Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
asuflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 716
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:48 pm

EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:27 am

On the heels of ALC telling Boeing to get their house in order, Sir Tim Clark, EK Chairman, is also expressing his frustration with Boeing essentially blaming the board for failing to sort out their internal problems, and saying they need to focus better on repairing trust with customers, suppliers and passengers.

https://theaircurrent.com/industry-stra ... 7-max-787/
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:02 am

I just read that. I think Clark is completely right on that one. I think it’s something we’ve all said right. I know the Boeing engineers are fantastic. That Board just needs an overhaul. They’ve made recent changes but I think everybody that was there just needs to not be there again or anybody with that mindset.

I accept Calhoun can go ahead and get them back on track but I don’t think should carry them forward in all honesty. But let’s see what happens
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:11 am

Opus99 wrote:
I just read that. I think Clark is completely right on that one. I think it’s something we’ve all said right. I know the Boeing engineers are fantastic. That Board just needs an overhaul. They’ve made recent changes but I think everybody that was there just needs to not be there again or anybody with that mindset.

I accept Calhoun can go ahead and get them back on track but I don’t think should carry them forward in all honesty. But let’s see what happens

And also management too.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2824
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:44 am

The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.
Signature. You just read one.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:52 am

B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out
 
Noshow
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:16 pm

It is not that easy for sure. Any aircraft manufacturer needs money, lots of. This is why the stock exchange has become so important. I agree that some elements, like stock buybacks and certain bonus payments should be changed but access to a lot of money will be needed for Boeings future. I still see them as a very capable company with a lot of talent. They just need to sharpen up a bit but they will be able to. More engineering talent at the top will help. And less fight between sites and with unions as well. What they seemed to lack a bit was the will to support long term investments.
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 2011
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:16 pm

Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out


It won't happen, but the solution to Boeing's problems would be if Warren Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway were to buy them. Mr. Buffet is a strong believer in nurturing companies for the long term, and if Boeing were owned by him, it would be great not just for the company, but for the aerospace industry as a whole.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:24 pm

WA707atMSP wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out


It won't happen, but the solution to Boeing's problems would be if Warren Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway were to buy them. Mr. Buffet is a strong believer in nurturing companies for the long term, and if Boeing were owned by him, it would be great not just for the company, but for the aerospace industry as a whole.

I doubt that will happen either tbh
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:49 pm

Noshow wrote:
It is not that easy for sure. Any aircraft manufacturer needs money, lots of. This is why the stock exchange has become so important. I agree that some elements, like stock buybacks and certain bonus payments should be changed but access to a lot of money will be needed for Boeings future. I still see them as a very capable company with a lot of talent. They just need to sharpen up a bit but they will be able to. More engineering talent at the top will help. And less fight between sites and with unions as well. What they seemed to lack a bit was the will to support long term investments.
Boeing was making more than enough money to guarantee its future, they just happened to squander most of it on short term goals.

Going way over budget on the 787 was them trying to be cheap. The MAX scenario only exists because they were being cheap. Stock buybacks and borrowing to buy back stocks was a way of goosing stock price so that management could benefit.

All these guys need to do is have a change in identity.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10369
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:55 pm

Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
[...]
That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out

Do they really have the talent tho?
Over the years they have either offered buyouts to their most senior engineers in order to replace them with younger, cheaper ones, or have outsourced just about everything they could, all in the name of cutting costs and meeting Wall Street expectations.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:01 pm

airbazar wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
[...]
That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out

Do they really have the talent tho?
Over the years they have either offered buyouts to their most senior engineers in order to replace them with younger, cheaper ones, or have outsourced just about everything they could, all in the name of cutting costs and meeting Wall Street expectations.

Boeing’s aircraft have been plagued by execution not design might I add. If they didn’t have the talent they wouldn’t be dominating the wide body market.

The execution has been plagued by the fact that there’s constant cost cutting.

MAX design irrespective of the issues is actually very efficient because of its engines and new winglets and that’s a 60 year old design might I add.

At the end of the day. The design still happens in house. Nobody else can design their product for them, and that’s the point. The last aircraft Boeing built without the pressures of cost reduction was the 777. See what happened there.

You can question their greed, you can question management motives but They have the talent.

Even Tim Clark with his many complaints made that clear.

Let the engineers do their work
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9442
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:06 pm

B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock


Just where do you think they would get the funds to go private? The market cap is $131 Billion.

If you want to see a commercial aircraft manufacturer that existed not to provide shareholder returns, but 'prestige' and jobs, look at Bombardier. How'd that turn out?
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:19 pm

B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.
Whatever
 
slider
Posts: 7720
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:34 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.


Agreed.
A better solution would be to, well, have true leadership. Boeing has lost its way in terms of the marketplace and it's due to inadequate leadership, plain and simple.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1126
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:39 pm

First, if anyone reads the actual article, it doesn’t fully support the headline. There’s plenty of valid criticism from Tim Clark. I think he’s using Jon Ostrower to negotiate with Boeing in the press, and I think Jon Ostrower has become more about promoting himself rather than insightful reporting.

Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?

Fantasies about taking Boeing private are just that, fantasies. Unless the US government is going to provide Boeing with low cost launch aid, Boeing needs to serve capital providers, amongst other constituents. Having Boeing be an engineering company run by engineers is a great idea until you need to make payroll and find out you have no money left.

