Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Time For A Change In Boeing Management?  
User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2777 posts, RR: 2
Posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 10817 times:

Hello..

As you all now know, Boeing have once again dropped the ball with AAL and Airbus. I honestly don't follow Boeing's every move, but from my perspective, it seems some of their decision making the past few years has been questionable to say the least. Really questionable... Is it time for a shakeup in management and to bring in some new people?

Or am I just being too dramatic?  


KPDX


View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
188 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7279 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 10821 times:

They made a huge mistake the past year and a shake up is needed once they figure out this "737RE"


"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10800 times:

Quoting KPDX (Thread starter):
As you all now know, Boeing have once again dropped the ball with AAL and Airbus.

How exactly was the ball dropped, besides not publicly communicating every move for the benefit of A.netters?


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7279 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10757 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 2):
How exactly was the ball dropped, besides not publicly communicating every move for the benefit of A.netters?

AA took 260 A320s over 100 737s. Now if this 737RE does well then it is not a huge ball drop as it would even out with 200 737s and 260 A320s. But for now they dropped the ball. They needed to have something ready for AA. And now they need to make sure WN and DL like the 737RE.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinemicstatic From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10733 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 2):
How exactly was the ball dropped, besides not publicly communicating every move for the benefit of A.netters?

A quote in another thread from the Boeing CEO comes to mind. He just recently had said:

"It's our judgment that our customers will wait for us, rather than move to an airplane that will obsolete itself when (Airbus) move(s) to a new airplane."

He also repeated his company's contention that Airbus was playing catchup to Boeing, saying: "The neo on paper closes the value gap that we have enjoyed. ...

"I feel pretty comfortable that we can defend our customer base both because they're not going ahead of us, they're catching up to us, and because we're going to be doing a new airplane that will go beyond the capability of what they neo could do."

This shows one of two things. Overconfidence or a total lack of understanding of the marketplace. This combined with the massive problems in the 748 and 787 lines. From the outside, their appears to be a major problem with Boeing management.



S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2572 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10731 times:

Quoting KPDX (Thread starter):
Or am I just being too dramatic?

Yep!

This is what Boeing needs, and is the smartest decision for them. The cost of a new airframe 797 would be too high for the market to bear right now, with not enough technology to provide the needed fuel-burn reduction required to make it viable.

HAL



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10642 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 3):
AA took 260 A320s over 100 737s. Now if this 737RE does well then it is not a huge ball drop as it would even out with 200 737s and 260 A320s. But for now they dropped the ball. They needed to have something ready for AA. And now they need to make sure WN and DL like the 737RE.

I didn't realize this was an order contest, with the OEM that sells the most planes winning. Yes, it is probably disappointing to Boeing that AA ordered from Airbus, but there's no practical way Boeing could have taken the whole order.

Quoting micstatic (Reply 4):
This shows one of two things. Overconfidence or a total lack of understanding of the marketplace. This combined with the massive problems in the 748 and 787 lines. From the outside, their appears to be a major problem with Boeing management.

Outside of the issues with the new programs, I fail to see how you can draw those conclusions based on selective quotes in press articles. We have no idea what type of conversations Boeing has been having with its customers.


User currently offlinewarreng24 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 708 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10597 times:

A similar situation occurred in the early 90's when UA was attempting a fleet renewal. They wanted a 150 (ish) seat narrow body with Trans-Con range. All Boeing would provide is the 737-400, which didn't have the range (or hot/high performance) that UA wanted or the 757-200, which was too much airplane. Thus, UA turned to Airbus and the rest is history (the A319 and A320 order).

User currently offlinemicstatic From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10597 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 6):
Outside of the issues with the new programs, I fail to see how you can draw those conclusions based on selective quotes in press articles. We have no idea what type of conversations Boeing has been having with its customers.

You are most certainly entitled to your opinion. It is a minority opinion. I can't connect the dots for you, but I can merely point out that it shows a CEO who doesn't seem to be in sync with the real world market. I'm critical of Boeing because I am a supporter of them. But it seems that the last 5 years in commercial aviation, has been overwhelmingly negative for the company. Not something I like to see. Of course I'm going to be critical.



S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7279 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10566 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 6):

I didn't realize this was an order contest, with the OEM that sells the most planes winning. Yes, it is probably disappointing to Boeing that AA ordered from Airbus, but there's no practical way Boeing could have taken the whole order.

I agree that they could not take the whole order. But allow Airbus to enter AA like that and take much more of the order. And of course it is an ordering contest that is what their whole business revolves around



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10547 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 6):
I didn't realize this was an order contest, with the OEM that sells the most planes winning. Yes, it is probably disappointing to Boeing that AA ordered from Airbus, but there's no practical way Boeing could have taken the whole order.

And Boeing still has 51 737-800s on order yet to be placed, so the actual Boeing total will be 155 and they already have 156 in place, so in the end, AA's narrowbody fleet will be 307 737s and 260 A320s.

