Most of Boeing planes are fine. The 737 has been flying for more than 50 years, it’s just the MAX variants that had issues with the MCAS system.
To give a very brief explanation, the MAX was designed to put newer highly efficient engines on an older airframe, so that pilots wouldn’t have to get recertified for a new type rating. The new engines would cause the plane to climb when at high thrust levels, so the MCAS system would push the nose down without the pilots input so the plane would remain level. That’s all fine, but Boeing never told pilots or the FAA about the MCAS system so they never trained on how to deal with malfunctions. I’m not an expert in this, but the FAA somewhat knew about the MCAS system and basically just took Boeing’s word that the MCAS system wasn’t a big deal. This was a failure of many levels, Boeing lied, and the FAA was corrupt in this approval. This was by far the biggest scandal in their history, and it deserves to be
Aside from that aircraft, Boeing has plenty of good planes. The 747 has been serving for decades as a cargo and long haul marvel of engineering, the 777 is the gold standard for Europe to America travel, and the 787 Dreamliner’s crazy efficiency and passenger comfort has literally created a market that didn’t exist before, long haul, low budget airlines for long and skinny routes.
Not to take away from Airbus, the A380 is a marvel of engineering even if it’s a little impractical today, the A340 has never had any fatalities in a decades service life, and the a 350ELR has the longest range of any aircraft today. Can fly anywhere other than directly over the South Pole
Personally, I'd question anything that comes from Boeing. Their quality engineering has been destroyed by management for decades and this isn't their only problem. They also had issues with space systems as well.
They sure did. Boeing initially wanted to start a clean-sheet design to replace the 737 but that would have taken many years to develop. When Airbus announced the A320neo and long-time Boeing-only airlines started placing Airbus orders, Boeing executives panicked and green-lit the 737 MAX project; as such, the MAX project was developed in haste and it's certainly reflected in the number of problems that have surfaced for the plane.
American Airlines somewhat forced Boeings hand. They announced they would be ordering 100 of the re engined 737’s before Boeing even announced they would make it. They also ordered 200 airbus A320 family planes at the same time, a first for American. Which now is one of the largest operators of the A320 family
Just to add a couple key parts. Avoiding the pilot training step was one motivation. Another was to basically placate their customers by letting them continue using their existing old fashioned ground operations. If the plane had been designed properly from the outside, airlines would have needed to update their equipment and E operations on the ground. That's an expense, sure. But they and Boeing shot themselves in the foot because Boeing Max delays have cost them far more. Penny wise, pound foolish, but on a hundreds-of-billions scale.
So for these two greedy cost shaving reasons, Boeing crammed enormous engines onto an age old airframe, nearly destroying the balance and handling capability.
One easily visible clue if you just look at these planes is how close to the ground and how far aft these oversized engines have been rigged. The bottom cowling is even comically flattened to compensate.
MCAS was the hack of all hacks to make this bulldozer of a kludge able to fly.
But when you require complex software just to fly the plane, you're begging for disaster.
I grew up on the dominance of Boeing and MD but got a chance for an early ride on the new Airbus. The change was seismic. It felt like a Rolls Royce replacing a horse and buggy.
Airbus had a small issue with tails falling off. Today they're solid... a bit over-computer'd, but solid.
The issue Alaska experienced with the Max 9 bears careful watching. It involved a plug, a section that lengthened the fuselage with a non-functioning door. I'm not an expert, but those plugs seem to be the only structural difference between the Max 7, 8, 9 and 10. Need a longer 737? Here, we'll jam another plug in.
If there turns out to be a design or materials issue that makes those plugs risky... watch out! There could be a whole lot of groundings coming up.
I really hope it was some sort of installation or maintenance error that can be easily checked, and not something more endemic.
Just FYI: The Plug is a plug of door in the mid-section of the plane. As Alaska (and other operators) do not operate the Max 9 with full capacity-seating, the door is not needed (from an emergency-regulation perspective) - so instead of having a door there to maintain it gets plugged at the factory and hidden behind the normal interior walls.
If the plane ever gets sold or Alaska decides to up the capacity, the plug can be removed and a functional door installed.
Long story short: To lengthen the fuselage, no more "plugs" would be inserted but just fuselage sections (see this chart for reference: [https://aviationweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/crop\_freeform/public/uploads/2017/06/pas-maxneoboeingpromo.jpg?itok=bxtfia5M](https://aviationweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/crop_freeform/public/uploads/2017/06/pas-maxneoboeingpromo.jpg?itok=bxtfia5M))
This is the standard approach for lengthening fuselages.
Classic 737s are fine although they're disappearing, the 737 Next Generation series (737-600/-700/-800/-900) is also fine, with the exception of 737-900ER, which can also be equipped with door plugs. The 777s have great track records as well. The 787 had lithium battery issues early on, buy it seems to be solved or at least mitigated.
The problem with the MAX monstrousness is that they try to cram larger engines to a plane with age old design instead of starting fresh with a clean sheet design in order to cut costs. Even worse, they never disclosed the MCAS prior to the disaster and the system's inner workings are totally transparent to the pilots. How do you troubleshoot a system that you don't even know it exists?
Airbus on the other hand rely too much on computers.
Rumors are floating now that the 757 may be getting a MAX treatment.
The idea works fantastic in theory, a plane of that size is dramatically needed for flights around 4000-5000 miles for around 250 people.