There’s a few Flydubai 737s sitting in Seattle waiting for delivery. I have a feeling the ultimate objective of this interview is to put pressure on Boeing to give Dubai Inc what they want.
 
dopplerd
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:46 pm

We can't know the alternate reality but a world where the MAX doesn't exist and a 737 sized 797 does looks like a much better one for Boeing. However, it probably wouldnt be a world where McNerny's stock options were maximized and there in lies the rub.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:50 pm

dopplerd wrote:
We can't know the alternate reality but a world where the MAX doesn't exist and a 737 sized 797 does looks like a much better one for Boeing. However, it probably wouldnt be a world where McNerny's stock options were maximized and there in lies the rub.

Uhhhhh. I’m not sure I agree. MAX business case was sound. Implementation certainly was not. 797 could not have competed like 320neo family did. First It would’ve been over priced. So it won’t have hit a home run with the likes of Ryanair. Who outright rejected it, the way the MAX was selling prior to its crash is the proof you need that it was the right decision. Their greed just didn’t allow them to be diligent and be up front with customers and say. Look the changes we are making to this aircraft mean you will need minimal training but we will bear the brunt. For southwest it was a million a frame? Like most 737 customers would still have bought it because it will still be significantly less than having to move to the 320 family. But no!
Last edited by Opus99 on Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
dopplerd
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:00 pm

Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11725
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:01 pm

dopplerd wrote:
Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.

Even with proper MCAs implementation from the get go a 737MAX would come in far cheaper and on the market far faster than a new program.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:04 pm

dopplerd wrote:
Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.

Clearly you can, if 1. its back in service and 2. its still picking up orders immediately it came back into service and is the first choice of a 300 aircraft order by the same southwest that drove for no simulation. So yes the business case still holds
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:05 pm

Having a socialist Boeing isn't going to help, but neither is a purely capitalistic enterprise, because if it was fully open to the whims of the market and not supported by government contracts and guarantees then it would have become insolvent. The problem is in the incentive structure in markets, that can only be changed by legislation. Which is pretty unlikely, capitalism does not assign resources, that is merrily a byproduct, it collects money.

If Boeing is merrily an enterprise in maximizing money collection for the companies owner then we should not care if it fails. However the fact that all you people care enough to read and write about it means something more and that its value is greater than return on investment to shareholders, in that it derives economic good to the communities it resides in, allows the US to have an indigenous industrial capacity, provides learning for individuals, provides transportation support to the country. The problem is we want all those extras but the market does not assign a value to these things, hence misaligned incentives. That is the tension at the center of this problem, it is the same reason the "other" side is valued in its home. This will always be a problem with strategically important businesses when their economic and other value come into conflict.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:21 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.

You have to admit, this isn't capitalism's finest moment...

I see your "plane so expensive no one will purchase it" and raise with "plane so unsafe no one will fly it".

That's where unfettered capitalism will take you.

Meanwhile, in FG: Boeing 737-10 processes to undergo revision after EASA’s Max scrutiny we read:

(EASA's) technical investigation during the Max recertification has revealed “several systemic issues” in Boeing’s aircraft design processes – which, says EASA, show that the methodological concerns surrounding the development of the controversial MCAS stabiliser-control system were “not an isolated case”.

The result has been a refreshment of Boeing’s safety-assessment and development-assurance processes which will be applied for the 737-10.

Basically we have EASA schooling FAA and Boeing on how to design airplanes safely.

+1 for the socialists, IMO.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?

Then you should be happy with Boeing's current course. They don't seem to have fired anyone other than Forkner and Gustaffson, whose boozy texts made them the perfect fall guys. In turn this let the DoJ slap Boeing with a few hundred million dollars in fines and declare victory. For Boeing, that was a drop in the bucket compared to the $60B in debt they're now wallowing in. Meanwhile, the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer has a new title, 777X Chief Engineer.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:27 pm

Revelation wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:
That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.

You have to admit, this isn't capitalism's finest moment...

I see your "plane so expensive no one will purchase it" and raise with "plane so unsafe no one will fly it".

That's where unfettered capitalism will take you.

Meanwhile, in FG: Boeing 737-10 processes to undergo revision after EASA’s Max scrutiny we read:

(EASA's) technical investigation during the Max recertification has revealed “several systemic issues” in Boeing’s aircraft design processes – which, says EASA, show that the methodological concerns surrounding the development of the controversial MCAS stabiliser-control system were “not an isolated case”.

The result has been a refreshment of Boeing’s safety-assessment and development-assurance processes which will be applied for the 737-10.

Basically we have EASA schooling FAA and Boeing on how to design airplanes safely.

+1 for the socialists, IMO.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?

Then you should be happy with Boeing's current course. They don't seem to have fired anyone other than Forkner and Gustaffson, whose boozy texts made them the perfect fall guys. In turn this let the DoJ slap Boeing with a few hundred million dollars in fines and declare victory. For Boeing, that was a drop in the bucket compared to the $60B in debt they're now wallowing in. Meanwhile, the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer has a new title, 777X Chief Engineer.

I feel like the chief engineer would’ve been such an easy person to fire in this scenario. I wonder why they’ve kept him on...maybe there’s more to it
 
dopplerd
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:28 pm

Opus99 wrote:
dopplerd wrote:
Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.

Clearly you can, if 1. its back in service and 2. its still picking up orders immediately it came back into service and is the first choice of a 300 aircraft order by the same southwest that drove for no simulation. So yes the business case still holds


I'm talking about the 2011 desicion point not the 2020 reconfigured MAX. Of course designing the 2020 MAX in 2011 would be the best option and one that would be profitable but the choices then were clean sheet or MAX with (unknowingly) faulty MCAS. The 2020 MAX only exists after two crashes, hundreds of deaths and $10s of billions.