So if you must have a "winner", it's still Boeing (not to mention Boeing will likely remain the exclusive widebody supplier to AA with their 777-300ER and 787-9 orders, MoUs and options).

What I see is a nice, balanced fleet with the 737 family working very well on short to medium haul narrowbody missions and the A320 family handling the TCON, TATL and high-density missions.


User currently offlinecsturdiv From Australia, joined Aug 2005, 1515 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10530 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 6):
I didn't realize this was an order contest,

Business in general is a contest.



An American expat from the ORD area living and working in Australia
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4987 posts, RR: 41
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HAL (Reply 5):
The cost of a new airframe 797 would be too high for the market to bear right now, with not enough technology to provide the needed fuel-burn reduction required to make it viable.

Exactly what John Leahy has been advocating for more then two years now. It is clear he did not drop the ball and pushed Boeing into the position to adapt the Airbus strategy.

The advantage is that both OEM's will switch to a completely new NB probably at the end of this decade with an EIS around 2025. This will mean that neither Airbus or Boeing can wait and see what the competitor is going to do as an all-new NB. Which will ensure exciting times to come for a long time, also out here on A-net.  .


User currently offlinerl757pvd From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4718 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10512 times:

Quoting KPDX (Thread starter):
Boeing have once again dropped the ball with AAL and Airbus

Its my understanding that Airbus provided a level of financing that no bank in their right mind would provide to AA, I think if boeing thought it was a smart idea to beat it, they would have.



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2976 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10471 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
So if you must have a "winner", it's still Boeing

Nice spin. However, 210 738s were already in placed or ordered, so today we have 260 firm orders for 32Xs and 97 not-yet firm orders for 737NGs, plus the "intent to buy" 100 737REs, when/if the plane actually on offer (and if AA likes it, I guess). Plus 365 signed options for further 32Xs, vs. 40 not-yet-signed options for 737NGs, and the "intent" for 60 options for 737REs. There is a clear winner here, no matter how you slice it.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7201 posts, RR: 50
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10457 times:

I have long been a fan of Boeing, but I have come to the conclusion recently that unfortunately the Peter Principle had worked its insidious ways on Boeing. This is very unfortunate, because I have never seen a company with severe Peteritis recover; they either get bought out by someone else or collapse. I really do hope that Boeing recovers; we'll have to wait and see. But I am not encouraged. It does sound indeed that Boeing dropped the ball big time on this one; they did not have a competitive product and had to commit to one that has not yet been approved by the board. They should have made a decision when Airbus launched the NEO; then they could have battled this one out instead of being blindsided the way they were. Of course, I share the doubt expressed by others that AA will actually be able to take all of these planes; has any established airline ever succeeded in buying more planes than their existing fleet at once? We'll have to wait and see.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10420 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As I noted in the other thread, I don't think Boeing could have met AA's delivery terms even if they'd launched the 737RE the same day as Airbus launched the A320neo.

As-is, AA has just locked up almost 5% of Boeing's and Airbus' narrowbody production for a decade. If Boeing had landed the entire order, it would have soaked up 9% of Boeing's monthly production of the 737 for a decade.

I don't think Boeing have that much slack in their production line. Especially once WN, FR and others start placing their 737RE orders with similar delivery dates desired and the total climbs into the four figures.

If nothing else, AA gives Boeing an excuse to abandon the 797/NSA. They can rightfully say that some of their customers cannot wait until the 2020s for significantly more fuel-efficient planes and by moving to the 737RE, Boeing can save customers money sooner and allow them to continue to leverage their current investment.

Because if Boeing had pushed with the NSA/797, they probably could have kept some of their largest customers with them, but if they started to hit troubles or fuel really started to rise, those customers likely would have started movement to the CSeries and A320neo by necessity.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2976 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10407 times:

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 13):
Its my understanding that Airbus provided a level of financing that no bank in their right mind would provide to AA, I think if boeing thought it was a smart idea to beat it, they would have.

Yep, this is the way Airbus wins every single order. This and the subsidies, of course...   

Instead, try that Boeing was so desperate to get something, anything, out of AA that they even committed to building a plane that doesn't even exist on paper and that has not been yet approved by Boeing's board...



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2976 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10387 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):
Especially once WN, FR and others start placing their 737RE orders with similar delivery dates desired

Is that a given? What about some of them ordering from Airbus or Bombardier or the Chinese or...?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10354 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 14):
Nice spin.

It's a fact. *shrug*

But I don't really give a s**t either way. AA has put together a solid narrowbody fleet by choosing both families and I feel that was a well-placed decision.



Quoting UALWN (Reply 18):
Is that a given? What about some of them ordering from Airbus or Bombardier or the Chinese or...?

