• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8
 
ap305
Posts: 1065
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 4:44 pm

This thing is getting absolutely comical and as Leeham reported the whole thing could be a trial balloon to target Airbus bypassing the WTO. The fact is the aircraft manufacturing industry as a whole cannot function without some form of Government support and for Boeing to target Bombardier is hypocritical to say the least. I am now hoping the mc-21 has a flawless certification and entry into service- with the performance and lower prices from the innovative manufacturing they could hurt Boeing even more than Bombardier. It will be interesting to see where Boeing goes crying if this happens.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 5:08 pm

Wayfarer515 wrote:
jmt18325 wrote:
Canada has hinted that they may cancel the negotiations to purchase Super Hornets from Boeing over this.

And what will they purchase then, Russian Sukhois? Chinese J-11's?
They have no leverage whatsoever on the US.


Eurofighter Typhoon.
 
Dash9
Posts: 248
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 5:36 pm

With all the enemies the USA have made in the world, especially in the Middle East, why is it that the current administration attacks its allies constantly? What's their end game? Get even more isolated?
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1474
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 5:43 pm

Boeing and Airbus have been abandoning the sub 150 passenger market for years. What did they think was going to happen?
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 570
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 5:47 pm

The aerospace industries of Canada and the United States are highly integrated and support good, middle class jobs on both sides of the border," Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland said. .

"We strongly disagree with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision."

Freeland's statement also added that Ottawa is now "reviewing current military procurement that relates to Boeing."

Military officials and defence industry representatives contacted by The Canadian Press on Thursday were united in assuming that Freeland's warning related to Ottawa's planned purchase of 18 Boeing Super Hornets to temporarily replace its aging fleet of CF-18s, a deal that could be worth up to $2 billion.

Aerospace analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group said the Canadian government's move was inevitable, putting into question Boeing's strategy in taking on Bombardier.

"If Boeing is smart it'll press the do-over button and walk away," he said in an interview, adding the aeronautics powerhouse has much more to risk from losing military contracts than the tiny gain from a successful trade complaint.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombard ... -1.4123209
 
sharktail
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:41 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 6:13 pm

I'm waiting for the investigation into price dumping of the Boeing 787. As you may know, the first couple hunderd were sold well below cost. Hmmm, could be a useful tax for various countries around the world looking for more money...
 
ytz
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 7:04 pm

I am enjoying this. The Liberal government is going to learn something. Boeing doesn't give a hoot about losing a few Super Hornet sales. They care far more about Bombardier making a massive dent in their bread and butter business.
 
william
Posts: 1802
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 7:08 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
Boeing is, among other things, jumping on the write down that BBD declared after the Delta deal went through. If BBD used the goofy program accounting that Boeing did on the 787, (which I believe is basically illegal in Canada), then they could have stretched their losses into infinity, just like Boeing.

I bet the boffins at Boeing have already heard from Delta telling them to mind their own business if they, a) ever want to be rid of the 717's in question, and more importantly, b), if they don't want Delta to put Toulouse on speed dial.

I wonder what could cost Boeing more...Delta buying a few CSeries, (which don't compete directly with anything Boeing sells), or some 321's and 350's.

They should learn to pick their battles. Trump is already saying bad things about the EXIM bank, (otherwise known as Boeing's bank). Boeing may want to just keep quiet lest the orange one starts looking at the new AF1 numbers again.

Skywatcher wrote:
No wonder the public perception of lawyers is somewhere south of used car salesmen and/or politicians.


...and serial killers.


Oh please, look at the last couple of orders from Delta, they have already used that speed dial.

I agree with the majority of posts here, it does scream, "hypocrite" for Boeing to do this, but if..........If there is some financial gain to Boeing at the end of this, it would be deemed a smart move.
 
User avatar
admanager
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 9:36 pm

A Reuters story from May 19 says "...political sources say the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is furious about Boeing's allegations. Richard Aboulafia, aerospace analyst at Teal Group, said that although Boeing's complaint appears valid, "the secondary effects are disastrous". He said Boeing could lose $10 billion to $20 billion in military sales to Canada, encompassing orders for jets, helicopters and maritime surveillance planes. Potential winners include rival makers of jets, such as Lockheed Martin Corp, Dassault Aviation SA, Airbus SE and Saab AB, analysts said." This continues to escalate..
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 9:44 pm

admanager wrote:
A Reuters story from May 19 says "...political sources say the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is furious about Boeing's allegations. .


Trudeau should be more furious how a nation got itself in this pickle and somehow ended up nationalizing what should be a for profit commercial enterprise.
Today is 2017, not the dark 1970s.

As Europeans which still have many nationalized companies have previously learned the lessons, when competing for non governmental business on a global arena, deals need to be made fully on commercial terms including financing on commercial terms lest run afoul of trade rules which one has agreed to previously.
 
airnorth
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Fri May 19, 2017 10:59 pm

I understand all of the trash talk around BBD getting handouts, and also agree with most that say all of the manufactures, B, A, EMB, M, etc., have received cash and or tax incentive, breaks etc., it is difficult to wade through that whole field of financial "stuff", and say, hey, those guys are cheating, and that is probably what Boeing is counting on. It is also fair to say that the Quebec Gov't actually took a stake in the C-Series program, and that cash injection I don't think is an actual bail out, much the same way the Canadian and US government bought stock in some of the automobile manufacturers a few years back. I know some of the governments actually made out really good when they sold out, so maybe Quebec will realize similar returns in a few years. Its kind of funny to read some posters that feel that this sort of business / government relationship is somehow unique to BBD. Time will tell, but at the end of the day, these sorts of actions do not help commerce on either side of the border.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 5:33 am

mercure1 wrote:
admanager wrote:
A Reuters story from May 19 says "...political sources say the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is furious about Boeing's allegations. .


Trudeau should be more furious how a nation got itself in this pickle and somehow ended up nationalizing what should be a for profit commercial enterprise.
Today is 2017, not the dark 1970s.

