Canadian Money Forum banner

861 - 880 of 912 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
Ridiculous company and history, only reason it's still alive is due to a handful of old patriotic Quebecois nationals that keep pushing provincial and federal governments for support to keep it alive because its "Canadian" and "Quebecois".
There's that but I think it's also the many "well paid jobs" it provides. Politicians always end up caving. I really hope I am wrong but I suspect there will be another handout before the next provincial election. At least our current PM is a businessman so there's hope he'll require some proper structural changes before handing out the money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
Why don't we just nationalize this or something then? Who cares if the equity is wiped out (jobs are more important anyway). If it's going to be heavily govt subsidized, why pretend it's a commercial entity?

I'm not saying this sarcastically. The jobs *are* important, as is having a domestic capability to build planes and trains. This might be a good candidate for something Canada should own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
Why don't we just nationalize this or something then? Who cares if the equity is wiped out (jobs are more important anyway). If it's going to be heavily govt subsidized, why pretend it's a commercial entity?

I'm not saying this sarcastically. The jobs *are* important, as is having a domestic capability to build planes and trains. This might be a good candidate for something Canada should own.
We can't afford to buy and subsidize yet another failing company.
Taxpayers are maxed out.

I don't like government privatizing stuff.
But if they were, I'd want to make sure the current management, and those holding supervoting shares, who got us into this mess, get NOTHING.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
Why don't we just nationalize this or something then? Who cares if the equity is wiped out (jobs are more important anyway). If it's going to be heavily govt subsidized, why pretend it's a commercial entity?

I'm not saying this sarcastically. The jobs *are* important, as is having a domestic capability to build planes and trains. This might be a good candidate for something Canada should own.
Do we need the domestic capability to build planes and trains that no one wants? Bombardier doesn't make anything that Canada or Canada's government needs to buy. Our national railways don't use their trains. Nor do our air force use their planes. Because they need planes and trains that work. Buying them out would be the worst decision possible because then we would be stuck with their products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,117 Posts
Our national railways don't use their trains. Nor do our air force use their planes. Because they need planes and trains that work.
Eh Toronto/Vancouver/Montreal have Bombardier trains that I can think of.. as does Via rail.. and most major cities around the globe. Seems they mades good trains but will need to compete with emerging tech like Elon Musk's hyperloop..

Our air force and air lines use de Havilland planes which originated to build planes for WWII. It was a crown corp until the 1980s, sold to Boeing and then Bombardier (apparently split off last year again as De Havilland). The air force also uses 1 Bombardier plane.. kind of sort of not for long

Canada was once a leader of the aerospace industry but the Avro Arrow threatened the US and we caved. The sale of the C series was the nail in the coffin. We could have specialized on developing some part of the Joint Strike Fighter but alas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
Maybe if the government takes it over and throws out the useless executives & managers, something better can emerge. It could be better as a Crown Corporation.

Much like De Havilland (which m3s mentioned) which was a crown corp for 40 years.

I frequently fly in Bombardier's Q400 planes. In fact Air Canada has quite a few Bombardier regional jets + props

https://aircanada.mediaroom.com/201...craft-to-More-Western-Canada-Regional-Markets
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,117 Posts
I frequently fly in Bombardier's Q400 planes. In fact Air Canada has quite a few Bombardier regional jets + props
Q400 is really a de Havilland Dash 8 that happened to be built while Bombardier controlled de Havilland. Bombardier added active noise control hence the Q. Turboprop uses half the fuel of a regional jet and requires less maint. It's the plane the mechanic stole from SeaTac and did aerobatics without any pilot experience. The Dash 8 is flown around the globe

Air Canada flies some Embraer which is a kick in the nuts to Bombardier. The only time I recall flying on a CRJ was ironically United airlines. Bombardier C series is apparently a really good plan though - a kick in the nuts to Embraer. Maybe if Embraer and Bombardier joined forces they could have competed with Boeing and Airbus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,980 Posts
Why don't we just nationalize this or something then? Who cares if the equity is wiped out (jobs are more important anyway). If it's going to be heavily govt subsidized, why pretend it's a commercial entity?