My point is that Boeing would be better off in 2021 with a clean sheet design vs MAX with the crashes, grounds, and redesign. I am in no way saying that the clean sheet road wouldn't have been a rocky one but ultimately less rocky than the MAX road that was taken.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2381
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:32 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

...

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.


That's basically how Boeing operated until the 1970s. They certainly did not lack innovation when designing the 707, 727, 737 and 747.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 1012
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:37 pm

Opus99 wrote:
I just read that. I think Clark is completely right on that one. I think it’s something we’ve all said right. I know the Boeing engineers are fantastic. That Board just needs an overhaul. They’ve made recent changes but I think everybody that was there just needs to not be there again or anybody with that mindset.

I accept Calhoun can go ahead and get them back on track but I don’t think should carry them forward in all honesty. But let’s see what happens


Boeing engineers are fantastic, but upper management pooches everything they do at every opportunity. Boeing fundamentally lost its way and almost lost its soul. Boeing has never had value except as a design, engineering and manufacturing firm. Its "managers," marketing and finance departments should not get command over the actual value-generating parts of the company. That would destroy it.

Boeing is basically a tech company that made the mistake of trying to manage itself like Proctor & Gamble or a breakfast cereal company.
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:39 pm

WA707atMSP wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out


It won't happen, but the solution to Boeing's problems would be if Warren Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway were to buy them. Mr. Buffet is a strong believer in nurturing companies for the long term, and if Boeing were owned by him, it would be great not just for the company, but for the aerospace industry as a whole.


Venture capitalist firms are vultures that are way more focused on the bottom line than Wall Street. I dont see this as a plus.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:44 pm

Opus99 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer has a new title, 777X Chief Engineer.

I feel like the chief engineer would’ve been such an easy person to fire in this scenario. I wonder why they’ve kept him on...maybe there’s more to it

Right, but he's not only not fired, but also promoted to a position of greater prestige and greater reward. What kind of signal does that send to people like the 'whistle blower' who argued against the same man for a third AoA source and was told it cost too much? The man had ultimate responsibility for the MAX from the engineering view. He signed off the design documents. When asked by Congress why he did this, he just said I trusted my subordinates. No personal responsibility so it seems, and no career consequences. IMO this sends a message to the worker bees that it's OK to cut corners in the company's favor, management will have your back. My cynical side says he was kept as a reward for keeping his mouth shut. IMO there still is a wall of silence around exactly how Boeing got the MCAS design and implementation so wrong in the first place, and how such a huge screw up was ever let out the door, and how they still were in deep denial even after the first crash. Boeing managed to find a good set of fall guys in Gustavsson and Forkner, and also made Muilenberg walk the plank, yet the rest of the operation is largely intact with its new CEO being a former board member and its 777X Chief Engineer the former 737MAX Chief Engineer. Both of these are pretty brazen moves, but no one calls them out on this, the executive class takes care of its own.

dopplerd wrote:
My point is that Boeing would be better off in 2021 with a clean sheet design vs MAX with the crashes, grounds, and redesign. I am in no way saying that the clean sheet road wouldn't have been a rocky one but ultimately less rocky than the MAX road that was taken.

They also should have sold everything and bought bitcoin and Tesla stock back then too, no need to have all the stress associated with making airplanes.

If we only had a time machine...

Meanwhile, in the real world, people have to operate based on what they know right now, not what they will know ten years in the future.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:06 pm

I guess a positive for Boeing in the midst of all this at least is that they're meeting performance targets with the planes, they just need to clean up their in-house mess. A customer is probably likely to cancel orders because of a messy management if the planes are on spec.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1126
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:09 pm

Revelation wrote:
I see your "plane so expensive no one will purchase it" and raise with "plane so unsafe no one will fly it".

That's where unfettered capitalism will take you.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?

Then you should be happy with Boeing's current course. They don't seem to have fired anyone other than Forkner and Gustaffson, whose boozy texts made them the perfect fall guys. In turn this let the DoJ slap Boeing with a few hundred million dollars in fines and declare victory. For Boeing, that was a drop in the bucket compared to the $60B in debt they're now wallowing in. Meanwhile, the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer has a new title, 777X Chief Engineer.


First, I believe that no airlines and an immaterial amount of passengers have said the MAX is too unsafe to fly. If you have proof to contradict, I would be interested to see it.

Second, a ton of people at Boeing have been fired, including Dennis Muilenburg (who was an aeronautical engineer!) and Kevin McAllister. There’s also been quite a bit of turnover on the board. Is there someone else that you believes should be held accountable that is still working at Boeing?
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer has a new title, 777X Chief Engineer.

I feel like the chief engineer would’ve been such an easy person to fire in this scenario. I wonder why they’ve kept him on...maybe there’s more to it

Right, but he's not only not fired, but also promoted to a position of greater prestige and greater reward. What kind of signal does that send to people like the 'whistle blower' who argued against the same man for a third AoA source and was told it cost too much? The man had ultimate responsibility for the MAX from the engineering view. He signed off the design documents. When asked by Congress why he did this, he just said I trusted my subordinates. No personal responsibility so it seems, and no career consequences. IMO this sends a message to the worker bees that it's OK to cut corners in the company's favor, management will have your back. My cynical side says he was kept as a reward for keeping his mouth shut. IMO there still is a wall of silence around exactly how Boeing got the MCAS design and implementation so wrong in the first place, and how such a huge screw up was ever let out the door, and how they still were in deep denial even after the first crash. Boeing managed to find a good set of fall guys in Gustavsson and Forkner, and also made Muilenberg walk the plank, yet the rest of the operation is largely intact with its new CEO being a former board member and its 777X Chief Engineer the former 737MAX Chief Engineer. Both of these are pretty brazen moves, but no one calls them out on this, the executive class takes care of its own.

dopplerd wrote:
My point is that Boeing would be better off in 2021 with a clean sheet design vs MAX with the crashes, grounds, and redesign. I am in no way saying that the clean sheet road wouldn't have been a rocky one but ultimately less rocky than the MAX road that was taken.