As Europeans which still have many nationalized companies have previously learned the lessons, when competing for non governmental business on a global arena, deals need to be made fully on commercial terms including financing on commercial terms lest run afoul of trade rules which one has agreed to previously.


Please. Boeing has been suckling at the government teats for decades. They won't build a damned thing anywhere if they don't get billions in tax breaks and incentives. As well, the one time they get a military contract that demands they eat penalties related to missing deadlines, they end up crapping the bed...ie, KC-46.

On the surface, it makes sense for Boeing to grab any competitive advantage, especially in a trumpian world, but they stand to lose a lot more than they gain from this...though I am surprised Boeing's lawyers can pull this off with a straight face considering that the 787's will still be sold at a loss after almost 1500 are delivered.
What the...?
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1474
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 1:42 pm

Snarling and growling are allowed in trade controversies. And to change the metaphor - Taking your ball and going home almost never works. Boeing needs to back off a bit.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2740
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 5:32 pm

The Super Hornet order will go ahead. Any disagreements will be worked out.

The CF-18s are at least 35 years old and if Canada is going to keep to its NATO commitments and international obligations - it will need to replace its CF-18s and the F/A-18E/F is the best option right now...
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
Beatyair
Posts: 752
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 6:49 pm

- Boeing are currently selling 777's for nothing.
- Boeing was selling the 787 at the beginning at steep discounts
- Boeing is out of the segment - stopped selling 717 and 737-600's
- Boeing might piss off Delta who is look at a 150 plane order for 737-8 Max or A320Neo order.
- Boeing will loose the SH order and up coming aerial tanker order.
- Many of the items that make up a CS100 are made in the U.S.A.

Boeing should just focus on a little longer 737-7 Max and that segment that has been left open with nobody jumping into the 757 gap.
 
Skywatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 11:19 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 9:33 pm

Don't the Boeing corporate legal department have better things to do with their time? Too many lawyers in the states for sure.
 
downdata
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 10:07 pm

Skywatcher wrote:
Don't the Boeing corporate legal department have better things to do with their time? Too many lawyers in the states for sure.


You mean besides potentially smothering a future competitor in the crib?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 8916
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sat May 20, 2017 10:17 pm

incitatus wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
Because Boeing was offering the 737 at super low prices.


If Boeing was price dumping Bombardier would be trying to file exactly the same type of complaint against Boeing. They are not, so you are wrong.


BBD may not have an army of lawyers on payroll and millions to burn on frivolous WTO spats that go nowhere for years and only serve to enrich the aforementioned lawyers.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sun May 21, 2017 1:46 pm

OK, I'm late to this party but.....

This is an interesting case to watch. The staff conference at the International Trade Commission was on Thursday - they held the conference in a pretty small ALJ hearing room because the main hearing room was already reserved for a full Commission hearing on rebar. Briefs of the parties are due on Tuesday.

The Commerce Department initiated the case on Wednesday - which was guaranteed to happen. DOC initiates on 99% of the petitions it receives.

I did not attend the conference, but had an interest in doing so. I'm trying to get a copy of the staff conference transcript from a friend.

Boeing has a tough injury argument to make. From my perspective, they have basically walked from the 737-600/700 market and their focus has been on the -800 and -900 market. Its difficult for me to envision injury when 1) Bombardier has not made a single entry of goods into the USA, 2) the aircraft sizes for the CS100 and CS300 are on the low end of the 100 seat range whereas the -700 is on the upper side of the range 150 range, and 3) injury based on a contract is not something the Commission runs into frequently.

If the Commission (there are effectively four commissioners now) votes affirmatively, the case will go forward and Commerce will investigate the dumping and subsidy claims. I can bet you top dollar that Commerce will find subsidies and I'm willing to bet they find dumping.

Whether Boeing survives an ITC final is another matter.......

I'll try to give another review after I get a copy of the hearing transcript. Bombardier hired Covington which does a decent job at the ITC.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Sun May 21, 2017 2:16 pm

planes112 wrote:
Because boeing obviously never sold under the cost of production for the dreamliner. Ever


If Bombardier made a Dreamliner aircraft, they could pursue this claim if they so choose to so. That they don't makes this claim largely irrelevant.

planes112 wrote:
alasizon wrote:
planes112 wrote:
Because boeing obviously never sold under the cost of production for the dreamliner. Ever


Or the UA 73G order.



fundamentally different. This is a dumping case which means that it is kosher to do that within your own country. If they did that to say, Air Canada, that would be bad


Its also a subsidies case. Boeing filed both a dumping complaint and a subsidies complaint. Provided they get through injury, my bet is the subsidies case is a slam dunk.

planes112 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
planes112 wrote:
I am not a lawyer either but I am in a lot of meetings with them. While the traditional definition of dumping agrees with you (saturate market intentionally), the definition that counsel uses is price was below production.

Interesting tidbit from the report: Boeing projects that BBD will make just over 2000 CSeries jets (using all BBD numbers for the cost base of the estimate). I wonder if they will be able to meet that.


You're mixing two issues here. Dumping and injury. The dumping is the sales of merchandise in the target country at less than fair value. LTFV is defined as a price less than what was sold in the home market, or alternatively, less than the price that was in a third country market or less than the cost of production. This is a determination made by the U.S. Department of Commerce. The question of market saturation is an injury question that is examined by the International Trade Commission.

b747400erf wrote:
Timber is not related to NAFA and President Trump wanted his name in the papers, he has no power to negotiate NAFTA.


He does and he did. Through USTR.

planes112 wrote:
look at the conclusion of the report. The report that BBD has a dumping margin of 80.5%. This is the heavily redacted version and I am willing to bet that the 10x larger one dives into this one more. They cannot publically state their damages because it would give a super clear roadmap on the 737 pricing.

Personally, I would surprise to see this continue because Delta is going to be very pissed and the message is already delivered


Conclusion of what report? Petition margins are wild estimates of the real margins. I put very little stock in a petition margin.

b747400erf wrote:
NAFTA's creation had been to remove tariffs from trade, something the lumber industry does not have. The only portion of NAFTA used is the trade dispute panel and general anti-dumping rules.

