Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Vicenza
Topic Author
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 12:10 pm

Am surprised this hasn't been posted yet, from BBC this morning. If it has, apologies but I don't see it anywhere.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63003632
 
maverick4002
Posts: 592
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 12:44 pm

Who is the recipient of this fine? The government?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 21479
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:15 pm

This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.
 
Opus99
Posts: 3553
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:17 pm

scbriml wrote:
This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.

Not that it’s fair but I think he has to pay 1M. Which is nothing for him so yes no real punishment
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 21479
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:21 pm

Opus99 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.

Not that it’s fair but I think he has to pay 1M. Which is nothing for him so yes no real punishment


My bad, I managed to miss that reading the BBC link on my phone. Not exactly pocket change, but hardly going to leave him destitute.
 
User avatar
MrBren
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 11:44 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:23 pm

Here are the details of the SEC press release.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-170
 
Vicenza
Topic Author
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 4:49 pm

maverick4002 wrote:
Who is the recipient of this fine? The government?


Both were imposed by the US SEC, so I assume government.
 
Vicenza
Topic Author
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 4:53 pm

scbriml wrote:
This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.


Indeed so, unfortunately, and it is largely merely symbolic. The only 'positive' is it does call out both Boeing and DM deliberately caught lying.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 972
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:20 pm

Vicenza wrote:
scbriml wrote:
This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.


Indeed so, unfortunately, and it is largely merely symbolic. The only 'positive' is it does call out both Boeing and DM deliberately caught lying.


Which could have implications for ongoing civil lawsuits from victims families, no?
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:35 pm

scbriml wrote:
This is nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Boeing. The $200 million is just a rounding error on the tens of billions the MAX fiasco has cost them.

More troubling is that much of the blame is laid squarely at the feet of DM, yet he appears to have escaped any direct punishment.


It's really tough to get individual criminal convictions under U.S. law -- which is one of the attractions of incorporating, frankly.

The company settled without admitting or denying the facts of the case.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/22/busi ... 7-max.html

That's a very common element in these settlements. Demand acknowledgement of wrongdoing and companies will drag it out in court for a very, very long time and hope the government prosecutors lose, if only on a technicality.
 
accentra
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2021 11:35 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 8:05 pm

To me it's interesting that Boeing talks much about its changed corporate culture and its new focus on safety... yet are not prepared to admit publicly that they did wrong. So, has anything really changed? I would have so liked them to have shown courage and put their hand up here. That would have been a real game changer. And a real indication of a lesson learnt. But that's not how it rolls in corporations, moor's the pity
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11597
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 8:13 pm

accentra wrote:
To me it's interesting that Boeing talks much about its changed corporate culture and its new focus on safety... yet are not prepared to admit publicly that they did wrong. So, has anything really changed? I would have so liked them to have shown courage and put their hand up here. That would have been a real game changer. And a real indication of a lesson learnt. But that's not how it rolls in corporations, moor's the pity

If they do or had done that they would also at the same time announce a winding up of operations, after all, money is money, and those who have suffered will not give them a pass. Boeing has already spent / lost billions on the MAX saga so would also have to find funds to pay off the new claimants since an admission would mean no court case. I don't think you will have airlines buying Boeing products to help them out because they were honest and up front.
Unfortunately, especially in the USA where liability is a big issue, expecting a business who wants to be an ongoing concern to fully claim responsibility will probably not happen.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:08 pm

par13del wrote:
accentra wrote:
To me it's interesting that Boeing talks much about its changed corporate culture and its new focus on safety... yet are not prepared to admit publicly that they did wrong. So, has anything really changed? I would have so liked them to have shown courage and put their hand up here. That would have been a real game changer. And a real indication of a lesson learnt. But that's not how it rolls in corporations, moor's the pity

If they do or had done that they would also at the same time announce a winding up of operations, after all, money is money, and those who have suffered will not give them a pass. Boeing has already spent / lost billions on the MAX saga so would also have to find funds to pay off the new claimants since an admission would mean no court case. I don't think you will have airlines buying Boeing products to help them out because they were honest and up front.
Unfortunately, especially in the USA where liability is a big issue, expecting a business who wants to be an ongoing concern to fully claim responsibility will probably not happen.


