If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BusinessWeek) Obvious Hey Kansas? Remember how we said that if you'd help us win that Air Force tanker contract, we keep all those jobs in Wichita? We lied. Love, Boeing. P.S. Thanks for the $41 Billion, suckas   (businessweek.com) divider line 63
More: Obvious, Boeing, Wichita, Jefferies & Company, BusinessWeek, U.S. Air Force, EADS, Kansas, defense industry  
•       •       •

3225 clicks; posted to Business » on 05 Jan 2012 at 10:56 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



63 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-05 10:26:20 AM
Guess it's time to steal more business from KCMO.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-01-05 10:33:39 AM
I am sure the jobs will "trickle over" from Seattle.
 
2012-01-05 10:45:54 AM
But big business loves everyone and just wants to help you.

Mayor should sue Boeing.
 
2012-01-05 11:01:50 AM
Westboro Baptist Church should protest this.
 
2012-01-05 11:07:19 AM
You just didn't give them enough incentives.
 
2012-01-05 11:08:16 AM
Wait, a corporation lied about its planned activities?
I'm shocked. Simply shocked.
 
2012-01-05 11:12:55 AM
A majority of farkers want more stimulus to 'create jobs'

A majority of farkers want defense cuts to balance the budget

A majority of farkers hate Boeing for laying off workers in anticipation of defense cuts

A majority of farkers favor contradictory policies
 
2012-01-05 11:16:48 AM
That the government took the totally farked up Boeing tanker contract at all is reason enough to consider that money flushed down the shiatter.
 
2012-01-05 11:20:00 AM
but...but...job creators...
 
2012-01-05 11:20:16 AM
I've got a couple good friends who worked for many years at the portion of Boeing that got turned into Spirit. They love telling stories about the complete and utter chuckle-heads who lived the life of Wally there back in the day. One guy would take a 2 hour nap at his desk every day, guys who would go get coffee at the QuickTrip 5 minutes away and come back 3 hours later smelling of FDS from the nearby strip club.

They used to (still do I suspect) offer these CAD/CAM night classes around here aimed specifically at the shop guys/drop outs, where they let you play around with AutoCad or Catia for 6 weeks and then try to get you hired as an "engineer" somewhere. These guys would come in without the necessary math skills to balance a checkbook, let alone the calculus or physics knowledge required. One of my friends told me that some of these guys they put under him didn't produce a single useful drawing in the 2 or 3 years they managed to hold the job.
 
2012-01-05 11:29:17 AM
MugzyBrown: A majority of farkers want more stimulus to 'create jobs'

A majority of farkers want defense cuts to balance the budget

A majority of farkers hate Boeing for laying off workers in anticipation of defense cuts

A majority of farkers favor contradictory policies



I fail to see how they're contradictory. Kansas legislators just screwed the pooch and didn't learn from other stimulus packages that stipulations must be put in place for private companies. All Kansas had to do was write out: "We are giving you a ton of money and throwing support for you to make EVEN MORE money, so if you don't keep this plant open and don't hire more employees you must legally pay us $XXX,000,000."

Do you think public funding for private American business should occur for American companies to remain competitive in a global market? Keep in mind, that line of thought is current opposed by the people who now have a majority in the House.....even though the actual Congressmen in the House are happy as hell to throw billions are private industry in the form of tax incentives.
 
2012-01-05 11:37:50 AM
HellRaisingHoosier: Do you think public funding for private American business should occur for American companies to remain competitive in a global market?

No I don't. I think private companies should be competitive on their own.
 
2012-01-05 11:43:42 AM
A corporation's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.
 
2012-01-05 11:45:16 AM
Lost Thought 00: A corporation's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.

But we are told every day that corporations should be trusted to police themselves!
 
2012-01-05 11:45:59 AM
A corporationeverybody's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.

I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of people in this world have been screwed on a business deal by their best friend/brother/cousin/father/neighbor/etc because somebody gave them their word.
 
2012-01-05 11:52:53 AM
Lost Thought 00: A corporation's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.

Which is the funniest part about the Boeing tanker contract: they're effectively playing chicken with the government. They agreed to a low price (in the range of a billion under cost) with strict contractual statements saying that Boeing is pretty much responsible for any cost delta. Boeing simply cannot perform the contract they signed up to do, but if they default, it cuts all ties between Boeing and the Fed for like seven years. So the government will be forced to either raise the agreed upon value (which was the primary reason they picked Boeing over EADS) which will involve complete contract renegotiation or T for D Boeing a few years down the road.

It's a train wreck.
 
2012-01-05 12:00:29 PM
sprawl15: Lost Thought 00: A corporation's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.