A President does not have the power to negotiate a treaty or agreement signed by Congress unless they grant him authority.

Don't quit your day job.


Actually that is precisely within the purview of the President. The President through USTR negotiates treaties and agreements that then get Congressional ratification.

Skywatcher wrote:
Typical corporate American strategy-sic a bunch of $1,000/hour lawyers on whoever they decide to try to bury in litigation. I'm sure both sides will end up spending millions on legal fees for nothing. Boeing should seriously get their legal department under control and stop listening to their never ending "sue their asses off" advice. How self serving for the corporate lawyers and destructive for everybody else. No wonder the public perception of lawyers is somewhere south of used car salesmen and/or politicians.


If you only knew how the decision process for this one went down.......

aerolimani wrote:
People keep calling them subsidies; money which BBD has received from the Québec and federal governments. They're not subsidies, they're loans. Of course, one can say all they want about whether they think BBD will ever pay off these loans, but the fact remains that they are loans, not gifts.
[/quote][/quote]

We'll get to this - through the Commerce Dept. But given that I know what firm Boeing is using to do the subsidies research, I can bet you that they will find subsidies....
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 12:32 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
planes112 wrote:
Because boeing obviously never sold under the cost of production for the dreamliner. Ever


If Bombardier made a Dreamliner aircraft, they could pursue this claim if they so choose to so. That they don't makes this claim largely irrelevant.

planes112 wrote:
alasizon wrote:

Or the UA 73G order.



fundamentally different. This is a dumping case which means that it is kosher to do that within your own country. If they did that to say, Air Canada, that would be bad


Its also a subsidies case. Boeing filed both a dumping complaint and a subsidies complaint. Provided they get through injury, my bet is the subsidies case is a slam dunk.

planes112 wrote:
Stitch wrote:


You're mixing two issues here. Dumping and injury. The dumping is the sales of merchandise in the target country at less than fair value. LTFV is defined as a price less than what was sold in the home market, or alternatively, less than the price that was in a third country market or less than the cost of production. This is a determination made by the U.S. Department of Commerce. The question of market saturation is an injury question that is examined by the International Trade Commission.

b747400erf wrote:
Timber is not related to NAFA and President Trump wanted his name in the papers, he has no power to negotiate NAFTA.


He does and he did. Through USTR.

planes112 wrote:
look at the conclusion of the report. The report that BBD has a dumping margin of 80.5%. This is the heavily redacted version and I am willing to bet that the 10x larger one dives into this one more. They cannot publically state their damages because it would give a super clear roadmap on the 737 pricing.

Personally, I would surprise to see this continue because Delta is going to be very pissed and the message is already delivered


Conclusion of what report? Petition margins are wild estimates of the real margins. I put very little stock in a petition margin.

b747400erf wrote:
NAFTA's creation had been to remove tariffs from trade, something the lumber industry does not have. The only portion of NAFTA used is the trade dispute panel and general anti-dumping rules.

A President does not have the power to negotiate a treaty or agreement signed by Congress unless they grant him authority.

Don't quit your day job.


Actually that is precisely within the purview of the President. The President through USTR negotiates treaties and agreements that then get Congressional ratification.

Skywatcher wrote:
Typical corporate American strategy-sic a bunch of $1,000/hour lawyers on whoever they decide to try to bury in litigation. I'm sure both sides will end up spending millions on legal fees for nothing. Boeing should seriously get their legal department under control and stop listening to their never ending "sue their asses off" advice. How self serving for the corporate lawyers and destructive for everybody else. No wonder the public perception of lawyers is somewhere south of used car salesmen and/or politicians.


If you only knew how the decision process for this one went down.......

aerolimani wrote:
People keep calling them subsidies; money which BBD has received from the Québec and federal governments. They're not subsidies, they're loans. Of course, one can say all they want about whether they think BBD will ever pay off these loans, but the fact remains that they are loans, not gifts.

We'll get to this - through the Commerce Dept. But given that I know what firm Boeing is using to do the subsidies research, I can bet you that they will find subsidies....


Sure they'll find subsidies....there hasn't been an airliner program in recent decades that hasn't been subsidised. As for dumping....the 787 probably won't ever show a profit as a program and their program accounting method allows them to amortize their losses over the life of the program, if they keep pushing up the break even number.

Right now, the Boeing ceo is in Riyadh having gotten the president of the USA to shill as a sales rep for the company to sell more airliners to Saudi airlines..as well as fighters and arms.

Boeing doesn't have a chance, (except in a trumpian world), to show harm or damage against a company that doesn't come close to directly competing. Dumping doesn't make any sense either since no US business is harmed by any sales of BBD products, whatever they sell for. In fact, the opposite is true since BBD employs thousands of people in the US and there are millions of dollars of US components in ever CSeries aircraft. You could even say that the American company Delta, is taking advantage of BBD.

At best, Boeing would have to show potential future harm against their sold out for half a decade 738 by a yet to be offered CS500.

The softwood lumber disputes have been shown to be bogus every time they've come up but at least there were real competitors on both sides of the border selling essentially the same products. The same sure isn't true with Boeing vs BBD.

The heart of dumping laws are to protect US business against predatory foreign manufacturers. It will be easier finding the real easter bunny than any US company that was harmed by the Delta/BBD deal.

On the other hand, in a world of Alternative Facts....anything is possible.
What the...?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 8916
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 3:45 am

What I find interesting is that with Trump we see the US for what it is, roughless and ready to throw supposed allies under the bus. In a way Obama fooled many people around the world. Several major companies in France have been harmed to the point of disappearing of being bought (sometimes by their US competitors) through the use of US espionage and US courts. I predict my country and others, Canada and Mexico first of course, will seize the opportunity offered by Trump and fight back much more than before. Trump's promises of "better deals" might backfire tremendously.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 3:35 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
Sure they'll find subsidies....there hasn't been an airliner program in recent decades that hasn't been subsidised. As for dumping....the 787 probably won't ever show a profit as a program and their program accounting method allows them to amortize their losses over the life of the program, if they keep pushing up the break even number.