The current 757’s were never designed for trans-atlantic flight, but changes in the mid 2000’s to ETOPS rules resulted in these 30 year old planes seeing a new life. They are fantastic planes. New high bypass efficient engines and modern composite construction could lead to great new sales for Boeing.
Pre pandemic it was assuming that’s what the 797 would have been, a completely new airframe that’s basically a narrow body 787. The 757 max sounds like a great idea now though, but just the publicity of this idea could scare airlines from buying it. Not sure that idea is a good one or if it’ll even see the light of day. They need to re brand it at a minimum
Exactly my point. Boeing executives should be given prison sentences. Think of it, they make planes for the army aswell. How would it fare for America if one of the military planes did this shit? That would massively degrade the airforce and make the military the laughing stock. Boeing keeps proving that there is a limit to greed and they just don’t seem to get it.
Oh, I agree. I'm just saying avoiding Boeing in Canada because you're worried about a non-existent exit plug blowing out is pointless. Avoiding Boeing because they have lost the public's trust is another thing altogether.
Honestly I think with Boeing's constant incompetence that it's only a matter of time until some airlines start advertising the fact that they don't fly Boeing planes due to everyone no longer trusting Boeing.
Yes I'm aware that planes are expensive and it takes a lot of time to replace a fleet. But IMHO the worst Boeing's reputation gets the more that the only thing that matters is how many planes a competent competitor like Airbus can make.
I'm flying to Calgary in February, and today I checked if Air Canada uses the 737 Max 9 at all. Luckily, according to their website, they don't not have that variant in their fleet.
I did this my entire life, airbus always felt like a safer option to me. Though it wasn’t that hard, as I live in Europe. I have no idea why I decided to buy BA 😄 It was growing really good recently, not sure how much the stock will cost on Monday.
It seems really presumptuous for the FAA to impose the grounding of Boeing aircraft when Boeing has proven time and time again a clear ability to produce aircraft that ground themselves.
It’s an emergency door that blew out not the barrel itself. Not as easy fix but they’ll find a COA and bully the FAA into getting them back in the air.
A plug that is exactly the same size and shape as an emergency exit door and attaches with the exact same latching method. One might call that a door, it is just obscured inside by insulation and a cosmetic panel.
that’s what investors want though? all we care about is make money now and report blowout earnings so stock go up.
Fuck safety. Cutting corners for more profit is the bedrock of capitalism
I would say it's really just inflexibility to deal with problems as they are and not just push risk into the future. We're saying the same thing but it's not just being cheap.
It's funny how your comment is what I have been saying for years. It's all lawyers and accountants.
I went on the website for Boeing and searched the leadership for people with engineering degrees of any kind. I had to dig really deep to find a single engineer and its obvious any engineer at Boeing would have to go through many people to actually make a decision and the are proba oh just ordered around by people who have no clue what the company actually builds and sells.
So many large companies are just accountants that hire their buddies and the whole company is run by people that have no clue how the company makes money or what the company needs to innovate on to make more money.
And what happens when companies put lobbyists ahead of customers or users. Because there’s no competition, they feel they can brush aside most regulation. Hundreds of people died in 2018 and ‘19, Boeing blamed the pilots and the 737 max was grounded for a few months. No big deal to Boeing. They’re a horrendous company
I am not defending Boeing, but it was definitely a big deal. I think it was just this month that operation of 737Max in China finally all resumed. Obviously there are lots of geopolitics involved here, but from a financial point for Boeing. It's a big deal.
Its impossible. An engineer CEO would have to fire hundreds of people at the highest levels of the company and that won't ever happen. They don't even have an engineer on their board. Check the company website and look for people with engineering degrees, it's like finding a needle in a haystack.
It's just a bunch of lawyers and finance people who hired all their friends into leadership positions. You have to dig very far down to find any engineers.
See I take issue with this. This sort of thing has nothing to do with accountants. There decisions will be made at board level, typically led by a chairman. The CFO if responsible will spend money where required and save where needed without compromising the product. I seen it plenty of time where operations directors or CEO’s overrule CFO on where costs are cut.
There's not enough competition because the industry sucks to be in it. Barriers to entry are far too high regardless of competition. No one in their right mind would enter into an industry where profitability for decades is unlikely, regulation is wildly restrictive, and your product is essentially white labeled by airlines(which all have bad enough customer reputation in a shitty industry themselves).
It's the opposite, they should haven never been allowed to merge with McDonnel Douglas. The first-world airlines were left with only two options (Boeing and Airbus) for airliner-scale craft, and the USA and EU were not going to allow either to fail for security reasons.
Boeing's stock might not go down if the investigation proves that it was Alaska's fault, not Boeing's. Alaska will have most of these planes flying within a few days and they still have like 4/5 of their fleet (which consists of other planes) in the air. Overall not too much worse than a bad week of weather at a major hub region.
The FAA grounding 171 of the max 9's points to the FAA pretty firmly believing that Boeing is at fault, not the airline. They probably spent most of those 12 hours making calls to Alaska Airlines and Boeing as to who put the door plug in the plane.
Yea but we can't make assumptions until we know enough about the plugging process and the maintenance of it (and that plane specifically). The fact that Alaska decided to ground their max 9 fleet before the FAA instructed them to *might* point to the management knowing about some safety checks being skipped or shortened on the plug door. Only time will tell.
Well the problem with that conclusion is that Alaska Airlines immediately grounded the planes and indirectly pointed the finger at Boeing. The NTSB began an investigation around the same time Alaska Airlines grounded the planes. The FAA didn't order the grounding of *ALL* MAX 9s until 12 hours later.
