I’m going to explictly state my stand:
- I’m neither from US nor Canada nor UK
- I’m an Airbus guy
Regardless, I’ll give my take on this in the least biased way as I can possibly make it:
Firstly, Boeing is not in the position to claim that Bombardier is having “unfair competition”. This is because it does not have any planes in direct competition with the CS series (planes of capacity 100-150), the only plane they had which would have been affected was the B717 which halted production at least a decade ago. To call Bombardier being an unfair competitor serves no justice to Bombardier. Its like Apple trying to tax Samsung for the new S30 or whatever copying their iPhone 3. Sure Samsung makes it now but Apple is not even in the small phone market to be even come close to competing with Samsung’s new phone.
Secondly, I would like to reiterate that funds from Quebec were loans. Loans, unlike gifts or sponsorships, need to be returned. $5 from your uncle to help you fix a phone and sell it for $2 doesnt mean that eventually you’ll have to find your own means to return the $5.
Thirdly, to those who mentioned “competition is good”, this is not competition. If you define this as competition at play, we would have people breaking Usain Bolt’s legs using the reason of “he was running too fast” to justify. To add on, breaking his legs wont even help if your competition is swimming. When you’re shooting down your competition there is no “competition”.
Lastly, I’m pretty sure every country has interests in its own companies doing well. No harm done in loaning your country’s company to help them do well. I’m sure people can always dig out cases where Boeing and even Airbus have been bailed out by their respective owner countries.
I’ld recommend people have a look at more than 1 article from all around the world. Whatever are your beliefs, facts cannot be fought against. Please steer away from touchy topics when leaving a reply.
Please leave your arguments for PM. I’ll be glad to entertain your queries.