speedbird52 wrote:

Is two manufactures who often don't build competing products really a free market?

Is outside (Government) interference to limit this duopoly really a "free market" ?
I'll help you out.

Wikipedia wrote:

In economics, a free market is an idealized system in which the prices for goods and services are determined by the open market and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.

On the other hand; Critics of the free market have argued that, in real world situations, it has proven to be susceptible to the development of price fixing monopolies. Such reasoning has led to government intervention, e.g. the United States antitrust law.

Just for giggles (from the world's worst comedian) only one known example of a true free market exists, and that is the Black Market. This may be under constant threat by the Police, but under no circumstances do the police regulate the substances that are being created.

speedbird52 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

The Airplane industry is already consolidated enough.

Says who? ...you?

Based on what? Why should anyone consider that an objective assessment?

Is two manufactures who often don't build competing products really a free market?

What world does that exist in? ...because it's not the one we live in.

SFOtoORD wrote:

Airbus just did a similar deal with Bombardier.

How do you say it's similar? We know the BBD deal gives Airbus the ability to become 100% owner after five years. I doubt we'll have that here. I also doubt EMB will sell the 51% share for $1.

At this point, I doubt that they'll reach a deal.
The money that Boeing would spend for this JV just doesnt hold the ROI prospects that investors are looking for.
The E2 is no Cseries.

Waterbomber wrote:

At this point, I doubt that they'll reach a deal.
The money that Boeing would spend for this JV just doesnt hold the ROI prospects that investors are looking for.
The E2 is no Cseries.

Really ??? Based on what is your information ???

LAX772LR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Says who? ...you?

Based on what? Why should anyone consider that an objective assessment?

Is two manufactures who often don't build competing products really a free market?

What world does that exist in? ...because it's not the one we live in.

Let's see: The A350 will be without a direct competitor, the 777X is without a direct competitor, the 787 has no direct competitor, the A330 has no direct competitor, and the 747-8f has no direct competitor.

speedbird52 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Is two manufactures who often don't build competing products really a free market?

What world does that exist in? ...because it's not the one we live in.

Let's see: The A350 will be without a direct competitor, the 777X is without a direct competitor, the 787 has no direct competitor, the A330 has no direct competitor

So once again, I'll ask you-- what world does this exist in?

Because here on planet Earth:
Both the 787 and 777 and even the in-house A330 compete with the A350s in various mission profiles.

The 777X is up against both the A359ULR (have you somehow missed the intense QF competition??) and the A35K.
That one's the easiest match-up of all.

The A330 has no competitor? Really?
Ask Hawaiian and Delta how they feel about such a statement. They sure seemed to think it did. Especially the latter in their RFP.

The 748F has no direct competitor, that's fair.
It also has a relatively puny market mission, so that's of no real surprise.

Lastly, I don't know what connotation you're attempting to apply to the word "direct," but be aware that it's nowhere remotely near an accurate assessment of the market.

LAX772LR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

What world does that exist in? ...because it's not the one we live in.

Let's see: The A350 will be without a direct competitor, the 777X is without a direct competitor, the 787 has no direct competitor, the A330 has no direct competitor

So once again, I'll ask you-- what world does this exist in?

Because here on planet Earth:
Both the 787 and 777 and even the in-house A330 compete with the A350s in various mission profiles.

The 777X is up against both the A359ULR (have you somehow missed the intense QF competition??) and the A35K.
That one's the easiest match-up of all.

The A330 has no competitor? Really?
Ask Hawaiian and Delta how they feel about such a statement. They sure seemed to think it did. Especially the latter in their RFP.

The 748F has no direct competitor, that's fair.
It also has a relatively puny market mission, so that's of no real surprise.

Lastly, I don't know what connotation you're attempting to apply to the word "direct," but be aware that it's nowhere remotely near an accurate assessment of the market.

The 777X is for higher density routes than the A350. The 787 is significantly smaller. Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

speedbird52 wrote:

Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

The 787 family offer similar to greater cabin area and greater cargo volume than the A330 family with similar or better range.

