| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Northrop, EADS will not bid for US tanker contract | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 9 2010, 02:07 AM (152 Views) | |
| Klaus | Mar 9 2010, 02:07 AM Post #1 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jPIehETgPH2F64N-h1jNlgGNXQoA
Sounds like sleaze in the DoD. I can understand if a country wants to spend its defense budget on domestic companies, but then they should make this explicit rather than pretending that there is a real competition. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Mar 9 2010, 08:07 AM Post #2 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Klaus, let me see if I can reword your post to more effectively provoke response here ...
|
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Mar 10 2010, 12:15 AM Post #3 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Well, I guess that didn't work, Ax. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Mar 10 2010, 06:12 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Sounds to me like there was something fishy about the initial bid contest in Northrop's and EADS favor:
The quote that Klaus posted loses some credibility, as the Congressman that made the quote lost 300 jobs for his constituency, and failed to bring home the bacon. Were there shenanigans involved (I love that word)? Possibly, but the article itself showed that Boeing's proposal was going to cost less money and less fuel. It seems to me that it's likely that there was some dishonesty involved, but it was likely on Northrop's part initially. They had a senators support and won the bid, only to have the irregularities come to light in 2008, and have the original bids overturned, and now Boeing came in with a product that Northrop/EADS can't compete with. So they pull out and make a big stink. Sour grapes, IOW. Edited by Luke's Dad, Mar 10 2010, 06:14 AM.
|
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Mar 10 2010, 06:23 AM Post #5 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I guess neither you nor I can really judge what was going on, but if you believe the news then in fact this seems to be an arranged deal in favor of Boeing. Another indicator is that in all similar previous competitions between Boeing and Northrop/EADS, the tanker from the latter has been considered superior. I would consider it almost a surprise if, given the protectionist history of the US, there wouldn't be loud voices demanding that defense money ought to be spend domestically (the fact that the US exports much more weapons to the EU than the other way around notwithstanding). |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| Piano*Dad | Mar 10 2010, 11:38 AM Post #6 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
If you believe what news? That article contains nothing by way of evidence that the bid is rigged. It does contain self-serving snippets from EADS as well as the sour grapes quote from a particular Congress-critter. Defense department contracting is a wasteful mind-boggling boondoggle (try saying that fast!). I am prepared to accept all sorts of information. But the evidence so far does not persuade me that this outcome is particularly rigged. |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |









4:23 PM Jul 10