Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7879 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7747 times:
Sure Forgeard wants to stay in the job. He's not the type that would like the embarrassment of being pushed out plus he might be able to keep the stock sales investigation under a little more control.
The Board at Boeing properly ousted a CEO not long ago when his behavior was not appropriate. Now, with Forgeart's stock sales clearly in the public eye, it will be interesting to see if Airbus has a Board that holds their CEO's to the same high standards.
Picard From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 85 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7690 times:
Although Forgeard may not be the best CEO on this planet, I want to ask how can anyone on in this post know what his job is like? Can anyone here do his job or do anywhere near as well as he has? If not how can you judge?
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7647 times:
One proposal under discussion would see both CEO posts kept, with one devoted entirely to troubleshooting at Airbus -- a plan Forgeard endorsed at the hearing, while underlining his own suitability for the job.
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7536 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 8): Quoting Leelaw (Reply 7):
Now that's having chutzpah!
Life would be very dull without it.
I agree, it must have been great theater in the hearing room with all the hostile french politicoes leering down from the dais as the "french leprechaun" vigorously defended "ango-saxon" compensation schemes.
Okelleynyc From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 219 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7509 times:
Personally, I could care less whether Forgeard remains or leaves. And I don't wish to sound callous. The theatrics are interesting, however:
Yes, CEOs are important and yes they are the face of the organization, but he's not the one who's going to crawl around in the A380 splicing wiring harnesses.
If he stays, then I'd I liked to hear more about how he is marshaling resources and expertise to address the current production issues and support the efforts of the folks in the assembly halls. I would suspect that they (the line workers) may feel slightly abandoned and left holding the bag? Or - maybe they're more in tune with the facts at hand, are already working the bugs out, and are confident that the worst is behind them.
Quoting Picard (Reply 6): Although Forgeard may not be the best CEO on this planet, I want to ask how can anyone on in this post know what his job is like? Can anyone here do his job or do anywhere near as well as he has? If not how can you judge?
I certainly wouldn't want to walk a mile in his shoes, Picard. I can't even imagine how much pressure he must be under given conflicting directives, a split management hierarchy, political interference, the press, the airlines and not to mention the auditors turning over every file cabinet in my office.
I only hope that we see a more proactive leader, one who's in charge and setting a clear direction, rather than the current vision we've been presented.
Maybe this perceived persona is exacerbated by the "media" and he does have things firmly in control. I also understand that he needs to "defend" himself aggressively; I would too. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and hope to hear a full disclosure of the challenges the facing the A380 along with a cogent recovery plan. Otherwise, lose the hubris and find a person that is capable of getting this great beast in the air and generating some revenue. I'm anxious to see it grace the skies - regardless of its economics.
The current side show seems to be distracting from the real issues - certification and EIS.
Just give me my Vario, my Ozone Mojo and a gorgeous day of soaring.
Halibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7459 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 2): During his watch, Airbus became the largest manufacturer of civil aircraft in the world. That's an odd thing for a "wanna-be" to achieve.
What winning new aircraft were designed under Forgeard's watch ? The only thing Forgeard as able to do for Airbus was provide ooddles of money from the European tax payer to Airbus ! Nothing to write home about !
Under Forgeard's watch Airbus is now in one of there worse situations in there history . Blunders that were made by him half a decade ago are now materializing .
Mr "Foot in the Mouth" Forgeard is a liablity for Airbus not an asset !
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7406 times:
I must reiterate my personal sentiment that I would be more than delighted to see Forgeard take a hike. His "consultancy", or whatever he thinks is the great job he could do, could also be accomplished without holding his current position. One can even create the position of "Inspector-General" and let him have what might or might not be a sinecure -- at considerably less pay and prestige.
There is an appearance of impropriety here that I think is significant. And I do not think that it is quite to be expected, or even particularly becoming, for someone as high up in the organization as this man should "fight for his job", since his job is in some ways more of a public (or at least shareholder) trust than an ordinary position.
I think that Leahy should also offer his resignation if it is true that he oversold the customizability of A380 with insufficient regard for the difficulty of compliance.
