|
|
|
|
|
by p_l
880 days ago
|
|
Then, to quote a certain overly popular series, You know nothing, cubefox. Hell, ex-McDonnel-Douglas engineer at Boeing explicitly called out financial "engineering" that looks good on stock market but doesn't work well long term with explicit example of DC-10. This horrifyingly played out with 787 (which also had design issues, some that FAA smacked them about - fortunately as a new plane and one of the first with AFDX in US market, FAA could assign enough people to checking twice what Boeing did). A lot of the subcontractors were companies that used to be part of Boeing - but which now could be squeezed for cheaper prices. And the thing you're missing is that the capitalist aren't sacrificing their capital if they can cash out the gains - for example thanks to only playing on the stock market and pushing publicly traded companies towards practices that enable better returns for them. While Boeing managed to keep considerable amount of shares under corporate ownership, it's less than enough to veto anything. And Vanguard (biggest individual owner of Boeing stock) or any other big fund thanks to stock market can get benefits from short-term planning and get positive returns. In fact, it's arguably beneficial to not hold out too long and always be ready to cash out. And the same kind of thinking led to a lot of cutting at IBM (the principal guideline was EPS value) and Digital in 1990s (where many units were sold off despite turning profit or being profit-drivers for other units). |
|