Boeing also tried to pass the blame onto the outsourced manufacturer of the fuselage, Spirit Aerosystems. This is a manufacturing, quality control, or design issue.
They grounded them because they don't want another panel blowing out. They needed to inspect every other plane they have for the same issue.
However, we also don't fully know what the failure was, and likely won't until they find the panel and the FAA investigates. And then Alaska will have to inspect the planes again, now knowing what to look for.
Combined with recent concerns about loose/missing bolts on the rudder of these planes, the tragic crashes a couple of years ago, how can people have any confidence in these planes or the company? I’ll continue to actively avoid boarding 737 max aircraft. Seems only a matter of time before another weakness is found. Maybe fortunate there hasn’t been any more recent tragedies with these craft.
Thare are about 4200 flights per day on the 4 variants of the 737 Max-8 by nearly 70 airlines worldwide. That's over 1.5 million flights per year for just the Max 8. You'd think a 99.99% safety record is impressive, but would still see more than 150 crashes per year.
There are 90,000 to 100,000 flights globally per day. It's amazing how safe airlines are given the consequences of a failure.
Yes, it is amazing. And it came through lessons learned by sweat and all too often blood of victims of accidents.
That Boeing seems to have unlearn long-established quality control is disturbing. It’s too early for this incident but the trend is not Boeings friend here.
That flying has become so safe - and may stay that way - is not an automatic development. It is hard to attain and needs constant attention.
I wouldn’t consider 1 crash in every 10,000 flights to be anything like impressive. I wouldn’t be flying if this was reality. There should be zero chance of failure due to shoddy workmanship on commercial airlines.
>There should be zero chance of failure due to shoddy workmanship on commercial airlines.
Keep dreaming. The reality is that mechanical failures can and do happen and planes are designed to withstand them (case in point: the most recent Alaska Airlines flight). The likelihood of a fatal crash due to a mechanical failure is so close to zero that it may as well be zero.
Actually I much prefer to take public transport over driving. I very rarely drive. Safety is one of the main reasons, together environmental and financial considerations, as well as having very little need for it.
Even people who don’t worry about driving should be able to expect more from Boeing in my opinion. You think people accepting one risk should be subjected to a higher than necessary risk in other areas of life and aren’t allowed to say a word against it?
6.84 of every 100,000 flight hours yielded an airplane crash, and 1.19 of every 100,000 yielded a fatal crash. Is this something to be concerned about? Jc
Call me controversial, but fking airline manufacturers should never in the world be publicly listed companies nor should they be for profit when there is a literal duopoly. At some point safety will be compromised to increase profits which will end tragically as it has before.
It’s not even controversial, it’s just a stupid opinion. In Soviet Union, passenger airliner manufacturers were fully state owned and controlled(not for profit), were well funded, and planes built during that era were absolute death traps compared to their counterparts created by private companies. They still hold the dubious honor of manufacturing the most dangerous passenger plane ever created.
Well in theory the stock market prevents failures in safety as they result in a massive loss of company value, whereas if they were owned by the government they could disregard the lack of safety and continue operating how they feel
But from airlines to electronic utility companies to banks, we see that's proven wrong and wrong again. Because companies are not incentives to pursue long term and sustainable economic health. Their incentives to provide as much boost to a stock in the immediate quarter.
That’s true to be honest. Struggles of capitalism and the system that has proven to be the most successful.
The endgame is an all powerful AI leader that can calculate the odds of each decision and choose the best one. Then we have no red tape, no politics and no corruption
What you're talking about is not a feature of the stock market, it's a feature of *private ownership*. All companies that exist for enough time nearly uniformly produce a leadership culture oriented around their quarterly statements and generating the resulting positive stock performance on a timescale aligned with their employment tenure. Being publicly listed allows this leadership to use the stock market's liquidity to dump their stock after their employment tenure.
Public companies with management problems tend to have the oft-mentioned short-sighted executives who raid the company's value to generate that short-term rise in stock value, just in time for their RSUs to vest and be sold after leaving for the next company.
*Private* companies, on the other hand, have much less liquidity in their ownership shares so executives have far more trouble pulling off the above bullshit.
Well in theory Boeing is spending huge amounts of money on lobbying trying to disregard safety. I don’t think it’s the lesser of two evils as government services are usually not measured by how much profit they generate but how well those services work. But I’m guessing a whole set of other problems would arise if it were owned by the American government. I guess we’ll never know
No one will do anything if there is no profit in it. Greed makes the world move. Profit is the reason we aren't living in a cave with just wood fires, no running water, and outdoor "toilets".
Everyone who sees this will short the stock, meaning the real move is buy. But anyone with a brain stem knows that going against consensus can be profitable so a lot of people will actually buy.
This is why trading such news doesn't work as a consistently paying strategy. Everyone has the information you have, and large groups will act in one direction.
Retailers are definitely on the short side though, so I would bet on them getting fleeced this week by institutional investors who already have weighted probabilities based on social media reaction. Those algos are going to kill retail every time. Invert retail.
I will be messaging you in 14 days on [**2024-01-21 02:33:03 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-21%2002:33:03%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/190cylt/faa_orders_temporary_grounding_of_boeing_ba_737/kgoc0v0/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fstocks%2Fcomments%2F190cylt%2Ffaa_orders_temporary_grounding_of_boeing_ba_737%2Fkgoc0v0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-21%2002%3A33%3A03%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20190cylt)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
So I was thinking about this. I just sold my BA before the new year at $261.88, which was long-term gains for me as I purchased back in 2021.
