Has outsourcing killed Boeing?

[Oldguy]

The article didn't say "Union busting" they talked more about Japanese technology specifically with respect to Carbon fibers.

Instead of carbon footprints we should focus on carbon fibers

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

 

[Seawytch]

No shit, Sherlock. Damn good thing I never said they were. It was that moron Warrior that was claiming that Boeing employees didn't belong to a union. When that was proven false, he tried the "toilet cleaners" angle which also proved to be another Warrior epic fail. You'd think he'd get tired of being so wrong, but he just doubles down.

Closet masochist I think.

Nice back peddle, assbreath

I really wouldn't mind you being a dick if you weren't so incredibly stupid as well. Where have I "back peddled", you inbred, backwoods ****?

YOU made the claim that Boeing was a private company and therefore didn't have unions. An idea you made up in your pea brain. I proved that false with a link to Union Boeing benefits (it said Union Benefits right on their ******* page) then you came back with there only being a union for the "cleanup crew" so I provided you a link about the Boeing Engineers union striking and you slunk away like the ***** you are.

So where is MY backpeddle ***** boi?

 

[Gadawg73]

This author thinks Boeing's decision to outsource 70% of the 787 Dreamliner has resulted in the company handing the Japanese a technological advantage which will leave Boeing in the dust.

Once again, a short-term, bottom line goal and deliberate union-busting may lead to another key American industry falling behind.

Yeah, you can do things cheaper overseas and turn a quick profit, but what about the future? Does anybody care anymore?

What Went Wrong at Boeing: My Two Cents - Forbes

Read the other article there on what went right with the plane.
Over a million passengers already with 50K miles on those planes.
Minor problems.
However, outsourcing ALWAYS drives profits and knowledge to suppliers while driving up costs for the mother company.

 

[SniperFire]

The article didn't say "Union busting" they talked more about Japanese technology specifically with respect to Carbon fibers.

Instead of carbon footprints we should focus on carbon fibers

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

 

[nitroz]

Most of us unionized workers at Kennedy Space Center are a huge reason why America is and will continue to be the leader of the pack when it comes to space flight.

you work at KSC?

 

[Warrior102]

YOU made the claim that Boeing was a private company and therefore didn't have unions.

Correct.

Next?

 

[Seawytch]

The article didn't say "Union busting" they talked more about Japanese technology specifically with respect to Carbon fibers.

Instead of carbon footprints we should focus on carbon fibers

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

Not according to this:
Top Ten Outsourcing Survey-Executive Survey: The Outsourcing Institute's Annual Survey of Outsourcing End Users

Top 10 Reasons Companies Outsource
1. Reduce and control operating costs
2. Improve company focus
3. Gain access to world-class capabilities
4. Free internal resources for other purposes
5. Resources are not available internally
6. Accelerate reengineering benefits
7. Function difficult to manage/out of control
8. Make capital funds available
9. Share risks
10. Cash infusion

Efficiency is not directly cited.

This White Paper also does not cite efficiency as the reason. Number one reason, again, is cost. Their bottom line. How much THEY can make and **** the people that used to work for them.

Top Five Reasons Companies Outsource

 

[Seawytch]

YOU made the claim that Boeing was a private company and therefore didn't have unions.

Correct.

Next?

It is correct that you said that, it is not correct that there are no unions at Boeing. There are and I proved it to you with links.

Please tell me that you're still trying to claim that there are not union workers at Boeing. Please, please, PUHLEASE.

That would be just toooooo awesome.

 

[SniperFire]

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

Not according to this:
Top Ten Outsourcing Survey-Executive Survey: The Outsourcing Institute's Annual Survey of Outsourcing End Users

Top 10 Reasons Companies Outsource
1. Reduce and control operating costs
2. Improve company focus
3. Gain access to world-class capabilities
4. Free internal resources for other purposes
5. Resources are not available internally
6. Accelerate reengineering benefits
7. Function difficult to manage/out of control
8. Make capital funds available
9. Share risks
10. Cash infusion

Efficiency is not directly cited.

This White Paper also does not cite efficiency as the reason. Number one reason, again, is cost. Their bottom line. How much THEY can make and **** the people that used to work for them.

Top Five Reasons Companies Outsource

1,2,4.5 and 7 and perhaps 6 and 8 are DIRECTLY driven by the need to be more efficient.

