Will Boeing be leaving Everett for good after +100 years ?

How smart would that be ?


This video is informative, but I am not convinced it's a great idea for Boeing. I am afraid they are gonna loose a lot of good workers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STMbL3dyXpc

Just the title of the video is bogus. Boeing hasn’t been in Everett for 100+ years. It’s been is Everett for about 53 years.

Anything is possible but we will have to wait and see. But Boeing has been treated pretty awful by the locals and especially the Seattle Times. I don't blame them if they have no loyalty to the region left. Dominic Gates is mostly to blame. He has never had one good word to say about Boeing and it's a shame the Seattle Times has allowed such blatant bias to go on for years. Boeing has had its problems but Gates acts as if they can't build a paper airplane. But he may not have them to kick around anymore. South Carolina appreciates Boeing.

I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds of the video. Too painful to hear this guy murder the English language.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Anything is possible but we will have to wait and see. But Boeing has been treated pretty awful by the locals and especially the Seattle Times. I don't blame them if they have no loyalty to the region left. Dominic Gates is mostly to blame. He has never had one good word to say about Boeing and it's a shame the Seattle Times has allowed such blatant bias to go on for years. Boeing has had its problems but Gates acts as if they can't build a paper airplane. But he may not have them to kick around anymore. South Carolina appreciates Boeing.

Not quite. Businesses don't make multi-billion dollar moves because of a journalist. DG's reporting is actually quite refreshing because more often than not local reporters look the other way when it comes to covering local large businesses and industries. Keeping big business in check is a duty of the press. We have seen what happens when communities ignore what is happening as long as the tax revenue is flowing.

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

Agreed. There are far better alternatives. Not to mention how WA State's weather has canceled numerous test flights.

TTailedTiger wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

Agreed. There are far better alternatives. Not to mention how WA State's weather has canceled numerous test flights.

Really? What percentage of test flights have been cancelled due to weather?

Please explain your statement that it’s “numerous”.

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow...

How is that, please, with aerospace firms paying a preferred B&O tax rate since 2003?

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

I don’t buy this at all. In my opinion, Boeing leadership often uses Washington State as a scapegoat to cover up for their own poor management. Every time Boeing leadership makes incompetent decisions that are disastrous for the company, they use Washington State as a whipping boy to deflect their own poor leadership.

Please explain how Washington State has been responsible for the 787 fiasco, KC-46 fiasco, 737 Max grounding, loss of market share to Airbus, lack of a capable competitor to the A321neo, and continuous other management induced problems?

BoeingGuy wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

Agreed. There are far better alternatives. Not to mention how WA State's weather has canceled numerous test flights.

Really? What percentage of test flights have been cancelled due to weather?

Please explain your statement that it’s “numerous”.

Indeed. That statement is clutching at straws. Sure, the rain and low ceilings mean that a lot of first flights get postponed by day or two but it's hardly the end of the world. I think Boeing would rather deal with that than have to fly a whole bunch of 787s on a 6000 mile round trip to Everett and back every time there's a sniff of a hurricane brewing in the Caribbean, which is pretty much every other week in the hurricane season.

For those poo-pooing the "opinion of one journalist," its not the journalist that matters. Its what he represents. His opinion is representative of the majority of people in the region towards Boeing. And that is what is so dangerous, and so regrettable, about those who believe we are in "post industrial America."

Also, previous discussion on the same topic from a few months ago : viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1452367

Boeing has been mugged by the state and local governments many a time. For example when Everett was built Boeing paid the cost to build the highway to the plant (WA-526), when the 777 addition went in Boeing had to pay some serious $ to expand the highway, even though their usage was far less than in the original plant plan.

On the Boeing Field paint hanger, having to post a $5M bond to rework any permit deficiency and several million in fees to expedite the permit review to only 12 months really chafed management at the time. Pierce County and South Carolina could get those plans reviewed and permits out within 90 days, without paying expediting fees as well.

But Boeing is not leaving Everett, it will get new production lines, Renton will run through the 737 production then be sold off. Yet I doubt Everett will have any new line only at Everett. The first line will go to Everett, as it settles into production, the 2nd line will be either in Texas or SC.

