Will it ever fly?

[Max]

I've done it before, here I go again, posting tangentially related things, although in this case it's a) in keeping with the 'Will it ever fly' subject of the thread and b) featuring the aircraft type that the thread started on. So, to QF7879 JFK-SYD that flew over the weekend.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/qantas-project-sunrise-sydney/

 

The Boeing 787 has become a PR nightmare for Boeing, I also think a financial catastrophe at the end of the day. Having just announced another delay yesterday after saying it was going to make a maiden flight by the end of this month. The Paris Air Show crowd must have known that Boeing Execs were bullshitting them...

 

Gonna go out on a limb here and predict (again) that in a decade, the 737 will still be one of the most widely operated aircraft in the history of commercial flight.

 

Hey Max, you better get ready for the axe!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7592497/Boeing-board-meet-Texas-scrutiny-intensifies-sources.html#comments

 

No idea to what "axe" you refer. But for the upcoming election, I'd be a buyer again at $325 to average down cost. I'm still quite comfortable with the ten year outlook.

[mike carey]

I agree, @Max but I'm not sure what point you were making. If it was that for all the issues with the B787 ten years ago, everything is fine now, then yes. If it was just about the B737, I suspect you are correct again. But that doesn't mean that the B737 Max will be the aircraft that carries the brand forward. The MAX may emerge from the current unpleasantness, but equally Boeing may back off and develop a different 'new' version of the B737.

[instudiocity]

LUV is in the air!

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/southwest-pilots-union-sues-boeing-saying-it-lied-about-737-n1063561

Um, how many Southwest 737-MAX aircraft crashed? Seems all of those planes were safe enough to fly without peril...

[Max]

I agree, @Max but I'm not sure what point you were making. If it was that for all the issues with the B787 ten years ago, everything is fine now, then yes. If it was just about the B737, I suspect you are correct again. But that doesn't mean that the B737 Max will be the aircraft that carries the brand forward. The MAX may emerge from the current unpleasantness, but equally Boeing may back off and develop a different 'new' version of the B737.

 

I think we are in agreement. The label is not important however - in the long term.

 

My point (primarily in response to @Oaktown) is that there is a difference between a remediable design flaw (whether battery construction or software engineering) and a fatal flaw in an airframe. And the difference is critical when your investment horizon is a decade but irrelevant with regard to each news item in the short term.

 

The 787 and A380 are excellent examples. Early on, 787 was a PR nightmare, BA stock took a big hit, etc. But the airframe (and concept of point to point travel being preferred over large hubs) has been very successful over the decade and the stock total return reflects that. OTOH, the A380 design was fatally flawed based on the assumption that hub to hub traffic would support it.

[Guest]

But that doesn't mean that the B737 Max will be the aircraft that carries the brand forward.

 

~Ding~

 

I want the Boeing brand to go forward and do well. However, I am very skeptical that the 737 Max is capable of doing that, and may ultimately drag BA down.

 

Just in todays news:

 

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/boeing-stock-price-target-slashed-3-banks-737-max-issues-2019-10-1028615974#bank-of-america-we-see-increased-uncertainty-related-to-the-max-return-to-service-timeline-3

 

Bank of America: "We see increased uncertainty related to the MAX return to service timeline."

 

UBS: "We see increasing risk that the FAA won't follow through with a certification flight in November."

 

Credit Suisse: "We can no longer defend the shares."

 

And $53 Billion is a big hit!

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boeing-stock-price-737-max-crash-revelations-may-cost-the-companys-shareholders-53-billion/

Edited October 22, 2019 by Oaktown

[Otto]

So it has finally happened—the truth has come out, at least part of it, and it is horrific.

 

The question now is what else don’t we know? Is it reasonable now to think that Boeing is being honest with respect to other parts of the plane? Did they lie to the FAA about other issues? How compromised is this plane?

 

Where is the accountability? You and I mess up at work there are consequences? Dennis Muilenburg, who made 30 million last year? Not so much.

 

Perhaps Muilenburg should donate his salary to the victims of his plane.

 

Sickening.

[+ oldNbusted]

Boeing misses big on earnings but remains optimistic for 737 Max return

 

Boeing reported a more than 50% slide in third-quarter profit, worse than analysts expected, as the company struggles to recover from two fatal crashes of its top-selling 737 Max aircraft.

[Guest]

But regulatory review this time will include depositions under oath, with prosecutors standing by .

[Guest]

"The FAA is fully committed to address all of the recommendations raised by investigators, including those that pertain to when, whether or how the 737 Max will return to service. As we have said repeatedly, the aircraft will fly only after we determine it is safe."

 

Steve Dickson, FAA Administrator

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/10/29/faa-admin-boeing-737-max-will-it-fly-again-column/2487912001/

Edited October 30, 2019 by Oaktown

[Max]

"The FAA is fully committed to address all of the recommendations raised by investigators, including those that pertain to when, whether or how the 737 Max will return to service. As we have said repeatedly, the aircraft will fly only after we determine it is safe."

 

Steve Dickson, FAA Administrator

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/10/29/faa-admin-boeing-737-max-will-it-fly-again-column/2487912001/

 

One would certainly hope that will be the case.