Stitch wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

The 787 family offer similar to greater cabin area and greater cargo volume than the A330 family with similar or better range.

It's a common a.net misconception that every airline wants to replace every retired aircraft with a precise 1:1 match, aside from an efficiency improvement.

*edited for grammar

aerolimani wrote:

Stitch wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

The 787 family offer similar to greater cabin area and greater cargo volume than the A330 family with similar or better range.

It's a common a.net misconception that every airline wants to replace every retired aircraft with a precise 1:1 match, aside from an efficiency improvement.

True, but the 787 is still a good A330 replacement option and that was the question asked.

Just to remember, the topic is:

"Boeing has held takeover talks with Embraer: WSJ".

Thank you ...

Source (in portuguese only):

https://economia.uol.com.br/noticias/re ... ta-voz.htm

Excerpts (translated):

Brazilian President Michel Temer is evaluating whether he supports a proposal to create a joint commercial aviation company between Boeing and Embraer, the presidential communications secretary said on Tuesday.

The Brazilian government opposed an acquisition of Embraer by Boeing and a new proposal involves the creation of a third company that includes the commercial aviation unit of Embraer, the world's largest manufacturer of regional jets, excluding its defense unit.
Any agreement has to be approved by the government.

The newspaper Valor Econômico, citing sources close to Temer, said Embraer would hold a 49% stake in the new company.
But people familiar with the talks told Reuters that Boeing would only agree to a joint venture that has between 80% and 90% of the company and full operational control.

Stitch wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

Stitch wrote:

The 787 family offer similar to greater cabin area and greater cargo volume than the A330 family with similar or better range.

It's a common a.net misconception that every airline wants to replace every retired aircraft with a precise 1:1 match, aside from an efficiency improvement.

True, but the 787 is still a good A330 replacement option and that was the question asked.

Yes, I agree. I think my statement supports your point.

There are 3 issues with the 51%/49% split on the E2 program, from a Boeing perspective.

1. Airbus will have full control of the Cseries program, if not immediately in due time.
2. The Cseries and in paticular the CS300 with max. 160 seats and a possible CS500 are mainline aircraft and was a threat to Airbus and Boeing. Now it's only a threat to Boeing. The E2 is still a regional jet, and can't compete against the CS300 nor any Airbus or Boeing product. The classic Ejet was never competitive against the A319 or B737-700.
3. The business case for the E2 is rather poor. A lot of Ejets saw premature retirements due to poor overall economics, the same way we saw other RJ's get retired. With the E2 upgrade, you are substituting lower fuel burn for more weight and more expensive engines. Essentially at current or slightly higher fuel prices, it doesn't make any more sense than a classic Ejet. The only business case there is now is in the E175, but I doubt that Boeing is interested in that.

And for the USA market, the E190/E195E2s are still too close to scope closes.

You need more seats to amortize the extra crew costs.

="Waterbomber

Airbus will have full control of the Cseries program, if not immediately in due time
.

Yes, best program in the world for just US$ 1,00 !!!

EMBSPBR wrote:

Yes, best program in the world for just US$ 1,00 !!!

Actually, it's closer to $2 as $1 only gets you 50.01%...

Joke aside, Boeing somehow pretends the CSeries is a treat to the whole 737 program (NG and Max).

They publicly said they will not let BBD enter the market (CSeries) the way they let Airbus in.

Boeing must have perceived the CSeries as a real treat as they sold UA 737-700s at $22M each (UA later cancelled / switched) just to block the CSeries to gain traction

Then that US Commerce BS dumping complaint...

So, $1 (along with Airbus marketing, supply chain, after sale support and assurance that the program will exist for years to come) was a pretty good deal back then, considering the above mentioned Boeing predatory behavior.

Anyways, financial analysts (and the markets) seem to value this Airbus contribution light years above that $1 (check the resulting increase to BBD stock prices - $Billions more? I did not exactly checked).