SteelChair wrote:

For those poo-pooing the "opinion of one journalist," its not the journalist that matters. Its what he represents. His opinion is representative of the majority of people in the region towards Boeing. And that is what is so dangerous, and so regrettable, about those who believe we are in "post industrial America."

What is also regrettable is how badly Boeing has been managed in the past 25 years.

Both the 787 and 737 Max were grounded due to safety flaws. The KC-46 was late and has quality issues. The 747-8 the same. The 777X is late, although it will be extremely well scrutinized and safe.

Boeing leadership turned a once World Class Flight Training into below average and middle of the road, at best.

There have been multiple ethics issues.

Maybe that’s why people feel the way they do. Maybe Dominic reports the truth.

All the employees of Boeing want is some competent leadership who makes decisions for the good of the company, not their own personal riches or ego.

BoeingGuy wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

Agreed. There are far better alternatives. Not to mention how WA State's weather has canceled numerous test flights.

Really? What percentage of test flights have been cancelled due to weather?

Please explain your statement that it’s “numerous”.

Thing is that even though the Flight Test Center is at BFI, very rarely does the weather cancel flights. We never test in the Puget Sound region because it is a high population area. We launch out of BFI and test in numerous locations around the country. If we need special weather conditions we fly to a suitable location for testing and for some of the testing we move the aircraft to remote locations for specific testing.

This board never misses an opportunity to talk about how tough multi-billion dollar corporations have it.

In hindsight, had Boeing spent its R&D time and dollars it wasted on 777X, on a NMA, NSA or even on MAX, it would be in a better position. As usual WA would have supported with tax abatement and other incentives.

There wouldn't any bad publicity and all these penny-pinching actions would have been unnecessary.

LAX772LR wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Anything is possible but we will have to wait and see. But Boeing has been treated pretty awful by the locals and especially the Seattle Times. I don't blame them if they have no loyalty to the region left. Dominic Gates is mostly to blame. He has never had one good word to say about Boeing and it's a shame the Seattle Times has allowed such blatant bias to go on for years. Boeing has had its problems but Gates acts as if they can't build a paper airplane. But he may not have them to kick around anymore. South Carolina appreciates Boeing.

LOL. A corporation which can lobby every lawmaker in the country, has worldwide regulators, media and social media in the pocket, couldn't mend fences with one hometown journalist!!!

^ This. Corporations are not sentimental.

Oh. Yes they are. USAir never saw Boeing in the same light ever again after US427...

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

It seems that you do not know all the facts. Boeing has received $3.8 billion in Washington state tax breaks since 2003, plus subsidies from Kansas, NASA and the US Department of Defense. All this by law. A law which had been repealead in march last year!
So, no more cash from WA, we go alse where! Simple as that! And after that Boeing goes and cry fault at WTO!?

talonone wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

It seems that you do not know all the facts. Boeing has received $3.8 billion in Washington state tax breaks since 2003, plus subsidies from Kansas, NASA and the US Department of Defense. All this by law. A law which had been repealead in march last year!
So, no more cash from WA, we go alse where! Simple as that! And after that Boeing goes and cry fault at WTO!?

You're trying to distill 15 years of WTO litigation into a few sentences. Its not that simple....

Boeing still do not seems to understand that corporate message will not beat Airbus.

I work in one truck brand managed by engineers supported by economy people. Both are important but long term the customer will buy the product based on the product quality and features with financial services as add on.

Next step is to create Eco systems.

The eco systems idea is forced because the old industries has got less value on the stock market then the new actors like Scania, Volvo vs Tesla.

The video is incredibly painful to listen to with the narrator’s voice being like a fingernail on a chalkboard.

I don’t think a newspaper coverage a company could get it to leave the state. Boeing has had a lot of of success over the years but the time since merging with McDonnell/Douglas has been filled with failure in many areas.

The tanker political drama and grift that took place. The 787 delays, Home Depot fasteners on the rollout plane, battery thermal runaways and the grounding of the 787. The decision to keep stretching the 737 vs a clean sheet, covering up the MCAS issues with Mark Forkner from Boeing bragging about tricking regulators to accept MCAS and leading to hundreds of deaths and a grounding of the MAX, the decision to not commit to a true 757 replacement. Sitting in their laurels and watching as Airbus took over order books. Their spacecraft needed a complete software redo and spaceX is lapping them in advancements.