Right now, the Boeing ceo is in Riyadh having gotten the president of the USA to shill as a sales rep for the company to sell more airliners to Saudi airlines..as well as fighters and arms.

Boeing doesn't have a chance, (except in a trumpian world), to show harm or damage against a company that doesn't come close to directly competing. Dumping doesn't make any sense either since no US business is harmed by any sales of BBD products, whatever they sell for. In fact, the opposite is true since BBD employs thousands of people in the US and there are millions of dollars of US components in ever CSeries aircraft. You could even say that the American company Delta, is taking advantage of BBD.


I read the conference transcript yesterday. And IMHO, yes, Boeing has a chance. I would give them even money on getting past a prelim. They only need to get two of the four current commissioners. And bear in mind the statutory threshold for an affirmative at a preliminary phase is very, very low: "is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports"

As to dumping, dumping and harm are not relevant. Dumping is a calculation done by the Commerce Department and harm is an issue addressed by the Trade Commission. The Commerce Department doesn't care if there is harm or not - they're there to assess the level of dumping (if any) and subsidization (if any).

JoeCanuck wrote:
At best, Boeing would have to show potential future harm against their sold out for half a decade 738 by a yet to be offered CS500.


Thats not what they argued at the Commission.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The softwood lumber disputes have been shown to be bogus every time they've come up but at least there were real competitors on both sides of the border selling essentially the same products. The same sure isn't true with Boeing vs BBD.


I'm not going to argue softwood lumber as the firm I work for represents an active participant in that case. However, the lumber dispute is a 30-year+ long dispute in various iterations.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The heart of dumping laws are to protect US business against predatory foreign manufacturers. It will be easier finding the real easter bunny than any US company that was harmed by the Delta/BBD deal.


Again, you're confusing dumping with injury. Two different sets of legal questions

JoeCanuck wrote:
On the other hand, in a world of Alternative Facts....anything is possible.
[/quote]

The U.S. has been active in trade matters for decades. So, I find this comment largely irrelevant.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 3836
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 4:11 pm

And Boeing needs to be investigated for its ethics. Boeing is just as dirty. Tanker deal comes to mind. Good for Bombardier for doing what it has to do to sell its planes.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 7:27 pm

You'll have to talk to the Air Force about that one and not Boeing.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1192
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 8:53 pm

washingtonflyer wrote:
You'll have to talk to the Air Force about that one and not Boeing.


Yes... because it was the Air Force that had executives sent to Jail.

[well... I suppose they actually had purchasing officers sent to Jail too IIRC]
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Mon May 22, 2017 9:23 pm

Poor things. They're probably suffering PTSD having witnessed another OEM which rose from obscurity and in 3 decades caught up to their market share, and are trying to ensure it doesn't happen again. Kill them young
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
Sure they'll find subsidies....there hasn't been an airliner program in recent decades that hasn't been subsidised. As for dumping....the 787 probably won't ever show a profit as a program and their program accounting method allows them to amortize their losses over the life of the program, if they keep pushing up the break even number.

Right now, the Boeing ceo is in Riyadh having gotten the president of the USA to shill as a sales rep for the company to sell more airliners to Saudi airlines..as well as fighters and arms.

Boeing doesn't have a chance, (except in a trumpian world), to show harm or damage against a company that doesn't come close to directly competing. Dumping doesn't make any sense either since no US business is harmed by any sales of BBD products, whatever they sell for. In fact, the opposite is true since BBD employs thousands of people in the US and there are millions of dollars of US components in ever CSeries aircraft. You could even say that the American company Delta, is taking advantage of BBD.


I read the conference transcript yesterday. And IMHO, yes, Boeing has a chance. I would give them even money on getting past a prelim. They only need to get two of the four current commissioners. And bear in mind the statutory threshold for an affirmative at a preliminary phase is very, very low: "is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports"

As to dumping, dumping and harm are not relevant. Dumping is a calculation done by the Commerce Department and harm is an issue addressed by the Trade Commission. The Commerce Department doesn't care if there is harm or not - they're there to assess the level of dumping (if any) and subsidization (if any).

JoeCanuck wrote:
At best, Boeing would have to show potential future harm against their sold out for half a decade 738 by a yet to be offered CS500.


Thats not what they argued at the Commission.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The softwood lumber disputes have been shown to be bogus every time they've come up but at least there were real competitors on both sides of the border selling essentially the same products. The same sure isn't true with Boeing vs BBD.


I'm not going to argue softwood lumber as the firm I work for represents an active participant in that case. However, the lumber dispute is a 30-year+ long dispute in various iterations.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The heart of dumping laws are to protect US business against predatory foreign manufacturers. It will be easier finding the real easter bunny than any US company that was harmed by the Delta/BBD deal.


Again, you're confusing dumping with injury. Two different sets of legal questions

JoeCanuck wrote:
On the other hand, in a world of Alternative Facts....anything is possible.


The U.S. has been active in trade matters for decades. So, I find this comment largely irrelevant.[/quote]

If Boeing isn't claiming they are being harmed, then why is it up to them to initiate action against Canada? This would never have come up if Boeing hadn't started the action. Is that the way the system works...? Any entity that thinks that another country is 'dumping' into the US, even if they have no personal interest, can initiate action? That sounds like a bizarre system...but little surprises me about US politics anymore.

My mention of softwood lumber is merely to contrast that action, where there is the possibility of harm, (slim though that has historically been), to Boeing's, where they could only show harm to the most biased panel. Reasonable? Sure. In 30 years the softwood lumber dispute hasn't been reasonable...so this is even less likely to be. I know...you're working for the allegedly injured parties.

Sure...I get it....harm isn't necessarily the same as dumping...but, if Boeing isn't being harmed, why are they even involved? Altruism...? The love of baseball, hotdogs and apple pie...?

Not only is no American industry being harmed by BBD's sale of jets, American companies are being boosted by the sale...Delta, Pratt, Spirit....there is a long list of American companies who hire American workers who would be harmed if they sale DOESN'T go through.