They also should have sold everything and bought bitcoin and Tesla stock back then too, no need to have all the stress associated with making airplanes.

If we only had a time machine...

Meanwhile, in the real world, people have to operate based on what they know right now, not what they will know ten years in the future.

If I’m being honest, and I am extremely happy to be corrected but what I’ve seen so far from Calhoun the CEO seems different from Calhoun the board member. Do I think he’s the right person to drive the business forward; I think not. Is he the right person to get them back on track? I haven’t seen anything suggest otherwise so far, their strategy on the return to service of the MAX was right to be fair it was the only one but he first came in and got everything out and improved cooperation with regulation and that was night and day from the words of Steve dickson. Even with these 787 issues, the deep analysis going on and a renewed focus on the quality issues and completely halting the groundings in a time where as much cash is needed also shows some positive signs. I don’t know if it’s just me. But a Boeing prior to max would’ve 100% not done this analysis and continued to deliver those planes like that. We’ve also heard improvements on issues with the KC-46s, let’s see what happens with starliner in May or whenever. I know Calhoun brought in chief software engineer from Space X with regards to that. So i mean, I might certainly be looking too much into it. Even with the 777X they’re going ahead with design modifications and have delayed that accordingly etc, we’ve seen many changes to the board, more changes are coming as two more long term members step down, as well as changes to management as well. So what am I saying? It seems more has changed in the last 12 months than it the last 10 years and all for the better. Is it enough? Probably not but at least we are seeing some changes
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:18 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I see your "plane so expensive no one will purchase it" and raise with "plane so unsafe no one will fly it".

That's where unfettered capitalism will take you.

First, I believe that no airlines and an immaterial amount of passengers have said the MAX is too unsafe to fly. If you have proof to contradict, I would be interested to see it.

You also have not seen a Boeing "plane so expensive no one will purchase it".

Clearly, we are having a hypothetical discussion.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, a ton of people at Boeing have been fired, including Dennis Muilenburg (who was an aeronautical engineer!) and Kevin McAllister. There’s also been quite a bit of turnover on the board. Is there someone else that you believes should be held accountable that is still working at Boeing?

As I've mentioned before, and so has STC, we don't have a true reading of what exactly went on within Boeing, so no, I can't name anyone who should be held accountable. Boeing has put a wall of silence around exactly what happened both during MAX development and during its response to the first crash.

Also as I've just mentioned it seems remarkable to me that the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer is now the 777X Chief Engineer. It sends the wrong signal, IMO.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I see your "plane so expensive no one will purchase it" and raise with "plane so unsafe no one will fly it".

That's where unfettered capitalism will take you.

First, I believe that no airlines and an immaterial amount of passengers have said the MAX is too unsafe to fly. If you have proof to contradict, I would be interested to see it.

You also have not seen a Boeing "plane so expensive no one will purchase it".

Clearly, we are having a hypothetical discussion.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, a ton of people at Boeing have been fired, including Dennis Muilenburg (who was an aeronautical engineer!) and Kevin McAllister. There’s also been quite a bit of turnover on the board. Is there someone else that you believes should be held accountable that is still working at Boeing?

As I've mentioned before, and so has STC, we don't have a true reading of what exactly went on within Boeing, so no, I can't name anyone who should be held accountable. Boeing has put a wall of silence around exactly what happened both during MAX development and during its response to the first crash.

Also as I've just mentioned it seems remarkable to me that the guy who signed off on the 737MAX as Chief Engineer is now the 777X Chief Engineer. It sends the wrong signal, IMO.

Did some research, he's been chief engineer of the 777X since at least 2017.

Check this out, He was chief engineer here:
https://www.boeing.com/777x/reveal/boei ... -assembly/

I mean, i don't know if that makes it worse or better but just thought i should point out
 
astuteman
Posts: 7368
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:29 pm

Opus99 wrote:
dopplerd wrote:
Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.

Clearly you can, if 1. its back in service and 2. its still picking up orders immediately it came back into service and is the first choice of a 300 aircraft order by the same southwest that drove for no simulation. So yes the business case still holds


Clearly you can't.
The MAX's business case has to be $20Bn - $30Bn further into a hole because of the implementation failure...

I agree the programme will continue to get orders that are "per frame" profitable and worth having going forward.
But I struggle to see how the MAX ever generates a positive programme NPV as it stands today

Rgds
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:31 pm

Opus99 wrote:
If I’m being honest, and I am extremely happy to be corrected but what I’ve seen so far from Calhoun the CEO seems different from Calhoun the board member. Do I think he’s the right person to drive the business forward; I think not. Is he the right person to get them back on track? I haven’t seen anything suggest otherwise so far, their strategy on the return to service of the MAX was right to be fair it was the only one but he first came in and got everything out and improved cooperation with regulation and that was night and day from the words of Steve dickson. Even with these 787 issues, the deep analysis going on and a renewed focus on the quality issues and completely halting the groundings in a time where as much cash is needed also shows some positive signs. I don’t know if it’s just me. But a Boeing prior to max would’ve 100% not done this analysis and continued to deliver those planes like that. We’ve also heard improvements on issues with the KC-46s, let’s see what happens with starliner in May or whenever. I know Calhoun brought in chief software engineer from Space X with regards to that. So i mean, I might certainly be looking too much into it. Even with the 777X they’re going ahead with design modifications and have delayed that accordingly etc, we’ve seen many changes to the board, more changes are coming as two more long term members step down, as well as changes to management as well. So what am I saying? It seems more has changed in the last 12 months than it the last 10 years and all for the better. Is it enough? Probably not but at least we are seeing some changes

Yet we have STC spending 90 minutes of his work day talking to Ostrower about how Boeing hasn't changed.

Calhoun was a board member throughout the MAX tragedy, and he still seems to have blinders about how his company is being perceived by its major customers.

The strategy he chose is largely about trying to protect Boeing from even more financial damage should its core engineering practices be found to be at fault.

So far he's avoided that by putting a wall of silence around the four second guy and by throwing Forkner under the bus.

The cost to pay for such silence is the perception of customers that Boeing is being evasive and thus not fully trustworthy.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:37 pm

astuteman wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
dopplerd wrote:
Problem is you can't separate the MAXs business case from its implementation, it was the drive to keeps costs low that led to MCAS.

Clearly you can, if 1. its back in service and 2. its still picking up orders immediately it came back into service and is the first choice of a 300 aircraft order by the same southwest that drove for no simulation. So yes the business case still holds


Clearly you can't.
The MAX's business case has to be $20Bn - $30Bn further into a hole because of the implementation failure...

I agree the programme will continue to get orders that are "per frame" profitable and worth having going forward.
But I struggle to see how the MAX ever generates a positive programme NPV as it stands today

Rgds

20-30bn did not come from solely having to make the changes to the MAX, there were compensation charges etc. Most of the changes actually occurred early on the re-certification. Putting a second AOA sensor, re-wiring and training will cost 20-30billion? 20-30 billon is what you use to build a new aircraft, infact 2 if you use the money well. Come on
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:40 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.

The Dreamliner was unlikely to make money before the inspections started. It is now sure to never make money.
The 737 MAX would have made Boeing a lot of money, but with the grounding, it is likely to never make any money for the company.
The 777X just took a forward loss; the order book is shrinking, and if we ever get the Trent Ultrafan, it is as dead as a dodo.

Boeing went away from what makes an airframer great, and that is having great engineering and providing funds to get better at that. What Boeing became was a great financial engineering company. The problem with these people who financially engineer is the fact that they always look at the short term, and as a result, the companies they lead work great in the short term to medium term but are absolutely lost when it comes to long term planning and delivery of stated long term goals.

Had Boeing not been cheap with the Dreamliner, had they not tried to bleed stone, it might have been slightly late, slightly over budget with planes meeting specification. If Boeing had been serious as an engineering firm, there was no way they design a plane with a single point of failure, and hide new additions from regulators and their airline customers. What ought to make Boeing great is not its ability to buy back shares and think in the short to medium term, what makes it great is making great products. Investing the money needed to get it right the first time instead of spending time and money rectifying products because they could not get it done right.

I honestly do not care where managers and the board come from as long as they have some people who know what is required by the industry at board and management level. Boeing needs to go back to being a firm centered around great engineering and great planes. IF they do this, there will be more money to be made than with the current operating model. This does not take a genius to figure out.
Last edited by Gremlinzzzz on Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:43 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
If I’m being honest, and I am extremely happy to be corrected but what I’ve seen so far from Calhoun the CEO seems different from Calhoun the board member. Do I think he’s the right person to drive the business forward; I think not. Is he the right person to get them back on track? I haven’t seen anything suggest otherwise so far, their strategy on the return to service of the MAX was right to be fair it was the only one but he first came in and got everything out and improved cooperation with regulation and that was night and day from the words of Steve dickson. Even with these 787 issues, the deep analysis going on and a renewed focus on the quality issues and completely halting the groundings in a time where as much cash is needed also shows some positive signs. I don’t know if it’s just me. But a Boeing prior to max would’ve 100% not done this analysis and continued to deliver those planes like that. We’ve also heard improvements on issues with the KC-46s, let’s see what happens with starliner in May or whenever. I know Calhoun brought in chief software engineer from Space X with regards to that. So i mean, I might certainly be looking too much into it. Even with the 777X they’re going ahead with design modifications and have delayed that accordingly etc, we’ve seen many changes to the board, more changes are coming as two more long term members step down, as well as changes to management as well. So what am I saying? It seems more has changed in the last 12 months than it the last 10 years and all for the better. Is it enough? Probably not but at least we are seeing some changes

Yet we have STC spending 90 minutes of his work day talking to Ostrower about how Boeing hasn't changed.

Calhoun was a board member throughout the MAX tragedy, and he still seems to have blinders about how his company is being perceived by its major customers.

The strategy he chose is largely about trying to protect Boeing from even more financial damage should its core engineering practices be found to be at fault.

So far he's avoided that by putting a wall of silence around the four second guy and by throwing Forkner under the bus.

The cost to pay for such silence is the perception of customers that Boeing is being evasive and thus not fully trustworthy.

Actually to be fair, What STC is saying, is what Boeing got wrong and why they are where they are today, Jon does ask him about the current team and if they have what it takes and he says only time will tell, that depeds on if they still have the same mindset that Boeing boards and management have had then this is folly.

I'm just saying we have seen more changes (is it fake, is it true? i can't answer that) but it is certainly more than they have done in the past 10 years. it is certainly not enough but i'm just giving my own opinion anyway
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18632
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:55 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.

LOL wut. That's not what socialism means.

sxf24 wrote:
Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?