You never fail to be a ******* idiot.

 

[Seawytch]

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

Not according to this:
Top Ten Outsourcing Survey-Executive Survey: The Outsourcing Institute's Annual Survey of Outsourcing End Users

Top 10 Reasons Companies Outsource
1. Reduce and control operating costs
2. Improve company focus
3. Gain access to world-class capabilities
4. Free internal resources for other purposes
5. Resources are not available internally
6. Accelerate reengineering benefits
7. Function difficult to manage/out of control
8. Make capital funds available
9. Share risks
10. Cash infusion

Efficiency is not directly cited.

This White Paper also does not cite efficiency as the reason. Number one reason, again, is cost. Their bottom line. How much THEY can make and **** the people that used to work for them.

Top Five Reasons Companies Outsource

1,2,4.5 and 7 and perhaps 6 and 8 are DIRECTLY driven by the need to be more efficient.

You never fail to be a ******* idiot.

Reducing cost does not automatically make a company more efficient. Is it more efficient to wait on the phone for an hour to get through to a call center in India? No, but it sure does save that company a bunch of money. **** the customers and **** the people in the US that used to have those jobs.

Outsourcing is not for efficiency, but your corporate masters are pleased you think so.

 

[SniperFire]

Not according to this:
Top Ten Outsourcing Survey-Executive Survey: The Outsourcing Institute's Annual Survey of Outsourcing End Users

Top 10 Reasons Companies Outsource
1. Reduce and control operating costs
2. Improve company focus
3. Gain access to world-class capabilities
4. Free internal resources for other purposes
5. Resources are not available internally
6. Accelerate reengineering benefits
7. Function difficult to manage/out of control
8. Make capital funds available
9. Share risks
10. Cash infusion

Efficiency is not directly cited.

This White Paper also does not cite efficiency as the reason. Number one reason, again, is cost. Their bottom line. How much THEY can make and **** the people that used to work for them.

Top Five Reasons Companies Outsource

1,2,4.5 and 7 and perhaps 6 and 8 are DIRECTLY driven by the need to be more efficient.

You never fail to be a ******* idiot.

Reducing cost does not automatically make a company more efficient. Is it more efficient to wait on the phone for an hour to get through to a call center in India? No, but it sure does save that company a bunch of money. **** the customers and **** the people in the US that used to have those jobs.

Outsourcing is not for efficiency, but your corporate masters are pleased you think so.

Nobody claimed that, strawman.

You suck at this.

 

[Oldguy]

The article didn't say "Union busting" they talked more about Japanese technology specifically with respect to Carbon fibers.

Instead of carbon footprints we should focus on carbon fibers

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

You didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you had, you'd have seen this:

"...As Steve shows at length, this greatly increased the managerial complexity of the project and almost certainly helps explain why the project ended up three years late..."

Sounds efficient to me....doesn't it you?

But, for the benefit of you low information voters, let me give you another example.

I bought my grandsons model airplanes to build as Christmas presents. They are made by Revell, an old and respected name in the business. According to the box label, the plastic parts were molded in the USA, the box was printed in China and....get this...the model was packaged in China.

Now...think this through and tell me how it's more "efficient" to make the model airplane here, then ship it halfway around the world to be put in a box and shipped right back. Those little plastic pieces crossed the entire Pacific Ocean twice before they ended up on the store shelf here in Texas.

 

[SniperFire]

No, I said union busting. What other excuse could Boeing have for outsourcing 70% of that aircraft than to reduce cost via the use of cheaper workers?

It's certainly not efficiency, is it?

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

You didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you had, you'd have seen this:

"...As Steve shows at length, this greatly increased the managerial complexity of the project and almost certainly helps explain why the project ended up three years late..."

Sounds efficient to me....doesn't it you?

But, for the benefit of you low information voters, let me give you another example.

I bought my grandsons model airplanes to build as Christmas presents. They are made by Revell, an old and respected name in the business. According to the box label, the plastic parts were molded in the USA, the box was printed in China and....get this...the model was packaged in China.

Now...think this through and tell me how it's more "efficient" to make the model airplane here, then ship it halfway around the world to be put in a box and shipped right back. Those little plastic pieces crossed the entire Pacific Ocean twice before they ended up on the store shelf here in Texas.

Why would I need to read an article to know from vast experience that outsourcing lends efficiencies to an operation?