That doesn't mean much when the top brass of Boeing is getting the president of the US to sell planes for them to Saudi...and they get a front row seat on AF1 for the show.

But that's not government assistance...no sir.
What the...?
 
airnorth
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 7:32 am

Another perspective from down unda:
https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalkin ... eing-town/
I thought this quote was funny:

"It means that Boeing says its American customers should have to buy their inferior older technology offering for a next-to-useless cut down 737 (whether a MAX or an NG) instead of a brand new cutting edge hi-technology design.

Delta, apparently, should pay more for a less capable jet, because, hey “It’s a Boeing.” Or just buy a Bombardier jet for a price that Boeing, rather than the customer, finds comfortable."
 
Nouflyer
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:38 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 7:52 am

I'm not convinced that this is really about Boeing - or the F/A 18 - at all.

I think that the Canadian government has realised that the F35 is a complete lemon, to be acquired on terms which are financially absurd.

And I think that the behaviour of Boeing gives them the opportunity to switch the F/A 18 order to a superior European aircraft (Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Rafale or even Saab Gripen) which would cost a fraction of the price.

But it's become obvious that the F35's imaginary stealth characteristics are its only redeeming feature. I suspect that Canada would give anything to replace that order with a European canard jet.

And Boeing has just provided the pretext.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 14413
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 8:00 am

DL's perspective on this is interesting...

https://leehamnews.com/2017/05/23/delta ... more-23479
“I want to be clear that Boeing is not competing for new orders when we were negotiating with Bombardier,” testified Greg May, SVP of Supply Chain Management and Fleet Strategy. “Boeing had no viable competitive alternatives to the CS100. We were not even considering any new Boeing product as an alternative when we made the purchase that Boeing challenges in the petition.”
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 9:01 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
Sure they'll find subsidies....there hasn't been an airliner program in recent decades that hasn't been subsidised. As for dumping....the 787 probably won't ever show a profit as a program and their program accounting method allows them to amortize their losses over the life of the program, if they keep pushing up the break even number.

Right now, the Boeing ceo is in Riyadh having gotten the president of the USA to shill as a sales rep for the company to sell more airliners to Saudi airlines..as well as fighters and arms.

Boeing doesn't have a chance, (except in a trumpian world), to show harm or damage against a company that doesn't come close to directly competing. Dumping doesn't make any sense either since no US business is harmed by any sales of BBD products, whatever they sell for. In fact, the opposite is true since BBD employs thousands of people in the US and there are millions of dollars of US components in ever CSeries aircraft. You could even say that the American company Delta, is taking advantage of BBD.


I read the conference transcript yesterday. And IMHO, yes, Boeing has a chance. I would give them even money on getting past a prelim. They only need to get two of the four current commissioners. And bear in mind the statutory threshold for an affirmative at a preliminary phase is very, very low: "is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports"

As to dumping, dumping and harm are not relevant. Dumping is a calculation done by the Commerce Department and harm is an issue addressed by the Trade Commission. The Commerce Department doesn't care if there is harm or not - they're there to assess the level of dumping (if any) and subsidization (if any).

JoeCanuck wrote:
At best, Boeing would have to show potential future harm against their sold out for half a decade 738 by a yet to be offered CS500.


Thats not what they argued at the Commission.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The softwood lumber disputes have been shown to be bogus every time they've come up but at least there were real competitors on both sides of the border selling essentially the same products. The same sure isn't true with Boeing vs BBD.


I'm not going to argue softwood lumber as the firm I work for represents an active participant in that case. However, the lumber dispute is a 30-year+ long dispute in various iterations.

JoeCanuck wrote:
The heart of dumping laws are to protect US business against predatory foreign manufacturers. It will be easier finding the real easter bunny than any US company that was harmed by the Delta/BBD deal.


Again, you're confusing dumping with injury. Two different sets of legal questions

JoeCanuck wrote:
On the other hand, in a world of Alternative Facts....anything is possible.


The U.S. has been active in trade matters for decades. So, I find this comment largely irrelevant.


JoeCanuck wrote:
If Boeing isn't claiming they are being harmed, then why is it up to them to initiate action against Canada? This would never have come up if Boeing hadn't started the action. Is that the way the system works...? Any entity that thinks that another country is 'dumping' into the US, even if they have no personal interest, can initiate action? That sounds like a bizarre system...but little surprises me about US politics anymore.

My mention of softwood lumber is merely to contrast that action, where there is the possibility of harm, (slim though that has historically been), to Boeing's, where they could only show harm to the most biased panel. Reasonable? Sure. In 30 years the softwood lumber dispute hasn't been reasonable...so this is even less likely to be. I know...you're working for the allegedly injured parties.

Sure...I get it....harm isn't necessarily the same as dumping...but, if Boeing isn't being harmed, why are they even involved? Altruism...? The love of baseball, hotdogs and apple pie...?

Not only is no American industry being harmed by BBD's sale of jets, American companies are being boosted by the sale...Delta, Pratt, Spirit....there is a long list of American companies who hire American workers who would be harmed if they sale DOESN'T go through.

That doesn't mean much when the top brass of Boeing is getting the president of the US to sell planes for them to Saudi...and they get a front row seat on AF1 for the show.

But that's not government assistance...no sir.


I didn't say that Boeing isn't claiming that they aren't harmed. They certainly are. However, the question of harm is a separate question from the question of dumping or the question of subsidies. Those are two distinct legal issues that are examined by two distinct federal agencies: the Trade Commission examines harm and the Commerce Department examines dumping and subsidization. Now I will say that you can't find injury (harm) without a finding of dumping/subsidies, but as I said before, I can all but guarantee you that Commerce will find that subsidies exist and I can bet you it will find dumping. The question really is going to be whether Boeing is injured (or threatened with injury). After reading the transcript over the weekend and shooting the breeze with my colleagues, I believe that there is a path to an affirmative finding - at the preliminary stage. I believe the final determination of injury is going to be much, much tougher.

