I’ll offer a different take on this merger other than the typical defense contractors = bad/politically in bed view held here. (Which may not always be wrong, b

I’ll offer a different take on this merger other than the typical defense contractors = bad/politically in bed view held here. (Which may not always be wrong, but by no means is it always right/accurate). I think the merger is about 2 things. 1.) neither company has a “Platform”. United builds jet engines, Raytheon, sensors and missiles. But Lockheed builds the F-35. I think this is about Raytheon getting closer to having platform capability, instead of the constant squeeze the platform owners put in their subcontractors. (Both in price, and function, which is lockheed making their own sensors and cutting out Raytheon biz. 2. I think it’s a debt/revenue restructure advantage for United, they’ve got lots of debt they can spin off without losing revenue, acquire a cash positive company, and look great to stockholders for the next few years and pay out fat dividends. (Which benefits who? all the executives who own tons of stock and make decisions).