Yes, corporations get the non-admission clause as part of the plea bargain, but the government is still free to explain their findings in the plea agreement. All it really does is shield the company from additional criminal liability. Which is standard practice in plea bargaining. It doesn't shield them from civil liability.

In this case the charge is that Boeing did not publicly admit the flaws in MCAS were contributing factors, until two months after the second accident. Thus depriving shareholders of decisional choice during that period.

It's a valid charge as Boeing should have been more forthcoming in that period. So this outcome is fair. Since Muilenburg left, Boeing has consistently self-reported, so I think things have changed. They are still under scrutiny by DoJ and FAA, and have to report regularly to those agencies on safety progress.
 
Vicenza
Topic Author
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:20 pm

Avatar2go wrote:

Since Muilenburg left, Boeing has consistently self-reported, so I think things have changed.


But, essentially, only because they have been forced to. I would very highly doubt it is 'out of choice' because it's the right thing to do.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:24 pm

Vicenza wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:

Since Muilenburg left, Boeing has consistently self-reported, so I think things have changed.


But, essentially, only because they have been forced to. I would very highly doubt it is 'out of choice' because it's the right thing to do.


No way to assess that assertion. My guess is that it's a combination of the two.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 7017
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 1:12 am

accentra wrote:
To me it's interesting that Boeing talks much about its changed corporate culture and its new focus on safety... yet are not prepared to admit publicly that they did wrong. So, has anything really changed? I would have so liked them to have shown courage and put their hand up here. That would have been a real game changer. And a real indication of a lesson learnt. But that's not how it rolls in corporations, moor's the pity


The culture is changing. I work at Boeing. There is work to do, but I’m seeing a big improvement.

They may not put their hand up publicly, but the acknowledgement that terrible mistakes were made and we lost the public and regulator confidence is freely stated in internal meetings. There is a big emphasis on earning back that confidence.

I’m as big of a critic as anyone with how badly Boeing has been managed for over 25 years, but outsiders saying nothing has changed is not correct.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 7017
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 1:15 am

Vicenza wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:

Since Muilenburg left, Boeing has consistently self-reported, so I think things have changed.


But, essentially, only because they have been forced to. I would very highly doubt it is 'out of choice' because it's the right thing to do.


To my last post, people who are outside making statements like this that they know nothing about are typical on A.net.

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 9:26 am

BoeingGuy wrote:

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?


Unfortunately the media narrative surrounding the MAX accidents, reduced a complex chain of events down to "Boeing is evil". I still hear that frequently in discussions with people. But the nature of history is that those beliefs recede, while the facts remain.

I'm confident you are correct about Being trying to improve, as there would be no upside to playing into the evil narrative. The only way forward is to develop a better safety culture and to regain trust, as you said. It can't be done overnight, but we are seeing signs of progress.

With Muilenburg, he took the media narrative personally and went into denial mode. It's a defensive impulse that has sunk many a corporate executive. The discovery e-mail from Boeing showed he had people around him, advising him not to take that approach, that he was risking the reputation of the company. But once in the bunker mentality, it's hard to climb out. He never really did fully emerge from those views. Which is why he didn't regain trust, and eventually lost the confidence of the board.
 
Noshow
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 9:53 am

To be fair it did not start with Mr. Muilenburg. Maybe he indeed took the wrong defensive strategy but he inherited things from much earlier. It started with a wrong priority to want to please the stock exchange with shinier balance sheets at the cost of not investing and improving as much as would have been needed. All this "avoid the Southwest cockpit training penalty" at all cost thing, keeping quiet about MCAS and AoA-sensor measurements not being standard displayed as promised.
I hope we are now behind this.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 10:33 am

Noshow wrote:
It started with a wrong priority to want to please the stock exchange with shinier balance sheets at the cost of not investing and improving as much as would have been needed.


That is part of the evil Boeing media narrative. The truth is far more complicated than this simple representation.

You can rightfully argue the merits of the company management, and I would not object, but the engineering errors can't be traced to that. They are largely separate issues.

All this "avoid the Southwest cockpit training penalty" at all cost thing, keeping quiet about MCAS and AoA-sensor measurements not being standard displayed as promised.