Another link: https://www.aerotime.aero/en/civil/2091 ... th-embraer

Waterbomber wrote:

There are 3 issues with the 51%/49% split on the E2 program, from a Boeing perspective.

1. Airbus will have full control of the Cseries program, if not immediately in due time.
2. The Cseries and in paticular the CS300 with max. 160 seats and a possible CS500 are mainline aircraft and was a threat to Airbus and Boeing. Now it's only a threat to Boeing. The E2 is still a regional jet, and can't compete against the CS300 nor any Airbus or Boeing product. The classic Ejet was never competitive against the A319 or B737-700.
3. The business case for the E2 is rather poor. A lot of Ejets saw premature retirements due to poor overall economics, the same way we saw other RJ's get retired. With the E2 upgrade, you are substituting lower fuel burn for more weight and more expensive engines. Essentially at current or slightly higher fuel prices, it doesn't make any more sense than a classic Ejet. The only business case there is now is in the E175, but I doubt that Boeing is interested in that.

1. I think this has far less to do with both the C-Series and E2 than people think. Boeing could have bought the C-Series if it wanted a smaller mainline(ish) jet. I think the E2 plays into what Boeing ultimately would want to do here a bit but I would expect the reason for doing this would be to develop a new product (or two) over the next 15 years. I assume the company will have a scope clause for lack of a better term that defines its product range moving forward. That will tell us a lot about what they are up to. Most of what Boeing wants in my view is additional engineering talent to mate with its ongoing vertical integration.

2. We will see what becomes of the c-series. For a variety of reasons I wouldn’t be shocked if Airbus doesn’t actually end up making a lot out of it. It’s no risk (at no cost) right now. Making it a true profit making enterprise may or may not be easy or realistic. It may or may not be seen as the best use of capital by the time they are in charge.

3. 51-49 is effectively full control and actually may have some advantages. It’s still full control for Boeing. They won’t sign something that doesn’t work for them. What will be interesting is when it comes time for contributions for development. Generally such agreements basically say that once the board (controlled by Boeing) calls for capital yoI have to contribute within such a time frame or you can be forcibly diluted. I would guess that is the reason for the 80% proposed split is Boeing figures Embraer wouldn’t be able to actually contribute at a 49% clip. There will be some contractual method to resolve that issue, but Boeing won’t move if they aren’t in effective control.

4. I agree with you the E2 isn’t going to do much bottom line wise. That is why this deal is there to be made. Embraer knows it’s headed for reasonably rough water. Not because the plane isn’t good (that’s why Boeing wants the engineers and program managers IMHO rather than those working the other small jet debacles worldwide) but because it’s just in a tough economic spot.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

EMBSPBR wrote:

Yes, best program in the world for just US$ 1,00 !!!

Actually, it's closer to $2 as $1 only gets you 50.01%...

Joke aside, Boeing somehow pretends the CSeries is a treat to the whole 737 program (NG and Max).

They publicly said they will not let BBD enter the market (CSeries) the way they let Airbus in.

Boeing must have perceived the CSeries as a real treat as they sold UA 737-700s at $22M each (UA later cancelled / switched) just to block the CSeries to gain traction

Then that US Commerce BS dumping complaint...

So, $1 (along with Airbus marketing, supply chain, after sale support and assurance that the program will exist for years to come) was a pretty good deal back then, considering the above mentioned Boeing predatory behavior.

Anyways, financial analysts (and the markets) seem to value this Airbus contribution light years above that $1 (check the resulting increase to BBD stock prices - $Billions more? I did not exactly checked).

What they mostly value was an end to the open ended arterial cash bleed with no end in sight the program was for BBD. It put a definitive end game to that. If you take out commercial avaiation BBD makes decent money. Either Airbus will make it a viable program or will shut it down. That’s what investors like.

bigjku wrote:

What they mostly value was an end to the open ended arterial cash bleed with no end in sight the program was for BBD. It put a definitive end game to that. If you take out commercial avaiation BBD makes decent money. Either Airbus will make it a viable program or will shut it down. That’s what investors like.