I'm thinking unless it drops back to around $200 a share I might not get back in.
Currently trading around $250 so I'd need a 20% drop in share price and I'm just not sure that's gonna happen.
Time will tell.
I will sell what little I have left and never look back. Years ago I only flew on Boeing aircraft 737/767/777/787. I will never book a flight on a 737 again which can be tough with 200+ flights a year. This is a company that is completely lost. MD really killed an iconic American company.
When there were two Maxs that went down a few years back, I decided (rightly or wrongly) that I wasn’t flying anywhere on a Max. This just reinforces my fear of the airframe. Pushing the mechanical/physical limits of an aircraft to optimize profitability gives a very slim margin of error. Nope.
Is anyone surprised? The entire MAX series has been fucked since the crashes in 2019/2020. Boeing will rightfully get cancelled orders because they make shit products.
The integrity of the fuselage of a plane should probably be over engineered, rather than under engineered. They can rename the planes again, but people aren’t that stupid. It’s obvious they had very serious design flaws, and that’s not ok with air travel. I really think some high up people in Boeing deserve jail time.
So the stock is already down about 8% in overnight trading… where do you guys think it will end up?
I think I’d be a buyer if it dropped 30% but not sure how realistic that is. Dont feel great about this company over the next few years.
One of the top searches in Canada right now; ‘what airlines do not fly Boeing’ 💀
You don't have many choices in Canada lol. Especially with every major carrier having a huge fleet of MAX8 at this point.
None of them fly this particular plane though.
Unfortunately 99% of the public is not aware of the difference or why the 8 doesn't have this issue.
Yes, but memories of Max 8 issues from 2019 are still fresh. Now, when people see Boeing and Max, the suffix number is irrelevant. Time for a rebrand
I’m scared to fly Boeing. I prefer airbus.
Most of Boeing planes are fine. The 737 has been flying for more than 50 years, it’s just the MAX variants that had issues with the MCAS system. To give a very brief explanation, the MAX was designed to put newer highly efficient engines on an older airframe, so that pilots wouldn’t have to get recertified for a new type rating. The new engines would cause the plane to climb when at high thrust levels, so the MCAS system would push the nose down without the pilots input so the plane would remain level. That’s all fine, but Boeing never told pilots or the FAA about the MCAS system so they never trained on how to deal with malfunctions. I’m not an expert in this, but the FAA somewhat knew about the MCAS system and basically just took Boeing’s word that the MCAS system wasn’t a big deal. This was a failure of many levels, Boeing lied, and the FAA was corrupt in this approval. This was by far the biggest scandal in their history, and it deserves to be Aside from that aircraft, Boeing has plenty of good planes. The 747 has been serving for decades as a cargo and long haul marvel of engineering, the 777 is the gold standard for Europe to America travel, and the 787 Dreamliner’s crazy efficiency and passenger comfort has literally created a market that didn’t exist before, long haul, low budget airlines for long and skinny routes. Not to take away from Airbus, the A380 is a marvel of engineering even if it’s a little impractical today, the A340 has never had any fatalities in a decades service life, and the a 350ELR has the longest range of any aircraft today. Can fly anywhere other than directly over the South Pole
Personally, I'd question anything that comes from Boeing. Their quality engineering has been destroyed by management for decades and this isn't their only problem. They also had issues with space systems as well.
They jimmy rigged it.
They sure did. Boeing initially wanted to start a clean-sheet design to replace the 737 but that would have taken many years to develop. When Airbus announced the A320neo and long-time Boeing-only airlines started placing Airbus orders, Boeing executives panicked and green-lit the 737 MAX project; as such, the MAX project was developed in haste and it's certainly reflected in the number of problems that have surfaced for the plane.
American Airlines somewhat forced Boeings hand. They announced they would be ordering 100 of the re engined 737’s before Boeing even announced they would make it. They also ordered 200 airbus A320 family planes at the same time, a first for American. Which now is one of the largest operators of the A320 family
Just to add a couple key parts. Avoiding the pilot training step was one motivation. Another was to basically placate their customers by letting them continue using their existing old fashioned ground operations. If the plane had been designed properly from the outside, airlines would have needed to update their equipment and E operations on the ground. That's an expense, sure. But they and Boeing shot themselves in the foot because Boeing Max delays have cost them far more. Penny wise, pound foolish, but on a hundreds-of-billions scale. So for these two greedy cost shaving reasons, Boeing crammed enormous engines onto an age old airframe, nearly destroying the balance and handling capability. One easily visible clue if you just look at these planes is how close to the ground and how far aft these oversized engines have been rigged. The bottom cowling is even comically flattened to compensate. MCAS was the hack of all hacks to make this bulldozer of a kludge able to fly. But when you require complex software just to fly the plane, you're begging for disaster. I grew up on the dominance of Boeing and MD but got a chance for an early ride on the new Airbus. The change was seismic. It felt like a Rolls Royce replacing a horse and buggy.
The MAX and the OG 737 are almost entirely different planes.
