4 ms·

It seems like Airbus paid nothing for this (maybe taking on some of the manufacturing expenses?). See: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/16/airbus-teams-up-with-bo

It seems like Airbus paid nothing for this (maybe taking on some of the manufacturing expenses?). See: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/16/airbus-teams-up-with-bombardier-on-c-series-program.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/16/airbus-teams-up-with-bombard... It certainly isn't a payday for the Quebec government, but I suppose that 19% of something is better than 49% of nothing. One can _still_ criticize the irresponsible handling of taxpayer money AND now (if the manufacturing part is true) the benefits of the original buy-in will not go to Canadian factory workers.

gsnedders 9y ago
> It seems like Airbus paid nothing for this (maybe taking on some of the manufacturing expenses?). The company they now own 50.01% pays the manufacturing and sales costs, so they're taking on that.
bigiain 9y ago
So if you believe the press release/announcement (ha ha ha)... Using Airbus's Alabama factory will mean they can build/sell planes in the US and avoid 300% duty/tariff on those, and (according to the claims) "they'll secure more orders and double the value of the program" - which doesn't seem completely implausible... Even if that's wildly optimistic, I'd guess even just farming out the 75 plane Delta order to Alabama and saving 220% and/or 300% in duty means a _lot_ of dollars (and cynically, if they were on the verge of losing the whole program, it'd be a super tempting lifeline to be thrown by Airbus...)