« Feeling Degraded | Main | 5/1 Frago »

May 01, 2007

Comments

Peter

Just thought I would post this Reuters article about how Russia may be the deciding factor in what policy EDAS pursues. It is a financial issue, but the implications could be big and certainly indicates that Russia has influence inside of EADS.

PREVIEW-Russia could sway EADS dividend vote
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20070503:MTFH67940_2007-05-03_12-50-34_L03471526&type=comktNews&rpc=44

B. Bates

Bill,

I don't see any mention of the USAF tanker project in the paper. It is possible that you might have a hidden agenda? Oh yeah, you're the guy who wrote the "Boeing, Boeing, gone" article.

Just one grown-up to another, how much money have you or your employer Jane's taken from EADS over the years?

Sorry Bill, by disclosure law you have forfeited your right to take part in defending EADS practices.

Marty

Dear Master Bates,

One at this level of analyzing the aerospace industry should realize that any mention of EADS involved in a major Defense procurement project would mean that they are talking about the US Air Force tanker deal. Unless there is some black program out there that you are referring to, which would be very enlightening to learn about.

One must realize as well that at this level, all governments are going to protect the businesses within their respective countries. European governments give EADS, Airbus, BAE, the guy who supplies computers to the Dorchester County school system tax breaks for doing business locally. Boeing gets the same tax breaks just the same, whether it be from lucrative Defense Department single supplier deals, to a multi-billion dollar tax break from the State of Washington for threatening to move the final assembly line of the 787 elsewhere.

Competition and business is always going to enjoy a "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" relationship with their governments, but to accuse foreign companies of unfair business practices because they follow their respective countries trade laws and not the United States just proves how far you have your head buried "in the sand".

*pats you on the head and lets you go back to playing with your Tonka truck*

Bill Sweetman

Your mother was a hamster...

No, I'm sure the CSP wasn't thinking about the tanker deal either. They were just concerned about JCA, and want to protect all those C-27 jobs in Turin. (Oh no! Turin had a Communist mayor! http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9903E0DE1239F93BA25750C0A965948260 Launch the freaking Titans NOW!)

And that Boeing article http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviationspace/91c65b4a1db84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html actually reads quite well, considering how peachy things looked for Boeing in early 2004. Thanks for reminding me about it.

How much money have I taken from EADS? Check the Swiss accounts.... Ah. None at all. As for Jane's (my former employer), they never shared that information with me, but it obviously wasn't enough, or the Thompsons wouldn't be trying to flog the operation today.

So in fact no disclosure was required, and soon as you find out what ad hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem means, we can resume our discussion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Current Issue

Blog powered by Typepad

Ares Photos

  • Riot 1
    Check out exclusive photos from Defense Technology International for a preview of upcoming stories, including: * Australian Army equips for stability ops * Army upgrades paratroopers * New A-10s!