[Guest]

Maxi, I italicized whether your name sake should be brought back to service

New and deeper layers of stupidity and malfeasance just keep emerging in this particular tale, and there's no particular reason to think we've hit bottom.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-ceo-faces-second-day-of-grilling-on-737-max-crashes

[Max]

Maxi, I italicized whether your name sake should be brought back to service

New and deeper layers of stupidity and malfeasance just keep emerging in this particular tale, and there's no particular reason to think we've hit bottom.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-ceo-faces-second-day-of-grilling-on-737-max-crashes

 

WOW, I didn't see that! [There must be a roll eyes emoji here somewhere.]

 

You mean they might not fly ever again? Really? Promise? You should short BA shares! Go all in my friend!

 

I sure hope the shares haven't hit rock bottom. Would love to buy more in a month or so.

 

Anything else I missed? Oakie? Townie? I'm not sure how you'd suggest I refer to you. I'm not familiar with the name calling tactic, maybe you can help me out and I'll try to play along. I'm sure I'll never be as cool as you are though.

[Guest]

WOW, I didn't see that! [There must be a roll eyes emoji here somewhere.]

 

You mean they might not fly ever again? Really? Promise?

 

No promises Maxi, but I found it surprising coming from the Administrator of the FAA.

[Max]

No promises Maxi, but I found it surprising coming from the Administrator of the FAA.

 

Should not have.

Entirely predictable...OakieTownie?

 

Still not going to share you short position with us I assume? Haah!

[Guest]

I'm wondering if the title of this thread should be changed to: "Will it ever fly, again?"

 

How we doin' Maxy, you gonna be part of the of the class action?

 

From Reuters:

 

Boeing's legal troubles grew Tuesday as a new lawsuit accused the company of defrauding shareholders by concealing safety deficiencies in its 737 MAX planes before two fatal crashes led to their worldwide grounding.

The proposed class action filed in Chicago federal court seeks damages for alleged securities fraud violations, after Boeing's market value tumbled by $34 billion within two weeks of the March 10 crash of an Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX.

Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg and Chief Financial Officer Gregory Smith were also named as defendants.

Boeing spokesman Charles Bickers had no immediate comment.

According to the complaint, Boeing "effectively put profitability and growth ahead of airplane safety and honesty" by rushing the 737 MAX to market to compete with Airbus SE, while leaving out "extra" or "optional" features designed to prevent the Ethiopian Airlines and Lion Air crashes.

 

My own post from April 9, 2019 Maxi.

[Max]

My own post from April 9, 2019 Maxi.

 

And your point is?

[Guest]

Would you ever question a F/A?

 

“It is clear there were serious breakdowns in the supervision of the 737 MAX,” Lori Bassani, president of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, wrote in a letter to Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg dated Oct. 30. “We have fundamental questions about whether the FAA has the resources necessary for oversight moving forward.”

 

Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, which represents flight attendants at 20 airlines, including United Airlines Holdings Inc., also said the hearings raised fresh questions.

 

“We will not work the 737 MAX until and unless we have full assurance from regulators around the world, our colleagues in the flight deck, engineers, and our airlines that the 737 MAX is safe,” she said. “This week took a step backward in this process, not forward.”

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/flight-attendants-question-safety-of-max-737

Edited November 1, 2019 by Oaktown

[Max]

Would you ever question a F/A?

 

“It is clear there were serious breakdowns in the supervision of the 737 MAX,” Lori Bassani, president of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, wrote in a letter to Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg dated Oct. 30. “We have fundamental questions about whether the FAA has the resources necessary for oversight moving forward.”

 

Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, which represents flight attendants at 20 airlines, including United Airlines Holdings Inc., also said the hearings raised fresh questions.

 

“We will not work the 737 MAX until and unless we have full assurance from regulators around the world, our colleagues in the flight deck, engineers, and our airlines that the 737 MAX is safe,” she said. “This week took a step backward in this process, not forward.”

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/flight-attendants-question-safety-of-max-737

 

Got it. No, I'd not look to the head of the flight attendant's union to judge the airworthiness of an airliner. I'm pretty sure the FAA and at least one congressional committee are taking a microscopic approach to evaluating the plane's future. As it should be.

[+ oldNbusted]

Got it. No, I'd not look to the head of the flight attendant's union to judge the airworthiness of an airliner. I'm pretty sure the FAA and at least one congressional committee are taking a microscopic approach to evaluating the plane's future. As it should be.

 

Straw man. No one asked if the head of a flight attendant union should be judging the airworthiness of an airliner and that person did not claim to be doing such a thing.

[+ oldNbusted]

Boeing CEO will give part of his bonus to 737 MAX victims' compensation funds

 

1. Why is he getting a bonus?

 

2. "part"

[+ quoththeraven]

Should not have.

Entirely predictable...OakieTownie?

 

Still not going to share you short position with us I assume? Haah!

Given that your attitude about all this has been relatively cavalier until recently, to the point where you appeared cheerful about design flaws that killed people, it's pretty rich for you to be this condescending toward the person who has harped the most on what Boeing has done wrong.

