Unemployment rate has nothing to do with this diosiecn. People who followed this from the beginning should know that Boeing offered a product that complied with the critera and was cost effective.  EADS offered plane also complied, but offered a lot bigger size, range and came at a higher cost.  On paper EADS plane makes sense, but when you factor in the cost of procurement + maintainence, etc.  Boeing made more sense.  Also, EADS would have to set-up facilities frm ground-up (I think the plan was to build a new factory in the US)... so either way it would have meant jobs for the US.  I think Boeing was right to appeal and I am glad that they won.  US haters can say what they want... including \"re-tender until desired results are obtained\".... chances are they are either jealous of the way things are handled in the US or the have no idea of how well the processes have evolved over many decades that produces a fair result with a fair chance to appeal the outcome.