5 ms·

Boeing may have used a lobbying firm to plant a scathing story about SpaceX

90 points by jdmark 8y ago

superkuh 8y ago
It would be better to link directly to the original ars technica story instead of this business insider regurgitation behind a computational paywall. https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/10/a-shadowy-op-ed-campaign-is-now-smearing-spacex-in-space-cities/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/10/a-shadowy-op-ed-camp...
- justinclift 8y ago
  Business Insider seem to be following up the initial Ars investigation, adding further relevant information.
- detaro 8y ago
  which was discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18139146 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18139146
NoB4Mouth 8y ago
I've always suspected there is group of people in the US who are on crusade against Elon Musk's projects -be it Tesla, SpaceX,...- I find it mind-boggling that there is a kind of "Let bring it down" pattern in America when some dreamers like Elon Musk are disrupting industries like car, Energy or Space with their endeavors. Elsewhere he would be protected, supported and promoted by the whole nation and the government. Am sure If Elon Musk was a Chinese he would have less hustle and media bashing than what he is going through... Disclaimer: I'm not an American citizen and i have no Tesla share on my portfolio.
- grecy 8y ago
  There are trillions of dollars at stake here and a lot of very powerful people want to keep the status quo. There is a very good reason their healthcare, education, banking and a whole lot more have not improved in 30+ years. Elon is just one example of someone (or something ) that is disrupting the status quo, and many extremely powerful and rich people will fight tooth and nail to derail any such attempts.
  - justtopost 8y ago
    He is the status quo at this point. Selling him as a disruptor is a bit rich for my blood.
  - zeroname 8y ago
    > Elon is just one example of someone (or something ) that is disrupting the status quo, and many extremely powerful and rich people will fight tooth and nail to derail any such attempts. This is a naive argument. The "rich and powerful" have the most to gain from hyping Elon's companies into the sky (and then profit again on the way down). Think about it, why make an effort to protect barely profitable "status quo companies" when you can just cash out on the personality cult around Elon, who himself is one of the richest and most powerful people in the world. This is mostly about Tesla, the SpaceX stuff is so minor it's not even on the radar of the "rich and powerful". It's a hobby for Boeing and a hobby for Elon Musk. Nobody is going to fight "tooth and nail" to prevent this. They're doing a little bit PR, it's par for the course.
    - grecy 8y ago
      > Think about it, why make an effort to protect barely profitable "status quo companies" I don't think Ford, GM, VW, etc. are barely profitable. Neither are Shell or BP or any petroleum company. Neither are ULA or Arianespace. Keep in mind I meant the more general case to - America's healthcare system and education system are fundamentally built the way they are to make very rich people very much richer.
      - zeroname 8y ago
        Company, Market Cap, Profit Margin (5Y avg) Ford, 36 billion, 4.3% GM, 48 billion, 3.79% VW, 85 billion, 3.41% Tesla, 45 billion, -14,8% So, Tesla, even while it is bleeding money, if you had bought in a few years ago, your return even today would easily be 10X. Those other companies stayed relatively flat. Again, I ask you, what's the better deal if you're "rich and powerful"? What's the way to make more money? You'd be stupid to fight tooth and nail to protect those "status quo" companies. You'd make less money and lose. Why not profit both ways? If you are rich and you want to stay rich, you diversify. You don't care if Tesla wins and GM loses because of that, because you have money in either one.
- hazz99 8y ago
  I've heard people complaining about how he pushes his employees too hard, and I always have an issue with this argument. It might apply to others, like maybe Bezos with his underpaid Amazon workers, but I don't really see how it applies to Elon. He works incredibly hard, long hours. He takes big risks, and shares a lot of the risk. It's not like he's on top laughing away as his underlings work for pennies - he's the one driving business.