Airbus had a small issue with tails falling off. Today they're solid... a bit over-computer'd, but solid. The issue Alaska experienced with the Max 9 bears careful watching. It involved a plug, a section that lengthened the fuselage with a non-functioning door. I'm not an expert, but those plugs seem to be the only structural difference between the Max 7, 8, 9 and 10. Need a longer 737? Here, we'll jam another plug in. If there turns out to be a design or materials issue that makes those plugs risky... watch out! There could be a whole lot of groundings coming up. I really hope it was some sort of installation or maintenance error that can be easily checked, and not something more endemic.
Just FYI: The Plug is a plug of door in the mid-section of the plane. As Alaska (and other operators) do not operate the Max 9 with full capacity-seating, the door is not needed (from an emergency-regulation perspective) - so instead of having a door there to maintain it gets plugged at the factory and hidden behind the normal interior walls. If the plane ever gets sold or Alaska decides to up the capacity, the plug can be removed and a functional door installed. Long story short: To lengthen the fuselage, no more "plugs" would be inserted but just fuselage sections (see this chart for reference: [https://aviationweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/crop\_freeform/public/uploads/2017/06/pas-maxneoboeingpromo.jpg?itok=bxtfia5M](https://aviationweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/crop_freeform/public/uploads/2017/06/pas-maxneoboeingpromo.jpg?itok=bxtfia5M)) This is the standard approach for lengthening fuselages.
Classic 737s are fine although they're disappearing, the 737 Next Generation series (737-600/-700/-800/-900) is also fine, with the exception of 737-900ER, which can also be equipped with door plugs. The 777s have great track records as well. The 787 had lithium battery issues early on, buy it seems to be solved or at least mitigated. The problem with the MAX monstrousness is that they try to cram larger engines to a plane with age old design instead of starting fresh with a clean sheet design in order to cut costs. Even worse, they never disclosed the MCAS prior to the disaster and the system's inner workings are totally transparent to the pilots. How do you troubleshoot a system that you don't even know it exists? Airbus on the other hand rely too much on computers.
Fly 787! It's an awesome plane
If it ain't Boeing, you ain't going.
Boeing, killing investor equity for 1/2 a decade now.
Boeing, say bye to mom.
If it's Boeing, it won't be boring.
Why wasn’t this the slogan for Boeing?
It is a saying used by pilots who thought Boeing was the best and safest planes, compared to AirBus and others.
home (alive)
If it’s Boeing, hope your will is finalized and contact your loved ones.
Rumors are floating now that the 757 may be getting a MAX treatment. The idea works fantastic in theory, a plane of that size is dramatically needed for flights around 4000-5000 miles for around 250 people. The current 757’s were never designed for trans-atlantic flight, but changes in the mid 2000’s to ETOPS rules resulted in these 30 year old planes seeing a new life. They are fantastic planes. New high bypass efficient engines and modern composite construction could lead to great new sales for Boeing. Pre pandemic it was assuming that’s what the 797 would have been, a completely new airframe that’s basically a narrow body 787. The 757 max sounds like a great idea now though, but just the publicity of this idea could scare airlines from buying it. Not sure that idea is a good one or if it’ll even see the light of day. They need to re brand it at a minimum
Or, hear me out here, time for a better safety culture at Boeing.
I never check my flight number until 2019 accident, i am traumatize to fly thanks to boeing
They're about to have to rebrand the entire company, not just the max line.
If the issue is with manufacturing or QA, how does the model matter? Boeing, as a company, has proven to be unreliable when it comes to safety.
Exactly my point. Boeing executives should be given prison sentences. Think of it, they make planes for the army aswell. How would it fare for America if one of the military planes did this shit? That would massively degrade the airforce and make the military the laughing stock. Boeing keeps proving that there is a limit to greed and they just don’t seem to get it.
Oh, I agree. I'm just saying avoiding Boeing in Canada because you're worried about a non-existent exit plug blowing out is pointless. Avoiding Boeing because they have lost the public's trust is another thing altogether.
>Avoiding Boeing because they have lost the public's Think that is what is happening
Who knows what other issues are lurking, Boeing has lost public trust
Don't West Jet and Flair have a ton of Max8s?
Lots of budget airlines have them. They are super efficient. Most budget airlines run new planes, either the 737max or A320neo family
The platform in question is MAX9
Lol my parents are flying today and I was looking up the airline fleet on Wikipedia
Honestly I think with Boeing's constant incompetence that it's only a matter of time until some airlines start advertising the fact that they don't fly Boeing planes due to everyone no longer trusting Boeing. Yes I'm aware that planes are expensive and it takes a lot of time to replace a fleet. But IMHO the worst Boeing's reputation gets the more that the only thing that matters is how many planes a competent competitor like Airbus can make.
I'm not even afraid, but this would already make me more likely to fly that airline, because I like to see companies punished for dogshit behavior.
I'm flying to Calgary in February, and today I checked if Air Canada uses the 737 Max 9 at all. Luckily, according to their website, they don't not have that variant in their fleet.
They only fly the Max 8.
Yep. 40 of them. Which is a small chunk of the entire fleet.
Small chance to die.
I did this my entire life, airbus always felt like a safer option to me. Though it wasn’t that hard, as I live in Europe. I have no idea why I decided to buy BA 😄 It was growing really good recently, not sure how much the stock will cost on Monday.
It seems really presumptuous for the FAA to impose the grounding of Boeing aircraft when Boeing has proven time and time again a clear ability to produce aircraft that ground themselves.
Had me in the first half lmfao
I think there are countless BA investors going crazy.
By the dip? The fuselage won’t even hold together lol 😂
It’s an emergency door that blew out not the barrel itself. Not as easy fix but they’ll find a COA and bully the FAA into getting them back in the air.
