(Lake Hartwell Specific)
61 messages
Updated 5/3/2023 7:56:51 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,609 messages
Updated 5/2/2024 5:30:02 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Lake Hartwell Specific)
3 messages
Updated 8/24/2016 3:16:17 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,260 messages
Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
Yankee06
|
|
Subject:
|
Serious Suff
|
|
Date:
|
9/2/2009 12:38:15 PM
|
|
-OK, polls, MSNBC, Morning Joe, --all interesting and fun, but the in alot of cases they are just distractions, --just entertainment.
-Below is a serius issue that indicates a much bigger problem, --The moving of American companies overseas. This has been going on a long time, mostly textiles and such, but now we're talking even more serious defections. What is government doing about it? How do we turn this arond? More government intervention? Lower business taxes? Tarriffs?
-Below is an article about Boeing thinking of moving to China. Yes! --that's what I said, Boeing moving to China. Alot of Boeing is already there. Sure, we all know the Auto industry is already overseas. Even if you look inside the GM-government bailout plan, more cars will bemade outside the country. That's right, we taxpayers paid $60 billion dollars for GM , another $17 billion (17% +/-) went to the union, --and what does the survival plan call for? --more cars made in Mexico!!!
-Now teh Boeing article below is important because it is around the 15th biggest manufacturing company in the US., ...and more importantly, it is the #1, --let me repeat, the #1 -- aerospace and defense company.
-Without US manufacturing base growth we will not get out of this recession, --with continued manufactuing reduction, teh recession will get worse.
-This is the stuff we should really be concerned abaut. THis is teh kind of stuff we should really be beating up our representatives about. Some projections call for teh US to be a third world work force in 25 years. I use to laugh at these reports. I don't anymore!
-here's the repot on Boeing:
-Will Boeing move to Beijing?
Peter Cohan
Aug 31st 2009 at 11:00AMText SizeAAAFiled under: Company News, Boeing
More
Boeing (BA) CEO Jim McNerney is eager to move the company to China. Whether moving Boeing to China means shifting its headquarters from Chicago to Beijing is up in the air. But Boeing already has $600 million in supplier partnerships with China -- such as a deal with Shenyang Aircraft Corporation to build an assembly for the 787's vertical fin. And Stan Sorscher, who spent 20 years at Boeing before taking a post at the Society of Professional Engineers in Aerospace (SPEEA) in 2000, told me that McNerney is hooked on the idea of shifting Boeing to China.
Sorscher told me that McNerney recently hosted a meeting with a group of engineers to discuss how Boeing should build its next aircraft. The conclusion of the meeting was that McNerney is comfortable with the way the 787 was developed but thinks it could use a bit of tweaking -- and he'd like to shift more of the design and manufacturing of future Boeing aircraft to China.
This would leave Boeing as a systems integrator which outsources product development to China and other countries. According to Sorscher, the engineers were very nervous in their presentation -- perhaps fearing that they would be punished for bringing McNerney the bad news that they believed Boeing should never repeat what it has done in the design and manufacturing of the 787. The engineers reportedly believe that in the future Boeing should take far greater authority and responsibility for aircraft design.
During the meeting, the engineers thought that McNerney was relaxed and that he agreed with them. Sorscher said that the engineers even told him that McNerney was talking through their slides for them. But months later, the engineers realized that McNerney was just seeing what he wanted to see in their presentation.
According to Sorscher, McNerney wants to partner with China rather than compete. He likes the idea of outsourcing the design and manufacturing of future aircraft there and -- with some minor tweaks -- is comfortable with shifting future aircraft design and manufacturing work to suppliers as Boeing did with the 787.
Who's right, McNerney or the Boeing engineers? McNerney might argue that outsourcing limits Boeing's financial risk, gives it access to more global talent while cutting its labor costs. Sorscher is suggesting that McNerney's approach threatens Boeing's engineers by giving them less to do. But if Sorscher is right, Boeing needs to return to the problem-solving approach that worked for the company in 1995 with its successful 777 program.
I'd argue that if Boeing can quickly overcome the problems with the 787 that have been publicized in places like the Wall Street Journal -- such as structural problems where the wing and the fuselage join and fuselage wrinkling -- along with problems that have yet to be formally acknowledged -- such as failures in the 787's Environmental Control System (ECS) and Electrical System (ES) -- then McNerney will be proven right.
But at this point, it appears that McNerney may be suffering from confirmation bias -- an approach to processing information that stifles inconvenient truths while embracing news that paints the picture that the decision-maker wants to see.
And for the 787 -- which has 850 orders and a $154 billion backlog -- this style of decision-making could be costly.
|
|
Reply
Back
Search
Off-Topic Forum
»
Georgia Lakes
»
Lake Hartwell
Login
|
Home