These are fair criticisms, although the Southwest contract provisions were established by them, not by Boeing. It was Southwest who wanted to avoid the training. But then Boeing pursued it to an extreme, which resulted in the fraud charge.

And the display error was flagged in the distributed software bug lists, available to customers and the FAA, so it was not concealed. But it's true that Boeing failed to issue a formal notice. That goes to the issue of which bugs rise to the notification level. In hindsight, it's clear this bug should have done so.

I hope we are now behind this.


I think everyone here can agree on that.
 
Noshow
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 11:05 am

I disagree with the "the bad outside world is to blame" theory. It was their own bad or wrong strategic move and until today they paid a high price including some damaged reputation and huge budget overruns. It started before the MAX about when the 7E7 got going.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 11:24 am

Noshow wrote:
I disagree with the "the bad outside world is to blame" theory. It was their own bad or wrong strategic move and until today they paid a high price including some damaged reputation and huge budget overruns. It started before the MAX about when the 7E7 got going.


Never said the outside world was to blame for Boeing's problems or mistakes. I said the media condensed the complex factual story into a simple narrative that cast Boeing as a villain. The truth is more nuanced than that, if the effort is made to research and understand the facts.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11597
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 2:15 pm

Noshow wrote:
I disagree with the "the bad outside world is to blame" theory. It was their own bad or wrong strategic move and until today they paid a high price including some damaged reputation and huge budget overruns. It started before the MAX about when the 7E7 got going.

Since we go back that far, a reconning is still coming because the 787 is still not being built solely in Washington and so far Boeing has shown no hint that they intend to go back to the good old day's where all work was in one place (subject to major union influence), headquarters was in the same place and executives from mergers were not running or trying to run the show.
 
Vicenza
Topic Author
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 7:10 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
Vicenza wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:

Since Muilenburg left, Boeing has consistently self-reported, so I think things have changed.


But, essentially, only because they have been forced to. I would very highly doubt it is 'out of choice' because it's the right thing to do.


To my last post, people who are outside making statements like this that they know nothing about are typical on A.net.

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?



I have no facts whatsoever for it but equally, and with all due respect, you have not provided any to the contrary. You may very well work at Boeing, and I have no reason to doubt that, but I highly doubt that you speak exclusively for senior management's position. You may well see 'improvement', but relative to what and you have provided no details (nor do I expect you to) so at this point it is only heresay or opinion.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sat Sep 24, 2022 8:40 pm

Vicenza wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

To my last post, people who are outside making statements like this that they know nothing about are typical on A.net.

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?


I have no facts whatsoever for it but equally, and with all due respect, you have not provided any to the contrary. You may very well work at Boeing, and I have no reason to doubt that, but I highly doubt that you speak exclusively for senior management's position. You may well see 'improvement', but relative to what and you have provided no details (nor do I expect you to) so at this point it is only heresay or opinion.


I don't work for Boeing, so have no internal insight, but here are some supporting external factual observations:

1. Boeing stopped fighting the USAF on the KC-46 RVS, appointed an outside expert panel, and agreed to pay for the upgrade.

2. Boeing self-reported the non-compliance of the MAX wiring harness, then belatedly filed for the waiver as FAA had requested in the 2010 regulation. Then accepted the FAA rejection of the waiver (way too late), and the remediation costs.

3. Boeing self-reported all the issues with the 787, voluntarily grounded and repaired affected aircraft, and voluntarily ceased deliveries while the issues were resolved. Then worked with the FAA to gain their approval before resuming deliveries. As a result, no AD had to be issued by FAA.

4. Boeing agreed to the EASA and Canadian requests for MAX modifications, even though not required by the FAA. This avoided a conflict between regulators.

5. Although Boeing has continued to pay fines for non-compliance actions that occurred prior to 2020, there have been no new fines for actions since that time.

6. Boeing has more or less accepted the new paradigm of increased FAA diligence, requirements for paperwork, and delays in certification, as legitimate, and without complaint. Whereas in the past, there would have been public grousing and complaining to Congress about the FAA. That has entirely subsided.

7. Boeing has taken action internally against harassment of FAA delegates, particularly in the 787 program. And overall strengthened the independence of employee delegates.