Now that Boeing is effectively committed to a re-engine, that will be the logical choice for them. As we saw with AA, if the size of the order is big enough and the delivery dates are tight enough, we could see them add the A320neo to meet that demand, but I tend to think that their operating model will keep them with the 737RE and if Boeing can indeed increase production to 60 a year, that would provide enough capacity to meet their demands even with large triple-digit orders.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2976 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10316 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
It's a fact. *shrug*

What is a fact? That Boeing was the winner today? Because that's what you wrote, and I disagree with.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
As we saw with AA, if the size of the order is big enough and the delivery dates are tight enough, we could see them add the A320neo to meet that demand

So you also belong to the camp of those who believe that AA ordered Airbuses only because Boeing couldn't deliver enough 737s fast enough?

[Edited 2011-07-20 10:23:32]


AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10315 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 2):
How exactly was the ball dropped, besides not publicly communicating every move for the benefit of A.netters?

I too, was feeling the same way, when the NEO was first announced. I was in the belief that just because Boeing has not come public with a true answer does not mean something is already in the works. I was even thinking, for that matter, they may just be waiting out Airbus to commit to the program to unvail the new narrowbody. Well, it's clear that Boeing was asleep at the wheel. If they truly has something to offer, the LOI wouldn't be an LOI from AA but rather an actual order.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineWarpSpeed From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 595 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10258 times:

Below are quotes from an AA insider used in a Dominic Gates story:

"American's feeling has been, 'You guys (Boeing) haven't got your act together. You're giving us something on a piece of paper that isn't anywhere near as far along as Airbus,' " he said.

"Airbus forced their hand," said the first source.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...hnology/2015662118_american20.html

I'm a Boeing fan, but that a customer says such things is clear evidence that Boeing senior management is out of touch with market reality.

Throw in the 787 and 747-8 production and delivery woes and I simply do not see how one can say Boeing senior management is capable of its number one task - maximizing shareholder value. I'd like to see a change.



DaHjaj jaj QaQ Daghajjaj !!!!
User currently offlinerbgso From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 599 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10232 times:

You make it sound like Boeing management is similar to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGi37eToDmY&feature=relmfu

I'm reasonably certain Boeing has been working on the 737 issue for years, not just spinning a ruler on a pencil in the executive suite. Now, do they look like they are a little slow on the trigger? Sure. But I suspect they do have a master plan somewhere. They aren't stupid....


User currently offlineMoltenRock From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10234 times:

As I said a month ago in reply to a poster claiming Boeing should offer an NSA and a 777NG ASAP:

Quote:
Boeing cannot afford to launch either program currently, much less "both". Announcing something right now would simply be that, an announcement. Boeing cannot bring to bear any serious resources to start engineering & executing until 2014 sometime unless they borrow heavily from creditors and rapidly expand their engineering / employee resources which I simply don't see happening. BA stock would take a pounding.

That said, Boeing is fine! They aren't on the ropes or desperate. The most important thing B needs to do is get the 787 launched and ramped up which is still a HUGE challenge. Additionally, they must get the new US tanker project designed, built, and deliver 18 battle ready airframes by 2017. This is the reason B is telling the marketplace a new 797 program wouldn't start to deliver until 2019/2020, and why B has said it will take until the end of the year (or into next year) to decide on a response, if any, to the A320neo program.

Airbus had an "easy" choice. One that cost them $1 to $1.5 billion to launch, and which has already paid for itself in pending orders. Additionally, Boeing got a big win by winning the tanker contest which has taken precious resources for other possible programs. The aircraft market it too large, and too diverse to be all things to everyone and be able to offer brand new, cutting edge, multi-billion dollar programs at the drop of a hat.

Given the huge order volume and booming aircraft market, I think the best choice is to get the most fuel efficient aircraft to market in the next few years before the inevitable bust market for aircraft. This avenue also allows Boeing to then work on their 777X to have available for delivery within 18 months after the A350-1000 begins deliveries.