This is kind of a case of first impressions for the Commission, and they're going to have to dig into Congress' intent of whether you can have injury (or threat) where you've not had an entry of goods, but where you've certainly have had a sale. The Commission will also have to assess whether Boeing, with a massive backlog, can possibly be injured, whether Boeing willfully exited this market by not producing the -700 or the 717 to any meaningful extent, and whether Boeing's definition of what constitutes the industry (100-150 seat jets with a range of at least 2900 miles) is the proper industry to be assessed. Bombardier complained at length that the proposed scope was written to eliminate comparisons to the E-195 E2s. I believe that is a very valid complaint and the Commission has the right to expand what is called the "like product" to assess whether harm exists.

JoeCanuck wrote:
Any entity that thinks that another country is 'dumping' into the US, even if they have no personal interest, can initiate action? That sounds like a bizarre system...but little surprises me about US politics anymore.


I strongly disagree with the notion that Boeing has no personal interest. They believe that that they have a very strong personal interest. From their perspective, they're trying to avoid Airbus II. I'd implore you to avoid references to politics. Trade cases are strategic business decisions and while there have been lots of run of the mill cases, there have been very sensitive ones from time to time that cause extra controversy: vector super computers, printing presses, crude oil, soft wood lumber, solar modules, etc.
 
Arion640
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 9:29 am

All I can conclude from all this is BBD are ruining Boeings cosy duopoly on the world market with Airbus and they aren't happy about it.
319 320 321 388 733 752 753 772 77E 773 77W 788 E195 F70 DH8C DH8D AT75
 
SWEDISHBLENDER
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 2:30 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 11:32 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
I wonder what could cost Boeing more...Delta buying a few CSeries, (which don't compete directly with anything Boeing sells), or some 321's and 350's.
While the current C-Series doesn't pose a direct threat to anything Boeing produces at the moment, it's the future STRETCHED versions that pose the real threat. the Airbus A320 is deftly outperforming the 737 product line in terms of sales. Another viable competitor in the market would be a big blow to Boeing. It's a good thing Boeing never took the sub-150 seat market seriously
:roll:
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 23937
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 11:49 am

scbriml wrote:
DL's perspective on this is interesting...

https://leehamnews.com/2017/05/23/delta ... more-23479
“I want to be clear that Boeing is not competing for new orders when we were negotiating with Bombardier,” testified Greg May, SVP of Supply Chain Management and Fleet Strategy. “Boeing had no viable competitive alternatives to the CS100. We were not even considering any new Boeing product as an alternative when we made the purchase that Boeing challenges in the petition.”


Interesting. It seems more is going on behind the scenes.

"Never again", says @Boeing

Boeing let Airbus enter the aviation industry and don't want to make the same mistake again.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1192
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 11:53 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
I strongly disagree with the notion that Boeing has no personal interest. They believe that that they have a very strong personal interest. From their perspective, they're trying to avoid Airbus II. I'd implore you to avoid references to politics. Trade cases are strategic business decisions and while there have been lots of run of the mill cases, there have been very sensitive ones from time to time that cause extra controversy: vector super computers, printing presses, crude oil, soft wood lumber, solar modules, etc.


If Boeing want to go down that route - then perhaps a reminder of who the first customer was for the 707 (the aircraft that established Boeing in the commercial-sphere) would be in order.

It was that support which which was vital to enabling it to be a viable project at the time of initiation.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 23937
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 12:02 pm

LAXintl wrote:
U.S government has accepted the Boeing complaint and will investigate dumping and subsidy claims.
Both the Commerce departments and International Trade Commission will run parallel an investigations.

U.S. launches probe of Boeing dumping, subsidy claims vs Bombardier
http://www.reuters.com/article/boeing-b ... SL2N1IK1L1


So while Boeing and Bombardier are having a cat fight on subsidies, China and Russia are about to develop a widebody aircraft with full government support and nobody will stop them. Nobody challenged the C919 either.

"Never again," says @Boeing. Except when it comes to China and Russia. Then not a peep from Boeing. Go after the 98 lb weakling, @Bombardier


Where is @Boeing's complaint to the WTO about government subsidies? "Never again" doesn't apply to China and Russia, only @Bombardier


https://twitter.com/LeehamNews
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 1840
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 12:13 pm

scbriml wrote:
DL's perspective on this is interesting...

https://leehamnews.com/2017/05/23/delta ... more-23479
“I want to be clear that Boeing is not competing for new orders when we were negotiating with Bombardier,” testified Greg May, SVP of Supply Chain Management and Fleet Strategy. “Boeing had no viable competitive alternatives to the CS100. We were not even considering any new Boeing product as an alternative when we made the purchase that Boeing challenges in the petition.”


Boeings argument, seems to be total BS, not only did they not offer the plane that they alleged was being dumped against they have no aircraft suitible for the RFP.
BV
 
StTim
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 12:17 pm

It does seem that Boeing is after making sure barriers to entry for the market (large Commercial planes) is kept extraordinarily high.
 
User avatar
PPVLC
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 12:07 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 12:24 pm

I wonder what could happen to BBD after Boeing's complaint. A fine? A reprimand? They have a great product and i wish them success with the CSeries. BTW, I'm not a fan of the 737, I know it's a commercial success but I really don't like flying it either as a crew or passenger.
L188 707 727 737 767 A300 DC10 MD11 747
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 23937
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 1:07 pm

PPVLC wrote:
I wonder what could happen to BBD after Boeing's complaint. A fine? A reprimand? They have a great product and i wish them success with the CSeries. BTW, I'm not a fan of the 737, I know it's a commercial success but I really don't like flying it either as a crew or passenger.


The WTO can't do much.

Remember that the WTO found the A380/777X/A350 subsidies/taxes to be illegal, yet Boeing and Airbus are not paying a penny. The WTO is not a courthouse.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 1:19 pm

Interesting comments about Boeing in the G&M:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion ... e35066324/

"From 2000-2015, Boeing got $13.4-billion in grants and tax breaks – almost three times as much as the number-two company on the list, Intel. And now it’s crying “no fair,” because Bombardier has received billions in federal and provincial assistance, loans and investment since 2008 for the C-Series jet."


I am guessing Boeing doesn't like someone playing using rules they often use themselves.

