707lvr From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4861 times:
For folks interested in the financial side of things, read more detail about the loss and specific Senators who have gone out of their way to make sure it hurts real good. A bit unprecedented, actually, from Senators who also happen to have key input on some upcoming decisions.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12336 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4861 times:
I believe the story is really talking about BMAC (Boeing Military Aircraft Company), and not BCAC (Boeing Commerical Aircraft Company). BCAC is doing very well this year, where as BMAC isn't doing as well as expected, plus they had the fines from the KC-767 scandel, and will not write the fines off of their taxes.
DeltaDC9 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 2844 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4768 times:
They missed thier target by a PENNY! Come on.
From MSN Money (Note the first few words):
"Boeing in line; ConocoPhillips rakes in $47B
Boeing reported a loss of 21 cents per share in the second quarter, a penny narrower than the Reuters Estimates consensus. The loss was due to a one-time $1.1 billion charge for legal settlements in government investigations. Revenues of $14.99 billion were just above the forecast for $14.96 billion.
Boeing said it expects to earn $2.40 to $2.55 per share this year, in line with expectations, and to earn $4.25 to $4.45 per share in 2007, a tad lower than the $4.54 per share consensus estimate. The stock fell 4.27% this morning.
Boeing shares had risen $2 to $83.75 in late trading yesterday, so investors may have been hoping for stronger results, but the numbers "look pretty good," Howard Rubel, aerospace analyst at Jefferies & Co., told CNBC's "Squawk Box." Rubel maintains his $100 price target on the stock."
So it rose then fell, big deal.
[Edited 2006-07-26 19:04:28]
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33655 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4752 times:
As noted in the article, the loss is directly attributed to the over $1 billion in fines Boeing agreed to pay to the Department of Defense and others that they will not write off. The loss was within expectations of those Wall Street analysts who did not expect Boeing to them write-off.
Per the article, revenue in the commercial-plane business rose 10 percent to $7.11 billion and operating revenue gained more than 50 percent. Revenue in the defense business was little changed at $7.77 billion and operating income dropped 62 percent.
Also per the article, sales rose 2.1 percent to $15 billion in the quarter and sales will be as much as $60.5 billion this year and as much as $65.5 billion in 2007, helped by demand for commercial planes and productivity improvements.
So the fiscal picture still looks good, just as it does for Airbus after their share price took a beating when the new A380 delays were announced.
Halibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4546 times:
No big deal .
I heard this news on Bloomberg radio this morning . There were mixed views regarding Boeing's future . Nothing really bad though , "some concerns about 787 production ". However nothing major . One gentlemen felt strongly that Boeing's stock will hit $100 in the near feature & it is currently in BUY status ! The same guy went on to say that Boeing's 787 was a better move than Airbus's A380 . " It was just his oppinion " !!! Don't have a cow .
It will be good once this is finally behind them - "Boeing" .
Katekebo From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 712 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4458 times:
Actually, the stock market reaction demonstrates that the investors have a lot of confidence in Boeing's business model and future. A 5% drop is share value (by the way, by now it's down to 3.5% drop) is remarkably small. The investors clearly understand that the loss is a one-off due to special causes, and the business fundamentals of the company are strong.
The share-price reaction apparently wasn't due to the (expected) charges but weaker-than-expected 2007 outlook:
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Boeing Co. (NYSE:BA - News) on Wednesday posted a large quarterly loss as expected, but shares fell as much as 5 percent because Wall Street anticipated a 2007 forecast even more optimistic than the one the company provided.
Pygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 991 posts, RR: 37
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4316 times:
Thats funny Boeing increased its guidance for 2007
Boeing Reports Second-Quarter Results including Previously Disclosed Charges; Raises 2007 Guidance on Strong Commercial Airplanes Performance
Revenue grew 2 percent to $15.0 billion, 7 percent year to date
Net loss of $160 million, or $0.21 per share, includes previously disclosed charges totaling $1.15 per share
Generated $2.4 billion of operating cash flow
Backlog climbed to a record $220 billion
2007 EPS and revenue guidance increased
Nudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4075 times:
They have to pay 1.1bn. Where I come from, that is quite some money. And it is all due to delays. Funny, I heard predictions about large companies folding because of delays, but obviously that does not happen in the aviation market. Must have been something different, I guess... Though, I am quite sure I read it here...
They have to pay a fine.
They will post a loss this year.
And it hurts, but sure absolutely not destroys Boeing.
As the competition is not that deep in trouble either.
Things happen, things go wrong, and problems are being ironed out.
Yet another period...
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3962 times:
From Dominic Gates/Seattle Times reporting on Boeing's 2nd Quarter Earnings announcement (Fair Use Excerpt):
...More engineers, overtime
McNerney said the money is going into "more engineers and more overtime" to ensure Boeing can meet 787 program goals on airplane weight and delivery schedule.