  - kiba 8y ago
    Some would say he's working too hard and too many hours.
    - hazz99 8y ago
      That's for him to decide, not others. He's done it for years, so I'm confident he's developed ways to manage that workload
      - hobofan 8y ago
        I think when we are at a point where a governmental body (in this case the SEC) has to step in and strip him from some of his power, we are beyond the point of "it's for him to decide".
  - omosubi 8y ago
    Do his employees share in his spoils though? I'm sure some get stock but if you're asked to work 20% harder for 10% more pay would you do it? If that's the case I don't care how long or hard the CEO works, it's not in my best interest.
    - AlphaWeaver 8y ago
      Isn't that your decision to make, as a worker though?
    - Tuna-Fish 8y ago
      > Do his employees share in his spoils though? To some extent, yes. He strongly believes that every employee under him should get some of their compensation in the company stock. Of course, the amount of stock the typical line worker gets is not very high.
- TangoTrotFox 8y ago
  He has a habit of finding the single strongest and most entrenched players in our society and then targeting them. He's targeted the automotive and fossil fuel industries. These are companies that are extremely intertwined with the government and subject to immense cronyism. We paid tens of billions of dollars to keep the entire vehicle industry in business. Ford is the only company that wasn't directly bailed out. Instead we have them a $5.9 billion loan at sub-inflation rates, which they unsurprisingly have not paid back - thanks to the ridiculous interest rate the government set, that loan becomes worth less and less the longer Ford holds out on paying it back. And then of course he's also gone after Boeing/Lockheed which again follow the exact same pattern of deep entrenching and cronyism within the government. They, in an anticompetitive merger known as ULA, have managed to get the government to pay them $800 million a year to do literally nothing. It's called their 'launch capability contract', which is them convincing the government to pay them a billion a year just to exist. And then most recently he's also decided to go after the media which is another extremely incestuous and entrenched industry that seems to be regularly driven by factors beyond simply going after the truth. In a nutshell, he picks some of the most entrenched and influential people to make enemies with, and then goes full steam ahead. Probably the exact reason that he's loved and hated.
wmeredith 8y ago
As sleazy as this may be for the uninitiated, it seems like normal corporate PR tactics. Am I missing something?
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  Sounds pretty normal, but when you attack Elon in any way, the former cryptocurrency now-tesla/spacex shareholders lose their tempers as if it's unfair.
  - socceroos 8y ago
    do you think the behaviour is fair?
    - zeroname 8y ago
      If you don't think it's fair, what's unfair about it, exactly? If we're talking about fairness, shouldn't we have to weigh in all the times Elon was running his mouth on Twitter?
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago
  The fact that it's sleazy whether you're initiated or not and the disclosure of that behavior is bad PR for the perpetrator, which acts to discourage it in the future.
  - zeroname 8y ago
    What's so sleazy about it? What exactly should have been disclosed here? The fact that the writer of the opinion piece didn't care to have it published himself, but also didn't care to not have it published?
- kreetx 8y ago
  It's still important to float the info up, so the general public can see -- so we could vote with our feet (if we feel we need to).
nutjob2 8y ago
Boeing has form with its shenanigans relating to Bombardier and Airbus. Hopefully they'll get what they deserve.
- vermontdevil 8y ago
  And Boeing behavior is how ULA was formed with Boeing in it ironically https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-probe-intensifies-over-secret-lockheed-papers/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-probe-intensifi...
halis 8y ago
Some companies don't rely on intelligence and innovation. They are one of a small group of big players and their business model dictates that they have to block any competitors from attaining success.

