quarta-feira, 10 de março de 2010
TEc "Accusations fly" On Boeing winning US$35bn airtanker contract, Northrop-EADS dropping out of bid
I will refrain from any definitive statements on this long saga in the defence business that opposed the two archrivals Boeing vs EADS whose main battle is the civilian sector.
I do so in the knowledge that many, if not the most important, pieces of information would be missing from my sources as only accessible to a few.
Whether or not the process from the original lease plan to first bidding/annulment and second bidding was transparent throughout is open to question only those who followed on close would be able to answer.
What I can and will say though is that Boeing would never let go lightly on a massive multi-billion dollar deal in the oversensitive defence segment no less.
While I find such a stance only natural and a reflection of the company's major role since long as the nation's supplier of military kit, my nagging questions have to do with Northrop-EADS having won the 2006 bidding at all.
The chosen plane's main arguments then being those of meeting the technical and capability requirements of the US Air Force.
Have those criteria changed from first to second bidding?
Were those procurement irregularities found beyond fixing?
Whatever.
For Boeing, for American workers and for American manufacturing this is welcome news indeed.
At a time when the after-effects of prolonged recession are still keenly felt and a general decline in American manufacturing is observed, the patriotic card could understandably be waved openly or subtly to better outcome.
For EADS, which obviously used Northrop to improve chances in America - understandably too - there remains some comfort(?) in that it can beat Boeing on home ground.
By any measure this has been a close call, a near miss or worse still - grabbed it but somehow it slipped out.
There will be more defence contracts in the future to supply the American military.
I do so in the knowledge that many, if not the most important, pieces of information would be missing from my sources as only accessible to a few.
Whether or not the process from the original lease plan to first bidding/annulment and second bidding was transparent throughout is open to question only those who followed on close would be able to answer.
What I can and will say though is that Boeing would never let go lightly on a massive multi-billion dollar deal in the oversensitive defence segment no less.
While I find such a stance only natural and a reflection of the company's major role since long as the nation's supplier of military kit, my nagging questions have to do with Northrop-EADS having won the 2006 bidding at all.
The chosen plane's main arguments then being those of meeting the technical and capability requirements of the US Air Force.
Have those criteria changed from first to second bidding?
Were those procurement irregularities found beyond fixing?
Whatever.
For Boeing, for American workers and for American manufacturing this is welcome news indeed.
At a time when the after-effects of prolonged recession are still keenly felt and a general decline in American manufacturing is observed, the patriotic card could understandably be waved openly or subtly to better outcome.
For EADS, which obviously used Northrop to improve chances in America - understandably too - there remains some comfort(?) in that it can beat Boeing on home ground.
By any measure this has been a close call, a near miss or worse still - grabbed it but somehow it slipped out.
There will be more defence contracts in the future to supply the American military.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário