It has been getting harder for staff to find parking spaces at Boeing’s Renton plant outside Seattle. For much of this year, the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer has been using the employee car park to store planes which it cannot deliver.
Renton is home to the 737 Max, the latest model of the best selling commercial jet in history. Since two fatal crashes prompted global regulators to ground the entire Max fleet in March, the plant’s 12,000 people have been confronted each day they arrive for work with hulking reminders of the biggest crisis in Boeing’s 103-year history.
The company has been producing 42 Max jets a month, even while it could not send them on to customers, leaving it with 400 “white tails” — finished planes awaiting airline liveries — in need of novel storage solutions.
They will soon have more room, after Boeing announced this week that it is halting production at Renton for an indefinite period. Employees will be parking at other nearby Boeing facilities where the $188bn company has promised to find them work.
Dennis Muilenburg, Boeing’s engineer-chief executive, had hoped the Max would be flying again by this summer, yet analysts now think it will not return until March 2020 at the earliest — almost 18 months after the first of two crashes, in Indonesia and Ethiopia, that killed 346 people. But even that might be optimistic — United Airlines said on Friday that the Max would not return to its fleet until June.
The crisis has not only cost America’s largest exporter billions of dollars: it has challenged many of the global aviation industry’s core assumptions about the political, regulatory and competitive context in which it operates.
Boeing’s announcement left employees who had feared lay-offs relieved, but it rattled suppliers who will find it harder to replace work lost during any prolonged interruption to orders.
With its shares down almost a quarter since March, and economists estimating that the disruption could shave half a percentage point off US gross domestic product in the first quarter of 2020, its troubles have also caught the attention of the passenger of its best known plane, Air Force One. Donald Trump reportedly called Mr Muilenburg on Sunday to ask about the company’s health highlighting that in election year the president will be weighing Boeing’s economic impact against his voters’ safety fears.
Boeing’s failure to put the Max crisis behind it has baffled even experts who have studied corporate crises, from Johnson & Johnson’s 1982 Tylenol pain relief recall, to BP’s Deepwater Horizon environmental disaster in 2010.
The drawn-out saga has few parallels, says Eric McNulty, associate director of the National Preparedness Leadership Initiative, but he believes it stems from “tone-deaf” management and an inability to understand that Boeing’s world was changing even before the pride of its fleet proved fatally flawed.
When questions first arose about the role its MCAS anti-stall system played in the Max crashes, Mr McNulty argues, the company’s first reaction was to think “we’re Boeing; this can’t be happening to us”; it failed to question potential failings in its culture, its close relationship with its domestic regulator or its fast-changing market.
“When you have a worldview that makes sense it’s almost impossible to break out of it,” he adds: “The system made perfect sense until it didn’t.”
Boeing is accused of producing a flawed design for the MCAS system, which pushed the nose of the plane down when sensors detected it was about to stall. But Boeing opted to use one instead of two sensors to deliver that crucial data to the flight control system, leaving it exposed if the remaining sensor was defective. Compounding the problem, Boeing lobbied to keep information on the system out of the manual to avoid costly pilot training, arguing that crew should be able to handle the system from existing checklists.
One analyst, a former aerospace engineer, says: “I don’t think they think they did anything wrong. They think they designed an aeroplane that was fine and this never would have happened if they had pilots who knew what they were doing . . . Deep down inside they think they are being picked on.”
If Boeing has been blindsided by the hostile response to its predicament, that is partly because its status as one of America’s most politically significant companies has offered it surprisingly little protection. With plants dotted around the country, the company donated $4.2m to politicians of all stripes from 2016 to 2018. It also gave $1m toward Mr Trump’s inauguration.
But if it hoped such patronage would shelter it, it was mistaken. Boeing does not face insurmountable technical problems, says Richard Aboulafia, vice-president of aviation consultancy Teal Group. Instead, “it’s a hideous mix of political pressure, messaging incompetence and regulatory misalignment” that is confronting the company.
In the view of one former supplier who asked not to be named, its problems with the Max began when the Federal Aviation Administration let it “ram through” alterations to a 737 design which was first certified in 1967, rather than face the more arduous approval process for an entirely new aircraft.
As House of Representatives and Senate committee members have learnt how keen Boeing was to avoid having the Max classified as a new jet, rather than an update of an old one, they have taken a tougher tone in questioning Mr Muilenburg and other executives.
The House transportation committee wants to find out who was pushing regulators to minimise how much training pilots would need on the Max. With 500,000 documents to review, its investigation has months to run.
“There is clearly a cultural issue at Boeing,” says one congressional official. “It is going to take a lot of things to turn this company around — a new leadership, and possibly a fresh perspective.”
Much of the scrutiny Boeing has faced on Capitol Hill has focused on a relationship with its domestic regulator that many now paint as excessively cosy. An official report from representatives of the FAA, Nasa and seven regulators, concluded that the FAA’s practice of delegating many of the steps required to certify an aircraft to Boeing’s own staff had created “conflicting priorities”.