Which is the funniest part about the Boeing tanker contract: they're effectively playing chicken with the government. They agreed to a low price (in the range of a billion under cost) with strict contractual statements saying that Boeing is pretty much responsible for any cost delta. Boeing simply cannot perform the contract they signed up to do, but if they default, it cuts all ties between Boeing and the Fed for like seven years. So the government will be forced to either raise the agreed upon value (which was the primary reason they picked Boeing over EADS) which will involve complete contract renegotiation or T for D Boeing a few years down the road.

It's a train wreck.


Airbus (EADS) refused to bid on the contract after having won it twice and having it yanked twice due to Boeing's lobbying efforts.
 
2012-01-05 12:02:51 PM
HAHAHA Let's just hand over a bunch of money to a corporation and hope they "do the right thing".

LOL, Kansas.
 
2012-01-05 12:10:50 PM
MugzyBrown: A majority of farkers want more stimulus to 'create jobs'

A majority of farkers want defense cuts to balance the budget

A majority of farkers hate Boeing for laying off workers in anticipation of defense cuts

A majority of farkers favor contradictory policies


Anything to justify screaming "Corporations are bad!" It doesn't matter what policies set the chain of events into motion, we just need the end result to put business in a bad light.
 
2012-01-05 12:17:15 PM

Submitter = dishonest tool. Headline = fail.

If you read the actual article, you'll notice that there is no mention of any specific benefit or incentive given to Boeing by Wichita or Kansas... only that the locals "fought" to bring the contract to their city. "Fought"? Is that like how my toothpaste "fights" gingivitis, meaning it may or may not have any effect at all?

Boeing does not owe anything to these yokels, and they know it, which is why they are going to the media instead of to court.

The article talks a lot about tax breaks given in the PAST, but the locals were compensated for those -- Boeing kept jobs there. This new tanker contract, not so much.

 
2012-01-05 12:18:29 PM
mcreadyblue: Airbus (EADS) refused to bid on the contract after having won it twice and having it yanked twice due to Boeing's lobbying efforts.

No, EADS bid on it with the A330 airframe. You're thinking of Northrop, who used to be partnered with EADS, and bailed after the EADS/NGC award was cancelled.
 
2012-01-05 12:18:54 PM
MugzyBrown: A majority of farkers want more stimulus to 'create jobs'

A majority of farkers want defense cuts to balance the budget

A majority of farkers hate Boeing for laying off workers in anticipation of defense cuts

A majority of farkers favor contradictory policies


If you stimulate the economy by building a road, at least when all is said and done you've got a road. If you stimulate the economy by firing missiles into tents in the middle east, you've got a shiatty youtube video and a smoking crater.

The stimulus/balanced budget are naturally at odds, but stimulus/defense cuts aren't necessarily.
 
2012-01-05 12:20:46 PM
vpb: I am sure the jobs will "trickle over" from Seattle.

No way; Boeing's trying to get away from Seattle's high-cost union workforce, that's why this is so strange.
 
2012-01-05 12:21:32 PM
Wireless Joe: vpb: I am sure the jobs will "trickle over" from Seattle.

No way; Boeing's trying to get away from Seattle's high-cost union workforce, that's why this is so strange.


Annnnd...never mind, I misread you vpb; carry on wit you bad self.
 
2012-01-05 12:22:13 PM
sprawl15: Lost Thought 00: A corporation's word is worthless. If it's not in the contract, it doesn't exist.

Which is the funniest part about the Boeing tanker contract: they're effectively playing chicken with the government. They agreed to a low price (in the range of a billion under cost) with strict contractual statements saying that Boeing is pretty much responsible for any cost delta. Boeing simply cannot perform the contract they signed up to do, but if they default, it cuts all ties between Boeing and the Fed for like seven years. So the government will be forced to either raise the agreed upon value (which was the primary reason they picked Boeing over EADS) which will involve complete contract renegotiation or T for D Boeing a few years down the road.

It's a train wreck.


You're not seriously saying that FFP contracts are a bad thing?
 
2012-01-05 12:29:27 PM
Spade: You're not seriously saying that FFP contracts are a bad thing?

They're not a bad thing when done in good faith, but Boeing submitted a binder full of ECPs before the ink was dry on the contract. When everyone knows the FFP number is far below cost, why the fark would any sane contracting department let it go through?
 
2012-01-05 12:33:38 PM
Ric Romero reports that you should never trust a sociopath.
 
2012-01-05 01:29:46 PM
Breathe Laugh Twitch: Submitter = dishonest tool. Headline = fail.
If you read the actual article, you'll notice that there is no mention of any specific benefit or incentive given to Boeing by Wichita or Kansas... only that the locals "fought" to bring the contract to their city. "Fought"? Is that like how my toothpaste "fights" gingivitis, meaning it may or may not have any effect at all?
Boeing does not owe anything to these yokels, and they know it, which is why they are going to the media instead of to court.
The article talks a lot about tax breaks given in the PAST, but the locals were compensated for those -- Boeing kept jobs there. This new tanker contract, not so much.


