C Series Info
10-06-2017, 09:34 AM
#961
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by Mesabah
Another 80% tacked on to the Cseries, tariff now 300%.
https://twitter.com/jonostrower/stat...49230146404352
https://twitter.com/jonostrower/stat...49230146404352
10-06-2017, 09:41 AM
#962
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
10-06-2017, 11:00 AM
#964
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Left
Posts: 1,807
Originally Posted by Mesabah
Yeah, no doubt about that now, the ITC will likely stack another 80% tariff on the CS300, upping it to 380%. The CS100 however, will likely only receive the "threat" status, and will not be assessed the tariff - It may also be restricted to 99 seats. I think that will be enough to kill the Cseries for Delta.
10-06-2017, 11:22 AM
#965
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by David Puddy
Why stop there? Let's go for 1000%! Don't expect Canada to respond kindly to this. Plus, the Commerce Department is also attacking Delta in this case - how is that positive? I am still curious to hear how this has financially harmed Boeing. This is complete bullspit!
10-06-2017, 11:38 AM
#967
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Left
Posts: 1,807
Originally Posted by Mesabah
The argument to be made, would be that if you produce the only product in a market segment, why are you discounting it 70%? The only explanation would be dumping.
First, I guess you would give no credit to Delta's negotiating team either? Why would any airline buy a new aircraft at book prices? Has that ever happened? Is Emirates paying book price for the new 777-X as launch customer with a significant volume order? What about launch pricing for a completely new aircraft type? Are those prices ever less than production price? Does Delta pay top price for any aircraft type?
Dumping is also very one-sided in this case. The definition of dumping implies cross-border. That's the issue. If Boeing created the 797 and offered it to Delta at a 70% discount to be the launch customer, Boeing can't be accused of dumping because it takes place within our country - it would be completely legal. That's the issue and it is RIDICULOUS.
Bottom line, it is unrealistic to think that any launch customer (in this case Delta would be the US launch customer) would pay book price for anything - especially with a volume order for 75 copies. UNREALISTIC. Why would Delta pay full price with that sort of "introduction risk?" This is a marketing issue - as a manufacturer you want reputable lead customers. Every manufacturer does this - you offer lower prices to launch customers. How those transactions are structured varies and strong negotiating can impact the final price.
Lastly, if Boeing offered used E190s from Air Canada, it is conceivable that the CS100s were offered at a low price to match the E190 pricing per unit. That is PURE SPECULATION. Again, Delta is a strong negotiator and was likely using the potential E190 purchase as further leverage with Bombardier - wouldn't that make sense? Boeing was also likely offering the E190s for dirt cheap to block a potential CS100 order because Boeing doesn't want to compete against Bombardier's innovative products. Boeing probably knew that Bombardier would need to counter at a low price in order to be competitive and expected this type of government action in response.
The only high-profile dumping that I am aware of recently was a case with Chinese steel being imported into the US at super low prices per sheet. In this case the Chinese steel competed directly with US steel. Looking at Boeing vs. Bombardier, Boeing did not have a comparable product to offer (which is why they offered used E190s instead) - so, technically you can't really compare these situations. That is the point. I still think it will be difficult for Boeing to prove financial harm. I wonder how they will spin offering the used E190s....
10-06-2017, 12:43 PM
#968
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Left
Posts: 1,807
Originally Posted by David Puddy
Really? The only explanation????????
First, I guess you would give no credit to Delta's negotiating team either? Why would any airline buy a new aircraft at book prices? Has that ever happened? Is Emirates paying book price for the new 777-X as launch customer with a significant volume order? What about launch pricing for a completely new aircraft type? Are those prices ever less than production price? Does Delta pay top price for any aircraft type?
Dumping is also very one-sided in this case. The definition of dumping implies cross-border. That's the issue. If Boeing created the 797 and offered it to Delta at a 70% discount to be the launch customer, Boeing can't be accused of dumping because it takes place within our country - it would be completely legal. That's the issue and it is RIDICULOUS.