It’s much like and accident. It is never one thing that causes a crash but a series of mistakes. The same happens when a company falters. It’s the amassing of all these mistakes that has put Boeing in a pickle. They need to revamp from the top down. Get back to building designing and building amazing products.

Wow, so many people so easily triggered into letting their pet narratives fly just because some u2ber that none of us had heard of posted a click bait video.

The title alone should be enough to let you know the video is bottom feeding click bait and you'd be better off finding something more deserving of your attention.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Anything is possible but we will have to wait and see. But Boeing has been treated pretty awful by the locals and especially the Seattle Times. I don't blame them if they have no loyalty to the region left. Dominic Gates is mostly to blame. He has never had one good word to say about Boeing and it's a shame the Seattle Times has allowed such blatant bias to go on for years. Boeing has had its problems but Gates acts as if they can't build a paper airplane. But he may not have them to kick around anymore. South Carolina appreciates Boeing.

A local journalist is not supposed to be a cheerleader, many are and thankfully DG is one of the rare journalists who is competent and does extensive research. It’s a refreshing change from Reuters or AP coverage that makes its way to 95% of the papers or online news these days.

Hint - if Boeing hadn’t screwed up pretty much every project they’ve touched in the past 15 years he wouldn’t have much to report about.

Also, don’t forget that if Boeing were to leave Seattle his reporting would continue either at the Seattle Times or another paper.

BoeingGuy wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

Agreed. There are far better alternatives. Not to mention how WA State's weather has canceled numerous test flights.

Really? What percentage of test flights have been cancelled due to weather?

Please explain your statement that it’s “numerous”.

And Seattle has no hurricanes or Tornadoes, which do more damage than a canceled or delayed test flight here or there.

talonone wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

It seems that you do not know all the facts. Boeing has received $3.8 billion in Washington state tax breaks since 2003, plus subsidies from Kansas, NASA and the US Department of Defense. All this by law. A law which had been repealead in march last year!
So, no more cash from WA, we go alse where! Simple as that! And after that Boeing goes and cry fault at WTO!?

Tax breaks are not cash payments to a company. You simply reduce the future tax obligations.

runway23 wrote:

A local journalist is not supposed to be a cheerleader, many are and thankfully DG is one of the rare journalists who is competent and does extensive research. It’s a refreshing change from Reuters or AP coverage that makes its way to 95% of the papers or online news these days.

Hint - if Boeing hadn’t screwed up pretty much every project they’ve touched in the past 15 years he wouldn’t have much to report about.

Also, don’t forget that if Boeing were to leave Seattle his reporting would continue either at the Seattle Times or another paper.

I agree. We're lucky there is still at least one "old school" journalist on the beat. These days corporatism is so pervasive that "new school" journalists are kissing corporation's backsides often without even realizing they are doing it, or are doing it because at some level they know it is the corporations that butter their bread. If you look at the information we are being fed, it's pretty clear that the world is largely suffering from information malnutrition largely without realizing it.

I think one reason DG and team earned the Pulitzer is his peers realize how fearless he is being, yet is still being fair and balanced, unlike a large three letter news network who changed their similar famous slogan because they realized it no longer applied.

BoeingGuy wrote:

Just the title of the video is bogus. Boeing hasn’t been in Everett for 100+ years. It’s been is Everett for about 53 years.

Yes he is apparently talking about Washington state ( 1910 )


Boeing has had a presence in Everett since 1943.

Mortyman wrote:

Will Boeing be leaving Everett for good after +100 years ?

How smart would that be ?


This video is informative, but I am not convinced it's a great idea for Boeing. I am afraid they are gonna loose a lot of good workers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STMbL3dyXpc

Well It might be true; but, would be one heck of a prediction.

If Boeing has been at Everett for 53 years... They might actually leave in another 47+ years.

The 767 and 777 line should have wound down by then; and even possibly a newer next generation aircraft will be endings its life.

So, perhaps true. I have many wild ass predictions of the future on other things that might be true as well...

Have a great day,

washingtonflyer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

LOL. A corporation which can lobby every lawmaker in the country, has worldwide regulators, media and social media in the pocket, couldn't mend fences with one hometown journalist!!!

^ This. Corporations are not sentimental.