25 Stitch : sxf24 made the comment that "I didn't realize this was an order contest, with the OEM that sells the most planes winning." I agree with him. I don't t
26 chuchoteur : Actually I'd understood that Boeing had also put an equivalent level of financing on the table, hence why AA couldn't resist and ordered from both, s
27 Byrdluvs747 : I have always said that it was a big mistake for Boeing not to develop the Yellowstone project components in parallel. Its obvious today that the fail
28 Post contains images Stitch : They could barely get one of them out the door with one easy derivative (777 Freighter) and one complicated derivative (747-8) in parallel. If they'd
29 SEPilot : They simply did not have the resources to do it. On top of that, did you really want all of the 787 cock-ups multiplied by 3?
30 mham001 : Much like the US loans, they have managed to buy their way into certain markets with floundering airlines. Time will tell how this works out.
31 Post contains links FlyASAGuy2005 : For those intered, the call should be complete in about 10 minutes (these things usually only last about 30 mins). It's avalable here http://phx.corpo
32 redflyer : They allowed their competitor to take away a huge chunk of their business with one of their most loyal customers. No matter how you slice this, it do
33 BMI727 : It isn't an order contest, it is a profitability contest. Market share means nothing if it does not translate to dollars. They didn't have much of a
34 SEPilot : It certainly would have been a different story if Boeing had the 737RE ready earlier; they might not have gotten the whole order but they would have
35 WarpSpeed : Smart people make wrong decisions all the time. Sometimes being too smart (over analyzing) can lead bright people to make seemingly correct decisions
36 BMI727 : Probably, but I'm not going to say that Boeing is wrong by waiting.
37 sxf24 : Yes, but a contest of earnings, not growth. For quite a few years, Airbus has delivered more planes to its customers but lower earnings (and returns)
38 Beta : On the subject of top management at Boeing Co. I feel that ever since the late Phil Condit era to the current time, the quality of top management at B
39 jackhi : This order presents a huge financial risk for Airbus. AA just lost another $268 million in the last quarter, a situation that continues to plague the
40 flyAUA : As a user in the AA Order thread already [very precisely] pointed out "Airbus got caught napping with the 787 and Boeing got caught in a dead drunk co
41 UALWN : I agree with your first paragraph, but I don't quite see how the second follows from the first. With the 737RE on the table, this would have been an
42 Stitch : How can you know that with certainty? We're arguing projections here with both the neo and the RE, but those projections are pointing to the 737RE fa
43 FlyASAGuy2005 : You're still missing the point. If they were as far along as they SHOULD have been, AA would have a firm order for the type. Not, we will look at it
44 ikramerica : Yes, I think management is inept. They keep replacing the head of this or that to try to fix it, but they are just cutting out one tumor to let anoth
45 sxf24 : I think you're reading too much into twisted words. But yes, you can't place a firm order for a product that is not for sale. Quite honestly, Boeing
46 Post contains links Revelation : I think that's right. Both McNearney and Albaugh have been making incredibly disjoint statements and have been kicking the can down the road in 3-6 m
47 UALWN : I can't, but it's most likely. AA is ordering 130 32X-OEOs. Why? They've got plenty of 738s, and there's no real difference in performance between th
48 UALWN : Since 1987, I believe. Deliveries extended into the mid 90s.
49 ikramerica : Airbus will be less than 50%. Currently AA narrowbodies rounded: 225 MD80s (not really boeings) 150 738s 125 757s Boeing: 55%, Not Boeing: 45% future
50 sxf24 : While Boeing could build a next generation narrowbody with composite technology, it is pretty clear the technology is not currently scalable to mass
51 Revelation : Thanks for the correction. I'm ok with amending it to "AA will go from a 0% Airbus narrowbody fleet to a 40% Airbus narrowbody fleet in a five year p
52 cerecl : It is not the technology, it is the timing. Boeing has been sitting on the fence regarding 797 or 737RE while Airbus went full steam ahead with the N
53 Revelation : If it's so clear, why did it take a year and a half for that clarity to reach McNearny, Albaugh, et al?
54 BMI727 : And make many of the 737s they would be making in 2013-2015 all but worthless? Not to mention that determining these things takes time.
55 Stitch : It sounds more like the technology is mature (at least to Boeing's satisfaction), however they don't feel they can within months scale production fro
56 Asiaflyer : Do you dare to elaborate on that?
57 MoltenRock : Of course Airbus did, they could have sat and done nothing as Boeing did by saying they were evaluating all things. But instead they took the reengin
58 kanban : I think the issue here was an engineering one.. how to put the new engine on the existing frame with the best performance and the fewest ooops to be d
59 JoeCanuck : Why is the statement from the customer itself not the most likely? AA, the company which actually is making the purchases, has stated that neither ma
60 jackhi : I believe I did!
61 cerecl : Firstly, I don't think 737RE will make 737NG worthless. There is enough demand for 737NG and A32xoeo out there. Secondly, this is a problem that ever