From the Article:

The company had said it would build the aircraft at its Everett, Washington, plant, which assembles 767 jets, and send them to Wichita for military modifications

So they lied.
 
2012-01-05 01:32:14 PM
www.the-spearhead.com

I'm leaving with your jet planes. Sorry, they won't be back again....

/ This is why we re-elect her again and again...
 
2012-01-05 01:40:35 PM
Do they have a piece of paper with the deal on it signed by both parties? No? Then STFU.


Yes? Take that shiat to court.
 
2012-01-05 01:52:32 PM
Alphakronik: Do they have a piece of paper with the deal on it signed by both parties? No? Then STFU.


Yes? Take that shiat to court.


Well, if I was in the state, I would look at legal ways to get a little payback. Use emenent domain to buy their facilities and completely low ball them. The make sure to revoke their tax breaks. While that shiats tied up in court, soak em with taxes.
 
2012-01-05 01:52:49 PM
To those belittling the "fighting" done by Kansas/the City of Wichita, I think you are not counting the ridiculous amounts of politicking (is that a word?) done by their Senators and Congressman in Washington. There's a reason that the contract was awarded three times in 10 years....

Personally, I say Kansas got what they deserved. The crooks were taken in by the better crooks; shocking! All of us in defense have to pander to the politicians (including the unelected ones in the Pentagon), but everyone knows Boeing buys their contracts left and right.

/no no, I'm not a bitter employee of a competing contractor the government BEGGED to compete just to attempt to make the process seem legitimate...
 
2012-01-05 02:08:53 PM
Mentat: Guess it's time to steal more business from KCMO.

FYI: Missouri is winning that war according to KC Star. KCMO has gained more workers than Wy/Jo.
 
2012-01-05 02:43:29 PM
Repeat with me: JOB CREATORS



HAHAHAHAHA
 
2012-01-05 03:04:59 PM
palestephie: Personally, I say Kansas got what they deserved. The crooks were taken in by the better crooks; shocking! All of us in defense have to pander to the politicians (including the unelected ones in the Pentagon), but everyone knows Boeing buys their contracts left and right.

/no no, I'm not a bitter employee of a competing contractor the government BEGGED to compete just to attempt to make the process seem legitimate...


Considering their best competition was the A330, whose boom is currently sitting on the bottom of the ocean, it was really the worst of two worlds syndrome.
 
2012-01-05 04:19:56 PM
Tardmitter must be using new math. Since 1979, Boeing got $3.5 billion in industrial revenue bonds, which the city doesn't pay for (investors do, and the company pays them back) and $650 million in property tax breaks, which DOES cost the city money (or it fails to collect).

However, it looks like (from this much better article) that Boeing hasn't gotten any breaks from the city since 2007. (new window)

It also sounds like Rep Mike Pompeo might get a little medieval on their ass and try to revoke the contract:

"The Boeing Company made a seven-year-long promise that if you do the right thing, help them compete, provide a good product for our soldiers and sailors and airmen, we will place that (tanker) work in south-central Kansas," said U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Wichita. "The folks in south-central Kansas did what they said they would do. The Boeing Company has not."

He pledged a review of the documents surrounding the tanker award, searching for some kind of binding commitment to build the tanker in Wichita that the federal government can enforce.

"We will pursue it until the facts suggest that we are wrong," he said. "But it is absolutely the case that in completing a bid, you submit documents under oath to the federal government, you make public statements, you do lots of things that require you to speak accurately and truthfully. I think it's important that we all come to a conclusion whether that was the case here."
 
2012-01-05 04:20:34 PM
This was a political decision.

Remember that just a few months ago the National Labor Relations Board smacked Boeing good over Boeing's efforts to expand production into a Red-State.

Had Boeing let go Blue-State workers, the NLRB would have been right there to screw them over again.

Sorry, Red-Staters. The government is picking the winners and losers, now -- and a Democrat is in power.
 
2012-01-05 04:20:56 PM
BarbadoSlim: Repeat with me: JOB CREATORS



HAHAHAHAHA


What were your payroll numbers this year? I bet Boeing has you beat.
 
2012-01-05 04:24:38 PM
Lsherm: Tardmitter must be using new math. Since 1979, Boeing got $3.5 billion in industrial revenue bonds, which the city doesn't pay for (investors do, and the company pays them back) and $650 million in property tax breaks, which DOES cost the city money (or it fails to collect).

The $41 billion is for KC-X.

What likely happened was that Boeing bid it as if they were going to work in Kansas or they said that the revenue from the tanker project would go elsewhere but would help keep the Kansas plant open. Kansas politicians obviously would have gunned for it, since it would have brought/kept a lot of jobs in the state. It doesn't contractually obligate Boeing to do the work there at all, but it's a huge betrayal of the normal lobbyist-politician gladhanding.
 
