Washington
Related: About this forumBuild 777X outside Washington? It would be illogical, analyst says
If the choice about where to build the 777X is really about Boeing's bottom line, two recent communications, one from a union coalition and the other from an aerospace analyst, contend Washington state remains the best choice.
Aerospace analyst Richard Aboulafia, in his monthly letter Monday, contends that, From an industry and economics standpoint, the (777X) line will stay in Puget Sound.
But then he adds that much about the situation isnt logical. In fact, Aboulafia says hes no more able to figure out the psychology behind Boeings thinking than Dr. McCoy (the doctor in the original "Star Trek" series and latest movies) could be a bricklayer.
Dammit, Im an industry analyst, not a psychologist, Aboulafia writes. Thats really what it comes down to.
As an industry analyst, Aboulafia is still betting on Everett, giving it an 89 percent chance of winning the 777X an updated version of the 777 that's already built there. Aboulafia gives just 10 percent odds for the only alternative site he takes seriously, North Charleston, S. C.
But with the psychology of fear and loathing driving any part of the decision, numbers like these are largely meaningless, he writes. And Im not a psychologist
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2013/11/25/analyst-unions-say-everett-best-for.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2013-11-25&page=all
pscot
(21,024 posts)on a 6000' runway 8 miles short of where they were going is illogical too. And yet...
KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)That defies business sense.
They have back orders on planes and are making profits, yet they act like the have to cut costs at the expense of their workforce in Washington state.
That South Carolina operation has proven to be subpar and not logistically feasible. And yet Boeing management acts like they can make planes somewhere other than Washington state.