Under fire, the FAA has appeared determined to demonstrate its distance.
Where once the regulator might have accepted Boeing’s reassurance that its aircraft were airworthy, now it is “reasserting itself”, Mr Aboulafia says.
The manufacturer’s timetable for getting approval for the Max to fly again was “not realistic”, the FAA said last week, reprimanding Boeing for appearing to try to “force” it into moving faster.
The FAA is not Boeing’s only concern. Despite a tradition of domestic regulators taking the lead in such decisions, China was the first country to ground the Max and the FAA’s international peers have all demanded a say in the process for getting it airborne again.
Authorities ranging from the European Aviation Safety Agency to Canada’s civil aviation body have peppered Boeing with questions. The FAA’s hopes of avoiding a piecemeal return to service have required unprecedented co-ordination with peers, which some in the US industry see as eager to challenge its standing as the leading regulator.
Their suspicions have been fed by other tensions between Washington and its trading partners. Mr Trump’s tariffs have sharpened competition with China, while the US recently won World Trade Organization backing for its case that the EU has provided unfair subsidies to Airbus, Boeing’s European rival.
Despite this win, one senior industry executive warns that “time is against Boeing” because the Max crisis may have set back the planned launch of its “new midsized aeroplane”, by three years. The popularity of Airbus’s recently launched A321XLR and re-engineered A330neo could leave little of the mid-market for it to go after, he says.
For now airlines faced with an effective duopoly between Boeing and Airbus cannot afford for either to fail. “The market needs [Boeing] to recover,” the executive says.
Despite the discomfort Mr Muilenburg showed while being grilled in October’s congressional hearings, many still expect Washington to temper its urge to punish the national champion.
“Boeing will receive all the support it needs to recover from airlines, the government, the agencies,” the executive says. “Boeing was too optimistic and arrogant in the way it predicted the aircraft would fly again but the FAA and EASA will authorise the 737 to fly again.”
If Boeing has had to rethink its assumptions about Washington and the wider regulatory environment, it has had to do the same with its planes.
The company faced angry reactions when it suggested earlier in the year that its errors with MCAS had been just one link in a “chain of events” but the pilot error at which it hinted remains a concern for manufacturers and regulators.
As the industry’s growth forecasts depend on emerging markets, Boeing faces the need to reassess its different pilot training programmes. That will mean building more technological safety nets into cockpits, and a level of automation which it had resisted.
The Boeing board, for now, is trusting Mr Muilenburg to execute these longer-term shifts, even while leading the urgent work to return the Max to the skies and responding to challenges like the malfunction which prevented its Starliner astronaut capsule from reaching the International Space Station on Friday.
But the chief executive will have one eye on the planes sitting in the Renton car park. A 737 does not take well to being grounded: its tyres go flat, its electronics need retesting, and its engine must be turned over. Much like one of the cars at Renton, one employee says, “you’ve got to take it out for a spin”.
TSX joins global stock market sell off as coronavirus fears refuse to go away – CBC.ca
The TSX joined stock markets around the world in a new round of selling off Monday, as surging cases of the coronavirus reignited concerns that the economic impact of the pandemic is still far from over.
The S&P/TSX Composite Index was down by almost 400 points or more than 2.5 per cent nearing midday, as health-care companies, energy companies, mining companies, banks and even tech names were all lower.
Losses began in Asia as soon as trading opened for the week, and they accelerated in Europe on worries about the possibility of tougher restrictions there to stem rising coronavirus counts.
In New York, the broad S&P 500 was down by 84 points or 2.5 per cent, while the Dow Jones fared even worse, down almost 1,000 points or 3.5 per cent.
Bank stocks had sharp losses Monday morning after a report alleged that several of them continue to profit from illicit dealings with criminal networks despite being previously fined for similar actions.
Shares in technology companies have been on fire for the past six months, as pandemic lockdowns have caused booming demand for online services such as Amazon, Netflix, Apple and Facebook.
But tech companies have been selling off of late on fears that they have risen too far, too fast.
“Stock markets around the world are trading lower to start the week amid mounting uncertainty,” said Colin Cieszynski, chief market strategist with SIA Wealth Management in Toronto. “Growing uncertainty and volatility in world markets has sparked a move of capital.”
Global banks hit by new corruption allegations. Why authorities are unlikely to act this time – MarketWatch
Shares of European banks fell sharply on Monday, after the release by BuzzFeed and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists of thousands of documents seemingly showing that some $2,000 billion worth of illicit funds were moved and laundered through the U.S. financial system over two decades.
– The papers show that five global banks — JPMorgan
HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank
and Bank of New York Mellon — kept doing business with “oligarchs, criminals and terrorists” even after being fined by U.S. authorities for earlier failures to clamp down on dirty money. The banks themselves said they could not comment on specific transactions due to bank secrecy laws. Their statements can be found here.
– The reports are based on leaked suspicious activity reports (SARs) filed by banks and other financial firms with the U.S. Department of Treasury.