Are the 787 and Max debacles not reason enough?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Noshow wrote:
It is not that easy for sure. Any aircraft manufacturer needs money, lots of. This is why the stock exchange has become so important. I agree that some elements, like stock buybacks and certain bonus payments should be changed but access to a lot of money will be needed for Boeings future. I still see them as a very capable company with a lot of talent. They just need to sharpen up a bit but they will be able to. More engineering talent at the top will help. And less fight between sites and with unions as well. What they seemed to lack a bit was the will to support long term investments.
Boeing was making more than enough money to guarantee its future, they just happened to squander most of it on short term goals.

Going way over budget on the 787 was them trying to be cheap. The MAX scenario only exists because they were being cheap. Stock buybacks and borrowing to buy back stocks was a way of goosing stock price so that management could benefit.

All these guys need to do is have a change in identity.

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: It sure seems like the corporate leadership in an ivory tower in Chicago has spent its time spending a dollar to save a penny by playing off labor in SC and WA, dreaming up convoluted supply chains that went kablooey, and patting themselves on the back for stock buybacks while they turf engineers. Reminds me of another Chicago HQ. :roll:
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:09 pm

Opus99 wrote:
Did some research, he's been chief engineer of the 777X since at least 2017.

Check this out, He was chief engineer here:
https://www.boeing.com/777x/reveal/boei ... -assembly/

I mean, i don't know if that makes it worse or better but just thought i should point out

You might want to read https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... y-details/ which says:

In testimony to congressional investigators probing the fatal crashes of two 737 MAX jets,Michael Teal, the chief engineer on Boeing’s 737 MAX program who signed off on the jet’s technical configuration, said he was unaware of crucial technical details of the flight control system that triggered inadvertently and caused the crashes.

And under questioning, both Teal and Keith Leverkuhn, the vice president in overall charge of the MAX development program, denied the airplane had any design flaws beyond an assumption that the pilots would have reacted differently to the triggering of the system.

And:

Teal, vice president and chief project engineer during development of the MAX, said he was not aware that the errant flight control software that brought down the two jets — the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — was triggered by a single sensor.

He learned that only after the first crash, Lion Air flight JT610, he said, “Most likely through the press.”

He was also unaware that the system could activate repeatedly, as it did in the crash flights, relentlessly pushing down the noses of the jets each time the pilots pulled them up.

“I had no knowledge that MCAS had a repeat function in it during the development,” Teal told investigators. “The technical leaders well below my level would have gone into that level of detail.”

Where is the accountability?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:17 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
Did some research, he's been chief engineer of the 777X since at least 2017.

Check this out, He was chief engineer here:
https://www.boeing.com/777x/reveal/boei ... -assembly/

I mean, i don't know if that makes it worse or better but just thought i should point out

You might want to read https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... y-details/ which says:

In testimony to congressional investigators probing the fatal crashes of two 737 MAX jets,Michael Teal, the chief engineer on Boeing’s 737 MAX program who signed off on the jet’s technical configuration, said he was unaware of crucial technical details of the flight control system that triggered inadvertently and caused the crashes.

And under questioning, both Teal and Keith Leverkuhn, the vice president in overall charge of the MAX development program, denied the airplane had any design flaws beyond an assumption that the pilots would have reacted differently to the triggering of the system.

And:

Teal, vice president and chief project engineer during development of the MAX, said he was not aware that the errant flight control software that brought down the two jets — the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — was triggered by a single sensor.

He learned that only after the first crash, Lion Air flight JT610, he said, “Most likely through the press.”

He was also unaware that the system could activate repeatedly, as it did in the crash flights, relentlessly pushing down the noses of the jets each time the pilots pulled them up.

“I had no knowledge that MCAS had a repeat function in it during the development,” Teal told investigators. “The technical leaders well below my level would have gone into that level of detail.”

Where is the accountability?

I think he should've been fired but i guess thats where EASA comes in with the systemic issues on aircraft design. Look, i'm not disagreeing with you, it looks bad, there's no way to sugar coat it, but maybe i'm just also looking at some of the changes that have been made, like i said, it certainly is not enough but like Clark said, time will tell.

I am also wondering what clark means by planes that don't work?

He only received the 300ERs from Boeing? Which he also praises all the time, maybe he's referring to flydubai
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:21 pm

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Boeing went away from what makes an airframer great, and that is having great engineering and providing funds to get better at that. What Boeing became was a great financial engineering company. The problem with these people who financially engineer is the fact that they always look at the short term, and as a result, the companies they lead work great in the short term to medium term but are absolutely lost when it comes to long term planning and delivery of stated long term goals.

There has to be a happy medium. As mentioned by others, airplane development is capital intensive. There has to be a degree of financial engineering to make it all work. Talented people (both engineering and management) will demand high salaries and if they don't get them they will go elsewhere. Yet we've seen Boeing not be good financial engineers. The 787 program showed this in spades. They understood the cost of everything and didn't understand the value of anything. I'm exaggerating, but it's not too far from the mark. Their fiscal decisions caused chaos, and they ended up paying for it big time.

Had Boeing not been cheap with the Dreamliner, had they not tried to bleed stone, it might have been slightly late, slightly over budget with planes meeting specification. If Boeing had been serious as an engineering firm, there was no way they design a plane with a single point of failure, and hide new additions from regulators and their airline customers. What ought to make Boeing great is not its ability to buy back shares and think in the short to medium term, what makes it great is making great products. Investing the money needed to get it right the first time instead of spending time and money rectifying products because they could not get it done right.

