Bit of a Slap . .

[CaptnKirk]

Of the USAF Tanker Contract

It's like a Little League Team sweeping the Yankees for the World Series.

Guess that McBoeing has been caught sleeping just once too often in bidding for something that they think they have an inside track on.

or defective pricing.

Be real interesting as to whether or not EADS & Airbuss can pull this one off.

 

[jpeyton]

Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

Lower prices for taxpayers paid to workers in Europe. Great.

It's funny how you bitch about American manufacturing being tossed out the window because low costs, but revel in it for this case.

It's even funnier that you bitch about the government spending too much and going in debt, but you'd rather have that debt payment go to the Europeans.

Do you really hate this country that much you fricking hypocritical traitor?

 

[maddogchen]

you have a tanker that flies longer and carries more fuel. not surprised they won.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Lower prices for taxpayers paid to workers in Europe. Great.

They'll be assembled in Alabama, so it's a multinational effort. Their US partner is Grumman.

It's funny how you bitch about American manufacturing being tossed out the window because low costs, but revel in it for this case.

Absolutely. Because in this case, Boeing got what they deserved. They cheated American taxpayers in a procurement scandal that led to their original contract being canceled. And EADS product was superior.

You would rather have a dishonest company put out an inferior product for more money? Glad you're not running the country.

Did you even read the article? Doing so would give you that 'clue' you're so severely lacking.

The Chicago-based company won the original contract to provide tankers, but Congress cancelled the deal in 2003 following a procurement scandal that sent a Boeing executive and Air Force procurement official to prison.

Loren Thompson, a defence analyst at the Lexington Institute, said the Air Force had concluded that the winning team beat Boeing in four out of five criteria used to pick the aircraft, including superior fuel and cargo-carrying capacity.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Well, Americans should be happy over this, i mean, you guys are supposed to be capitalists, right? Well, the more the competition the better then, right? Or is nationalism more important to you than capitalism?

Boeing has charged the US overprices while delivering the same stuff to Israel, the UK, Austrailia and "New Europe" for a fraction of the price because except in the US, there is competition for these things, well capitalism works only through competition, no competition, no capitalistm, then it's just corporatism which is a fancy word for communism driven by companies.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

Lower prices for taxpayers paid to workers in Europe. Great.

It's funny how you bitch about American manufacturing being tossed out the window because low costs, but revel in it for this case.

It's even funnier that you bitch about the government spending too much and going in debt, but you'd rather have that debt payment go to the Europeans.

Do you really hate this country that much you fricking hypocritical traitor?

ignorance is bliss I guess...

Do you really think if Boeing got the deal then it would have been made by American workers? Don't know where you got your info, but Boeing business model is that most of the parts are made all over the world and just assembled here in the USA. I highly doubt that Boeings tanker would have been made in the USA.

 

[MadRat]

If the KC-767 won it was a significant blow to free enterprise and the taxpayer. The best choice won. And Americans get the bulk of the work in the deal.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

Lower prices for taxpayers paid to workers in Europe. Great.

It's funny how you bitch about American manufacturing being tossed out the window because low costs, but revel in it for this case.

It's even funnier that you bitch about the government spending too much and going in debt, but you'd rather have that debt payment go to the Europeans.

Do you really hate this country that much you fricking hypocritical traitor?

ignorance is bliss I guess...

Do you really think if Boeing got the deal then it would have been made by American workers? Don't know where you got your info, but Boeing business model is that most of the parts are made all over the world and just assembled here in the USA. I highly doubt that Boeings tanker would have been made in the USA.

And who assembles it here?

I am not saying that this was the wrong decision, I just love how people can be dancing on the grave of a contract when they bemoan the death of manufacturing here.

The duality is amazing.

"OMG, MANUFACTURING IS DEAD, CHINA DOES IT ALL, GLOBALIZATION SUCKS, OUR OVERLORDS FOOLED US, DEATH TO NAFTA AND ALL GLOBALISTS"


Then it's...

"ooh wait, as long as we can pay marginally better prices for marginally better products made in a foreign country, funded by more debt, it's all good"

Isn't that why manufacturing is "dead" in the first place?

I argue against both sides, I think the competition is good and I also think that manufacturing isn't dead, just focused in different areas.

However, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to point out hypocrisy.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
I am not saying that this was the wrong decision

Something we can agree on.

 

[Pandaren]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
I just love how people can be dancing on the grave of a contract when they bemoan the death of manufacturing here.

Here's why we're dancing:

(1) Assembly of the tankers will be in the US, with majority US-made parts.

EADS announced it would put a plane assembly plant in Mobile, Alabama, if the company won the contract.

Link

But Northrop and EADS recognized how important the role of jobs and domestic content would be, and they pledged to build the Airbus A330-based tankers in Mobile, Ala., by expanding EADS engineering facilities there. The Northrop/EADS team says the project will create 1,500 to 2,000 jobs and support 25,000 others and include 60% domestically produced parts.

Link

(2) Citizens are pissed at Boeing for the corruption scandal concerning the 767-based tanker.

We get jobs and Boeing gets payback for its shady dealings. Besides, its not like Boeing doesn't have plenty of work. Boeing will make a ton of $ on the 787, which if I recall is beating the crud out of Airbus in contracts awarded.

 

[CanOWorms]

Wow, we're sending $100 billion straight to our future enemies.

 

[Pandaren]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Wow, we're sending $100 billion straight to our future enemies.

*taps sarcasm meter...

Enemies? Our NATO allies are hardly "enemies". Now I would be concerned if the manufacturing was done by Al Queda or by the Chinese government, but this is not the case.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Pandaren

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Wow, we're sending $100 billion straight to our future enemies.