– Shares in British-Asian giant lender HSBC
and the U.K.’s Standard Chartered
fell 6% and 5%, respectively, marking 20-year lows in London mid trading. HSBC said in a statement that “all of the information provided (…) is historical.”
The outlook: The report, based mostly on past behavior already fined and sanctioned by U.S. authorities, is unlikely to trigger new punishments by governments or regulators. Especially not in a moment in the deepest of the coronavirus recession, when authorities are trying to convince and subsidize banks so they can keep lending to businesses and households. And even if legal grounds did exist in a few cases for authorities to act, regulators everywhere are likely to decide that punishment by markets is enough for now.
HSBC shares plunge to 25-year low on banks report, China fears – Aljazeera.com
HSBC Holdings Plc slumped below its financial crisis low set more than a decade ago as pressures mount on several fronts including a potential threat to its expansion plans in China.
The London-based bank’s Hong Kong shares on Monday slid below their closing low for March 2009, hitting as low as HK$29.60, as they extended this year’s plunge to about 50%. Echoing a decline in London on Friday, its Hong Kong shares are trading at the lowest since 1995.
Europe’s largest bank is a possible candidate for China’s “unreliable entity list” that aims to punish firms, organizations or individuals that damage national security, the Communist Party’s Global Times newspaper reported Saturday. A day later, HSBC was among global banks named in a report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists on lenders that “kept profiting from powerful and dangerous players” in the past two decades even after the U.S. imposed penalties on the institutions.
“If the company is listed as a unreliable company by China, which looks certain since it’s a Global Times article, the bank will be facing lots of difficulties to do business in China,” Banny Lam, head of research at CEB International Investment Corp., said by phone Monday. “They may have trouble expanding the mainland business, after investing so much there over the past few years.”
The bank has rankled China over its participation in the American investigation of Huawei Technologies Co. Penalties include restrictions on trade, investments and visas on companies, countries, groups or persons that appear on the list.
HSBC declined to comment on the Global Times article. In a statement Monday in response to the ICIJ report it said that “starting in 2012, HSBC embarked on a multi-year journey to overhaul its ability to combat financial crime across more than 60 jurisdictions. HSBC is a much safer institution than it was in 2012.”
Standard Chartered Plc, which was also mentioned in the ICIJ report, declined as much as 3.8% in Hong Kong. “We take our responsibility to fight financial crime extremely seriously and have invested substantially in our compliance programs,” the bank said Monday in a statement.
HSBC now risks being caught in deepening turmoil after a swirl of trouble over the past year amid political unrest and an economic slump in its biggest market, Hong Kong. It also faces difficulties in navigating low interest rates and surging loan losses sparked by the global pandemic.
HSBC Chief Executive Officer Noel Quinn, who took over as the bank’s permanent head in March, last month issued a stark warning about tough times ahead while reporting that first-half profit halved and predicting loan losses could swell to $13 billion this year. Quinn said the bank would attempt to hasten a shakeup of its global operations, accelerating a further pivot into Asia as its European operations lose money.
Struggling to boost returns, the lender has come under fire both in the West and in China as it attempts to steer through political tension. HSBC was lambasted in the U.S. and the U.K. over its support for China’s new security legislation on Hong Kong.
A jump in income from its markets business has failed to make up for broader shortcomings, unlike at some Wall Street and European competitors. HSBC stock has fallen more steeply than most big rivals this year, with Citigroup Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. posting declines of 44% and 29%, respectively.
To make matters worse, HSBC sparked anger in Hong Kong earlier this year, alienating some of its most loyal investors, after scrapping its dividend in response to the pandemic. The bank is the worst performer on the benchmark Hang Seng index so far this year.
A Florida woman was attacked by a 10-foot alligator while trimming trees – WSVN 7News | Miami News, Weather, Sports | Fort Lauderdale
CI Financial buying US investment adviser Bowling Portfolio Management – BNN
US household wealth hits record even as economy struggles – TimminsToday
Silver investment demand jumped 12% in 2019
Iran anticipates renewed protests amid social media shutdown
Richmond BBQ spot speaks out about coronavirus rumours Vancouver Is Awesome
- Tech9 hours ago
Sony promises more PS5 pre-order stock for retailers – GamesIndustry.biz
- Real eState24 hours ago
LACKIE: There are signs of a softening real-estate market – Toronto Sun
- Politics18 hours ago
Mitch McConnell is the apex predator of U.S. politics – The Washington Post
- Health22 hours ago
23 of 29 new COVID-19 cases announced in Manitoba on Sunday are in Winnipeg
- Sports22 hours ago
2020 Tour de France stage 21 highlights – Video – Cyclingnews.com
- Tech16 hours ago
Asus TUF Gaming RTX 3080 OC Review – TechSpot
- Business24 hours ago
Iconic Ranchman's Cookhouse & Dancehall building up for lease – Calgary Herald
- Investment18 hours ago
Openspace Ventures Welcomes New Team Members and Announces First Investment from OSV+ – Stockhouse