Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 12/04/2025 7:58:57 PM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
Boeing came under increasing scrutiny in the popular press in the wake of a series of reported incidents and accidents involving aircraft it manufactured…
Perhaps the most glaring production deficiency occurred in October 2022, when Boeing provided a MAX plane for Alaska Airlines. Workers at Boeing had apparently forgotten to reinstall four bolts that keep a piece known as a door plug in place on the 737 MAX. It was removed to allow three contractors from a temporary staffing company hired by Spirit AeroSystems, the company’s production partner and supplier, to rework defective rivets…
The problems at Boeing were due to pushing through production without adequate testing of parts and other lax quality controls. Moreover, Boeing failed to replace aging 737s with new planes. Business Week reported that the company “increasingly emphasized financial wizardry over manufacturing, spending $41.5 billion on stock buybacks from 2013 to 2018 that enriched investors and management.” Muilenburg alone “made at least $106 million from 2011 to 2018, mainly from stock grants. Boeing’s capital expenditures plummeted to less than 2% of sales by 2018, half what European rival Airbus SE typically spends, after running as high as 7.2% in 1992. As a board member and CEO, Calhoun participated in these decisions and “made more than $64 million from 2020 to 2022.”
Calhoun had the opportunity to reset Boeing’s culture in the aftermath of the disasters in Indonesia and Ethiopia. Instead, he essentially doubled down on the same strategy, laying out a plan in 2022 to generate $10 billion of annual free cash flow by 2026 and start returning some of that to shareholders.
Following the blowout, FAA inspectors found “multiple” instances where quality control procedures were not followed.
(Excerpt) Read more at cpajournal.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Bkmk
Reads like they ran the company into the ground while maximizing executive compensation and large shareholders. Failed to invest in equipment and quality.
The merger with McDonnell Douglas in 1997 was part of the problem.
“The fatal fault line was the McDonnell Douglas takeover,” says Clive Irving, author of Jumbo: The Making of the Boeing 747.The 1997 merger that paved the way for the Boeing 737 Max crisis“Although Boeing was supposed to take over McDonnell Douglas, it ended up the other way around.”
As former Boeing physicist Stan Sorscher said, the GE people who took control of Boeing replaced “a long and proud safety culture with a culture of financial bullshit”.
GE’s Welch developed a management strategy that dazzled Wall Street and ruined many companies that foolishly followed.
A well-paid Wall Street financial analyst at the party though disputed those views. After all, Boeing had a bulging order book and the stock was a reliable performer. Looking back, it seems that the power of ordinary observation was superior to expert analysis. In effect, expert opinion ignored airline design and build quality, with safety issues potentially also looming.
We now know that Boeing used their political clout to weaken internal and FAA safety oversight so as to better spur production. Boeing's 737 Max is an ugly design that originally relied on a defective and immature computer system to simulate the flight characteristics of its popular predecessor. Tragically, in service, the combination did not always prove reliable and safe.
“GE’s Welch developed a management strategy that dazzled Wall Street and ruined many companies that foolishly followed.”
Six Smegma.
Boeing was finished when the schmuck CEO moved corporate to Chicago because his wife liked to squander money on north Michigan Ave,
I worked at Boeing from 98-99 on the military side, their way of fixing an issue was to add another level management. When I started there was 1 level of management between me and HQ in DC, when I got laid off less than a year later there were 4 levels.
This stems from leadership now allowing their workforce to make decisions about anything. I contracted to Boeing and every request I made had to go through at least four levels of management. And if my request had a dot missing over the “i” it was sent back down to me, ticket closed and I had to start the entire process all over again.
I said screw it after I requested Microsoft Project on my laptop. I was the PM after all and this piece of software was critical to the project I was assigned to. Some EVP denied the request, twice. She said why did I need it? It was in my request form why I needed it.
Boeing would be a much better company if they canned three levels of leadership. Needless to say, but this was their highest cost IT project for the year and the EVP’s denials cost Boeing a year in delays. Could I have used Excel or something else? Sure. But that’s not the point. When the EVP called me and my company to tell me what I did was unacceptable and demanded I be removed from the account, I brought the receipts.
Know what Boeing did? They canned me, delisted the company I worked for and promoted the EVP for several million dollars in cost savings for a “key” IT project that never happened.
“Not” not “Now”
That’s it exactly. MD somehow took over the management of Boeing. It’s a case study in what NOT to do after a merger.
-SB
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