I'm tempted to include that Boeing accepted the request to rewrite the entire MAX flight software, beyond the MCAS issues, based on very remote probability occurrences. But the reality is that the FAA would have forced that issue if Boeing refused. So not entirely voluntary, but they did take on a huge project at huge cost, with little complaint.

You could argue that it shouldn't have taken accidents for these things to happen, and that is certainly valid. You could also argue that some of this is due to greater oversight, and that too is valid. But overall I would agree with BoeingGuy, that while it's a work in progress and still has a ways to go, there has been relative improvement.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sun Sep 25, 2022 5:06 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?


Unfortunately the media narrative surrounding the MAX accidents, reduced a complex chain of events down to "Boeing is evil". I still hear that frequently in discussions with people. But the nature of history is that those beliefs recede, while the facts remain.

I'm confident you are correct about Being trying to improve, as there would be no upside to playing into the evil narrative. The only way forward is to develop a better safety culture and to regain trust, as you said. It can't be done overnight, but we are seeing signs of progress.

With Muilenburg, he took the media narrative personally and went into denial mode. It's a defensive impulse that has sunk many a corporate executive. The discovery e-mail from Boeing showed he had people around him, advising him not to take that approach, that he was risking the reputation of the company. But once in the bunker mentality, it's hard to climb out. He never really did fully emerge from those views. Which is why he didn't regain trust, and eventually lost the confidence of the board.

It's very easy to portray "Boeing is evil" because they put profit over safety culture, stock price over safety culture, cost cutting over safety culture ever since Stonecipher was named CEO. Heck, even Phil Condit had some hand in the trajectory that landed Boeing where it was in 2018. So, the "Boeing is evil" mantra isn't entirely unwarranted.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sun Sep 25, 2022 5:15 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
Vicenza wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

To my last post, people who are outside making statements like this that they know nothing about are typical on A.net.

What facts or knowledge do you have to assert that it’s not “out of choice”?


I have no facts whatsoever for it but equally, and with all due respect, you have not provided any to the contrary. You may very well work at Boeing, and I have no reason to doubt that, but I highly doubt that you speak exclusively for senior management's position. You may well see 'improvement', but relative to what and you have provided no details (nor do I expect you to) so at this point it is only heresay or opinion.


I don't work for Boeing, so have no internal insight, but here are some supporting external factual observations:

1. Boeing stopped fighting the USAF on the KC-46 RVS, appointed an outside expert panel, and agreed to pay for the upgrade.

2. Boeing self-reported the non-compliance of the MAX wiring harness, then belatedly filed for the waiver as FAA had requested in the 2010 regulation. Then accepted the FAA rejection of the waiver (way too late), and the remediation costs.

3. Boeing self-reported all the issues with the 787, voluntarily grounded and repaired affected aircraft, and voluntarily ceased deliveries while the issues were resolved. Then worked with the FAA to gain their approval before resuming deliveries. As a result, no AD had to be issued by FAA.

4. Boeing agreed to the EASA and Canadian requests for MAX modifications, even though not required by the FAA. This avoided a conflict between regulators.

5. Although Boeing has continued to pay fines for non-compliance actions that occurred prior to 2020, there have been no new fines for actions since that time.

6. Boeing has more or less accepted the new paradigm of increased FAA diligence, requirements for paperwork, and delays in certification, as legitimate, and without complaint. Whereas in the past, there would have been public grousing and complaining to Congress about the FAA. That has entirely subsided.

7. Boeing has taken action internally against harassment of FAA delegates, particularly in the 787 program. And overall strengthened the independence of employee delegates.

I'm tempted to include that Boeing accepted the request to rewrite the entire MAX flight software, beyond the MCAS issues, based on very remote probability occurrences. But the reality is that the FAA would have forced that issue if Boeing refused. So not entirely voluntary, but they did take on a huge project at huge cost, with little complaint.

You could argue that it shouldn't have taken accidents for these things to happen, and that is certainly valid. You could also argue that some of this is due to greater oversight, and that too is valid. But overall I would agree with BoeingGuy, that while it's a work in progress and still has a ways to go, there has been relative improvement.