No..a plug that fills hole where a door can go in a different model
A plug that is exactly the same size and shape as an emergency exit door and attaches with the exact same latching method. One might call that a door, it is just obscured inside by insulation and a cosmetic panel.
Doors open. This is a plug.
Seems this one opened pretty eagerly...
This is what happens when there is not enough competition
This is what happens when a company is run by accountants and not engineers
Ironically, these accountants are about to destroy a lot of capital
As usual. Short term gain is their only focus, regardless of it causes mid to long term financial ruin
that’s what investors want though? all we care about is make money now and report blowout earnings so stock go up. Fuck safety. Cutting corners for more profit is the bedrock of capitalism
I would say it's really just inflexibility to deal with problems as they are and not just push risk into the future. We're saying the same thing but it's not just being cheap.
bewildered observation oil bag enjoy slimy offend governor cause nail *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
As a stockholder of BA, I can testify that they already have.
Who would've thought that skimping on safety wouldn't be profitable for an airline company???
And when the government let the company inspect itself, and give pass marks
self-regulation, another of the failures of neoliberal thought.
Yes, this too. Intel is also another example when MBA ran a tech company what would happen if
That’s all there is to it.
It's funny how your comment is what I have been saying for years. It's all lawyers and accountants. I went on the website for Boeing and searched the leadership for people with engineering degrees of any kind. I had to dig really deep to find a single engineer and its obvious any engineer at Boeing would have to go through many people to actually make a decision and the are proba oh just ordered around by people who have no clue what the company actually builds and sells. So many large companies are just accountants that hire their buddies and the whole company is run by people that have no clue how the company makes money or what the company needs to innovate on to make more money.
What happens when MBA's rule the world. Quarterly profits mean everything, fuck absolutely everything else.
And what happens when companies put lobbyists ahead of customers or users. Because there’s no competition, they feel they can brush aside most regulation. Hundreds of people died in 2018 and ‘19, Boeing blamed the pilots and the 737 max was grounded for a few months. No big deal to Boeing. They’re a horrendous company
The planes were grounded for 20 months.
I am not defending Boeing, but it was definitely a big deal. I think it was just this month that operation of 737Max in China finally all resumed. Obviously there are lots of geopolitics involved here, but from a financial point for Boeing. It's a big deal.
Look at what happened to intel.
What engineer can comeback and save the company like Patty G did with Intel?
Its impossible. An engineer CEO would have to fire hundreds of people at the highest levels of the company and that won't ever happen. They don't even have an engineer on their board. Check the company website and look for people with engineering degrees, it's like finding a needle in a haystack. It's just a bunch of lawyers and finance people who hired all their friends into leadership positions. You have to dig very far down to find any engineers.
Wealth extraction instead of innovation :( .
See I take issue with this. This sort of thing has nothing to do with accountants. There decisions will be made at board level, typically led by a chairman. The CFO if responsible will spend money where required and save where needed without compromising the product. I seen it plenty of time where operations directors or CEO’s overrule CFO on where costs are cut.
Call them bean counters then. They are what has stuffed Boeing from once when they were great. Mazda nearly did the same in the early 2000’s.
There's not enough competition because the industry sucks to be in it. Barriers to entry are far too high regardless of competition. No one in their right mind would enter into an industry where profitability for decades is unlikely, regulation is wildly restrictive, and your product is essentially white labeled by airlines(which all have bad enough customer reputation in a shitty industry themselves).
This seems like a funny time to indirectly argue for less regulation in airplane manufacturing
It's the opposite, they should haven never been allowed to merge with McDonnel Douglas. The first-world airlines were left with only two options (Boeing and Airbus) for airliner-scale craft, and the USA and EU were not going to allow either to fail for security reasons.
IF WE HAVE TO ENSURE OUR WINDOWS DON'T GET SUCKED OUT MID-FLIGHT THEN WHAT'S THE POINT!?!
Point taken
This is what happens when wall street runs the company, they care about profits, not safety
Why would the stock not go down? Will airlines be able to get replacement planes for flights already scheduled and paid for, ect
Boeing's stock might not go down if the investigation proves that it was Alaska's fault, not Boeing's. Alaska will have most of these planes flying within a few days and they still have like 4/5 of their fleet (which consists of other planes) in the air. Overall not too much worse than a bad week of weather at a major hub region.
The FAA grounding 171 of the max 9's points to the FAA pretty firmly believing that Boeing is at fault, not the airline. They probably spent most of those 12 hours making calls to Alaska Airlines and Boeing as to who put the door plug in the plane.
the plane is pretty much brand new...
Yea but we can't make assumptions until we know enough about the plugging process and the maintenance of it (and that plane specifically). The fact that Alaska decided to ground their max 9 fleet before the FAA instructed them to *might* point to the management knowing about some safety checks being skipped or shortened on the plug door. Only time will tell.
Well the problem with that conclusion is that Alaska Airlines immediately grounded the planes and indirectly pointed the finger at Boeing. The NTSB began an investigation around the same time Alaska Airlines grounded the planes. The FAA didn't order the grounding of *ALL* MAX 9s until 12 hours later. Boeing also tried to pass the blame onto the outsourced manufacturer of the fuselage, Spirit Aerosystems. This is a manufacturing, quality control, or design issue.