Oh. Yes they are. USAir never saw Boeing in the same light ever again after US427...

No they aren't. That's just an AvGeek urban legend, right up there with UA vs. McDD over UA232, and AA vs. Airbus over AA587.

While it's arguable that the indefinite deferral of their 733s was reaction to US427; the reality is that US in the late '90s was Airbus' opportunity to finally sell the A330/A340 to a US carrier (then actually deliver it, vis-a-vis NW A340s) and they effectively seized on that business opportunity, also offering killer deals on narrowbodies, that effectively kneecapped Boeing from both the top and bottom.

For an airline whose business plan was already to reduce its fleet to three types, that was a masterstroke by Airbus. Wasn't really another replacement cycle for Boeing to ever make a competitive bid for anything else, with USAirways.

What??? First off, I thought the next 757/67 replacements are going to be built here? Not to mention we still have 737s to finish, and I assume Everett will house the 737's successor as well. Also, isn't the 777X being built at Everett?

Boeing757100 wrote:

What??? First off, I thought the next 757/67 replacements are going to be built here? Not to mention we still have 737s to finish, and I assume Everett will house the 737's successor as well. Also, isn't the 777X being built at Everett?

The 777X, 767F, and KC-46 will continue to be built in Everett. The 737 is built in Renton not Everett.

This still leaves the Everett factory considerably underutilized.

Everett will be running a long time, there are plans to restart 757 production and that will keep it together for decades.

<sarcasm now off>
Yes, Boeing is consolidating fast at the moment as the Covid 19 world has decimated the aviation industry. But Boeing is assessing each process, each contract, each building to see what needs to be done to improve corporate efficiency. Well, the Everett plant is one of the assets that is essential for Boeing as long as they are making planes.

We are going to see the former Commercial HQ building be sold, buildings near Boeing Field, other properties that served a good function back at some point but are under utilized today.

For an aviation website, it is flat amazing how many wish Boeing would just stop making planes as it is the EEVVIILL Corporation destroying all in its path.

BoeingGuy wrote:

Boeing757100 wrote:

What??? First off, I thought the next 757/67 replacements are going to be built here? Not to mention we still have 737s to finish, and I assume Everett will house the 737's successor as well. Also, isn't the 777X being built at Everett?

The 777X, 767F, and KC-46 will continue to be built in Everett. The 737 is built in Renton not Everett.

This still leaves the Everett factory considerably underutilized.

But I assume that the 757/767 replacements are going to be built there, which will make up for the loss of the 747 and 787 in Everett.

JayinKitsap wrote:

For an aviation website, it is flat amazing how many wish Boeing would just stop making planes as it is the EEVVIILL Corporation destroying all in its path.

It's hard to address such a claim if you don't at least quote one person who said this. Without such a quote, you're just having a straw man argument with yourself.

Boeing757100 wrote:

But I assume that the 757/767 replacements are going to be built there, which will make up for the loss of the 747 and 787 in Everett.

Anything is possible, from there being no 757/767 replacement, to one being built Everett, or Charleston, or some green field site in the US, or some international partner's site.

Personally, I don't have too hard a time convincing myself one possibility is Boeing just lets the current product lines run their course and they exit commercial aviation, or they spin it off into its own entity and the corporate survivor uses whatever proceeds they get to grant bonuses to themselves.

Boeing757100 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

Boeing757100 wrote:

What??? First off, I thought the next 757/67 replacements are going to be built here? Not to mention we still have 737s to finish, and I assume Everett will house the 737's successor as well. Also, isn't the 777X being built at Everett?

The 777X, 767F, and KC-46 will continue to be built in Everett. The 737 is built in Renton not Everett.

This still leaves the Everett factory considerably underutilized.

But I assume that the 757/767 replacements are going to be built there, which will make up for the loss of the 747 and 787 in Everett.

You know what they say, never assume anything...

Boeing757100 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

Boeing757100 wrote:

What??? First off, I thought the next 757/67 replacements are going to be built here? Not to mention we still have 737s to finish, and I assume Everett will house the 737's successor as well. Also, isn't the 777X being built at Everett?

The 777X, 767F, and KC-46 will continue to be built in Everett. The 737 is built in Renton not Everett.

This still leaves the Everett factory considerably underutilized.