62 Stitch : It sounds like Boeing really wanted the NSA to work and that was the program they were pushing. I would expect that they talked to current and potent
63 fpetrutiu : It has been time for a change for five years now... It started with the 787 project [mis-]management.... Edited for clarity added [mis-] in front of m
64 Revelation : I'm not following your logic. Clearly this was a known problem right from the start, unless Boeing was going to let the 737 drop to near zero units p
65 cerecl : I don't doubt Boeing did all that, but they took their sweet time doing them. It doesn't look like they heard what their customers were saying either
66 BMI727 : More likely they just wanted to play more golf. You would want to make sure enough of the old ones are sold before announcing the new version. For 10
67 cerecl : Is a backlog of 2109 (according to flightblogger) not enough?
68 fpetrutiu : I think that is plenty, I am also pretty sure that some of those would be willing conversions as well...
69 BMI727 : Maybe. That depends on a lot of things. But any manufacturer would be idiotic to let them.
70 Stitch : I'm sure they would not, but if Boeing could not ramp the production rate very high very fast, they just push orders by default to the A320neo becaus
71 BMI727 : That time gap isn't getting any bigger. For launching something that might not be the best option for them, Boeing should demand a lot more than 100
72 Asiaflyer : Airbus is leasing out 130 A320 to AA. Its not a loan from Airbus. Looks to me like the same risk as any other leasing contract. If AA goes under, the
73 sofianec : Oh please. Just because of recent developments to call for management change is absurd. I have always considered elitist corporate stuff in America a
74 b737200 : I bet you that after all the calls for re-engining we will now start hearing the same old "the 737 RE is in essence an ancient plane from decades past
75 mdword1959 : They're ineffectual, time for McNerney (CEO) and Duberstein (lead director) to exit and let someone else have a crack at it.
76 Stitch : And maybe when Boeing's Board gives formal Authority to Offer and a formal design is put out, we'll see more orders for it. Let us not forget Airbus
77 BMI727 : Of course they will, but the problem is Boeing possibly having been forced to offer the plane sooner than they would have liked, not as well defined
78 Stitch : Well Boeing has hinted they could do both the re-engine and the NSA, so maybe this decision doesn't quite have the stink of desperation it does at fi
79 ckfred : The problem with the 787 is that Boeing tried to undertake two major changes in how it builds airplanes. First was the all-composite airplane. Second
80 sofianec : That's a possibility but wouldn't it be better to hold longer to get better savings from NSA. Launching 737RE and NSA in such short period of time ap
81 Burkhard : They could, just by offering the 737RE in time, in Paris as latest possibility. American waited for VERY long... They could, at least all the MD80 re
82 UALWN : Well, those press releases are not known for saying the objective truth, are they? They certainly contain no lies, but there's always a fair amount o
83 WN738 : Yeah that sounds like Boeing Management allright Actions speak louder than words and ignoring airlines and letting your arch enemy get into be with o
84 cerecl : Then one has to ask: why is Boeing in this situation? You can't say they haven't enough warning. They spend more than one year seemingly favouring 79
85 Post contains images wn700driver : Dramatic. Way, way dramatic. It's ok though, Anet makes it easy to be so. Not saying that to pick on you, but to make you feel better. Boeing will be
86 UALWN : As did Boeing, apparently. That's what Horton said, but I have trouble believing that Boeing (or Airbus, for that matter) coud not have dealt with th
87 EPA001 : Both Airbus and Boeing are not at that production level yet. And even on existing production lines it is always a challenge to increase the productio
88 Post contains images ferpe : The key takeaway from what happened over the last year is that: - Leahy and Airbus judged the market correctly, fuel could go up and it did, and if so
89 Burkhard : Could -sure they could. Want - maybe not. The more I think about it, this is a repetition of the TWA dawn.
90 mdword1959 : Not without a change in top management.
91 warren747sp : What Boeing really need is government launch aid to level the playing field. Everything is lopsided now because of unfair advantage enjoyed by Airbus
92 Post contains images Babybus : Not at all. I think Boeing management are doing a fantastic job getting the orders they are and with those ambitious plans for new aircraft in the fut
93 Post contains images EPA001 : What an utter nonsense. . Let's just wait until the ruling on the other protest becomes final. That will be much worse for Boeing and the US then the
94 Revelation : Stitch, I really think Albaugh would have been better served to go with this line of reasoning rather than the "we have the technology but we can't f
95 ytz : I see the AA win as a management failure. It's not just that they didn't make a decision to re-engine, which in itself is bewildering given that they'
96 pylon101 : Very harsh words and quite extreme judgements - not really in a.net style. I still would wait for what Boeing says. I used to watch Mr. Albaugh (he is
97 Post contains images EPA001 : Maybe not. But they have followed the "advice" John Leahy and Airbus gave them. .