I'm still not sure Boeing was cheap with the MAX. I don't see the cause and effect link between cheapness and dumb engineering decisions such as trusting untrustworthy AoA data and allowing multiple activation based on that faulty data. As above, though, we still have no insight as to who made these decisions and what circumstances they were made under. We honestly can't say it was due to financial pressure versus simple incompetence. Boeing's wall of silence has stood firm.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:30 pm

Opus99 wrote:
I think he should've been fired but i guess thats where EASA comes in with the systemic issues on aircraft design. Look, i'm not disagreeing with you, it looks bad, there's no way to sugar coat it, but maybe i'm just also looking at some of the changes that have been made, like i said, it certainly is not enough but like Clark said, time will tell.

I am also wondering what clark means by planes that don't work?

He only received the 300ERs from Boeing? Which he also praises all the time, maybe he's referring to flydubai

Actually, I'm not calling for firings, I am calling for accountability. Teal's comments just pass the buck to his underlings. He never says anything like he should have been more involved, he should have asked more questions, etc. He never identifies where the system broke down. He never accepts responsibility.

I agree the recent changes have been for the better, but there still seems to be a distrust between Boeing and its customers that will not go away as long as Boeing continues to avoid a full accounting of what went wrong. Right now they're still clinging to plausible deniability, presumably for legal and financial reasons. Yet they act as if their evasion is invisible, while it is anything but. This will sustain the ongoing climate of distrust that STC is voicing in his comments.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:37 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
I think he should've been fired but i guess thats where EASA comes in with the systemic issues on aircraft design. Look, i'm not disagreeing with you, it looks bad, there's no way to sugar coat it, but maybe i'm just also looking at some of the changes that have been made, like i said, it certainly is not enough but like Clark said, time will tell.

I am also wondering what clark means by planes that don't work?

He only received the 300ERs from Boeing? Which he also praises all the time, maybe he's referring to flydubai

Actually, I'm not calling for firings, I am calling for accountability. Teal's comments just pass the buck to his underlings. He never says anything like he should have been more involved, he should have asked more questions, etc. He never identifies where the system broke down. He never accepts responsibility.

I agree the recent changes have been for the better, but there still seems to be a distrust between Boeing and its customers that will not go away as long as Boeing continues to avoid a full accounting of what went wrong. Right now they're still clinging to plausible deniability, presumably for legal and financial reasons. Yet they act as if their evasion is invisible, while it is anything but. This will sustain the ongoing climate of distrust that STC is voicing in his comments.

Literally Seattle times just dropped an article on our discussion. And it’s Pretty much voicing what you’re saying:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ed-enough/

Teal says he doesn’t see anyone at Boeing’s board with aerospace engineering background that is Airbus’ board of directors right now nobody has that experience. Until their latest CEO came in. Tom Enders their previous CEO up until 2019 did PPE at uni.

They need strong and good leadership that will harness engineering. When they had an engineer didn’t quite work out but engineering must be the centre of decision making
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:58 pm

Changing from a successful income generating product to a new one is the bane of many industries and the demise of some, either because they refused to move with the times or backed the wrong horse. So it easy to understand this common decision being so difficult. Either decision to switch or update came with risks. Even before the MAX safety problem A320 family was selling better than the 737 family, making people wonder if they had made a mistake. Despite the market share being smaller they were still selling a phenomenal number of planes, that's what makes these decisions so tough. Most airlines would have trusted that an established company would make generally safe planes without major flaws. The moment that Boeing announce that the 737 will be replaced orders will be effected and the company has to make sure that its existing workload can carry it through to the next plane. At this point everyone must be aware that plane EIS dates have a tricky habit of sliding past where you and your customers would like them to be, and if this is to be your major revenue stream that will make anyone nervous.

So in conclusion you will be damned whatever you do, but I think prioritizing safe aircraft is number one.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26151
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:08 pm

Opus99 wrote:
Literally Seattle times just dropped an article on our discussion. And it’s Pretty much voicing what you’re saying:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ed-enough/

Teal says he doesn’t see anyone at Boeing’s board with aerospace engineering background that is Airbus’ board of directors right now nobody has that experience. Until their latest CEO came in. Tom Enders their previous CEO up until 2019 did PPE at uni.

They need strong and good leadership that will harness engineering. When they had an engineer didn’t quite work out but engineering must be the centre of decision making

Thanks for the link. A bit of clarification on who is being quoted:

Aviation analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group is unimpressed.

He notes there’s not a single aeronautical engineering degree among the 10 board members and the two most powerful executives, Calhoun and Chief Financial Officer Greg Smith.

I agree with the thrust of the article. It seems the company hopes time will heal all wounds. That strategy is mostly working as far as the flying public is concerned. It does not seem to be working with its customers or with its own workforce.

Calhoun often hints at the tech being developed for their next airplane, but I have to question which airline will be willing to sign up as launch customer when their engineering executives are willing to go in front of Congress and say they don't have a detailed knowledge of how the program whose documents they signed works.

I can only imagine the kind of guarantees the airlines are going to ask Boeing for on the next clean sheet. That will be the price to pay for trust breaking down.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
Literally Seattle times just dropped an article on our discussion. And it’s Pretty much voicing what you’re saying:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ed-enough/

Teal says he doesn’t see anyone at Boeing’s board with aerospace engineering background that is Airbus’ board of directors right now nobody has that experience. Until their latest CEO came in. Tom Enders their previous CEO up until 2019 did PPE at uni.

They need strong and good leadership that will harness engineering. When they had an engineer didn’t quite work out but engineering must be the centre of decision making

Thanks for the link. A bit of clarification on who is being quoted:

Aviation analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group is unimpressed.