I see Boeing's pathetic actions as the first confirmation that the CSeries is a viable contender. Delta Air Lines is a big playier in this issue. They are the ones who may end up paying more for the best ship for the job. I wonder if Delta's last large order for A321s (and not 737s) was not a shot across the bow at Boeing.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 3:27 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
PPVLC wrote:
I wonder what could happen to BBD after Boeing's complaint. A fine? A reprimand? They have a great product and i wish them success with the CSeries. BTW, I'm not a fan of the 737, I know it's a commercial success but I really don't like flying it either as a crew or passenger.


The WTO can't do much.

Remember that the WTO found the A380/777X/A350 subsidies/taxes to be illegal, yet Boeing and Airbus are not paying a penny. The WTO is not a courthouse.


This isn't the WTO. The US Trade Comission can act unilaterally and levy a countervailing duty on imports of the CSeries. This tax would be borne by the importer, i.e. the airline, and likely triggering what's known as an "adverse material change" clause in the contract and cause the deal to fall apart. This would effectively block imports of the CSeries unless the pricing is increased, or the duty paid.
 
StTim
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 4:28 pm

I see this as protectionism under a different guise. Boeing had no competing product.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 5:51 pm

StTim wrote:
I see this as protectionism under a different guise. Boeing had no competing product.

:checkmark: Absolutely.

Honestly, I'm not sure if Boeing has truly thought this one through. Imagine if BBD goes under. If Boeing is seen as being a factor in such a situation, there's going to be blowback. If you kill off one of your neighbour's flagship corporations, or are even partly responsible, you can't expect everyone's just going to smile and say "Oh well. That's just business." Such a situation could have far-reaching consequences for both Boeing and generally for trade relations between Canada and the USA.

This is not like the softwood lumber debate. The trees keep growing, no matter what. If you kill/hurt BBD, that's the cornerstone of an industry which may never recover. The intellectual capital will leave Canada, and quite likely never return.

Meanwhile, Trump has just initiated proceedings for the renegotiation of NAFTA. This definitely sets the stage for the Canadian government to put pressure on not just Boeing, but on the entire US aviation industry. Reopening NAFTA reopens the possibility of a return to protectionism. Two can play at that game. Canada and the EU just signed CETA, so Airbus certainly doesn't have to worry.
 
jalarner
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:07 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 7:36 pm

aerolimani wrote:
StTim wrote:
I see this as protectionism under a different guise. Boeing had no competing product.

:checkmark: Absolutely.

Honestly, I'm not sure if Boeing has truly thought this one through. Imagine if BBD goes under. If Boeing is seen as being a factor in such a situation, there's going to be blowback. If you kill off one of your neighbour's flagship corporations, or are even partly responsible, you can't expect everyone's just going to smile and say "Oh well. That's just business." Such a situation could have far-reaching consequences for both Boeing and generally for trade relations between Canada and the USA.

This is not like the softwood lumber debate. The trees keep growing, no matter what. If you kill/hurt BBD, that's the cornerstone of an industry which may never recover. The intellectual capital will leave Canada, and quite likely never return.

Meanwhile, Trump has just initiated proceedings for the renegotiation of NAFTA. This definitely sets the stage for the Canadian government to put pressure on not just Boeing, but on the entire US aviation industry. Reopening NAFTA reopens the possibility of a return to protectionism. Two can play at that game. Canada and the EU just signed CETA, so Airbus certainly doesn't have to worry.


I almost think that is exactly what Boeing wants to do, but so it can buy Bombardier. Think about it...get all the info you need, confirmed in court, lawyers, etc., drain company resources and maybe even drag down the share price, and poof...buy the company, and develop a CS500/700 as 737 replacement. Keep the line open and a new line in WA for the bigger derivatives.

I am not in the aviation industry, but stuff like this happens in my specialty manufacturing business I do sales/proposals with.
Support air cadets!
 
fly4ever78
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 10:17 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 8:10 pm

777Mech wrote:
so in theory, Boeing should be fighting against the ME3 "price dumping" seats in the TATL markets? Or are they just picking and choosing the battles that will line their pockets?


Exactly!!!! Instead, they let the Import Export Bank subsidize Boeing airplane sales to the ME3 who in turn dump their government subsidized seats back into the US International market. Boeing is no better, they are just upset because now THEY are hurting!!
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Tue May 23, 2017 8:38 pm

scbriml wrote:
DL's perspective on this is interesting...

https://leehamnews.com/2017/05/23/delta ... more-23479
“I want to be clear that Boeing is not competing for new orders when we were negotiating with Bombardier,” testified Greg May, SVP of Supply Chain Management and Fleet Strategy. “Boeing had no viable competitive alternatives to the CS100. We were not even considering any new Boeing product as an alternative when we made the purchase that Boeing challenges in the petition.”


Interesting indeed. I expected Delta would make some efforts to support Bombardier's side of the case at a minimum to protect their order, but I didn't expect them to essentially argue, "Boeing is full of hot air, and this petition is nonsense."

Delta appears to have just kicked the legs out from under the requirement to prove harm. I wonder if that pretty much kills the case or if Boeing has a substantive counter-argument, because the response mentioned in the Leeham article certainly wasn't substantive.

wrongwayup wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
PPVLC wrote:
I wonder what could happen to BBD after Boeing's complaint. A fine? A reprimand? They have a great product and i wish them success with the CSeries. BTW, I'm not a fan of the 737, I know it's a commercial success but I really don't like flying it either as a crew or passenger.


The WTO can't do much.

Remember that the WTO found the A380/777X/A350 subsidies/taxes to be illegal, yet Boeing and Airbus are not paying a penny. The WTO is not a courthouse.


This isn't the WTO. The US Trade Comission can act unilaterally and levy a countervailing duty on imports of the CSeries. This tax would be borne by the importer, i.e. the airline, and likely triggering what's known as an "adverse material change" clause in the contract and cause the deal to fall apart. This would effectively block imports of the CSeries unless the pricing is increased, or the duty paid.