98 Post contains images ferpe : If you have followed the debate here since summer last year when it became clear that A would go the re-engine route you would understand there is a
99 ytz : They don't have to follow anybody's advice. But they should have made up their minds by now. It's indecision that's costing them. They seem to have t
100 Post contains images Aerosol : Boeing had the wrong strategic focus with the 748 - they would have better concentrated on the narrowbody market. But that is just my personal 2 cents
101 Asiaflyer : That is spot on! Many people keep defending the 748 project, saying it is a forward profit position, which is possible, but the resources used on the
102 Post contains links WarpSpeed : A quick check didn't show this posted yet. Its commentary from Leeham.net noting that the decline of Boeing commercial product strategy has its roots
103 Stitch : If Boeing truly had not predicted the future market, they would not have been talking about a re-engine 737NG, much less a New Small Airplane. I thin
104 kanban : any commercial employee could have told you that... unfortunately Mullaly won't return. and there are no cross discipline trained corporate managers
105 UALWN : The article claims that Boeing was planning to introduce the NSA next year, 2012, assuming a 787 EIS in 2008. Wow. If they had pulled that off, the r
106 mdword1959 : Once you've staged a "Potemkin Roll-out" anything is possible.
107 Revelation : We should probably wait to see what Boeing actually offers, but I think the A321NEO with winglets and the big fan will be the most popular 757 replac
108 WarpSpeed : I agree and do not see fundamental change as long as John McDonnell is on the board. He's the largest shareholder and can put down any development th
109 Post contains links mdword1959 : BTW, what is Mike "Potemkin Dreamliner" Bair up to these days? http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus/execprofiles/bair.html
110 ytz : It's not just the delay in making a decision on the 737RE vs. RS. It's the lack of foresight to anticipate a ramp-up. It's the lack of any competitiv
111 WarpSpeed : Well, let's certainly hope he has learned a lot from the 787 debacle! Maybe the 737RE project will be too limited in scope for him to direct. Even so
112 WarpSpeed : At a bare minimum, I want proof that Albaugh pays out of his own wallet the cost for the bottle of wine owed to Adam Pilarski's for his correct bet t
113 mdword1959 : Screw the pooch once, shame on you.... It's really quite scary that the talent pool is seemingly so limited that the OEMs find it necessary to recycl
114 ytz : BS. Their current predicament was entirely of their own making. It's a cop-out to blame launch aid to the Europeans.
115 ytz : It's only their incestuous habits that keep the gene pool so shallow.
116 JoeCanuck : Actually, they used the word, 'commit'. That doesn't make any sense. You're saying that Airbus actually won the entire 460 plane order but Boeing und
117 Post contains links UALWN : Nope. They used "intent". This is the press release: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/AMR-Co...es-prnews-3494254702.html?x=0&.v=1 " American also in
118 Post contains links ytz : Boeing's spin on the situation: http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archive...he_next-generation_and_beyond.html
119 F9Animal : The ENTIRE management team at Boeing needs to hit the road. They have made costly mistakes for years, and it will continue with the leadership struct
120 packsonflight : I don't think that the Sonic Cruiser was ever formally launched, and I don't think that AA was joking, they just took a free ride on Boeing's PR wago
121 LTBEWR : Let us also not forget the stupid mistakes and alleged bribery over the 767 Tanker project top management allowed to happen as well as individual bad
122 Stitch : Most of that happened before the majority of Boeing's current senior management were in their positions. Those mistakes and c**k-ups allowed them to
123 Post contains links Stitch : For those demanding James McNerney's head, this opinion piece by Scott Hamilton might be of interest: http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2011...impact-ov
124 ferpe : Management is there to manage the company! This means being ready to make decision when the market needs those decisions! B new 100% they needed to t
125 Stitch : Because they apparently never planned to launch a new narrowbody until well into the 2020's at the earliest. Boeing was the one ready to take the ris
126 Beta : Stitch, you are 1 of the most respected and trusted member who frequented this board, and I will certainly extend you the well-deserved due respect.
127 Post contains images mdword1959 : LOL Putative "Damage-Controller-In-Chief" Mr. Albaugh can't really be too surprised when he found himself with egg on his face Tuesday (forced to sin
128 Stitch : Well let us not forget that the F-35 is floundering something fierce, and Boeing may yet pick up some foreign F/A-18 sales because of it. Boeing's als
129 mdword1959 : If true, this makes his subsequent ineffectual performance even more unforgivable.
130 Stitch : What was he supposed to do? Cancel the program and all the contracts and start fresh? We need an "incredulous" smiley.
131 ferpe : But they did not manage to pull it of, and when in this precarious position they frustrated the market with delaying time and time again when they wo
132 BMI727 : The reason is exactly in what you said previously: Airbus had more on their plate. Their question was a much simpler matter of re-engining or not re-
