Originally Posted by C W

Why? That hurts the companies and their employees, the airlines, consumers, and the countries and regions in which planes are designed and built.

To most of us, this isn't a grudge match between favorite companies. We just want the best planes. Governments supporting aerospace companies have been a mean to that end since the inception of the industry, they are uniquely interrelated through the military industrial complex.

Boeing receives massive support from Washington in tax breaks and the US Government in the form of defense contracts and the Export Import Bank, which almost exclusively benefits Boeing. Airbus and Bombardier receive state support too, and everybody is better off for it. We get lower prices on better planes and the countries and states get to maintain their excellent aerospace jobs.

I think the greatest irony here, is that in your conception of an even playing field, Boeing would have been allowed to push Bombardier out of business by selling absurdly cheap 737s to airlines that don't really want them and by taking advantage of the current nationalistic political climate to tax them out of the market. A duopoly is hardly an ideally competitive even playing field.

Originally Posted by C W

Why? That hurts the companies and their employees, the airlines, consumers, and the countries and regions in which planes are designed and built.

To most of us, this isn't a grudge match between favorite companies. We just want the best planes. Governments supporting aerospace companies have been a mean to that end since the inception of the industry; they are uniquely interrelated through the military industrial complex.

Boeing receives massive support from Washington in tax breaks and the US Government in the form of defense contracts and the Export Import Bank, which almost exclusively benefits Boeing. Airbus and Bombardier receive state support too, and everybody is better off for it. We get lower prices on better planes and the countries and states get to maintain their excellent aerospace jobs.

I think the greatest irony here, is that in your conception of an even playing field, Boeing would have been allowed to push Bombardier out of business by selling absurdly cheap 737s to airlines that don't really want them and by taking advantage of the current nationalistic political climate to tax them out of the market. A duopoly is hardly an ideally competitive even playing field.

Originally Posted by 24left

Meanwhile, in related news.........

P.S. I'd donate my SkyMiles to be a fly on the wall during these discussions


http://atwonline.com/airframes/airbu...rrowbody-order

(subscription required for access to full article)


.

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare

Spare me. I have called for a level playing field for everyone. If you can't survive without government support then you don't deserve to be in business. I think you and others would be thrilled if Boeing went out of business. I've never heard any of you say anything good about them. Just on and on about that extra 0.5 in width of seat width that Airbus offers.

You are still ignoring the fact that the Boeing 737-7 does compete with the C300 of which Delta has options to convert to. If this was just the C100 then I would agree that Boeing wasn't harmed. Bombardier received a massive cash injections and then sold the C Series way below cost. Boeing and Airbus can sell the 737NG and A320ceo cheap because the programs have long been paid off. Bombardier can't claim that with the C Series.

Originally Posted by skyrider117

Guava... All I am saying is that Boeing can and (most likely will) argue that the wings are a PRETTY important part of the overall finished product and should be taxed proportionally. After all without them all the assembly in the US will be kind of a moot point. :-) Please do not take my points as Pro-Airbus Anti-Boeing I am just contributing to the discussion. But to take off what you said about the courtcase.. Depending on who the judge is and where their sympathies "lie" and/ or how much hotter this gets politically it may NOT be laughed out of court. Boeing doesn't need the C series to be NOT sold.. they just need a temporary injunction against (now) Airbus and Bombardier selling the jets in the US until all the appeals have made the jets to costly or they finish their designs.

Originally Posted by Seattle Times

Even before the Airbus deal, half the value of the CSeries components — including the avionics systems and engines — was already U.S.-built. So once that Mobile final assembly line is up and running, it may be untenable politically to maintain the tariffs against opposition from airlines, major aerospace suppliers and Congressional Republicans in Alabama.

George Ferguson, an aviation analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence, nevertheless said he doubts the Trump administration will back down. “They’ll see this deal as circumventing what they have put in place and will still pursue it,” Ferguson said.

But Aboulafia said “the new deal destroys Boeing’s trade case.” He predicted Tuesday that the U.S. government will eventually let the matter drop and allow President Trump to take credit for bringing Airbus factory jobs to Alabama.

Originally Posted by Guava

As flyers, we just want to ride the most comfortable and safest plane possible. Delta's purchase is good and in the interest of flyers. Boeing's greed should be condemned.

Originally Posted by skyrider117

Guava... All I am saying is that Boeing can and (most likely will) argue that the wings are a PRETTY important part of the overall finished product and should be taxed proportionally. After all without them all the assembly in the US will be kind of a moot point. :-) Please do not take my points as Pro-Airbus Anti-Boeing I am just contributing to the discussion. But to take off what you said about the courtcase.. Depending on who the judge is and where their sympathies "lie" and/ or how much hotter this gets politically it may NOT be laughed out of court. Boeing doesn't need the C series to be NOT sold.. they just need a temporary injunction against (now) Airbus and Bombardier selling the jets in the US until all the appeals have made the jets to costly or they finish their designs.

Originally Posted by spin88

....And as I am happy to see surface, Delta has a tender out for 200+ planes to replace their pmNW airbus and pmDL 738 fleets. Good luck with that Boeing.

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare

Lol the article is wrong. That's not a 739. It's a 757.

Originally Posted by flyerCO

The CS300 hasn't been ordered. This case revolves arond the CS100. Options to order don't mean a sale will occur. Boeing would like to make it about the CS300 though.

Originally Posted by spin88

Just FYI, the 787 wings are made in Japan. https://www.mhi.com/products/detail/boeing_787.html

In fact 35% of the plane is foreign made components. Given that the cs100 engines are made in the US, doubtlessly more than 50% of the cs100 is made in the USA.

The earlier decision was a political one, it was not by a judge. And it would have been reversed (by a trade panel, not a judge). It was also completely meritless - Boeings arguement was that DL would have bought planes from it: Some used E-190s and 737-700s, but for the cs100 subsedies. Obviously this is poppy cock. But the Trump folks, engaged in a war over NAFTA, and looking IMHO for some leverage, bought it.

But sorry, once it's under EU-US aviation treaty's there is noting Boeing can do for further delay.

And as I am happy to see surface, Delta has a tender out for 200+ planes to replace their pmNW airbus and pmDL 738 fleets. Good luck with that Boeing.

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare

Spare me. I have called for a level playing field for everyone. If you can't survive without government support then you don't deserve to be in business. I think you and others would be thrilled if Boeing went out of business. I've never heard any of you say anything good about them. Just on and on about that extra 0.5 in width of seat width that Airbus offers.

You are still ignoring the fact that the Boeing 737-7 does compete with the C300 of which Delta has options to convert to. If this was just the C100 then I would agree that Boeing wasn't harmed. Bombardier received a massive cash injections and then sold the C Series way below cost. Boeing and Airbus can sell the 737NG and A320ceo cheap because the programs have long been paid off. Bombardier can't claim that with the C Series.

Originally Posted by 24left

Meanwhile, in related news.........

P.S. I'd donate my SkyMiles to be a fly on the wall during these discussions


http://atwonline.com/airframes/airbu...rrowbody-order

(subscription required for access to full article)


.

Originally Posted by bergamini

I don't understand the world of airline business, but if Boeing did to my company what they did to DL, then I would be like yeah, here's my hand and that's with whom you can converse. The Airbus is compelling enough that Boeing would only be in consideration to drive Airbus price down maybe.