Boeing Has MAX Ambitions

• Report this Comment On September 01, 2011, at 12:30 PM, praizinplace wrote:

  Another horrific article that takes a Boeing initiative to maintain competitiveness and make a childish attempt to link it the delay on the 787...amazing. Do you have Groudnhog Day running on a loop in the basement you work out of?

  Nothing to see here folks, just another crime scene disaster of journalistic proportions, it'll be cleaned up soon, go read the Sunday comics for a step up in investment tips.

• Report this Comment On September 01, 2011, at 12:36 PM, FBEditorial wrote:

  "So far, there are no plans for Boeing to offer an alternative engine from United Technologies"

  And there wont be any plans either. CFM International has exclusivity to the airplane. Pratt & Whitney will never recoup the narrowbody engine lead now that CFM has the 737 under its wings - 100% monopoly for years to come....

  "General Electric hasn't even built the new MAX engine"

  That's because they aren't making it. CFM International are. And if you had done your homework, you'd know where the LEAP engines are in their development cycle. But you don't.

  "While Southwest (NYSE: LUV ) and Delta (NYSE: DAL ) reportedly remain on the fence"

  What a load of crap. I wonder how much you will acknowledge this as a balls up when Southwest Airlines commits in the next few weeks for a series of 737-MAX7's and 737-MAX8's. Delta is in no rush given that they have 100 737-900ER's that they can swap if they need to - but at a price. (Unless of course they place an all new order which is still possible).

  "I'm guessing we'll see more such "trade-ins" as time goes by"

  As usual, you guess wrong. And not for the first time either. Boeing won't be trading in anything for anyone without significant costs to the end buyer. But of course, you dont know that either.

  "If Boeing can charge a premium on conversions to the new plane, it might help to repair some of the damage done by its 787 debacle"

  Boeing doesnt need to charge a premium - if airlines want the 737MAX, they'll have to pay top dollar for it. Both they and Boeing know it. Yes the 787 is/was a debacle - by the end of the decade when deliveries reach a few hundred or more units, no one will give a rats a ss. Except people with sour grapes...

• Report this Comment On September 01, 2011, at 3:06 PM, TMFDitty wrote:

  I suppose I could refute line by line, but to be honest, I've got better things to do with my time. I'll just toss out a couple quick points in demonstration of why comments from anonymous posters are sometimes ... less than reliable.

  First, Boeing itself has said it will take "several hundred" 787 deliveries before the program breaks even. Hence, "a few hundred" by definition will not do the trick.

  Second, Southwest itself has said it "isn't yet committed" to the 737 MAX. Maybe they'll change their minds "in the next few weeks." Maybe not. But for now, they are by their own admission still undecided.

  Whether readers choose to believe anonymous posters with no CAPS record to back up their opinions, or believe the companies themselves, stating the facts as I've cited them -- that's up to you.

  Foolish best regards,

  TMFDitty

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 6:51 AM, praizinplace wrote:

  CAPS record? What in the world does a CAPS record have to do with a bunch of fool writers consistently producing drivel that is so misleading about Boeing, it's beyond frightful? Can you even produce a proven "CAPS record" of your articles ditty? And in the scheme of personal investing, who is concerning themselves with CAPS record anyway!? Amazing.

  Just take your marbles, go home, grab your EADS wooby, insert binky and keep complaining about that bad Boeing company. There are so many other investment advisors contradicting your foolishness, it would be comical if it weren't such a serious crime you are committing against the day to day Joe investor reading this mess.

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 8:13 AM, praizinplace wrote:

  Funny, no CAPS record mentioned by this guy...

  http://seekingalpha.com/article/291261-boeing-has-almost-30-...

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 10:15 AM, FBEditorial wrote:

  "I suppose I could refute line by line, but to be honest, I've got better things to do with my time."

  No you haven't got anything better to do - all you do is peddle anti-Boeing nonsense.

  "First, Boeing itself has said it will take "several hundred" 787 deliveries before the program breaks even. Hence, "a few hundred" by definition will not do the trick."

  How about trying to READ what I wrote instead of trying to attach an interpretation to something I never even inferred.

  There wasn't A SINGLE REFERENCE to breakeven. I talked purely and simply about deliveries. Because that is what is VISIBLE. Breakeven is not and even then that information is proprietary.

  "Second, Southwest itself has said it "isn't yet committed" to the 737 MAX. Maybe they'll change their minds "in the next few weeks." Maybe not. But for now, they are by their own admission still undecided."

  And that proves how journo's like you have no inside track on what's REALLY going on. You guys get fed standard cannon fodder by airlines and take it as sacrosanct. LMFAO. I'm content that my intelligence happily spits in the face of your "still isn't yet committed" baloney.

  "Whether readers choose to believe anonymous posters with no CAPS record to back up their opinions, or believe the companies themselves, stating the facts as I've cited them -- that's up to you."

  Facts, what facts? Where are they? Try reading my prior remark which embarrasses your opening post with the litany of faults that you scribed....facts my arse. LOL

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 1:01 PM, TMFDitty wrote:

  To each his own, but I personally give more weight to the words of investors who come on these boards, post insightful comments -- and have a CAPS record proving they know what they are talking about.

  No offense, but when a poster with no record to speak of drops by, spouts off, then declares that "records don't matter" ... this reads to me a little bit like the C student who whines that grades don't matter, or the profitless CEO who says "I'm not in this to make money."

  TMFDitty

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 1:14 PM, TheDumbMoney wrote:

  Wow, I had no idea there were so many rabid Boeing fans out there! (It's like it's Sirius XM or something now.)

  I think:

  1) The mulitple years of 787 delays have objectively been a debacle. I think that is inarguable as an objective observer. (So were the A380 delays, and now look how those are forgotten though.)

  2) I think this article was actually fairly positive towards Boeing.

  3) What this article missed was actually that Airbus is THRILLED that Boeing is doing the MAX, because what really scared them was the prospect of Boeing doing a fully-redisigned 787-style 737 in 2019-2022, which now will never happen. That hypothetical plain would have kicked the pants off of the A320neo, and I think it's a shame that Boeing has been forced by shorter-term concerns into doing the MAX at all. And frankly one of the reasons they have been forced to do so is the 787 debacle. If they had finished the 787 when they said they were going to, they could have started a totally new 737 program replacement two years ago, whereas now because of the neo they have basically missed that window.

  4) I think Boeing is probably the most important industrial/manufacturing company in America, and I'm always routing for them, if not always invested in them (though I owned some shares for six months or so starting in 3/2009).

  5) People, if you can't take criticism of your favored companies, you either are sitting at a desk at their headquarters with a red Swingline stapler on your desk, or you are a bad investor.

• Report this Comment On September 02, 2011, at 3:06 PM, TMFDitty wrote:

  @dumberthanafool: Ha! You know, now that I think of it, you're right -- this *was* intended to be a positive response to the MAX news. I believe it will do good things for profit margins at the company.

  I get so many knee-jerk reactions when I write about Boeing, though, that sometimes I get to doubting whether I actually wrote what I thought I wrote. ;)

  TMFDitty

  P.S. Opinions differ on whether re-engining was the right way to go. Most folks seem to think that it cost less than a complete redesign, and so helped to preserve cash for other initiatives. But you're right -- if the 787 had been generating free cash flow three years ago, when it should have been, this might not have been an issue.

Add your comment.