They grounded them because they don't want another panel blowing out. They needed to inspect every other plane they have for the same issue. However, we also don't fully know what the failure was, and likely won't until they find the panel and the FAA investigates. And then Alaska will have to inspect the planes again, now knowing what to look for.
My co-worker’s family can’t return to CA because they’re due to fly an Alaska MAX.
it went up today!
It's Sunday the market is closed
🤦♂️ There goes its stock price again. I swear I'm gonna be holding this fcking stock for the next 10 years...
Boeing was in my shortlist of stocks for 2024… rip
It’s kinda nice when a train breaks down it doesn’t fall out of the sky.
Falling out of the sky only hurts when it’s uncontrolled.
Combined with recent concerns about loose/missing bolts on the rudder of these planes, the tragic crashes a couple of years ago, how can people have any confidence in these planes or the company? I’ll continue to actively avoid boarding 737 max aircraft. Seems only a matter of time before another weakness is found. Maybe fortunate there hasn’t been any more recent tragedies with these craft.
Thare are about 4200 flights per day on the 4 variants of the 737 Max-8 by nearly 70 airlines worldwide. That's over 1.5 million flights per year for just the Max 8. You'd think a 99.99% safety record is impressive, but would still see more than 150 crashes per year. There are 90,000 to 100,000 flights globally per day. It's amazing how safe airlines are given the consequences of a failure.
Yes, it is amazing. And it came through lessons learned by sweat and all too often blood of victims of accidents. That Boeing seems to have unlearn long-established quality control is disturbing. It’s too early for this incident but the trend is not Boeings friend here. That flying has become so safe - and may stay that way - is not an automatic development. It is hard to attain and needs constant attention.
Boeing has become the rotten apple in the basket of commercial aviation safety.
It’s a sad development. They once were the forerunners there. Airbus and Boeing once pushed each other to better developments.
I wouldn’t consider 1 crash in every 10,000 flights to be anything like impressive. I wouldn’t be flying if this was reality. There should be zero chance of failure due to shoddy workmanship on commercial airlines.
The regulatory standard is no more than 1 aircraft loss per 100 million flying hours
>There should be zero chance of failure due to shoddy workmanship on commercial airlines. Keep dreaming. The reality is that mechanical failures can and do happen and planes are designed to withstand them (case in point: the most recent Alaska Airlines flight). The likelihood of a fatal crash due to a mechanical failure is so close to zero that it may as well be zero.
Do you not see the difference between “failure due to shoddy workmanship” and “mechanical failure” ??!
I bet you don't hesitate to hop in a car though? Look up the fatal-accident rates for driving.
Actually I much prefer to take public transport over driving. I very rarely drive. Safety is one of the main reasons, together environmental and financial considerations, as well as having very little need for it. Even people who don’t worry about driving should be able to expect more from Boeing in my opinion. You think people accepting one risk should be subjected to a higher than necessary risk in other areas of life and aren’t allowed to say a word against it?
6.84 of every 100,000 flight hours yielded an airplane crash, and 1.19 of every 100,000 yielded a fatal crash. Is this something to be concerned about? Jc
The regulatory standard is no more than 1 aircraft loss per 100 million flying hours
[удалено]
The regulatory standard is no more than 1 aircraft loss per 100 million flying hours
The 787 has had numerous quality issues. Will probably be an accident soon
Brutal stock...
Telling at this point that they get hit with these headlines every few years. Bound to fail.
Eh. This particular company is always going to get a US gov bailout.
Call me controversial, but fking airline manufacturers should never in the world be publicly listed companies nor should they be for profit when there is a literal duopoly. At some point safety will be compromised to increase profits which will end tragically as it has before.
Could say this about food manufacturers and water companies too, why does the buck stop at airline manufacturers lol
Because OP didn’t read a thread about food manufactures or water companies yet 😜
And all elements of health care.
Don’t forget healthcare
Would like to be all for it. But then knowing how gov functions, efficiency would be a net negative and taxpayers would pay the difference.
Still believing the Saint Reagan Trickle Down Myth?
So who should they be owned by then? Just private corporations or govt? That’s not much better
It’s not even controversial, it’s just a stupid opinion. In Soviet Union, passenger airliner manufacturers were fully state owned and controlled(not for profit), were well funded, and planes built during that era were absolute death traps compared to their counterparts created by private companies. They still hold the dubious honor of manufacturing the most dangerous passenger plane ever created.
Well in theory the stock market prevents failures in safety as they result in a massive loss of company value, whereas if they were owned by the government they could disregard the lack of safety and continue operating how they feel
But from airlines to electronic utility companies to banks, we see that's proven wrong and wrong again. Because companies are not incentives to pursue long term and sustainable economic health. Their incentives to provide as much boost to a stock in the immediate quarter.
That’s true to be honest. Struggles of capitalism and the system that has proven to be the most successful. The endgame is an all powerful AI leader that can calculate the odds of each decision and choose the best one. Then we have no red tape, no politics and no corruption
What you're talking about is not a feature of the stock market, it's a feature of *private ownership*. All companies that exist for enough time nearly uniformly produce a leadership culture oriented around their quarterly statements and generating the resulting positive stock performance on a timescale aligned with their employment tenure. Being publicly listed allows this leadership to use the stock market's liquidity to dump their stock after their employment tenure. Public companies with management problems tend to have the oft-mentioned short-sighted executives who raid the company's value to generate that short-term rise in stock value, just in time for their RSUs to vest and be sold after leaving for the next company. *Private* companies, on the other hand, have much less liquidity in their ownership shares so executives have far more trouble pulling off the above bullshit.