Bottom line, it is unrealistic to think that any launch customer (in this case Delta would be the US launch customer) would pay book price for anything - especially with a volume order for 75 copies. UNREALISTIC. Why would Delta pay full price with that sort of "introduction risk?" This is a marketing issue - as a manufacturer you want reputable lead customers. Every manufacturer does this - you offer lower prices to launch customers. How those transactions are structured varies and strong negotiating can impact the final price.
Lastly, if Boeing offered used E190s from Air Canada, it is conceivable that the CS100s were offered at a low price to match the E190 pricing per unit. That is PURE SPECULATION. Again, Delta is a strong negotiator and was likely using the potential E190 purchase as further leverage with Bombardier - wouldn't that make sense? Boeing was also likely offering the E190s for dirt cheap to block a potential CS100 order because Boeing doesn't want to compete against Bombardier's innovative products. Boeing probably knew that Bombardier would need to counter at a low price in order to be competitive and expected this type of government action in response.
The only high-profile dumping that I am aware of recently was a case with Chinese steel being imported into the US at super low prices per sheet. In this case the Chinese steel competed directly with US steel. Looking at Boeing vs. Bombardier, Boeing did not have a comparable product to offer (which is why they offered used E190s instead) - so, technically you can't really compare these situations. That is the point. I still think it will be difficult for Boeing to prove financial harm. I wonder how they will spin offering the used E190s....
First, I guess you would give no credit to Delta's negotiating team either? Why would any airline buy a new aircraft at book prices? Has that ever happened? Is Emirates paying book price for the new 777-X as launch customer with a significant volume order? What about launch pricing for a completely new aircraft type? Are those prices ever less than production price? Does Delta pay top price for any aircraft type?
Dumping is also very one-sided in this case. The definition of dumping implies cross-border. That's the issue. If Boeing created the 797 and offered it to Delta at a 70% discount to be the launch customer, Boeing can't be accused of dumping because it takes place within our country - it would be completely legal. That's the issue and it is RIDICULOUS.
Bottom line, it is unrealistic to think that any launch customer (in this case Delta would be the US launch customer) would pay book price for anything - especially with a volume order for 75 copies. UNREALISTIC. Why would Delta pay full price with that sort of "introduction risk?" This is a marketing issue - as a manufacturer you want reputable lead customers. Every manufacturer does this - you offer lower prices to launch customers. How those transactions are structured varies and strong negotiating can impact the final price.
Lastly, if Boeing offered used E190s from Air Canada, it is conceivable that the CS100s were offered at a low price to match the E190 pricing per unit. That is PURE SPECULATION. Again, Delta is a strong negotiator and was likely using the potential E190 purchase as further leverage with Bombardier - wouldn't that make sense? Boeing was also likely offering the E190s for dirt cheap to block a potential CS100 order because Boeing doesn't want to compete against Bombardier's innovative products. Boeing probably knew that Bombardier would need to counter at a low price in order to be competitive and expected this type of government action in response.
The only high-profile dumping that I am aware of recently was a case with Chinese steel being imported into the US at super low prices per sheet. In this case the Chinese steel competed directly with US steel. Looking at Boeing vs. Bombardier, Boeing did not have a comparable product to offer (which is why they offered used E190s instead) - so, technically you can't really compare these situations. That is the point. I still think it will be difficult for Boeing to prove financial harm. I wonder how they will spin offering the used E190s....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the...de-tariff.html
No doubt this is also tied to NAFTA negotiations as well... But this time US citizens will be hurt as well with Delta and Bombardier's US suppliers also being impacted negatively. Again, Boeing will need to prove it was financially harmed when it did not have an alternative product to offer beyond used E190s.
10-06-2017, 05:00 PM
#970
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
So wats the vegas line on the c series bid materializing?
You know...we have incredibly talented folks over in tech ops....maybe delta will build it under license. Or..assemble more than 50% in jorjah...??
Enough to make it a domestic product. Or at least as much of one as the 787.
You know...we have incredibly talented folks over in tech ops....maybe delta will build it under license. Or..assemble more than 50% in jorjah...??
Enough to make it a domestic product. Or at least as much of one as the 787.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