LOL

 

[Oldguy]

Efficiency is one of the top reasons to outsource.

Fail.


LOL

You didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you had, you'd have seen this:

"...As Steve shows at length, this greatly increased the managerial complexity of the project and almost certainly helps explain why the project ended up three years late..."

Sounds efficient to me....doesn't it you?

But, for the benefit of you low information voters, let me give you another example.

I bought my grandsons model airplanes to build as Christmas presents. They are made by Revell, an old and respected name in the business. According to the box label, the plastic parts were molded in the USA, the box was printed in China and....get this...the model was packaged in China.

Now...think this through and tell me how it's more "efficient" to make the model airplane here, then ship it halfway around the world to be put in a box and shipped right back. Those little plastic pieces crossed the entire Pacific Ocean twice before they ended up on the store shelf here in Texas.

Why would I need to read an article to know from vast experience that outsourcing adds efficiencies into an operation?


LOL

Well, of course. Silly me! Why SHOULD anyone need to read a linked article that is THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD before commenting.

Gee..what WAS I thinking?

 

[SniperFire]

You didn't bother to read the article, did you? If you had, you'd have seen this:

"...As Steve shows at length, this greatly increased the managerial complexity of the project and almost certainly helps explain why the project ended up three years late..."

Sounds efficient to me....doesn't it you?

But, for the benefit of you low information voters, let me give you another example.

I bought my grandsons model airplanes to build as Christmas presents. They are made by Revell, an old and respected name in the business. According to the box label, the plastic parts were molded in the USA, the box was printed in China and....get this...the model was packaged in China.

Now...think this through and tell me how it's more "efficient" to make the model airplane here, then ship it halfway around the world to be put in a box and shipped right back. Those little plastic pieces crossed the entire Pacific Ocean twice before they ended up on the store shelf here in Texas.

Why would I need to read an article to know from vast experience that outsourcing adds efficiencies into an operation?


LOL

Well, of course. Silly me! Why SHOULD anyone need to read a linked article that is THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD before commenting.

Gee..what WAS I thinking?

You are deflecting.

I was addressing your asinine notion that 'efficiency' was not a huge reason for outsourcing.

Dumbass.

 

[Seawytch]

1,2,4.5 and 7 and perhaps 6 and 8 are DIRECTLY driven by the need to be more efficient.

You never fail to be a ******* idiot.

Reducing cost does not automatically make a company more efficient. Is it more efficient to wait on the phone for an hour to get through to a call center in India? No, but it sure does save that company a bunch of money. **** the customers and **** the people in the US that used to have those jobs.

Outsourcing is not for efficiency, but your corporate masters are pleased you think so.

Nobody claimed that, strawman.

You suck at this.

You just did. The NUMBER ONE reason given for outsourcing is to "control cost" which you claimed made the company more efficient. It doesn't. Outsourcing is about making more money for the company, period.

 

[SniperFire]

Reducing cost does not automatically make a company more efficient. Is it more efficient to wait on the phone for an hour to get through to a call center in India? No, but it sure does save that company a bunch of money. **** the customers and **** the people in the US that used to have those jobs.

Outsourcing is not for efficiency, but your corporate masters are pleased you think so.

Nobody claimed that, strawman.

You suck at this.

You just did. The NUMBER ONE reason given for outsourcing is to "control cost" which you claimed made the company more efficient. It doesn't. Outsourcing is about making more money for the company, period.

I claimed that reducing costs automatically makes a company more efficient?

Linkage?

ROTFL

 

[GoneBezerk]

Swamp trash, you aren't the ones making the rockets, satellites, etc.

You are hired hands there to pick up garbage around the launch area.

Most of us unionized workers at Kennedy Space Center are a huge reason why America is and will continue to be the leader of the pack when it comes to space flight.

 

[Oldguy]

Why would I need to read an article to know from vast experience that outsourcing adds efficiencies into an operation?


LOL

Well, of course. Silly me! Why SHOULD anyone need to read a linked article that is THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD before commenting.

Gee..what WAS I thinking?

You are deflecting.

I was addressing your asinine notion that 'efficiency' was not a huge reason for outsourcing.

Dumbass.

I'm the one deflecting? LOL

Quit squirming and get on with the subject.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Once again, a short-term, bottom line goal and deliberate union-busting may lead to another key American industry falling behind.

What union busting?