Valuable analysis indeed.
Analysts always gave a zero value (not negative) to the commercial aircraft division. They now assess it with a positive outlook. Same for the CSeries limited partnership.

The "open ended arterial cash bleed" (a good way to call a program in its production ramp up phase) will still continue a little more, even with Airbus onboard.

However, Airbus expected to save at least 15% in production costs (supply chain). Also, Boeing might end up not pursuing its predatory pricings much longer as it can't hope to bankrupt BBD anymore.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

bigjku wrote:

What they mostly value was an end to the open ended arterial cash bleed with no end in sight the program was for BBD. It put a definitive end game to that. If you take out commercial avaiation BBD makes decent money. Either Airbus will make it a viable program or will shut it down. That’s what investors like.

Valuable analysis indeed.
Analysts always gave a zero value (not negative) to the commercial aircraft division. They now assess it with a positive outlook. Same for the CSeries limited partnership.

The "open ended arterial cash bleed" (a good way to call a program in its production ramp up phase) will still continue a little more, even with Airbus onboard. The only difference is that Boeing might not pursue its predatory pricings much longer as it can't hope to bankrupt BBD anymore.

With just BBD it was open ended because I don’t believe the ramp up plan was ever going to scale enough to cut cost enough to make it competitive with frames being built at 4-5 times greater rate. I don’t think BBD had an end game where they made money. And certainly not the cash to get it there.

To me the question is will Airbus scale it to 25-30 a month needed to allow it to be price competive in the largest variant(s). I think it’s a less sure thing than many do. They may look at the details and decide they are better off just selling more A320neo variants and not bothering. They certainly have the option to do it if they want. They also retain the option to not do so.

The end game (at first) was to achieve a 10/month production level with the first FAL in Mirabel (currently only half completed). If need be, that could have been increased to 140/year, until a second FAL was up and running.

The whole program was expected to be profitable at 10/month, even with only the first FAL.

All the above was the plan. The 2014-2015 near bankruptcy delayed/ disrupted the whole thing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-embr ... SKCN1GC2XT


Seems like this tie up will conclude around the month of June.

SAO JOSÉ DOS CAMPOS, Brazil (Reuters) - The chief executive officer of Brazilian planemaker Embraer SA (EMBR3.SA), Paulo Cesar de Souza e Silva, said on Wednesday that he expects tie-up talks with Boeing (BA.N) to be finalized in the first half of this year.

speedbird52 wrote:

The 777X is for higher density routes than the A350.

Not necessarily. The 779 will actually be certified to carry *less* people than the current 77W.
An A35K can essentially match that as well.

speedbird52 wrote:

The 787 is significantly smaller.

Why do you cling to this idea that an aircraft must be of the same dimension to act as a competitor or replacement? That hasn't been the case in commercial aviation, since prior to the dawn of the jet age.

speedbird52 wrote:

Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

787, duh.

EMBSPBR wrote:

Source (in portuguese only):

https://economia.uol.com.br/noticias/re ... ta-voz.htm

Excerpts (translated):

Brazilian President Michel Temer is evaluating whether he supports a proposal to create a joint commercial aviation company between Boeing and Embraer, the presidential communications secretary said on Tuesday.

The Brazilian government opposed an acquisition of Embraer by Boeing and a new proposal involves the creation of a third company that includes the commercial aviation unit of Embraer, the world's largest manufacturer of regional jets, excluding its defense unit.
Any agreement has to be approved by the government.

The newspaper Valor Econômico, citing sources close to Temer, said Embraer would hold a 49% stake in the new company.
But people familiar with the talks told Reuters that Boeing would only agree to a joint venture that has between 80% and 90% of the company and full operational control.

The English version can be found at Reuters:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-embr ... SKCN1GB2CZ

LAX772LR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

The 777X is for higher density routes than the A350.

Not necessarily. The 779 will actually be certified to carry *less* people than the current 77W.
An A35K can essentially match that as well.

speedbird52 wrote:

The 787 is significantly smaller.

