Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
I think the case was won, which is why bombardier did what it did. Boeing didn't need to offer a 736 for bombardier and quebec to have been found in the wrong.
But there are differences between technical dumping and actual damages. That's the point. Technically, you could define Quebec's support as enabling Bombardier to survive and offer a competitive product. However, if the other party can't prove financial harm with a competing product, I don't see a compelling, non-political case for Boeing. Dumping is one thing, quantifiable financial harm (equal to 300%????) is another when they don't offer a competing product....
Again, using this logic, Lockheed Martin should sue Airbus for missed Tristar sales!!!!