2012-01-05 04:46:10 PM
MugzyBrown: BarbadoSlim: Repeat with me: JOB CREATORS



HAHAHAHAHA

What were your payroll numbers this year? I bet Boeing has you beat.


Nice deflection, son. Tell me, what were yours?
 
2012-01-05 04:49:24 PM
Hey Kansas, thanks for the jobs.

Signed, Oklahoma.
 
2012-01-05 05:21:51 PM
Easy solution to this bullshiat: nationialize Boeing in the interest of national defense.
 
2012-01-05 07:25:54 PM
Hey Kansas, sucks to be you!

Signed Oklahoma!

/the rest of you, keep flying over
//we don't want you here
 
2012-01-05 08:20:00 PM
politics aside - I never understood the idea of building them in Everett then flying to Wichita to tear them apart and rebuild as tankers.
 
2012-01-05 08:55:03 PM
one of Ripley's Bad Guys: politics aside - I never understood the idea of building them in Everett then flying to Wichita to tear them apart and rebuild as tankers.

Same reason why the Space Shuttle's boosters were the design they were - they had to be able to go by rail from Morton Thiokol in Utah to Florida for attachment to the Shuttle. Problem is, Utah's on the wrong side of a mountain and the train cars had to fit through a tunnel. Congresspeople will only back a massive project like this if their state gets a piece.
 
2012-01-05 10:07:04 PM
Forgot_my_password_again: but...but...job creators...

Oh, they're creating jobs...

just not for us.
 
2012-01-05 10:11:40 PM
BarbadoSlim: MugzyBrown: BarbadoSlim: Repeat with me: JOB CREATORS



HAHAHAHAHA

What were your payroll numbers this year? I bet Boeing has you beat.

Nice deflection, son. Tell me, what were yours?


You're the one mocking them as job creators, not me.
 
2012-01-05 11:29:52 PM
MugzyBrown: A majority of farkers want more stimulus to 'create jobs'

A majority of farkers want defense cuts to balance the budget

A majority of farkers hate Boeing for laying off workers in anticipation of defense cuts

A majority of farkers favor contradictory policies



A majority of farkers would like to see the heads of corporations to be a benefit to society rather than a burden in most cases. Do corporations employ a lot of people? Of course they do, it depends on how they direct their excess profits, and how their business is run that affects the people though. If a company chooses to move overseas to increase profits (not become remain or become profitable but increase profits, which is why most companies move overseas), there is something wrong with that picture. If a company takes profits and uses it to improve a community that is a good thing, if they decide to take the excess profits and line a hand full of people's pockets there is something wrong there.


Who cares about job lay off's for defense cuts. The money spent on defense can be spent SIGNIFICANTLY more efficiently creating more jobs than the defense contracts have a hope to, plus that money would be spent within the country rather than a large portion that ends up spent outside the country. For example our countries infrastructure is deteriorating (roads, bridges, rail roads, power lines, power plants, water lines, etc) if we took money out of the defense budget and spent it on infrastructure the number of jobs created within the U.S. would increase significant compared to what the defense contracts are. Plus almost all of the money could stay in the U.S.


It is not that the majority of Farkers have contradicting view points. It is that the majority of Farkers would like to have the handful of people that run major companies and pull upper 7, or 8/9 figure salaries to take a minute and consider the majority of their workers that pull lower to mid 5 figure salaries. It is absurd for some CEO's to make more money in a week than the majority of their employees make in a year. That indicates a fundamental flaw in they system.


But hey you will be rich someday, you just have to work hard right? Big house, big car, maybe a second house on the side right? Surely a CEO does as much work in a week as one of their employees does in a year right?


I actually pity people like you I really do. It is not corporations that are bad, it is the people who run corporations that put their own greed ahead of the corporation, the employees, and society in general.



But hey I am just a liberal hippy schmuck. How could anyone hold the view point that spending money to create more jobs and improve society out weight, creating fewer jobs and blowing people up, I mean really how could someone be so crazy to hold that view point.
 
2012-01-05 11:36:07 PM
MugzyBrown:

How many people did you kick to the curb this year. Bet Boeing has you beat.

See how easy that is?
 
2012-01-06 12:10:34 AM
FTFA: Boeing didn't consult with city officials or ask for financial incentives to stay put before announcing its decision yesterday to close the Wichita plant with 2,160 workers before 2014, Mayor Carl Brewer said in a telephone interview. The company had indicated that winning the tanker work last year would support 7,500 local jobs, he said.

"Fools... Only now... at the end... do you understand."

Seriously, though, the city if Wichita could buy 7,500 hammers and pay 7,500 local workers minimum wage to tear down the soon-to-be-abandoned facilities by hand. See? It's all a matter of perspective!

/The Great Screwing continues...
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »