One in the eye for Boeing

[effects]

Bombardier win ruling.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... ictory-us/

[speedbird2639]

Hopefully this will be used as a precedent for other industries that have tariffs slapped on them by The Donald. He has slapped a 30% tariff on PV panels which they reckon could cost the US 23,000 installers jobs as people baulk at paying for the higher priced domestically produced panels.

[MingtheMerciless]

I'm sure this case will be put in front of the 'right' judges who will find for Boeing at the appeal.

[Wissam24]

Lose lose lose for Boeing and a win win win for Airbus here. Assuming any appeals are unsuccessful (which isn't a given, mind), I'd expect a sharehold lawsuit or two on that one.

[boff180]

Boeing lost on one key thing IMHO.

They do not produce an airliner in the same class as they C series. Everything they currently have (until they buy Embraer) is bigger.

Therefore they could not be suffering injury as they claimed as the C series doesn’t compete with them.

It was basic petty “why aren’t you buying from me”’bullying as we’ve come to expect from Boeing.

[Brevet Cable]

Don't know if it's correct or not, but on Radio 4's 'Any Questions' yesterday Frances O'Grady ( General Secretary of the TUC ) claimed that a large number of American Trade Unions were opposed to the tariff imposition and had been lobbying against it.

[GertrudetheMerciless]

Lose lose lose for Boeing and a win win win for Airbus here. Assuming any appeals are unsuccessful (which isn't a given, mind), I'd expect a sharehold lawsuit or two on that one.

Not quite sure that'll be an avenue they'll pursue, seeing as apparently the Canadians started sniffing to spend their money elsewhere for F-18 replacements (which could well have been Boeing's very own Super Hornet).

[Tommy]

Lose lose lose for Boeing and a win win win for Airbus here. Assuming any appeals are unsuccessful (which isn't a given, mind), I'd expect a sharehold lawsuit or two on that one.

Not quite sure that'll be an avenue they'll pursue, seeing as apparently the Canadians started sniffing to spend their money elsewhere for F-18 replacements (which could well have been Boeing's very own Super Hornet).

Much stranger things have happened, but it appears that ship has sailed as a result of the above dispute.

Article dated 8th Dec 2017:
https://www.ft.com/content/d3094604-dc6 ... 4b1c09b482

Canada is now looking for second hand legacy Hornets from Australia.

I have wondered whether the Typhoon (or the Rafale) could be pushed to be exported to Canada. It's a working omni-role platform, it's not Boeing, it's a twin-engine generation 4.5 jet with proven performance and a pretty large and well-developed infrastructure system orchestrated around it. Second hand legacy F-18s are fine, but they're only going to prolong the inevitable. If the Super-H isn't the way to go, and Canada has already taken a dump on the idea of purchasing the F-35, I cant understand why Dassault or the Eurofighter consortium isn't making significant pushes across the pond. It would be nice to be able to sell our jets to a nation we "like" rather than places like Saudi etc..

Anyway, good for Bombardier. Boeing's policy of dispute/litigation has come home to roost. They can only roll that dice so many times. Disputing the B-21 selection, making *huge* issues regarding the KC-46, legal battles on the Saudi AH-6is, and you can bet your bottom dollar some sort of dispute if their airframe isn't picked for the T-X competition, has given them a monumental amount of bad press. Even when (and sometimes because) they win.

Corporations like Boeing obviously have entire departments weighing up cost/benefit scenarios of litigation, but Boeing have shaped themselves into a grubby corporate machine that will make every effort to sue the competition out of existence, or at the very least cost the US taxpayer millions of extra dollars because they don't get their way.

The above is very much a simplification, I know, but to go into the nuances of it would be a monumentally long post which I have neither the time nor inclination write, and no-one else would have the time or inclination to read. And, more importantly, I seldom have a clue what I'm actually talking about. I just wrote the above because I have a pizza in t'oven and I'm waiting for it to finish cooking

[jalfrezi]

Lose lose lose for Boeing and a win win win for Airbus here. Assuming any appeals are unsuccessful (which isn't a given, mind), I'd expect a sharehold lawsuit or two on that one.

Not quite sure that'll be an avenue they'll pursue, seeing as apparently the Canadians started sniffing to spend their money elsewhere for F-18 replacements (which could well have been Boeing's very own Super Hornet).

Much stranger things have happened, but it appears that ship has sailed as a result of the above dispute.

Article dated 8th Dec 2017:
https://www.ft.com/content/d3094604-dc6 ... 4b1c09b482

Canada is now looking for second hand legacy Hornets from Australia.

I have wondered whether the Typhoon (or the Rafale) could be pushed to be exported to Canada. It's a working omni-role platform, it's not Boeing, it's a twin-engine generation 4.5 jet with proven performance and a pretty large and well-developed infrastructure system orchestrated around it. Second hand legacy F-18s are fine, but they're only going to prolong the inevitable. If the Super-H isn't the way to go, and Canada has already taken a dump on the idea of purchasing the F-35, I cant understand why Dassault or the Eurofighter consortium isn't making significant pushes across the pond. It would be nice to be able to sell our jets to a nation we "like" rather than places like Saudi etc..

Anyway, good for Bombardier. Boeing's policy of dispute/litigation has come home to roost. They can only roll that dice so many times. Disputing the B-21 selection, making *huge* issues regarding the KC-46, legal battles on the Saudi AH-6is, and you can bet your bottom dollar some sort of dispute if their airframe isn't picked for the T-X competition, has given them a monumental amount of bad press. Even when (and sometimes because) they win.

Corporations like Boeing obviously have entire departments weighing up cost/benefit scenarios of litigation, but Boeing have shaped themselves into a grubby corporate machine that will make every effort to sue the competition out of existence, or at the very least cost the US taxpayer millions of extra dollars because they don't get their way.

The above is very much a simplification, I know, but to go into the nuances of it would be a monumentally long post which I have neither the time nor inclination write, and no-one else would have the time or inclination to read. And, more importantly, I seldom have a clue what I'm actually talking about. I just wrote the above because I have a pizza in t'oven and I'm waiting for it to finish cooking

Sorry Tommy I just can't agree with that at all, are you really trying to say pizza for Sunday lunch is OK?

[Tommy]

Sorry Tommy I just can't agree with that at all, are you really trying to say pizza for Sunday lunch is OK?

Honestly, it's leftover pizza from the night-out before, too. #Winning

[GertrudetheMerciless]

Much stranger things have happened, but it appears that ship has sailed as a result of the above dispute.

Article dated 8th Dec 2017:
https://www.ft.com/content/d3094604-dc6 ... 4b1c09b482

Canada is now looking for second hand legacy Hornets from Australia.

Indeed, but you wonder how much of that was politics from the Canadians to show that they were will to take their dollars elsewhere.