Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 454 posts

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#441

Post by bitcharmer »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #368
JohnBooty wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly fundamental capitalism, right? The world is not overflowing with people who can even theoretically lead a $77bn company and will be acceptable candidates in the eyes of the board/shareholders. So you will need to pay accordingly if you want one. It's like wondering why pro sports teams give megabucks guaranteed contracts to superstars. There aren't a lot of them and there is a lot of money at stake when i…

In addition to that, companies want CEOs to take some level of risk to grow the company, And to take the fall when needed for bad decisions / press / accidents and incidents. The golden parachute, as is my understanding, is an all but explicit pay to take responsibility and be the fall guy / resign with many a hollow sounding apology letter when and as needed from shareholder perspective (which may not overlap from o…

I keep seeing "responsibility" brought up but what responsibility do you mean? I have never seen a CEO suffering unpleasant consequences of their own failures. It's always a golden parachute and failing upwards for these people.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#442

Post by chx »

kelnos wrote: post #340
chx wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> domestic flyers in the U.S. deserve something better than a 1967 design. And Boeing was working on a replacement for the entire 737-757 line, a brand new airplane using many of the same concepts as the 787 "Dreamliner" but it took a long time and in 2011 Southwest blackmailed them if they need to retrain their pilots then they might as well buy Airbus. Sources. First for the replacement airplane. https://www.dallas…

Obviously 2011 Boeing couldn't see into the future, but I do wonder if standing firm against Southwest -- even if they went and bought Airbus -- would still have been better for the company in the long run. Wikipedia says Southwest has the fourth-largest fleet in the world (today, dunno about in 2011); while that's a lot, that's still only 800-some planes; did Boeing really let an airline with a 7%-or-so share of the…

Neither did the plans start in 2011. Rather, they ended there.

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/25906-why-can-t-boeing-ju...

> In the early 2000s, the plan was to roll out the production model of Y1 by 2015. In 2010, Boeing’s patent became public, revealing a glimpse of the new project: a dream of all low-cost airlines and a bold new step for the industry. The aircraft was supposed to have T-tail and nearly elliptical fuselage cross section with twin-aisle 2-3-2 configuration, but retain drag-per-seat and weight-per-seat ratio comparable to single-aisle competitors. A variety of weight-optimization techniques, utilizing the newest composite structures, was explored. According to Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh, the company was already looking into converting their plants from metal to all-composite manufacturing.

> But come 2011, the project was shelved.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#443

Post by Gravityloss »

dv_dt wrote: post #227
BoxFour wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like this guy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Muilenburg

This is the guy that Boeing should have made CEO https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally who has a much deeper background on the civil aviation side of things. Turned down for the Boeing CEO position, went to Ford and carried them through the Great recession as one of the big 3 auto makers that did not need a govt bailout. I'd say call him back, but he's probably enjoying retirement by now.

Some people at Boeing criticize Mulally though. 777 program involved already a lot of outsourcing. There's a nice documentary about the program on youtube, "21st Century Jet": https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=21st+century+je...

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#444

Post by zardo »

masklinn wrote: post #425
refurb wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$800M? Can you imagine the public howling at that kind of CEO comp?

The more hilarious part is the incentive to pump the stock and leave someone else to hold the bag would be even worse. This would reach crypto-scales pumping.

Yeah, if you're building a product that's supposed to last 50 years stock value in year one is far from the whole story.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#445

Post by Dylan16807 »

rpmisms wrote: post #434
Dylan16807 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then make the connection between racism and damages to a company relevant to the discussion, or being thin-skinned and the same. They both have obvious consequences in a leadership position. Obvious consequences are enough. > There is zero evidence that Elon profited off the emerald mine his dad bought shares in, and the allegation is that he conspired to hide that money somehow. It's a normal definition of conspir…

> Obvious consequences are enough. Obvious potential consequences are not enough. This is the richest man in the world, surely you have an example.

What does being rich have to do with it?

It's hard for someone outside a company to point to a direct consequence of racism in the company leadership. That doesn't make it not-bad for the leadership to be racist.

Surely you're not saying it's okay to discriminate as CEO if you make enough money.

And if you want a consequence of being thin-skinned, uh, anything to do with twitter? Half his interactions with the SEC?

