| > So, while the EU has certainly supported Airbus, the US government has also heavily subsidized Boeing, creating a complex and competitive landscape in the aerospace industry. This context is crucial when discussing the challenges and decisions faced by both companies. LLM-generated comment is becoming quite obvious to spot. On the main topic: Boeing not only received subsidies from the government as stated on the two parent-sibling comments as they've also attempted to kill Bombardier CSeries competition by judicial means in the USA. Instead of providing a better product they attempted to delay Bombardier's sales of the CSeries by starting a long judicial process accusing Bombardier of price-dumping when they didn't have a competitive product. Unfortunately for Bombardier it was a big blow to their sales of the CSeries, fortunate was Airbus who could pick up the pieces and start production of the jets in the USA to circumvent the main argument Boeing tried to use against them. > The original sin of the Max disasters was rushing to make the 50+ year-old 737 something it wasn't meant to be to counter Airbus's success in the narrow body segment. Completely due to mismanagement of Boeing's product line, they lost against Airbus A320neo/A321 and Bombardier CSeries, they weren't competitive and didn't have a product in the works to compete. Against Bombardier they tried their dirty tricks, and failed. It's all on Boeing, they rushed a subpar product in a panic because of their own failures to read the market, in the process killing hundreds of people. |