Still, he insisted these issues are "more normal than abnormal" on a new airplane program and said the 787 will still be "the most efficiently developed airplane that we've ever done."
McNerney admitted that some of Boeing's partners had run into trouble, though nothing "unanticipated or earth-shaking."
"We've had a couple of instances where we've moved work," he said, "but that was all part of the contingency plan where we had built extra engineering capacity in the event that someone ran into an issue.
"We're attacking the weight issues aggressively and the associated schedule issues," McNerney said. "We still see the plane delivered on time, within the performance commitments we've made to our customers..."
"...There are always going to be issues, and we're paranoid every day about them," McNerney said. "I'd rather be paranoid now than deeply disappointed later."
Byron Callan, a leading financial analyst with Prudential Equity Group, characterized the R&D spending boost as "an alarm bell" but kept his "buy" recommendation on Boeing stock.
"No one should think that developing a new jet is a walk in the park," Callan wrote to clients after Boeing's results
He said shareholders should focus on the strong demand for the 787 and its healthy competitive position...
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 15141 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3862 times:
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 10): But presumably those actors were acting on behalf of the company, no?
I'm not sure I see your point. In theory every employee acts on behalf of their company, and does so in accordance with the company's policies, but in this case it didn't happen.
Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 16): They have to pay 1.1bn. Where I come from, that is quite some money. And it is all due to delays.
Nope, part is due to corruption, and part is due to delays.
Quote: Boeing agreed to pay $615 million to settle Justice Department ethics charges, and analysts expected some tax deductions. The company also said late deliveries of aircraft to Australia and Turkey cut earnings by $496 million, at the high end of its forecast.
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3535 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3845 times:
Quoting 707lvr (Reply 1): For folks interested in the financial side of things, read more detail about the loss and specific Senators who have gone out of their way to make sure it hurts real good. A bit unprecedented,
Yes, it is unprecedented to allow bribers to get away without any criminal charges.
PanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4281 posts, RR: 86
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3770 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
Quoting Leelaw (Reply 17): Byron Callan, a leading financial analyst with Prudential Equity Group, characterized the R&D spending boost as "an alarm bell" but kept his "buy" recommendation on Boeing stock.
Damned if they do and damned if they don't. IMO Mr Callan can take a walk in the park. U.S. Corporations are sitting in record cash levels, the stock is still close to it's highs and quarter by quarter boy here reckons an increase in R&D spending is "an alarm bell"
Quoting Leelaw (Reply 17): "No one should think that developing a new jet is a walk in the park," Callan wrote to clients after Boeing's results
He said shareholders should focus on the strong demand for the 787 and its healthy competitive position...
Oh! He realises that does he? I believe that the "strong demand" he cites might justify spending some cash reserves on increased R&D because as they say "you've got to spend some to make some". That way if it all goes right then 4-5 years down the track the ROE will be much better than another stock buyback which is what Mr Callan seems to want.
To the short term doomsayers whom look at the daily stock price as though it is the be all and end all I suggest you enter into the following transaction to really profit from your views. This with Boeing stock roughly up 5% on the year and EADS down roughly 35% on the year.
Do an equity swap over a 4 year term and pay the return on Boeing to receive the return on EADS, or vice versa, then you'll all know who's right. After all the programs that EADS and Boeing work on usually have a 20 year lifecycle so give it some time
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
: Risk sharing partner , not a Sugar Daddy , Danny ! Big difference . Halibut
: When do Boeing and the Japanese manufacturers have to pay the Governments money back? Big difference all right, its free money with little risk for t
: Little risk if the 787 is a scuccess ! Airbus's setup with the governments in the EU en-able them to be "wrong" & survive . RP I think you have
: I struggled with that too. In 2003 and 2004, BCA's R+D spending was historically low, and a fraction of the money it's competitor was spending. Now i
: Good work BCA Please leave this topic out of this thread guys, you should both know better.
: There are 2 sides to every story.......... Fair use excerpt; ``I'm not saying: don't give money,'' Mandelson said in an interview today in Brussels.
: True indeed... Mind you, Airbus posted 11.3% op. margin today also. They must be doing something right, too....... Regards
: They must have received some subsidies as it is known that they give planes away for free.
: With the utmost respect Astuteman my quote was in reference to the WTO issue. That said I concur with your point. What's better is that I see better
: Nothing unexpected, although Boeing deserved to have a few more of its execs sent to jail---something that we all know would never happen in M. Fogea
: It's true, there is no rule that you have to know what you're talking about in order to post opinions. The original point was that these senators hav
: I know, and humbly abase myself - it just seemed to fit my train of thought so well I'll be in the corner if you need me ....... Regards