2 years doesn't erase 22 years of cutting corners, bullying engineers and QA people and then driving home denial and deceit. It'll take some time for many to give Boeing and Calhoun the benefit of the doubt. Self reporting after decades of saying everything is hunky dory, you'll have to forgive us for believing that these actions weren't unforced. 20 years of denial and bullying put Boeing where they were in 2018, blaming foreign trained pilots for crashing their airplanes when at the same time, they were being sued by APA and SWAPA for not being forthcoming about MCAS, not providing any troubleshooting for it faulting, etc.

If the current leadership team continues this trajectory, trust will return.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sun Sep 25, 2022 6:45 pm

Sancho99504 wrote:

It's very easy to portray "Boeing is evil" because they put profit over safety culture, stock price over safety culture, cost cutting over safety culture ever since Stonecipher was named CEO. Heck, even Phil Condit had some hand in the trajectory that landed Boeing where it was in 2018. So, the "Boeing is evil" mantra isn't entirely unwarranted.


This is basically using the narrative to defend the narrative. The whole point was that the narrative isn't representative.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Sun Sep 25, 2022 6:57 pm

Sancho99504 wrote:

2 years doesn't erase 22 years of cutting corners, bullying engineers and QA people and then driving home denial and deceit. It'll take some time for many to give Boeing and Calhoun the benefit of the doubt. Self reporting after decades of saying everything is hunky dory, you'll have to forgive us for believing that these actions weren't unforced. 20 years of denial and bullying put Boeing where they were in 2018, blaming foreign trained pilots for crashing their airplanes when at the same time, they were being sued by APA and SWAPA for not being forthcoming about MCAS, not providing any troubleshooting for it faulting, etc.


These are further examples of the narrative, which as explained, are not representative of the much more complex truth. But I don't fault people for believing it, as I said it's been the media narrative since the first accident, and no doubt will continue to be, although it appears to be subsiding somewhat now.

Yet it's not supported by a complete review of the facts and events that actually occurred. And thus continues to not be representative, as stated.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:05 am

Avatar2go wrote:
Sancho99504 wrote:

2 years doesn't erase 22 years of cutting corners, bullying engineers and QA people and then driving home denial and deceit. It'll take some time for many to give Boeing and Calhoun the benefit of the doubt. Self reporting after decades of saying everything is hunky dory, you'll have to forgive us for believing that these actions weren't unforced. 20 years of denial and bullying put Boeing where they were in 2018, blaming foreign trained pilots for crashing their airplanes when at the same time, they were being sued by APA and SWAPA for not being forthcoming about MCAS, not providing any troubleshooting for it faulting, etc.


These are further examples of the narrative, which as explained, are not representative of the much more complex truth. But I don't fault people for believing it, as I said it's been the media narrative since the first accident, and no doubt will continue to be, although it appears to be subsiding somewhat now.

Yet it's not supported by a complete review of the facts and events that actually occurred. And thus continues to not be representative, as stated.

Many of us had a negative view of Boeing prior to the accidents. Those accidents and the denial that followed solidified the negative views of Boeing.



What are the actual "complex" truths that you continue to pander?
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: 737 Max: Boeing to pay $200m over charges it misled investors

Mon Sep 26, 2022 1:16 am

Sancho99504 wrote:

Many of us had a negative view of Boeing prior to the accidents. Those accidents and the denial that followed solidified the negative views of Boeing.


Yes, I'm aware. But those views were in the minority, until widely disseminated to the public by the media narrative.

What are the actual "complex" truths that you continue to pander?


The facts have been provided here in numerous previous discussions. I won't repeat now because that is not the topic of this thread.

If you have somehow missed all of that, I'd recommend reading the detailed accident reports, including the presented data and voice recordings (not just the summaries as the media has). As well as the FAA IG report on the MAX certification. Those are the most objective sources, that paint the clearest picture of what actually transpired. At Boeing, FAA, and during the flights themselves.

One thing you will not find in those documents, is discussion of Boeing's financial or management history. While there is a valid debate to be had for all those issues, it's not relevant to understanding how the MAX debacle unfolded, or what its causes were.

Despite that, those issues have come to dominate the narrative, which is what I've tried to explain here, as being not representative of the complex truth.

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