133 mdword1959 : Mr. McNerney was ostensibly in complete command two years before 7/8/7. If he indeed recognized the inherent problems even before the launch, he shou
134 Beta : It is healthy today, but will it be 5 yrs from now and onward, when the 777 is squeezed by the A359/10, the 737-whatever newest designation will be h
135 UALWN : The value of a share is meaningless, only the trend is relevant. Mullaly left Boeing for Ford in September 2006. Since then, Boeing's shares have bee
136 Post contains images keesje : damaging IMO I guess we agree then that AAs CEO was just keeping Boeing out of the wind when he said neither of the OEM's would have been able to ser
137 SEPilot : I have taken the position that Boeing management has been infected with extreme Peteritis, and prior to the MD acquisition I think it was to some ext
138 Stitch : Boeing themselves were pretty clear - they believed the NSA was the best course for them and that is what they preferred to do, but they had a re-eng
139 mdword1959 : LOL Mr. McNerney spent the first two years of his tenure as CEO, prior to 7/8/7, telling every journalist who would listen that one of his two primar
140 ytz : Probably true. But I'd love to know what the source of their indecision was. They just kept putting off the decision. Why? Probably true. But were I
141 AM744 : My thoughts exactly. And even if AA went under and the order got cancelled by the company that takes over (highly unlikely), several airlines would j
142 SEPilot : This is indeed the biggest evidence of the problem. The number one job of an executive is to make decisions. A wrong decision is often far less damag
143 Post contains images Stitch : I can only speculate, since I am not privy to direct information, but I think it was a few things: Boeing finally "being bold". Launching Y1, Y2 and
144 EPA001 : Agreed. And in the end with public companies this is what it usually comes down to, stockholder confidence.
145 WarpSpeed : The issue is not about CEO control, but leadership. The CEO is ultimately responsible for setting the corporate culture and tone for others to follow
146 traindoc : The problem with Boeing is that its' most important "customer" is Wall Street, not the airlines!! They decided not to pursue a super jumbo because the
147 WarpSpeed : There is the notion that by pleasing customers you can ultimately please Wall Street through better financial performance. It requires a long-term pe
148 BMI727 : I didn't say that. But plowing through all of the options for a new plane and doing all of that work takes time. The same is true for EADS. Take the
149 Post contains links and images Revelation : Right, but if Boeing had the right products, AA could have moved to an all Boeing 737 narrowbody fleet like its LCC competitor WN. And it is reported
150 Post contains images EPA001 : 100% correct imho. Still, also for Airbus the NEO is a lot more than slapping new engines under the wing. There will be extensive aerodynamic changes
151 ytz : Not just the right products. They didn't anticipate ramping up early enough to beat Airbus. They could have at least won all the OEO orders. I disagr
152 Stitch : Actually, I would have done significantly worse if I'd bought EADS, but then each investor will be different. Well I used to work for Boeing, so mayb
153 BMI727 : Money isn't likely a big deal considering how many planes they would stand to sell. Time is possibly not a problem since the limiting factor for sche
154 Antoniemey : Some people here love to jump to the "This manufacturer is doomed because the other one has all their ducks in a row!" arguments... We saw it about A
155 WarpSpeed : Who said Boeing was on the edge of oblivion? That's like saying you see nothing wrong with the company. Do you equate criticism of Boeing as so unacc
156 mdword1959 : Tragically, we're currently looking at an eerily familiar rerun of the early episodes of the McDonnell Douglas story in the eighties, i.e., a venerabl
157 pylon101 : Mr. Albaugh IMO did his best to promote the plan no-RE - full ahead for 797. His mid-long term vision of the market and industry is outstanding. But t
158 BrouAviation : Good points of those saying neither Airbus nor Boeing would be able to fill AA's demands in the required timeframe alone. That's what this market is a
159 UALWN : Your argument would have looked nicer a week ago. Now after one of the largest, more solid Boeing customers has defected to Airbus, well, it doesn't
160 BrouAviation : What you mean by defected with 200NG's bought, 100 options and another 100RE's? Do you really believe Boeing engineers have been sitting at their des
161 UALWN : 200 NGs bought? AA will sign an order (hasn't done it yet, but will) for 100 NGs with 40 options. AA has not bought any RGs. It has expressed that it
162 Revelation : I surely hope not, but 737RE has moved from 'Plan B' to 'Plan A' in less than two weeks and will need to have to pick from four different configurati
163 BrouAviation : 100% of the orders you are reffering to were of a total different caliber than this one. A glance at the AA fleet learns you that AA's short haul hev
164 Post contains images mdword1959 : LOL That sounds like a scenario where all parties involved will be miserable in their relationships. Something tells me that the Boeing money men all
165 UALWN : Really? Let's check: AA *plans* to acquire 200 Boeing aircraft. AA *has* acquired 260 Airbus aircraft. Can you see the difference? Sure, let me help
166 packsonflight : You are spot on there. When quarterly earnings is the king, and not long term profit, I ask my self, Can a company in aerospace where long term plann
167 mdword1959 : Good Question. Of course the pendulum swung to the "quarterly approach" 25-30 years ago after decades of Wall Street suffering less than lackluster e
168 Post contains links Revelation : Right, but Boeing has won 100% of the business since 1996 and was a part of the (unenforcable) Boeing exclusivity agreement that AA has never rescind
169 Post contains images BrouAviation : Nonsense, as in the press release, the term *planning* is also used for the airbus-order. You are making a difference where there actually is none. I
170 legoguy : My interpretation from the various AA order threads is that AA ordered 460 aircraft; 100 737's 100 737 NEO's 130 A320's 130 A320NEO's With additional
171 UALWN : No. It makes 300. From the headline: "American Airlines to Order 460 Narrowbody Jets to Replace and Transform its Fleet". and "Agreement includes opt
172 BrouAviation : Exactly. But that does not include the *intention* of buying 100 RE's, does it? While comparing to Airbus you shouldn't count them since airbus only
173 UALWN : Nonsense? The press release says "American will take delivery of 130 current-generation Airbus A320 Family aircraft beginning in 2013. Beginning in 2
174 UALWN : Yes, it does! Read the press release again, read every other news item on this, everybody understands it does!
175 Post contains links Revelation : In a word, YES! And so is Domenic Gates of the Seattle Times: Boeing scrambles to avoid losing American Airlines deal to Airbus: The order is that Ai
176 BrouAviation : What? Where have I ever been pretending that? Quote from the press release: Under the agreement with Boeing, American plans to acquire a total of 200
177 UALWN : Oh please. Read again this: "Under the agreement with Boeing, American plans to acquire a total of 200 additional aircraft from the 737 family, with
178 BrouAviation : That article mentions a MoU, which is far from a solid order, let alone if over 50% of it consisted of options. American has never signed a DEAL like
179 ikramerica : But again, that's also translated to: Boeing will go from 55% to 60%. And 1/2 of that are due to new deliveries.
180 flyglobal : Let me tell you as a European. This way of doing business has threatened Americas production industrie with lower investment then required and especi
181 FLALEFTY : Here's some random thoughts: 1) After the merger with MDD, Boeing went from a commercial aircraft manufacturer that minored in defense contracting, to
182 BMI727 : All the US airlines that have ordered French and German built Airbus jets over the last few decades and some people still think things like this coun
183 Post contains links Revelation : Must we toy with words? Kind of strange since the last several responses to your posts have been correcting you on actual facts. Since we want to pla
184 FLALEFTY : Yes, the A32Xs built-to-date for US airlines were European-built. But given the dire jobs situation in the US, and the fact that Airbus is going to n
185 Stitch : If AA intended to replace their Boeing / McD fleet with Airbus, then why did they go to Boeing and tell them they had a deal with Airbus to do so? Be
186 Revelation : It's not known if AA went to Boeing or not. Info like this has many ways to leak. But in any case, I agree it is of course in AA's interest to go bac
187 Post contains links and images EPA001 : Exactly. The AA deal will be for a maximum of 300 Boeings and a maximum of 625 Airbusses. It does not get any clearer then that. @BrouAviation: all i
188 NZ1 : Due to the discussion spiralling off topic, this thread is now locked. NZ1 Forum Moderator
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing Management Changes - Carson Retires posted Mon Aug 31 2009 13:16:40 by LY4XELD
Boeing's Management Of The 787 Program posted Sun Jul 12 2009 14:16:07 by TomB
Classy Boeing Management: 2006 Turnaround Year posted Mon Apr 30 2007 23:52:00 by Iwok
Boeing Restructures BCA Management posted Thu Dec 11 2008 09:00:56 by Stitch
Chances Of Boeing Not Going Ahead With RE? posted Wed Jul 20 2011 05:24:56 by KFlyer
Official: AA Order 460 Airbus And Boeing posted Wed Jul 20 2011 04:18:22 by moderators
Boeing To Re-engine 737 posted Wed Jul 20 2011 04:13:02 by delimit
Richard Ab. To Boeing: Its All About The Engines! posted Tue Jul 19 2011 07:34:49 by keesje
UA Boeing 737-900ER Gigaplane posted Tue Jul 19 2011 06:26:50 by STT757
Split Orders Airbus/Boeing. The Way Forward? posted Tue Jul 19 2011 04:13:47 by a380900
Boeing To Re-engine 737 posted Wed Jul 20 2011 04:13:02 by delimit
Richard Ab. To Boeing: Its All About The Engines! posted Tue Jul 19 2011 07:34:49 by keesje
UA Boeing 737-900ER Gigaplane posted Tue Jul 19 2011 06:26:50 by STT757
On Board Announcements... Time For A Change? posted Mon Sep 17 2007 06:49:42 by Aerofan
United Economy Plus ~ Time For Change? posted Thu Jun 21 2007 18:35:55 by FLYGUY767
Check In Time For A Flight In Europe? posted Thu Dec 14 2006 00:19:57 by Aak777
It's Time For A Change! posted Sat Oct 20 2001 22:41:59 by Rwy31R
Change In Scheduling Plans For BA 77W? posted Sun Sep 5 2010 07:04:40 by vikinga346
UA Debuts New Rhapsody Ads In Time For Olympics posted Fri Aug 8 2008 08:23:43 by *HighFlyah*
Time For A Name Change At ANC? posted Tue Jul 29 2008 22:15:12 by BooDog
2nd Time For NW 742 In SYD? posted Tue Jul 15 2008 19:42:00 by 1821
Time For Boeing To Be Bold posted Fri Nov 2 2007 08:49:57 by Parapente