8 ms·
Boeing lost 1.2B in 2022 first quarter
- msie 4y agoThey have to kick out the MBAs. They ruined the company.
- moralestapia 4y agoBetter keep them contained there. Imagine the damage all these ex-VPs of whatever could do if unleashed.
- voz_ 4y agommm I'd rather they work on something 100% useless like NFTs, instead of airplanes.
- djbusby 4y agoNon Flying Things
- Espressosaurus 4y agoToo late, they already took over Amazon's drone program[1]. Who knows where else they've spread? [1] https://dronedj.com/2020/03/31/ex-boeing-executive-to-spearhead-amazon-prime-air-delivery-by-drone-service/ https://dronedj.com/2020/03/31/ex-boeing-executive-to-spearh...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Victerius 4y agoI just made a headcount. Of the 22 members of Boeing's Executive Council, 9 have a MBA, and 1 has a Master of Science in organizational management. Still, a slight majority of Boeing executives do not have a MBA.
- throwawayboise 4y agoAre any of them aeronautical engineers?
- jonas21 4y ago9 of them have engineering degrees (mostly aerospace, aeronautical, and mechanical engineering)
- NegativeLatency 4y agoIt’s not really boeing anymore though, not since McDonald Douglas reverse acquired them
- fransje26 4y agoThat was a brilliant move. Take over Boeing by having Boeing buy McDonald Douglas with Boeing money. The heist of the century!
- renewiltord 4y agoIt doesn’t matter what Boeing loses. Uncle Sam will backstop. This isn’t a nightmare. It’s just life. The idea that the US would allow any poor outcome for Boeing is like believing PG&E will go bust.
- dannyw 4y agoUncle Sam won't backstop the shareholders. See: AIG.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y agoThe company won’t be allowed to dissolve. What that means for shareholders, who knows? In the worst case, the government buys the company outright.
- khuey 4y agoIn the nightmare scenario it probably looks a lot like the GM bankruptcy where shareholders get wiped out. New GM was owned by a combination of the government and the unions and eventually IPOed again.
- renewiltord 4y agoThat was then. Things have changed. Will buy BA to prove skin in the game and that I believe.
- throwawayboise 4y agoUncle Sam will ensure that the US has an aerospace industry adequate to meet military needs. Whether this will forever include Boeing I'm not certain. Seems like there is an opportunity here for companies such as Lockheed to make a move?
- robonerd 4y agoAlmost all of the USAF's cargo and tanker jets are made/supported by Boeing. Big jets are not Lockheed's competency; the C-5's development was a mess, and Lockheed hasn't been in the airliner business since the Tristar failed. Almost seeming to mirror this, Boeing seems to be useless at making fighter jets. Also, the US Government would be wise to preserve their domestic airliner industry. Suppose the US decided to invade Iraq a third time and the EU responded with sanctions, cutting off US airliners from Airbus. This is the sort of situation Russian airlines faces today, but who's to say it couldn't one day happen to America if Boeing no longer existed? It's not as though America is any stranger to waging unpopular wars.
- paxys 4y agoI'd love to hear some insider scoops about the Air Force One contract on which they attributed $660 million of the loss. There are lots of vague statements, but no details on what really went down. > «I’m going to call it [the Air Force One deal] a very unique moment, a very unique negotiation, a very unique set of risks that Boeing probably shouldn’t have taken,» he said. «But we are where we are, and we’re going to deliver great airplanes. And we’re going to recognize the costs associated with it.» I'm surprised shareholders haven't demanded a better explanation yet.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y agoThe article says they are delivering two Presidential planes, total cost paid by the gov’t 3.2 billion. Can someone explain why two these planes are more than a third of the total cost of the James Web Telescope? What exactly do they need to do in order to protect one apparently irreplaceable man? Don’t they fly with fighter jet escorts so the need for offensive weapons can’t be significant. Seriously, why do they cost so much?
- fshbbdssbbgdd 4y agoYou bejewel a plane with the president’s name, then suddenly there’s a new president! Your fixed-price contract just got a lot more expensive.
- slimsag 4y agoThe F-22 program was $11.6 billion, F-35 $1.7 trillion, Boeing recently got a contract to manufacture 100 more AH-64E attack helicopters at $3.4 billion. We spend a lot on the military, including air force 1, and spend very little on science like JWT.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hericium 4y ago> We spend a lot on the military, including air force 1, and spend very little on science like JWT. Silly humans. Don't even have anyone to fight but themselves.
- greatpostman 4y agoThey need to open source they’re engineering specs abs let startups have at it.
- cameldrv 4y agoThe cost does seem excessive, but it’s surprising that Boeing would make such a bad deal given that the U.S. government had no real alternative. What is the president going to ride in, an Airbus?
- sidewndr46 4y agoIf Boeing didn't win the contract, it would have likely gone to other US contractors. They would have purchased 747-8 airframes from Boeing and modified them in their own facilities. Lockheed comes to mind as a company capable of doing this.
- djmips 4y ago"in April 2020, it had already declared it would cost 168 million for «engineering inefficiencies» caused by the pandemic" -> what do they mean blaming engineering inefficiencies on the pandemic?
- bagels 4y agoCould be delays caused by engineers not able to show up to the office/factory.
- hoppyhoppy2 4y agoor maybe the cost of redesigning things around chip shortages or other supply issues of specific components?
- durnygbur 4y agoAmericans hiring outside of US: "you realize that with 45k USD salary you'd be in the top 5% of your country's population? Best we can do is 35k USD". Americans spending on their military: "billion here, billion there, everyone gets a billion".