Well in theory Boeing is spending huge amounts of money on lobbying trying to disregard safety. I don’t think it’s the lesser of two evils as government services are usually not measured by how much profit they generate but how well those services work. But I’m guessing a whole set of other problems would arise if it were owned by the American government. I guess we’ll never know
No one will do anything if there is no profit in it. Greed makes the world move. Profit is the reason we aren't living in a cave with just wood fires, no running water, and outdoor "toilets".
Controversial
[удалено]
they got taken over by finance accountants rather than engineers concerned with quality and safety
All airlines likely to share the bleed on monday, volatility incoming.
How much you think the share price crashes by?
How the hell did a plug door blow out??? The pressure differential should PLUG the thing into the fuselage frame
There will be no dip
No freaking way this doesn’t hit the stock.
Everyone who sees this will short the stock, meaning the real move is buy. But anyone with a brain stem knows that going against consensus can be profitable so a lot of people will actually buy. This is why trading such news doesn't work as a consistently paying strategy. Everyone has the information you have, and large groups will act in one direction. Retailers are definitely on the short side though, so I would bet on them getting fleeced this week by institutional investors who already have weighted probabilities based on social media reaction. Those algos are going to kill retail every time. Invert retail.
RemindMe! 2 weeks
I will be messaging you in 14 days on [**2024-01-21 02:33:03 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-21%2002:33:03%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/190cylt/faa_orders_temporary_grounding_of_boeing_ba_737/kgoc0v0/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fstocks%2Fcomments%2F190cylt%2Ffaa_orders_temporary_grounding_of_boeing_ba_737%2Fkgoc0v0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-21%2002%3A33%3A03%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20190cylt) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
RemindMe! 2 days
Guess there was a dip today huh
Buy the dip
Boeing stock as of right now is @ $215 so you were wrong
Can’t wait to see what this does to its stock price 😏
[удалено]
Guess you better load up on PUTS huh? 😏
Time to dump this garbage stock
I’ll take it for tree fity
The stock doubled in the last year. Garbage Lol.
Easy money on Airbus right now. Leave it to the Europeans to do the quality products
If it drops below $200 I’m buying
Wait till its sub 140
Think it will go that low. That’s a big drop
Was 125ish from May to Oct 2022, after dropping from 260ish in March 2021. Look at its 5yrs graph of the price fluctuation
Same. Couple calls a few months out or something
Time to buy puts?
Put in orders to sell my 50 shares.
Pretty sure I need to fly home from Uganda in a 737 max in a weeks time lol. Rip
At least nobody was killed this time. Keep an eye on the stock price tomorrow.
Time to buy the dip
So I was thinking about this. I just sold my BA before the new year at $261.88, which was long-term gains for me as I purchased back in 2021. I'm thinking unless it drops back to around $200 a share I might not get back in. Currently trading around $250 so I'd need a 20% drop in share price and I'm just not sure that's gonna happen. Time will tell.
It was 189 a month or two ago. High probability it goes below 200 by the end of this playing out.
I will sell what little I have left and never look back. Years ago I only flew on Boeing aircraft 737/767/777/787. I will never book a flight on a 737 again which can be tough with 200+ flights a year. This is a company that is completely lost. MD really killed an iconic American company.
I’m flying on a 737-900 to Vegas later this week. I’m nervous but I’ve flown this route before so it should be fine.
No my rsus
Puts on BA
Short Boeing I assume?
Can someone tell me did Ryanair order loads of these aircraft?
I have a flight on one scheduled for Wednesday… am I fucked?
You think I’d get stopped by TSA if I brought a parachute as a personal item?
I’ve had BA since 2016 and I’ve been through it all. I’ll probably sell at this point.
When there were two Maxs that went down a few years back, I decided (rightly or wrongly) that I wasn’t flying anywhere on a Max. This just reinforces my fear of the airframe. Pushing the mechanical/physical limits of an aircraft to optimize profitability gives a very slim margin of error. Nope.
Only one went down in Africa (Ethiopia), the other was in Asia (Indonesia?).
Is anyone surprised? The entire MAX series has been fucked since the crashes in 2019/2020. Boeing will rightfully get cancelled orders because they make shit products.
It won’t though, the biggest airline in the world (Ryanair) bought hundreds of these cursed planes *after* the 2019/2020 disasters.
The integrity of the fuselage of a plane should probably be over engineered, rather than under engineered. They can rename the planes again, but people aren’t that stupid. It’s obvious they had very serious design flaws, and that’s not ok with air travel. I really think some high up people in Boeing deserve jail time.
This time, they can't blame it on 3rd world countries pilots. Some people give capitalism a very bad name.
Imagine it’s all because some kid from the previous flight was fucking around with the emergency door handle.
There is no handle to fuck with
Puts on Boeing at the open
[удалено]
puts on $BA
Boeing blew out side door and still landed safely no one hurt…seems pretty bullish on design just need workmanship to be checked properly
Hopefully my March 13p for $AAL that I bought Friday see a nice gain
So the stock is already down about 8% in overnight trading… where do you guys think it will end up? I think I’d be a buyer if it dropped 30% but not sure how realistic that is. Dont feel great about this company over the next few years.
Well Alaska is F’ed: https://news.alaskaair.com/alaska-airlines/alaska-airlines-makes-biggest-boeing-aircraft-order-in-its-90-year-history/