Mrcomet From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 502 posts, RR: 8 Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7337 times:
Quoting Picard (Reply 15): Its easy to say it was a misstep with hindsight, but who at the time could guess the rise in fuel prices?
Uhhh....just about everyone on EARTH including BOEING. The supply and capacity trends have been going that way for years. They are in the transportation busines for god sakes. They should have seen it.
I agree that Forgeard is overrated. He came in 1998 and oversaw the A340-500, A380 and A350/70. None of them are Airbus's finest achievements from. Airbus's other successes that is really what built Forgeard's reputation predate his arrival. More over, look at the opportunity costs of not competing earlier with the 787 and more sucessfully with the 777.
In fact, a dispassionate look shows that Forgeard actually was a pretty pedestrian CEO and he bet most of the company on the A380 and then didn't deliver (so far). He allowed Boeing to have no competition in the largest part of the widebody market. I think Airbus can do A LOT better.
Picard From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 85 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7299 times:
Quoting Mrcomet (Reply 17): Quoting Picard (Reply 15):
Its easy to say it was a misstep with hindsight, but who at the time could guess the rise in fuel prices?
Uhhh....just about everyone on EARTH including BOEING. The supply and capacity trends have been going that way for years.
The A380 project was started well over 10 years ago back when fuel prices where stable and looked like it would be for sometime, yes I am sure prices where expected to go up. But prediction for the current level of fuel costs?
Lets see all the predictions on fuel costs for the next 10 years and see how many get it correct?
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4214 posts, RR: 29 Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7246 times:
Quoting Solnabo (Reply 1): Didn´t Boeing have a quite retarded CEO couple of years ago?
Yes, Boeing's CEO of a few years ago was quite retarded. But Condit's ego was nowhere near Forgeard's.
Quoting Mariner (Reply 2): During his watch, Airbus became the largest manufacturer of civil aircraft in the world.
During his watch Airbus lost its lead as the largest manufacturer of civil aircraft in the world [that hasn't happened yet but will in 2007]; squandered billions on an aircraft that is not needed [yet]; and Airbus effectively gave up the mid-market to its rival for approximately six years.
There is a time and place for every CEO in an organization's life-cycle. Forgeard's time has passed. To use the argument that he was good for the company in the past fails to address the company's needs in the future.
Quoting Picard (Reply 19): Lets see all the predictions on fuel costs for the next 10 years and see how many get it correct?
I predict they will come down to and stabilize around $40 - $50 bbl.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7230 times:
All this is not to say that Airbus is a bad company. Far from it. It's a good company, from what I can see of it. It's a very advanced company from a technological standpoint and it employs a great many talented individuals. By and large, labor relations appear good and physical infrastructure, as far as I can tell, is more than satisfactory.
Airbus has the know-how to make good large airplanes that I am proud to fly on. Darned good thing, too, since I would never want to fly on aircraft made by a crummy company.
However, from a program standpoint, there are real issues. I don't know how one can gloss over the A350 fiasco, let alone the A380 delays. And various other aircraft programs at Airbus have not been as competitive with the 777 as they could have been. Many people -- rightly, I think -- point to these factors as failures of strategic leadership, and as it stands, I think that the motto in this case is that the captain goes down with the ship. While the ship isn't sinking, the profit potential of Airbus right now appears to be. And the significant declines in shareholder value of its corporate parent, EADS -- who could be pleased at that? BAE and shareholders are abuzz with talk of litigation.
I would say this: If Forgeard is the best hope for Airbus, I think that Airbus may be quite doomed. But because I know that Airbus is far more than what Forgeard's talents (which in the past were not inconsiderable) can offer, I think that Airbus will pull through and do nicely in the near future.
I just don't think it should be under Forgeard.
Quoting Mariner (Reply 22): But I very much dislike the "bash-Forgeard for everything" attitude so prevalent on a.net.
I think that if we bash Forgeard for what appears to have turned to mush under his watch (e.g., the A380 production schedule; the A350 program) then that's certainly sufficient, and since these things are much in the news these days, then it may very well be that he is being bashed a great deal -- even if not for everything. But my philosophy is, as far as Forgeard's fault may be concerned: If the shoe fits....
Who better to blame, in any event? Hamburg? Enders? Engineering? I would rather not, actually.