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#446

Post by dv_dt »

Gravityloss wrote: post #443
dv_dt wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the guy that Boeing should have made CEO https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally who has a much deeper background on the civil aviation side of things. Turned down for the Boeing CEO position, went to Ford and carried them through the Great recession as one of the big 3 auto makers that did not need a govt bailout. I'd say call him back, but he's probably enjoying retirement by now.

Some people at Boeing criticize Mulally though. 777 program involved already a lot of outsourcing. There's a nice documentary about the program on youtube, "21st Century Jet": https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=21st+century+je...

After Mulally left, Boeing went all in (to an extreme imho) on outsourcing. I don’t know enough to say if he would have done the same. But imho spinning off fundamental items like fuselages is a big source of inefficiency and risk right now for Boeing.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#447

Post by rurban »

bitcharmer wrote: post #438
mayneack wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, in "Flying Blind", the book written about the first round of 737 max issues, the author has a pretty negative outlook on Calhoun as being mostly aligned with Muilenburg. > Robison, however, finds little reason for optimism. While Boeing has now accepted responsibility for one of the crashes as part of a settlement, no one at the company besides Forkner has been charged with a crime. Muilenburg wa…

> Muilenburg was ousted as C.E.O., but still collected a $60 million golden parachute That's why I hate the MBA types and the whole executive caste with a passion

You are misguided. He was the only engineer at the top of Boeing for decades. Before and after were the MBA types.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#448

Post by JohnBooty »

bitcharmer wrote: post #440
JohnBooty wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly fundamental capitalism, right? The world is not overflowing with people who can even theoretically lead a $77bn company and will be acceptable candidates in the eyes of the board/shareholders. So you will need to pay accordingly if you want one. It's like wondering why pro sports teams give megabucks guaranteed contracts to superstars. There aren't a lot of them and there is a lot of money at stake when i…

> The world is not overflowing with people who can even theoretically lead a $77bn company I strongly disagree. It's a matter of surrounding yourself with capable people and there's a huge factor of financial inertia. I guarantee you most HN-ers could run Google or Apple for 5 years without causing their value to plummet.

A company in good financial shape with strong positive inertia? Sure, but I don't know that describes Boeing at the time of his hire. (Maybe it does, not sure)

I still don't necessarily disagree, but you left out the second part of my sentence which is rather significant:

    "and will be acceptable candidates in the eyes of the board/shareholders."
Sure, Random HN User #587942 might be a decent Apple CEO. Hell, they might even make a great POTUS. Aside from having one's finger on the nuclear button, I think a POTUS is primarily a strong delegator in much the sense that a CEO is.

That doesn't mean they are going to be remotely acceptable as a candidate in the eyes of the board + shareholders. Nobody is going to stick their neck out for Random HN User #587942. They are going to pick somebody with a positive track record of leading big companies.

This isn't ideal! I'm not defending it. I'm just saying why it happens. It's the C-suite equivalent of "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#449

Post by FerretFred »

tomp wrote: post #296
mayneack wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, in "Flying Blind", the book written about the first round of 737 max issues, the author has a pretty negative outlook on Calhoun as being mostly aligned with Muilenburg. > Robison, however, finds little reason for optimism. While Boeing has now accepted responsibility for one of the crashes as part of a settlement, no one at the company besides Forkner has been charged with a crime. Muilenburg wa…

Can ELI5 why do investors (owners of the company) accept CEO's pay packages that involve golden parachutes? It doesn't make sense to me (I mean, it might in case of offensive takeovers, but who's gonna take over Boeing?!)

Unintended pun, but would Calhoun use a parachute designed and built by Boeing?

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#450

Post by tomp »

krisoft wrote: post #435
tomp wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I don't buy this. The shareholders would be better off if they promised a $800m incentives-based / performance-based package (e.g. stock options etc.) than promising $80m if the CEO performance sucks . And any CEO rejecting this offer, is a huge red flag.

> would be better off if they promised a $800m incentives-based / performance-based package (e.g. stock options etc.) than promising $80m if the CEO performance sucks. I don’t know about the relative ratios between the two but i believe you need both. From a perspective of a succesfull CEO candidate with a proven track record joining your company is risky. There might be something structurally wrong with your industr…

I didn't suggest no compensation. Obviously I would want to be paid some base salary, comparable with whatever I could earn elsewhere ($1m / year? $1m / month? etc.)

But instead of a $80m golden parachute (failure reward), I'd offer $800m options (success reward).

Post reply on HN