Why do you cling to this idea that an aircraft must be of the same dimension to act as a competitor or replacement? That hasn't been the case in commercial aviation, since prior to the dawn of the jet age.

speedbird52 wrote:

Could you point out a good A330 replacement that isn't an A330?

787, duh.

Again, the 787 is a lot more expensive to buy, and on shorter routes doesn't justify operating costs. Let's say you are searching for a new car: An SUV and a Sedan are technically both competing in your favor: But are they built to compete against each other?

speedbird52 wrote:

Again, the 787 is a lot more expensive to buy, and on shorter routes doesn't justify operating costs. Let's say you are searching for a new car: An SUV and a Sedan are technically both competing in your favor: But are they built to compete against each other?

Well the majority end up going for the SUV even though it costs more and is less fuel efficient. So if the 787 is the SUV to the A330's sedan...

Stitch wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Again, the 787 is a lot more expensive to buy, and on shorter routes doesn't justify operating costs. Let's say you are searching for a new car: An SUV and a Sedan are technically both competing in your favor: But are they built to compete against each other?

Well the majority end up going for the SUV even though it costs more and is less fuel efficient. So if the 787 is the SUV to the A330's sedan...

Perfect way of putting it Although we should remember that with the exception of America, not everywhere in the world has an SUV fetish

speedbird52 wrote:

Again, the 787 is a lot more expensive to buy,

And you base that on ____?

speedbird52 wrote:

and on shorter routes doesn't justify operating costs.

Yeah, you might want to tell JL, NH, JQ, and several other carriers who use it for that purpose, that.

They sure seem to have a different opinion; gonna go out on a limb and say that theirs is closer to an actual market reflection.

speedbird52 wrote:

Let's say you are searching for a new car:

Let's say we leave mundane allusions out of this convo.

Flightglobal reporting deal between the two is likely to be finalized. I expect interesting things to come out of this tie up.

bigjku wrote:

Flightglobal reporting deal between the two is likely to be finalized. I expect interesting things to come out of this tie up.

Pretty cool.





"Boeing and Embraer Likely to Reach a Deal, Brazil Defense Chief Says"
Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... chief-says

Comments suggest a shift after ministry’s caution on the talks
Boeing Co. and Embraer SA are likely to reach a deal after months of talks, Brazil’s new defense chief said, opening the door to the second alliance between major planemakers in six months. Negotiators “are getting closer” to an agreement, Defense Minister Joaquim Silva e Luna said in an interview Tuesday at a security trade show in Sao Paulo.

“I would say, in short, this will end in marriage,” said Silva e Luna, who was appointed six weeks ago.Silva e Luna said he wasn’t sure what form a transaction between Embraer and Chicago-based Boeing would take. “Don’t ask me which kind of marriage, if it is with total sharing of assets, with partial sharing of assets or with separation of assets,” he said.
One option under discussion is a venture that would include commercial jets instead of an outright acquisition, Bloomberg reported in February. But a deal would potentially go beyond commercial planes, Silva e Luna said, citing an opportunity for Brazil to get help from Boeing in selling Embraer’s KC-390 military-transport aircraft.

“This is one of the ‘wins’ for Embraer,” he said. “Boeing can facilitate the marketing of the KC-390. Boeing can offer that. So in these talks, this makes talks easier.”

Reminds me of a quote from one journalist,

"The handover of the E190-E2 to Norway's Widerøe may very well be the final first delivery Embraer will make as an independent plane maker."
Source: https://jonostrower.com/



Soon we'll be talking about a Boeing E2 instead of an Embraer E2. Times are changing.

Reuters article: "Boeing, Brazil's Embraer close to tie-up: report"

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-b ... ector.html

"SAO PAULO (Reuters) - Talks aimed at a tie-up between planemakers Boeing Co <BA.N> and Embraer SA <EMBR3.SA> that also involve Brazil's government are at an advanced stage, O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper reported on Friday, citing unnamed sources.

The Boeing and Embraer partnership would create a new company in which the U.S. planemaker would have an 80.01 percent stake and the Brazilian firm 19.99 percent, the paper said, adding this was a model supported by the Brazilian government.

Why would Embraer Accept this? Something fishy is going on. A get Cseries and B get E2 - sounds like collusion.

Defense and Executive Jets are out of the deal. Boeing will be only getting the EJets.

Samrnpage wrote:

Why would Embraer Accept this? Something fishy is going on. A get Cseries and B get E2 - sounds like collusion.

Long term survival. Embraer competing against Bombardier was one thing. Competing against Airbus is another one altogether.

reffado wrote:

Samrnpage wrote:

Why would Embraer Accept this? Something fishy is going on. A get Cseries and B get E2 - sounds like collusion.

Long term survival. Embraer competing against Bombardier was one thing. Competing against Airbus is another one altogether.

BBD was headed for bankruptcy without the Airbus deal and government bailouts. Embraer executed better but ultimately was in a tough space with or without the Airbus deal happening. The market space for jets smaller than the mainline ones just isn’t that strong and has a lot of union weirdness in it.

A just out come would have been BBD going bankrupt and Embraer owning the whole market which probably would have let it survive alone. But it was the Canadian government stepping in that sealed the fate of both small jet builders IMHO.

bigjku wrote:

A just out come would have been BBD going bankrupt and Embraer owning the whole market which probably would have let it survive alone. But it was the Canadian government stepping in that sealed the fate of both small jet builders IMHO.

I agree with this entirely. But as you say, the Canadian Government wasn't about to let that happen quietly, and effectively might have led both manufacturers to where they are now. However, I can't blame them that much - it's hard to imagine the Brazilian Government wouldn't have done the same (within what's possible), had the tables been turned.

In the end, I just hope those two names don't disappear completely.

This will have trickle down effect. Airbus got the C-Series and none of the other. Here, Boeing is getting the whole thing on the commercial side including the RJS that fall under scope in the US. You also have Embraer talking about a new turboprop that would target AB/ATR with possible Boeing backing now. This could force Airbus to get more involved with Bombardier and develop planes below the C-Series to now match the range of aircraft Boeing can pedal to airlines with packaged deals. Think United's need to add 100 seater mainlines for more 76 seaters. Could this fast track developementioned of a new AB/Bombardier CRJ and possibly using the same tube design queues for a new turbo prop as well and how would that effect ATR? Things are changing quickly

Sometime soon the world is going to need some modern planes between 19pax and 75pax. Eventually were are going to want to replace all of those ERJ1XXs, CRJX00s, QX00, Saabs, Fockers and Fairchilds… and they can't all be ATR42s and ATR72s....


So do Boeing and Embraer get to work on that some day together? Or would that space be considered a derivative/evolution of the ERJ family which only exist now to produce the Legacy Business aircraft?

NameOmitted wrote:

What sort of resources would Boeing need to put up for Embraer to give a JV it's commercial division and only get 20% of the company for it?

I think you are missing the part where Boeing will pay money to Embraer. It isn't just Embraer handing over their commercial business and getting 20% back.

planecane wrote:

NameOmitted wrote:

What sort of resources would Boeing need to put up for Embraer to give a JV it's commercial division and only get 20% of the company for it?

I think you are missing the part where Boeing will pay money to Embraer. It isn't just Embraer handing over their commercial business and getting 20% back.

Yes, it'll be very interesting to see how EMB is compensated for providing its commercial line to the new business.

BBD/QC is being compensated by retaining half of the new company and hoping that in five years it is worth a significant amount of money. At least BBD's stockholders are in that situation. QC taxpayers mainly benefit from the BBD workers remaining employed rather than collecting unemployment, and of course any appreciation of the company would be welcomed too.

rotating14 wrote:

Here's the issue: Boeing needs Embraer more than Embraer needs Boeing. Airbus took its position with Bombardier because it didn't have the tools and/or resources to market its aircraft portfolio. Embraer does not have that problem.