That would be the likely action, but it can't be taken unilaterally, as far as I know, unless you simply mean without Canada's approval.

Maybe I'm missing something, but my understanding is if the US Trade Commission acts without a similar finding from the WTO, the US will be in violation of the General Agreement on Trades and Tariffs, and therefore would jeopardize the protection against other countries taking similar unilateral action arbitrarily against US products. Treaties generally only work if both sides uphold them.

Both WTO and Trade Commission cases would be part of the process because, as pointed out, the WTO can't do much. They can issue a ruling that dumping occurred, but that doesn't obligate the US to do anything. The US needs to act to enact the actual penalty.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Wed May 24, 2017 6:54 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:

I read the conference transcript yesterday. And IMHO, yes, Boeing has a chance. I would give them even money on getting past a prelim. They only need to get two of the four current commissioners. And bear in mind the statutory threshold for an affirmative at a preliminary phase is very, very low: "is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports"

As to dumping, dumping and harm are not relevant. Dumping is a calculation done by the Commerce Department and harm is an issue addressed by the Trade Commission. The Commerce Department doesn't care if there is harm or not - they're there to assess the level of dumping (if any) and subsidization (if any).



Thats not what they argued at the Commission.



I'm not going to argue softwood lumber as the firm I work for represents an active participant in that case. However, the lumber dispute is a 30-year+ long dispute in various iterations.



Again, you're confusing dumping with injury. Two different sets of legal questions



The U.S. has been active in trade matters for decades. So, I find this comment largely irrelevant.


JoeCanuck wrote:
If Boeing isn't claiming they are being harmed, then why is it up to them to initiate action against Canada? This would never have come up if Boeing hadn't started the action. Is that the way the system works...? Any entity that thinks that another country is 'dumping' into the US, even if they have no personal interest, can initiate action? That sounds like a bizarre system...but little surprises me about US politics anymore.

My mention of softwood lumber is merely to contrast that action, where there is the possibility of harm, (slim though that has historically been), to Boeing's, where they could only show harm to the most biased panel. Reasonable? Sure. In 30 years the softwood lumber dispute hasn't been reasonable...so this is even less likely to be. I know...you're working for the allegedly injured parties.

Sure...I get it....harm isn't necessarily the same as dumping...but, if Boeing isn't being harmed, why are they even involved? Altruism...? The love of baseball, hotdogs and apple pie...?

Not only is no American industry being harmed by BBD's sale of jets, American companies are being boosted by the sale...Delta, Pratt, Spirit....there is a long list of American companies who hire American workers who would be harmed if they sale DOESN'T go through.

That doesn't mean much when the top brass of Boeing is getting the president of the US to sell planes for them to Saudi...and they get a front row seat on AF1 for the show.

But that's not government assistance...no sir.


I didn't say that Boeing isn't claiming that they aren't harmed. They certainly are. However, the question of harm is a separate question from the question of dumping or the question of subsidies. Those are two distinct legal issues that are examined by two distinct federal agencies: the Trade Commission examines harm and the Commerce Department examines dumping and subsidization. Now I will say that you can't find injury (harm) without a finding of dumping/subsidies, but as I said before, I can all but guarantee you that Commerce will find that subsidies exist and I can bet you it will find dumping. The question really is going to be whether Boeing is injured (or threatened with injury). After reading the transcript over the weekend and shooting the breeze with my colleagues, I believe that there is a path to an affirmative finding - at the preliminary stage. I believe the final determination of injury is going to be much, much tougher.

This is kind of a case of first impressions for the Commission, and they're going to have to dig into Congress' intent of whether you can have injury (or threat) where you've not had an entry of goods, but where you've certainly have had a sale. The Commission will also have to assess whether Boeing, with a massive backlog, can possibly be injured, whether Boeing willfully exited this market by not producing the -700 or the 717 to any meaningful extent, and whether Boeing's definition of what constitutes the industry (100-150 seat jets with a range of at least 2900 miles) is the proper industry to be assessed. Bombardier complained at length that the proposed scope was written to eliminate comparisons to the E-195 E2s. I believe that is a very valid complaint and the Commission has the right to expand what is called the "like product" to assess whether harm exists.

JoeCanuck wrote:
Any entity that thinks that another country is 'dumping' into the US, even if they have no personal interest, can initiate action? That sounds like a bizarre system...but little surprises me about US politics anymore.


I strongly disagree with the notion that Boeing has no personal interest. They believe that that they have a very strong personal interest. From their perspective, they're trying to avoid Airbus II. I'd implore you to avoid references to politics. Trade cases are strategic business decisions and while there have been lots of run of the mill cases, there have been very sensitive ones from time to time that cause extra controversy: vector super computers, printing presses, crude oil, soft wood lumber, solar modules, etc.


I basically made the point earlier that the only harm Boeing can even theoretically show , is potential harm from a stretch of the cs300....which is currently as real as the Easter bunny and would be two sizes larger than the model Delta wants.

Delta has said Boeing had no product in the size they wanted and were never being considered.

Yet even though they as much as admit they don't have a competitive product, they still claim harm now. Boeing might as well start whining about Honda in case they build a flying car that might hurt 737 sales.

As for these being strategic business decisions....sure, but they are just as much politics. the orange one was elected partly on his USA uber alles trade platforms. Trade wars can win elections....just ask the senators in Oregon.
What the...?
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Boeing targets Bombardier for “price dumping” CSeries

Wed May 24, 2017 10:48 am

KarelXWB wrote:
PPVLC wrote:
I wonder what could happen to BBD after Boeing's complaint. A fine? A reprimand? They have a great product and i wish them success with the CSeries. BTW, I'm not a fan of the 737, I know it's a commercial success but I really don't like flying it either as a crew or passenger.


The WTO can't do much.

Remember that the WTO found the A380/777X/A350 subsidies/taxes to be illegal, yet Boeing and Airbus are not paying a penny. The WTO is not a courthouse.


I understood that Airbus made some payment to the lending governments to correct the non-commercial rates... I'm sure that was out of a belief it would settle the case rather than because they thought it was a fun thing to do! ;)
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8

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