply 27): Saturated?

for the next 7 years? I'd say "yes".
Beyond that there will be opportunities, no doubt.
But the boeing and Airbus products won't stand still either.

Quoting Tangowhiskey (Reply 27): Competent? Exactly where do you get your information from? Do you know how late those programs are?

A bit like the C-Series, "competency" refers to the product, not the manufacturer.
It may take a long time for the C919 and MC-21 to mature, but I think it would be foolish to dismiss their longer term impact.
And they have strong domestic markets to sell into, so they will happen

Quoting Tangowhiskey (Reply 27): I'd say 3 years tops

It's taking Boeing 5 years to bring the 787-10 to the market, and that is a simple stretch.

I suspect a simple stretch of the CS300 won't be enough, as it will be severely range hampered compared to the bigger aircraft. Which means a much higher MTOW, which means bigger engines, new MLG, wing mods etc etc etc

The notion that Bombardier can bring that to the market, as in in-service, by early 2019, strikes me as a bit ridiculous, if I'm honest. There's no conceivable way IMO that they can risk the business by investing yet more NRE long before they've got anything like a predictable revenue stream coming in. Not going to happen.

CS 500 sounds great.
Bombardier should have started off with CS300 and CS500. Then it might have actually ended up being great.
Launching it as a "Gen 2" C-Series with the next, next gen engines on, in a decade's time sounds like a good shout.

Rgds

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 35): Not without sacrificing pretty much every other firm order.

Firm orders...   

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter): At the same time they probably have a growing pool of idle engineers and other expertise that can be let go with severance charges or be kept to at a marginal cost to stretch the CS300

Engineers need resources in order to develop products, not only their time, but materials and outside assistance. Bombardier don't have the money to pay for either.

They need to look at the CS500, CS700, and the CS900. I think the 900 would be a good one.

Quoting UA444 (Reply 11): The 737 did not kill it off, Boeing killed it off and refused to market it because doing so would be an admission that their own design is far worse than Douglas'.

Oh buh-rother.   You can be anti-Boeing without being over-the-top revisionist. The MD in all it's incarnations was barely selling. It wasn't just the 737 that was killing it but the A320 as well. When Boeing bought MD, it was a no-brainer to shut down their commercial ops as they offered little value in the market. That's not to say they didn't have a good product (though obviously people disagree) but if they were so relevant they would have been more successful moving forward.

And your peeling skin comment was really unnecessary.

-Dave

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 31): Unfortunately it will take several billion dollars and several years to get a CS500 to market - particularly if they don't want to take a range hit (bigger wing)

When looking at some basic specs, it is obvious that the CSeries is already sized for a CS500. I don't think they will give up on range as they have plenty of wiggle room for improved engine efficiencies PIPs, finding extra space for fuel, and they already have gained 300 nm range over the baseline spec. The major change would be the undercarriage, structural strengthening for the added 7,000 lbs payload plus structure. The fly by wire can let them do much more tweaking for airfield performance improvements. I would say this would be somewhere between $500 mill to $1 B tops.


Meanwhile here is an interesting article
The CSeries is Just Too Small
Westjet and other airlines finding the CSeries too small in seat capacity range.

Also interesting that the 160 plus seat range has over 5500 orders, while the sub 150 seat range has 110
A319neo: 50
737-7MAX: 60
A320neo: >3300
737-8 MAX: 1100
A321neo: >1100

[Edited 2016-02-11 18:35:49]