He notes there’s not a single aeronautical engineering degree among the 10 board members and the two most powerful executives, Calhoun and Chief Financial Officer Greg Smith.

I agree with the thrust of the article. It seems the company hopes time will heal all wounds. That strategy is mostly working as far as the flying public is concerned. It does not seem to be working with its customers or with its own workforce.

Calhoun often hints at the tech being developed for their next airplane, but I have to question which airline will be willing to sign up as launch customer when their engineering executives are willing to go in front of Congress and say they don't have a detailed knowledge of how the program whose documents they signed works.

I can only imagine the kind of guarantees the airlines are going to ask Boeing for on the next clean sheet. That will be the price to pay for trust breaking down.

Certainly. The only way Boeing can actually rebuild the trust of their customers. Is to actually deliver a plane on time with zero issues, there’s nothing they can currently say or do that will change that. The next clean sheet like you say is going to heavily favour the customers in terms of not meeting spec or any sort of delay. So Boeing better bring their A-Game.

In terms of accountability, I don’t think they’ll never do it sadly. Sigh
 
speedbird52
Posts: 1069
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:38 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The best way forward for Boeing would be to de-list their stock, getting out of the grips of short-sighted Wall Street vultures and their perpetual desire for ever improving quarterlies.

Secondly they need to recognise that they're an engineering company first, second and last. Their mission should never be to "maximise shareholder value", as that will only lead to never ending cost cuts, but rather to "produce the safest, most efficient and most reliable products in the industry". Profits will naturally follow, provided they do indeed meet those mission targets.

Thirdly they need to have as a stated objective never to engage in stock buy-backs, but rather to invest the vast majority of their profits (75% or more) into R&D. Whatever is left can be split equally between workers (including management) and owners, in the form of bonuses and dividends.

Fourthly, it must be a prerequisite for joining the Boeing board that they've never worked for GE/Jack Welch or any other company with a similar ethos, and must never have been employed by a management consultancy firm. The majority of the board must come from an aerospace background in the fields of either safety, engineering or quality. The chairman must be a long-time Boeing employee from either of those fields, with a long and unblemished record of having safety as their number one priority.

That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.


What do you think socialism is
That is straight up socialism and if you want a company to flounder and not be innovative, that is it. That is some sort of utopian thinking and in reality, a terrible idea.

Sorry, that would be disastrous and completely against the realities of economics. It would be so expensive to purchase a plane, they would sell none and not be in business at all.


What do you think socialism is.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:55 pm

Revelation wrote:
There has to be a happy medium. As mentioned by others, airplane development is capital intensive. There has to be a degree of financial engineering to make it all work. Talented people (both engineering and management) will demand high salaries and if they don't get them they will go elsewhere. Yet we've seen Boeing not be good financial engineers. The 787 program showed this in spades. They understood the cost of everything and didn't understand the value of anything. I'm exaggerating, but it's not too far from the mark. Their fiscal decisions caused chaos, and they ended up paying for it big time.


I think that people forget that Boeing's previous program launch was the 777, and it was not only a great launch, but a fantastic platform for the company to learn from. Then came the financial engineers, people schooled in the GE school of thought that saw Jack Welch and his cronies generally plunder and gut what was a great company. People that had seen MD wither into almost nothing on the civilian aviation side, these were trusted with running a company that knew how to make planes.

More than talented people, a company needs to have the right people. You need a board that recognizes that they are there to ensure the company plans for the long term. Management below them that ensures that the right culture is in place, and one that lends it ear to the employee to see that they have the proper tools to deliver to the best of their ability. What they got were some greedy people more interested in lining their pockets and pleasing speculators as opposed to getting a good product out.

All financial engineering has a cost. You gain in the short term, even post 'profits' early, but there is always a price to pay once the honeymoon ends. Boeing has been posting profits, borrowing to buy back stocks, and ensuring that program cost, eons later and almost 1000 787's delivered has not been fully realized.

Revelation wrote:
I'm still not sure Boeing was cheap with the MAX. I don't see the cause and effect link between cheapness and dumb engineering decisions such as trusting untrustworthy AoA data and allowing multiple activation based on that faulty data. As above, though, we still have no insight as to who made these decisions and what circumstances they were made under. We honestly can't say it was due to financial pressure versus simple incompetence. Boeing's wall of silence has stood firm.

Time = Money.
Good products need a good amount of time to get right, thus, by extension, money.
The 737MAX was not even on time, it came in early. Now we know from the hearings that Boeing was rushing to get the product out, and we know from the audits that MCAS was not the only issue that was found with the plane i.e. taking the time, and therefore money needed to get things right first time round was not as big an issue as getting a plane out to compete with the A320NEO.

We know they screwed up big time because it took close to two years to get the plane up and flying again. If civilian aviation was not a duopoly, this zombie company would be done. The only thing keeping it up is military contracts and interest rates that have been kept artificially low.
 
2eng2efficient
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2020 5:30 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:14 pm

I recently finished reading the “Lights Out” GE book and it is painfully obvious that the Jack Welch school of management contributed to the problems at Boeing too.

Fortunately, perhaps, we are having this conversation in 2021 when the philosophy of value creation is shifting away from “shareholder value at all costs” and toward a more holistic perspective. I understand this is typically used to frame climate issues, but the governance of Boeing’s total supplier/employee/customer ecosystem certainly warrants attention. Not saying they should go on a purge of “GE thought”, but major strategic decisions about things like R&D, pressure on suppliers, etc. should be reviewed at the Board level with these considerations in mind.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos