Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
(snip)"The Chicago-based company has been evaluating potential sites for a second assembly line for the 787, a next-generation aircraft built for fuel efficiency with lightweight carbon composite parts.
Production of the plane -- its best-selling new model to date -- has been hampered by problems that have contributed to repeated delays of its first test flight and deliveries.
But the 787 remains a priority for Boeing, which has struggled with sharply lower orders as the global economic slowdown has eroded demand for air travel and cargo services.
The North Charleston plant, which Boeing bought last month from Vought for $580 million plus about $420 million in debt forgiveness, makes fuselage sections for the 787. It was built in 2005."(snip)
While the story and the comments of Boeing officials go to great lengths to minimize the actual significance, ultimately no corporation spends almost 1 billion dollars without a well justified plan to realize future 'return on investment'. There can be no question that Boeing is accelerating a migration to South Carolina in order to take advantage of lower taxes, lower costs for skilled labor, lower utility costs, lower regulatory compliance costs etc. as compared to the state of Washington.
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
Watch the strippers rush to South Carolina...
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
Bully for Boeing. They are just following the lead of dozens of American manufacturers who have relocated in the South.
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Eric Stoner
Bully for Boeing. They are just following the lead of dozens of American manufacturers who have relocated in the South.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, "bully" for outsourcing. The 787 components are built by outsourced companies in a greater % compared to other models. Lesser % built and assembled in house. Only the final product. So called large ammount of outsourcing contributes to the delay of 1st flight, and quality control issues. As for labor cost/ tax issues "astuteness": I wouldn't be too quick to pat Boeing on the head for that one. I'm still perplexed of their decision to move corporate HQ from Seattle to Chicago a few yrs. ago to "be closer to their big customers". How many new aircraft have United & American taken delivery on lately?? Not to mention product liability lawsuits involving Boeing would now be tried in IL, a state with a greater tendency for generous plaintiff awards vs WA.
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
Quote:
Originally Posted by
minnow
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, "bully" for outsourcing. The 787 components are built by outsourced companies in a greater % compared to other models. Lesser % built and assembled in house. Only the final product. So called large ammount of outsourcing contributes to the delay of 1st flight, and quality control issues. As for labor cost/ tax issues "astuteness": I wouldn't be too quick to pat Boeing on the head for that one. I'm still perplexed of their decision to move corporate HQ from Seattle to Chicago a few yrs. ago to "be closer to their big customers". How many new aircraft have United & American taken delivery on lately?? Not to mention product liability lawsuits involving Boeing would now be tried in IL, a state with a greater tendency for generous plaintiff awards vs WA.
Actually before the latest Stock Market Crash and Great Recession, Boeing was doing VERY well. It was kicking Airbus's ass and it's stock price had climbed nicely. I should know. I made a tidy sum buying Boeing stock and then selling it in late 2007.
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
^^^ and Boeing's CEO is making long term changes to try and assure that similar profitability returns in the future ...
(snip)"Boeing (BA) CEO Jim McNerney is eager to move the company to China. Whether moving Boeing to China means shifting its headquarters from Chicago to Beijing is up in the air. But Boeing already has $600 million in supplier partnerships with China -- such as a deal with Shenyang Aircraft Corporation to build an assembly for the 787's vertical fin. And Stan Sorscher, who spent 20 years at Boeing before taking a post at the Society of Professional Engineers in Aerospace (SPEEA) in 2000, told me that McNerney is hooked on the idea of shifting Boeing to China.
Sorscher told me that McNerney recently hosted a meeting with a group of engineers to discuss how Boeing should build its next aircraft. The conclusion of the meeting was that McNerney is comfortable with the way the 787 was developed but thinks it could use a bit of tweaking -- and he'd like to shift more of the design and manufacturing of future Boeing aircraft to China.
This would leave Boeing as a systems integrator which outsources product development to China and other countries. According to Sorscher, the engineers were very nervous in their presentation -- perhaps fearing that they would be punished for bringing McNerney the bad news that they believed Boeing should never repeat what it has done in the design and manufacturing of the 787. The engineers reportedly believe that in the future Boeing should take far greater authority and responsibility for aircraft design.
During the meeting, the engineers thought that McNerney was relaxed and that he agreed with them. Sorscher said that the engineers even told him that McNerney was talking through their slides for them. But months later, the engineers realized that McNerney was just seeing what he wanted to see in their presentation.
According to Sorscher, McNerney wants to partner with China rather than compete. He likes the idea of outsourcing the design and manufacturing of future aircraft there and -- with some minor tweaks -- is comfortable with shifting future aircraft design and manufacturing work to suppliers as Boeing did with the 787.
Who's right, McNerney or the Boeing engineers? McNerney might argue that outsourcing limits Boeing's financial risk, gives it access to more global talent while cutting its labor costs. Sorscher is suggesting that McNerney's approach threatens Boeing's engineers by giving them less to do."(snip)
Re: Boeing setting up 787 plant in South Carolina
Most of Boeing's "outsourcing" really amounts to off sets used to sell military aircraft to foreign nations and keep the production lines here open. An example: Korea agrees to buy F-15 fighters make in St. Louis. In return, Boeing agrees to buy some parts for the 787 from a Korean company. In the end, the policy keeps many nations from developing an aviation manufacturing capability while preserving our own.
HTH
Z
PS, anyone who has gotten a property tax bill in So. Carolina knows that state isn't known for its low taxes. They try to tax everything, cars, boats, furniture.......