I'm not saying this sarcastically. The jobs *are* important, as is having a domestic capability to build planes and trains. This might be a good candidate for something Canada should own.
If it was government run it would have gone bankrupt a decade or more ago.

If the government took it over, two events would take place. 1st, the government would start poking their noses into how it is run. In the business world a nose gets poked in for the betterment of the company. In the political world a nose gets poked in for the betterment of society to result in hopefully better numbers at the next election. Those two do not always go hand in hand. Hence why we can't have government running business. Just look at the state of crown corporations for how well that can work out.
2nd, if the government simply hands over money, when it is needed by private industry and then goes away, the risk element that is required in business, so that they make better decisions, would start to fall away.

Business has to make it on their own or the next best result is a quick failure, so those workers can get on with their new life.

I hope that answers your question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
Q400 is really a de Havilland Dash 8 that happened to be built while Bombardier controlled de Havilland. Bombardier added active noise control hence the Q. Turboprop uses half the fuel of a regional jet and requires less maint. It's the plane the mechanic stole from SeaTac and did aerobatics without any pilot experience. The Dash 8 is flown around the globe

Air Canada flies some Embraer which is a kick in the nuts to Bombardier. The only time I recall flying on a CRJ was ironically United airlines. Bombardier C series is apparently a really good plan though - a kick in the nuts to Embraer. Maybe if Embraer and Bombardier joined forces they could have competed with Boeing and Airbus
I always think of that theft incident. Imagine how stable and cooperative this plane must be in the air... just how well it's designed. The fighter jet pilots watching the Q400 saw the amateur pilot do amazing acrobatic maneuvers. I feel very safe in that plane.

I've flown in the CRJ but forget where that was. It was a nice aircraft.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,414 Posts
If the government took it over, two events would take place. 1st, the government would start poking their noses into how it is run. In the business world a nose gets poked in for the betterment of the company. In the political world a nose gets poked in for the betterment of society to result in hopefully better numbers at the next election. Those two do not always go hand in hand. Hence why we can't have government running business. Just look at the state of crown corporations for how well that can work out.
<Off-topic> to reinforce that point is Canada Post. The Liberals interference into the Canada Post plan to eliminate most home and rural route delivery is already killing Canada Post with losses in both 2018 and 2019 (most likely). It is absolutely dumb that some 300,000 new postal addresses are added each year, but that 'lettermail' and 'admail' volumes decrease every year. https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/examendepostescanada-canadapostreview/rapport-report/consult-eng.html Reading the executive summary is all one needs to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,378 Posts
<Off-topic> to reinforce that point is Canada Post. The Liberals interference into the Canada Post plan to eliminate most home and rural route delivery is already killing Canada Post with losses in both 2018 and 2019 (most likely). It is absolutely dumb that some 300,000 new postal addresses are added each year, but that 'lettermail' and 'admail' volumes decrease every year. https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/examendepostescanada-canadapostreview/rapport-report/consult-eng.html Reading the executive summary is all one needs to do.
I have a superbox, it's better than a home mailbox.
It's also safer and cheaper for Canadapost.

I don't think anyone is saying they don't mail letters or buy admail because it is giong to a superbox.


Personally I think most lettermail (ads and bills) could go to an every other day delivery schedule at significant cost save and little customer impact.


It's crazy that I can get items shipped from China for less than the cost of a mailing a letter within Canada.
For small business shipping is a big deal, and we need cheap shipping to be competative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,414 Posts
I didn't want to derail the BBD thread any more than I have, so chose not to discuss options...but we could in a CP thread!

The point is there was political interference into a crown corp that should be left to fulfill its mandate in the best way it finds possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,839 Posts
Personally I think most lettermail (ads and bills) could go to an every other day delivery schedule at significant cost save and little customer impact.