90 points by jdmark 8y ago

It would be better to link directly to the original ars technica story instead of this business insider regurgitation behind a computational paywall. https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/10/a-shadowy-op-ed-campaign-is-now-smearing-spacex-in-space-cities/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/10/a-shadowy-op-ed-camp...

justinclift 8y ago
Business Insider seem to be following up the initial Ars investigation, adding further relevant information.
detaro 8y ago
which was discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18139146 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18139146

NoB4Mouth 8y ago

I've always suspected there is group of people in the US who are on crusade against Elon Musk's projects -be it Tesla, SpaceX,...- I find it mind-boggling that there is a kind of "Let bring it down" pattern in America when some dreamers like Elon Musk are disrupting industries like car, Energy or Space with their endeavors. Elsewhere he would be protected, supported and promoted by the whole nation and the government. Am sure If Elon Musk was a Chinese he would have less hustle and media bashing than what he is going through... Disclaimer: I'm not an American citizen and i have no Tesla share on my portfolio.

grecy 8y ago
There are trillions of dollars at stake here and a lot of very powerful people want to keep the status quo. There is a very good reason their healthcare, education, banking and a whole lot more have not improved in 30+ years. Elon is just one example of someone (or something ) that is disrupting the status quo, and many extremely powerful and rich people will fight tooth and nail to derail any such attempts.
- justtopost 8y ago
  He is the status quo at this point. Selling him as a disruptor is a bit rich for my blood.
- zeroname 8y ago
  > Elon is just one example of someone (or something ) that is disrupting the status quo, and many extremely powerful and rich people will fight tooth and nail to derail any such attempts. This is a naive argument. The "rich and powerful" have the most to gain from hyping Elon's companies into the sky (and then profit again on the way down). Think about it, why make an effort to protect barely profitable "status quo companies" when you can just cash out on the personality cult around Elon, who himself is one of the richest and most powerful people in the world. This is mostly about Tesla, the SpaceX stuff is so minor it's not even on the radar of the "rich and powerful". It's a hobby for Boeing and a hobby for Elon Musk. Nobody is going to fight "tooth and nail" to prevent this. They're doing a little bit PR, it's par for the course.
  - grecy 8y ago
    > Think about it, why make an effort to protect barely profitable "status quo companies" I don't think Ford, GM, VW, etc. are barely profitable. Neither are Shell or BP or any petroleum company. Neither are ULA or Arianespace. Keep in mind I meant the more general case to - America's healthcare system and education system are fundamentally built the way they are to make very rich people very much richer.
    - zeroname 8y ago
      Company, Market Cap, Profit Margin (5Y avg) Ford, 36 billion, 4.3% GM, 48 billion, 3.79% VW, 85 billion, 3.41% Tesla, 45 billion, -14,8% So, Tesla, even while it is bleeding money, if you had bought in a few years ago, your return even today would easily be 10X. Those other companies stayed relatively flat. Again, I ask you, what's the better deal if you're "rich and powerful"? What's the way to make more money? You'd be stupid to fight tooth and nail to protect those "status quo" companies. You'd make less money and lose. Why not profit both ways? If you are rich and you want to stay rich, you diversify. You don't care if Tesla wins and GM loses because of that, because you have money in either one.
hazz99 8y ago
I've heard people complaining about how he pushes his employees too hard, and I always have an issue with this argument. It might apply to others, like maybe Bezos with his underpaid Amazon workers, but I don't really see how it applies to Elon. He works incredibly hard, long hours. He takes big risks, and shares a lot of the risk. It's not like he's on top laughing away as his underlings work for pennies - he's the one driving business.
- kiba 8y ago
  Some would say he's working too hard and too many hours.
  - hazz99 8y ago
    That's for him to decide, not others. He's done it for years, so I'm confident he's developed ways to manage that workload
    - hobofan 8y ago
      I think when we are at a point where a governmental body (in this case the SEC) has to step in and strip him from some of his power, we are beyond the point of "it's for him to decide".
- omosubi 8y ago
  Do his employees share in his spoils though? I'm sure some get stock but if you're asked to work 20% harder for 10% more pay would you do it? If that's the case I don't care how long or hard the CEO works, it's not in my best interest.
  - AlphaWeaver 8y ago
    Isn't that your decision to make, as a worker though?
  - Tuna-Fish 8y ago
    > Do his employees share in his spoils though? To some extent, yes. He strongly believes that every employee under him should get some of their compensation in the company stock. Of course, the amount of stock the typical line worker gets is not very high.
TangoTrotFox 8y ago
He has a habit of finding the single strongest and most entrenched players in our society and then targeting them. He's targeted the automotive and fossil fuel industries. These are companies that are extremely intertwined with the government and subject to immense cronyism. We paid tens of billions of dollars to keep the entire vehicle industry in business. Ford is the only company that wasn't directly bailed out. Instead we have them a $5.9 billion loan at sub-inflation rates, which they unsurprisingly have not paid back - thanks to the ridiculous interest rate the government set, that loan becomes worth less and less the longer Ford holds out on paying it back. And then of course he's also gone after Boeing/Lockheed which again follow the exact same pattern of deep entrenching and cronyism within the government. They, in an anticompetitive merger known as ULA, have managed to get the government to pay them $800 million a year to do literally nothing. It's called their 'launch capability contract', which is them convincing the government to pay them a billion a year just to exist. And then most recently he's also decided to go after the media which is another extremely incestuous and entrenched industry that seems to be regularly driven by factors beyond simply going after the truth. In a nutshell, he picks some of the most entrenched and influential people to make enemies with, and then goes full steam ahead. Probably the exact reason that he's loved and hated.

wmeredith 8y ago

As sleazy as this may be for the uninitiated, it seems like normal corporate PR tactics. Am I missing something?

prolikewh0a 8y ago
Sounds pretty normal, but when you attack Elon in any way, the former cryptocurrency now-tesla/spacex shareholders lose their tempers as if it's unfair.
- socceroos 8y ago
  do you think the behaviour is fair?
  - zeroname 8y ago
    If you don't think it's fair, what's unfair about it, exactly? If we're talking about fairness, shouldn't we have to weigh in all the times Elon was running his mouth on Twitter?
AnthonyMouse 8y ago
The fact that it's sleazy whether you're initiated or not and the disclosure of that behavior is bad PR for the perpetrator, which acts to discourage it in the future.
- zeroname 8y ago
  What's so sleazy about it? What exactly should have been disclosed here? The fact that the writer of the opinion piece didn't care to have it published himself, but also didn't care to not have it published?
kreetx 8y ago
It's still important to float the info up, so the general public can see -- so we could vote with our feet (if we feel we need to).

nutjob2 8y ago

Boeing has form with its shenanigans relating to Bombardier and Airbus. Hopefully they'll get what they deserve.

vermontdevil 8y ago
And Boeing behavior is how ULA was formed with Boeing in it ironically https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-probe-intensifies-over-secret-lockheed-papers/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-probe-intensifi...

halis 8y ago

Some companies don't rely on intelligence and innovation. They are one of a small group of big players and their business model dictates that they have to block any competitors from attaining success.