2 ms·

> Bombardier draw the short straw as it was smaller and wasn't able to combat the duopoly of Boeing/Airbus. It was able to compete though on the merit of its p

> Bombardier draw the short straw as it was smaller and wasn't able to combat the duopoly of Boeing/Airbus. It was able to compete though on the merit of its products before the duties came into play. The duties were designed to kill its momentum and it did -- look at the loss of orders in 2017 compared to 2016. But once the issue is resolved, the orders in 2018 are huge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Airbus_A220_orders_and_deliveries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Airbus_A220_orders_and... This was a classic case of stifling threatening competition via government regulation.

420codebro 7y ago
On the merit of their products? Lol the bailout seems to indicate otherwise mcbrobro.
WillPostForFood 7y ago
It was able to compete though on the merit of its products Merit, and a billion dollar subsidy from the government. There is clearly government interference on both sides. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-quebec-deal-1.3648707 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-quebec-deal-1.36...
- wbl 7y ago
  Capital investment on terms available to all local production is not a subsidy. It's industrial policy.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]