For small business shipping is a big deal, and we need cheap shipping to be competative.

at risk of de-railing bombardier discussion but the above on CP are good suggestions.

we already have only twice-weekly mail delivery in my hood. Possibly across my entire ville. Occasionally the postie gets himself up to 3 times a week. It's all perfectly OK. It's said that CP is making money nowadays only on package & express post deliveries.

back to BBD, the founding family les bombardier/beaudoin made off with the profitable recreational vehicles division - started off as skidoo division once upon a time - years ago. Recently they sold portion to the public, believe it trades as DOO.

loss/shutdown of aircraft division will impact hundreds of parts suppliers all over canada as well as northeastern US states, even north central US. Engine sub-contractors are giant american aerospace manufacturers, but there are hundreds of small parts fabricators involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,980 Posts
I have a superbox, it's better than a home mailbox.
It's also safer and cheaper for Canadapost.

I don't think anyone is saying they don't mail letters or buy admail because it is giong to a superbox.


Personally I think most lettermail (ads and bills) could go to an every other day delivery schedule at significant cost save and little customer impact.


It's crazy that I can get items shipped from China for less than the cost of a mailing a letter within Canada.
For small business shipping is a big deal, and we need cheap shipping to be competative.
Mail should only be delivered 2 days per week at the most and it should be delivered to a superbox. Everything else is political waste.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
Some of the folks in this thread who are saying the government should stay out of this stuff, not subsidize, not support...

I don't think many of you realize to how large an extent the US government stands behind a huge number of major US industries. Aerospace is very heavily government subsidized in all western countries. Companies like Boeing wouldn't even exist (and certainly wouldn't be viable) without tremendous government handouts and support. Same is true in Europe.

In fact, government assistance and subsidies help make US industries very strong. Just about everything... high tech, finance, health, aerospace... is very heavily government supported in the US, and that country is the champion of capitalism and free enterprise. There wouldn't be much of a US economy without government backing and assistance.

People these days talk about silicon valley as a monster of industry but this too is heavily government supported, especially decades ago when the industry was young and up-and-coming. It was very heavily funded by the public.

Something to think about before you say the government shouldn't be playing a role.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,839 Posts
Some of the folks in this thread who are saying the government should stay out of this stuff, not subsidize, not support...

I don't think many of you realize to how large an extent the US government stands behind a huge number of major US industries. Aerospace is very heavily government subsidized in all western countries. Companies like Boeing wouldn't even exist (and certainly wouldn't be viable) without tremendous government handouts and support. Same is true in Europe.

In fact, government assistance and subsidies help make US industries very strong. Just about everything... high tech, finance, health, aerospace... is very heavily government supported in the US, and that country is the champion of capitalism and free enterprise. There wouldn't be much of a US economy without government backing and assistance.

People these days talk about silicon valley as a monster of industry but this too is heavily government supported, especially decades ago when the industry was young and up-and-coming. It was very heavily funded by the public.

Something to think about before you say the government shouldn't be playing a role.


definitely something to think about!

to carry the thoughts a step further direction cynicism, it's eerie how much war improves an economy. Gigantic stock market winners over the past decade have been US aerospace & defense manufacturers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,727 Posts
to carry the thoughts a step further direction cynicism, it's eerie how much war improves an economy. Gigantic stock market winners over the past decade have been US aerospace & defense manufacturers.
Also a good illustration of how government stimulus boosts the stock market. These companies have received enormous sums of money from the US govt.

And myself, working at small company which was downstream from US government spending, also benefitted. Where did I put that excess money in my pocket? The stock market. The money originated from government, though it changed hands many times of course.

Frankly I'm not sure there would be much of a US economy (and North American economy) at all if it wasn't for US government spending. These hardcore conservative capitalists at CMF have government spending to thank.
 
861 - 880 of 912 Posts
Top