But I assume that the 757/767 replacements are going to be built there, which will make up for the loss of the 747 and 787 in Everett.

Nothing has been said. You should assume nothing will be said until the decision has been made, which will not happen until the next program is well-enough defined to know what on a large scale the manufacturing process would look like and how much space and which skills and infrastructure each step in the process requires.

The NMA, which would have effectively been a 757/767 replacement, is officially on hold. They may skip that and go straight to the 737 replacement. It is unlikely either would be launched for several more years.

When the next program does happen, I think the proximity to the bulk of the Commercial engineering workforce, the experience of the Puget Sound assembly and fabrication workforce, and the existence of ample assembly space once 787 and 747 have vacated their buildings together will be of higher value than the savings that could be accomplished by locating final assembly elsewhere. I could be wrong, but I hope that's how Boeing sees it.

Revelation wrote:

JayinKitsap wrote:

For an aviation website, it is flat amazing how many wish Boeing would just stop making planes as it is the EEVVIILL Corporation destroying all in its path.

It's hard to address such a claim if you don't at least quote one person who said this. Without such a quote, you're just having a straw man argument with yourself.

Boeing757100 wrote:

But I assume that the 757/767 replacements are going to be built there, which will make up for the loss of the 747 and 787 in Everett.

Anything is possible, from there being no 757/767 replacement, to one being built Everett, or Charleston, or some green field site in the US, or some international partner's site.

Personally, I don't have too hard a time convincing myself one possibility is Boeing just lets the current product lines run their course and they exit commercial aviation, or they spin it off into its own entity and the corporate survivor uses whatever proceeds they get to grant bonuses to themselves.

Maybe it's just me being overly optimistic or naive, but they did just invest a lot in that new composite wing fabrication facility. Seems like a lot of money to sink into something that would be used for a few 777X's (considering the current outlook) only to abandon it a short time later.

washingtonflyer wrote:

talonone wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

It seems that you do not know all the facts. Boeing has received $3.8 billion in Washington state tax breaks since 2003, plus subsidies from Kansas, NASA and the US Department of Defense. All this by law. A law which had been repealead in march last year!
So, no more cash from WA, we go else where! Simple as that! And after that Boeing goes and cry fault at WTO!?

You're trying to distill 15 years of WTO litigation into a few sentences. Its not that simple....

Oh, but it is very simple! 3,8 bilion dollars in the pocket!

sxf24 wrote:

talonone wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Washington State has used Boeing as a cash cow, while the pols simultaneously use them as a whipping boy. High taxes, burdensome regulation, etc. There are other alternatives, and Boeing has been slowly moving stuff out for years.

It seems that you do not know all the facts. Boeing has received $3.8 billion in Washington state tax breaks since 2003, plus subsidies from Kansas, NASA and the US Department of Defense. All this by law. A law which had been repealed in march last year!
So, no more cash from WA, we go elsewhere! Simple as that! And after that Boeing goes and cry fault at WTO!?

Tax breaks are not cash payments to a company. You simply reduce the future tax obligations.

I
Tax breaks are not cash payments, which is true! It is in fact a "keep your money on your pockets"! So, they do not take the money, but let Boeing to keep them, instead of paying! With one move, they swept away thousands of high paying jobs, get rid of the sindicate, and put some money in to the shareholder's pocket! Or, as they prefer to say, "creating value for the shareholders"! This is the true! At least as I see it!

I think it is safe to assume Boeing will pitch a new narrowbody assembly line to the States and see what surfaces and it likely will not be Washington as the chicken dinner winner. I got 5 bucks on Texas.

How expensive and "unionized" is St. Louis for Boeing? I mean the existing MDD plant. Would this work for airliner sized aircraft?

Noshow wrote:

How expensive and "unionized" is St. Louis for Boeing? I mean the existing MDD plant. Would this work for airliner sized aircraft?

St. Louis would be a no in my sports book. Wichita would stand a greater chance. It'll be 90% on something Southern at an airport that isn't too major . I'm thinking like a McKinney TX would be along the lines.

An ideal spot with lots to sell is XNA in Northwest Arkansas, A fantastic area to live. Centrally located, right to work and union resistant, growing like a weed, constantly included included in best of lists. It has an airport with plenty of room to grow. I just don't think Arkansas could come up with the best package.