 

Whether and when Boeing's share price will recover isn't the point of this thread. That you think it is is telling. For one thing, the share price for any business that isn't imminently going out of business usually rebounds, either because of future good news or because of a general market upturn. Suggesting that share prices will rebound is not the revelation you seem to think it is.

[+ oldNbusted]

Southwest, American extend Boeing 737 Max cancellations until early March

 

The decision comes as the Southwest Airlines flight attendants union weighs suing Boeing over lost pay as a result of the prolonged 737 Max grounding. The airline’s pilots sued Boeing last month over what it said was more than $100 million in lost wages due to the grounding.

[Guest]

And here's why they keep moving the goal posts:

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/delays-in-boeing-max-return-began-with-near-crash-in-simulator

 

(BTW, Boeing said the Max was okay before & after both crashes, so I’m not sure why saying it will be okay in March would be reassuring to anyone.)

Edited November 10, 2019 by Oaktown

[Max]

Given that your attitude about all this has been relatively cavalier until recently, to the point where you appeared cheerful about design flaws that killed people, it's pretty rich for you to be this condescending toward the person who has harped the most on what Boeing has done wrong.

 

Whether and when Boeing's share price will recover isn't the point of this thread. That you think it is is telling. For one thing, the share price for any business that isn't imminently going out of business usually rebounds, either because of future good news or because of a general market upturn. Suggesting that share prices will rebound is not the revelation you seem to think it is.

 

Actually, my poking the bear with respect to @Oaktown is an admittedly childish response to his doing the same. So, that's my "he started it" defense. IDGAF if you think it's condescending frankly.

 

That said, I'm not at all cavalier about the design flaw. And I don't disagree with the general skepticism and distrust of Boeing (see below) in this circumstance.

 

And I have not suggested - at all - that share prices will rebound in the short term. In fact, I'd prefer they not do so. What I've said, several times, is that I've invested (and have provided details for share prices IIRC) and I believe that over the next decade, BA will outperform the market, much as it did in the decade subsequent to the date of the original post in this thread. @Oaktown claims to have taken a short position and I've simply invited him to share the strike price and expiration date of his options. We've each taken a wager, the game is set, and I've shown my cards.

 

And, if you go way back to the first few posts in this thread, they (to paraphrase/summarize) posit that the flawed battery design in the 787 would or at least might result in the termination of what has become one of the most technologically transformative aircraft development programs in history.

 

And here's why they keep moving the goal posts:

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/delays-in-boeing-max-return-began-with-near-crash-in-simulator

 

(BTW, Boeing said it was okay before & after the crashes, so I’m not sure why saying it will be okay in March would be reassuring to anyone.)

 

I strongly suspect that the FAA will be taking a much closer look at the details of MCAS and other automation systems before the plane flies again. Certainly shareholders and their attorneys will be doing so. Another fatal crash would very likely be the end of the program.

 

Interestingly, an Embraer 175 had a loss of trim control incident a couple of days ago as well.

 

https://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com/2019/11/08/american-e175-diversion/

[Max]

Given that your attitude about all this has been relatively cavalier until recently, to the point where you appeared cheerful about design flaws that killed people, it's pretty rich for you to be this condescending toward the person who has harped the most on what Boeing has done wrong.

 

Whether and when Boeing's share price will recover isn't the point of this thread. That you think it is is telling. For one thing, the share price for any business that isn't imminently going out of business usually rebounds, either because of future good news or because of a general market upturn. Suggesting that share prices will rebound is not the revelation you seem to think it is.

 

Actually, my poking the bear with respect to @Oaktown is an admittedly childish response to his doing the same. So, that's my "he started it" defense. IDGAF if you think it's condescending frankly.

 

That said, I'm not at all cavalier about the design flaw. And I don't disagree with the general skepticism and distrust of Boeing (see below) in this circumstance.

 

And I have not suggested - at all - that share prices will rebound in the short term. In fact, I'd prefer they not do so. What I've said, several times, is that I've invested (and have provided details for share prices IIRC) and I believe that over the next decade, BA will outperform the market, much as it did in the decade subsequent to the date of the original post in this thread. @Oaktown claims to have taken a short position and I've simply invited him to share the strike price and expiration date of his options. We've each taken a wager, the game is set, and I've shown my cards.

 

And, if you go way back to the first few posts in this thread, they (to paraphrase/summarize) posit that the flawed battery design in the 787 would or at least might result in the termination of what has become one of the most technologically transformative aircraft development programs in history.

 

And here's why they keep moving the goal posts:

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/delays-in-boeing-max-return-began-with-near-crash-in-simulator

 

(BTW, Boeing said it was okay before & after the crashes, so I’m not sure why saying it will be okay in March would be reassuring to anyone.)

 

I strongly suspect that the FAA will be taking a much closer look at the details of MCAS and other automation systems before the plane flies again. Certainly shareholders and their attorneys will be doing so. Another fatal crash would very likely be the end of the program.

 

Interestingly, an Embraer 175 had a loss of trim control incident a couple of days ago as well.

 

https://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com/2019/11/08/american-e175-diversion/