It should be noted, Embraer and Boeing currently have an agreement to share technical know-how and market analysis to spur development of the Brazilian firm's KC-390 military aircraft.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/embraer-boein ... ccounter=1

I think that most of you are missing the real issue for Embraer in this saga.
It's all about the engines.
PW is aboard on the NEO and the CSeries.
So to PW, it makes vastly more sense to support a Cseries purchase with interesting pricing than a Ejet/Boeing customer.
A customer operating Cseries is more likely to combine that purchase with PW operated A320NEO's.
A customer choosing only E2's would also be more likely to opt for an A320 Neo with PW engines but if the E2 is a Boeing product, there is a risk that the customer would take a CFM Max as part of the deal for Ejets.
So PW would definitely prefer to have the customer take Cseries over Boeing E2's.

Boeing and Embraer have a common issue.
But the problem is bigger for Embraer IMO because Boeing can probably produce a Max for less than an E2 under an independent Embraer.

Waterbomber wrote:

Boeing and Embraer have a common issue.
But the problem is bigger for Embraer IMO because Boeing can probably produce a Max for less than an E2 under an independent Embraer.

They both have the bigger problem that the market is slow for planes the size of 737-7/A319 and smaller.

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

Just for giggles (from the world's worst comedian) only one known example of a true free market exists, and that is the Black Market. This may be under constant threat by the Police, but under no circumstances do the police regulate the substances that are being created.

Free self regulating markets are a theoretical fantasy.
homogenous access ( offerer, takers ), informational flatness, ...
no secondary decission points.

lack of informational flatness ( PR, stuff ) ...

Best thing you can do is prepare the environment to form it into the theoretical model
or refrain from blabbing about free markets.

Waterbomber wrote:

I think that most of you are missing the real issue for Embraer in this saga.
It's all about the engines.
PW is aboard on the NEO and the CSeries.
So to PW, it makes vastly more sense to support a Cseries purchase with interesting pricing than a Ejet/Boeing customer.
A customer operating Cseries is more likely to combine that purchase with PW operated A320NEO's.
A customer choosing only E2's would also be more likely to opt for an A320 Neo with PW engines but if the E2 is a Boeing product, there is a risk that the customer would take a CFM Max as part of the deal for Ejets.
So PW would definitely prefer to have the customer take Cseries over Boeing E2's.

Boeing and Embraer have a common issue.
But the problem is bigger for Embraer IMO because Boeing can probably produce a Max for less than an E2 under an independent Embraer.

That's funny, I could use your argument to reach the opposite conclusion. Given that the only commonality between the CSeries and the A320-family is the engine, I see no economies of scale when operating with A320's and Cseries when compared with operating A320's and E2's. In that case, I could make the argument that airlines would have the incentive to spread the purchase between the two manufacturers, instead of being hostage to only one.

A stronger argument would be that Boeing controlling the E2 program would be even better for PW, as it potentially reduces the chance for Boeing to offer the -7 in a competition that clearly favors the E2 and CS. This would make PW the sole-source vendor in a competition where CFM could've been playing.

Waterbomber wrote:

I think that most of you are missing the real issue for Embraer in this saga.
It's all about the engines.
PW is aboard on the NEO and the CSeries.
So to PW, it makes vastly more sense to support a Cseries purchase with interesting pricing than a Ejet/Boeing customer.
A customer operating Cseries is more likely to combine that purchase with PW operated A320NEO's.
A customer choosing only E2's would also be more likely to opt for an A320 Neo with PW engines but if the E2 is a Boeing product, there is a risk that the customer would take a CFM Max as part of the deal for Ejets.
So PW would definitely prefer to have the customer take Cseries over Boeing E2's.

Boeing and Embraer have a common issue.
But the problem is bigger for Embraer IMO because Boeing can probably produce a Max for less than an E2 under an independent Embraer.

Boeing would likely sell more PW 737s if they buy the E2 program. Customers interested in operating a 100-150 seat aircraft and the 737 would likely choose PW for their 737, for commonality sakes.