1 hour ago, BrianW said:

Boeing did originally have plans to do a clean slate design (project Yellowstone). It was the Airbus decision to make the neo and the sale to American Airlines that forced the decision to do do the 737 redesign.  Brand new designs take a lot of time and money, and had Boeing continued down the redesign path the new aircraft wouldn't have even flown till 2020 at the earliest, but more realistically 2021-22.  That would have meant no real competition with the A320neo, and all the record breaking orders they’ve had for the MAX potentially going to the neo instead. That doesn’t mean there’s no work being done on an all new replacement, trust me Boeing knows they need a new model and would like to have a 737 sized 787 more than anyone.

In my view the A320 did come along later then the 737 and is actually the better aircraft, tough for me to admit that but I will admit the A320 does come on top. The 787 should have been called something else and not have a 7 in front of it, that was the platform moving forward. Taking elements of a 787 and putting them into an updated 737, 747 or 777 is lacking in innovation.

I don't buy into the government subsidies argument either, Boeing is a large recipient of Government Subsidies through both defense contracts from many countries as well many countries subsidies their airlines that purchase from Boeing. Just because the US Government doesn't pay them as much in development many airliners around the world already do through their individual government support. Canada was included with that is Air Canada was a 787 customer that supported that program through some government support as well as a CF-18 Customer that wanted more. 

Emirates is a subsidies airlines and they do buy a lot of A380s, but they also buy even more 777s, so that is another example of how the company is supported by government spending around the world. My government subsidizes Air New Zealand and they are a majority Boeing fleet, with the exception of the A320s. They used to have 737s but replaced them with A320 because they are better.

Wow, even more bad news for Boeing (and good news for Airbus):

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/delta-orders-100-airbus-jets-valued-127-billion-51789029

Boeing could be the first corporation wounded by the ongoing trade war.

This one as well:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/superhornet-sale-dead-1.4439612

Canada has created a new Procurement requirement that will measure each bidders "overall impact on Canada's economic interests,"  That means that Boeing's Behavior will put them at a disadvantage over LM or other suppliers on Military Procurement's moving forward. 

Quote

"Bidders responsible for harming Canada's economic interests will be at a distinct disadvantage compared to bidders who aren't engaged in detrimental behaviour," Public Works Minister Carla Qualtrough has said.

So Canada gets a bunch of old lemons from Australia when they already had the budget prepared on purchasing $6.3 Billion for new ones from Boeing instead. 

Hey Boeing, have you got another spare million dollars kicking around? Why not just for fun just give a million to me instead since your bleeding away all that cash anyways, I could make better use of it rather then it all going to waste. 

Or it just means the A321neo better met their needs and they got a better deal from Airbus + a nice MRO deal from Pratt & Whitney.  Had Delta gone with Boeing it’s pretty likely the trade complaint would have been dropped anyway. Boeing doesn’t like to sell at a loss unless they really need to.

I think the main factor when it comes to A320's or 737's is who can deliver the fastest for the customers procurement process. Reality is neither Airbus or Boeing can deliver these aircraft fast enough so the one that can edge a delivery schedule faster over the other will be a big factor for the customer.

 

C-Series at a slight discount now, you pay only 292% Duties compared to 299% 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-c-series-duties-1.4458589

Delta will wait for Alabama Production which is fine for everyone except Boeing

*sigh*. Boeing messed up here big time, what they should have done if this was such a massive concern for them was to buy the E-Jet series from Embraer, or at least a controlling potion of them. This would’ve filled the GAO in their product line and would have created an alliance that would’ve crushed Bombardier’s C-Series sales if Airbus hadn’t jumped in when they saw an opportunity. Embraer and Boeing could’ve been a great team, while avoiding all of this terrific nonsense.

EDIT: Just been informed that Boeing is in talks to take over Embraer, good move IMO.

Now that Boeing is indeed in talks to take over Embraer, an E-Jet series from PMDG isn’t so far fetched anymore.

And Aeromexico make take some of Delta's C Series order slots while the tariffs are sorted out.

https://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN1DY2NU-OCABS

1 hour ago, Milton Waddams said:

*sigh*. Boeing messed up here big time, what they should have done if this was such a massive concern for them was to buy the E-Jet series from Embraer, or at least a controlling potion of them. This would’ve filled the GAO in their product line and would have created an alliance that would’ve crushed Bombardier’s C-Series sales if Airbus hadn’t jumped in when they saw an opportunity. Embraer and Boeing could’ve been a great team, while avoiding all of this terrific nonsense.

EDIT: Just been informed that Boeing is in talks to take over Embraer, good move IMO.

When it comes to aviation, no one crushes no one, reality is Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier or Embraer are all just final assembly, they put the stickers on them and deliver to the customer, they all use pretty much the same supply chain.  None of them can deliver fast enough to meet the market demand so that is why they end up with a market share.

Lots of airlines are a mix of Airbus and Boeing's and that isn't based on customer loyalty, it is based on who can deliver what and with the best timeline