*taps sarcasm meter...

Enemies? Our NATO allies are hardly "enemies". Now I would be concerned if the manufacturing was done by Al Queda or by the Chinese government, but this is not the case.

Pandera, meet Can of Worms. If he's being sarcastic, he has been ever since he started posting here and hasn't let anyone know about it yet.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

iirc, there was a thread a few years back in here where people where dancing around over the Airbus A380 and how it was taking orders away from Boeing. We all know how well that worked out too.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

No doubt the 2 year delay of the A380 was a huge windfall for Airbus.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

No doubt the 2 year delay of the A380 was a huge windfall for Airbus.

Nobody is immune from delays, regardless of what side of the pond they're from.

However, Boeing also showed they weren't immune from corruption charges for bilking taxpayers.

 

[Zorba]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

It got pushed back from May 2008 to Beginning of 2009, how is that another year? That is 8 months. The A380 was delay for two years. Why do you hate Boeing and American jobs so much?

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

The KC-30 will cost more than the KC-767 per aircraft. Not to mention more to fly and operate.

Originally posted by: ericlp
ignorance is bliss I guess...

Do you really think if Boeing got the deal then it would have been made by American workers? Don't know where you got your info, but Boeing business model is that most of the parts are made all over the world and just assembled here in the USA. I highly doubt that Boeings tanker would have been made in the USA.

The majority of the 767 is built in the US by US employees. The conversion would've also been done in the US by US employees. Now the 767 line will likely be closed in the near future and those jobs will never come back.

Also, very few large sections of the A330 are made in the US. That 60% US part is a completely load of BS, unless they are counting connectors.

 

[BoomerD]

I'm one of those horrible nationalists who believes our government should not be doing a single dime of business with foreign companies. America should be spending American tax dollars in America, buying American made products, made by American workers who spend their American money in America...unfortunately, buying Chinese made goods...it doesn't matter if the plane is made by a company in a NATO country, nor if they build a plant in Bum-Fuck Alabama where workers may earn $9.00/hour...the government should NOT be buying foreign made...IMO, it's UN-AMERICAN!

 

[jpeyton]

Am I the only person who noticed the fact that Boeing already had the contract back in 2003, but lost it because corruption charges were filed and they received heavy fines for procurement fraud? Two of their executives received jail time, including their CFO, and their CEO resigned soon after.

How is this a slap against Boeing? Do you guys often give this much sympathy to companies that lose contracts because they defrauded the public?

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Zorba

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

It got pushed back from May 2008 to Beginning of 2009, how is that another year? That is 8 months. The A380 was delay for two years. Why do you hate Boeing and American jobs so much?

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

The KC-30 will cost more than the KC-767 per aircraft. Not to mention more to fly and operate.

Originally posted by: ericlp
ignorance is bliss I guess...

Do you really think if Boeing got the deal then it would have been made by American workers? Don't know where you got your info, but Boeing business model is that most of the parts are made all over the world and just assembled here in the USA. I highly doubt that Boeings tanker would have been made in the USA.

The majority of the 767 is built in the US by US employees. The conversion would've also been done in the US by US employees. Now the 767 line will likely be closed in the near future and those jobs will never come back.

Also, very few large sections of the A330 are made in the US. That 60% US part is a completely load of BS, unless they are counting connectors.

I did limited gathering on Wiki and it appears the EADS aircraft will cost 2x as much and carry less fuel. Not to mention the wing refuelers are optional from what it seems, while the Boeing ones are superior. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[sunzt]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Zorba

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
We all know how well that worked out too.

You mean with the A380 already in service while the 787 just got pushed back another year to early 2009?

It got pushed back from May 2008 to Beginning of 2009, how is that another year? That is 8 months. The A380 was delay for two years. Why do you hate Boeing and American jobs so much?

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Nice! Competition means lower prices for taxpayers.

The KC-30 will cost more than the KC-767 per aircraft. Not to mention more to fly and operate.

Originally posted by: ericlp
ignorance is bliss I guess...

Do you really think if Boeing got the deal then it would have been made by American workers? Don't know where you got your info, but Boeing business model is that most of the parts are made all over the world and just assembled here in the USA. I highly doubt that Boeings tanker would have been made in the USA.

The majority of the 767 is built in the US by US employees. The conversion would've also been done in the US by US employees. Now the 767 line will likely be closed in the near future and those jobs will never come back.

Also, very few large sections of the A330 are made in the US. That 60% US part is a completely load of BS, unless they are counting connectors.

I did limited gathering on Wiki and it appears the EADS aircraft will cost 2x as much and carry less fuel. Not to mention the wing refuelers are optional from what it seems, while the Boeing ones are superior. Correct me if I am wrong.

Wow you needed to be on the review board! Your superior wiki-based understanding obviously shows just how uninformed and inexperienced the selection committee was for not choosing Boeing.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: sunzt


Wow you needed to be on the review board! Your superior wiki-based understanding obviously shows just how uninformed and inexperienced the selection committee was for not choosing Boeing.

Now you're catching on. Obviously everything on the internet is true. Thanks for your superior skills sparky.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Am I the only person who noticed the fact that Boeing already had the contract back in 2003, but lost it because corruption charges were filed and they received heavy fines for procurement fraud? Two of their executives received jail time, including their CFO, and their CEO resigned soon after.

How is this a slap against Boeing? Do you guys often give this much sympathy to companies that lose contracts because they defrauded the public?

Yes, you're the only person who noticed that it was Boeiing's fault for that and not the AF procurement officer who was angling for her own future.