Should Boeing Buy GE?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- Could Boeing Go Bankrupt? • Why Hasn't Boeing Re-E...
If you enjoy these videos and want to help me make more, please consider joining our Patreon: / cobyexplanes
Can't get enough Coby Explanes? Follow me on Instagram for even more great aviation content! / cobyexplanes
Thanks so much to my "First Class" patrons Vicky Bagwalla, Sebastian Dimond, and Timothy Franklin To learn more about Vicky's company Cloud Managed Networks, check out the links below!
Cloud Managed: cloudmanaged.ca/
Thanks so much to my videographer friends for generously providing excellent B-roll for this video. Go check out and subscribe to their channels for more A+ plane spotting content
@FRAproductions
@miraviation
@BrunoLevionnois
@PlanesWeekly
___________________________________________________________________________
General Electric has long been a trusted name in commercial aviation. From building the most popular turbofan of all time, to developing the world’s largest and most powerful engine, the company’s fingerprints are all over the industry. But despite its strong legacy, it hasn’t been immune to the downturn that COVID 19 has induced. With the layoffs and losses piling up, it begs the question: What happens if GE goes belly up? Let me explain…
#GE #Boeing #Airbus #RR #Raytheon
GE is a Defense Contractor. They aren’t going anywhere.
Good point!!
Exactly. This speculation makes no sense because it just wouldn't be likely to happen if GE did get into serious financial trouble. The government would flood it with cash in a heat beat.
@@jonathanw11 LOL A heart Beat.
And EBITA of $16B.. All of the pain that GE has endured over the last 12 years is a directly related the highly leveraged GE Capital (which they have offloaded). Since 2008 they have clearly sold or written down a huge amount of assets. Just looking at the change in revenues has no context, and given the circumstances, is pretty meaningless. They have actually done a lot in that time to clean up their balance sheet and have a reasonable amount of cash on hand.. and are profitable again.
@@jonathanw11 Breach of WTO rules. Would have to split into 2 Companies. Commercial that is BUST! and Military that is Subsidised. Same fact with Boeing.
In terms of company structure, if the aviation arm of GE went insolvent, it would only be that arm, which is bound to be structured as a separate company to the remainder of GE.
PW is lookin bad, first he PW1000, then the PW4000 on the 772 and 744 then days later a 757 from delta had engine problems with PW2000
Perhaps the best approach for both the aircraft manufacturers and GE would be for each to create these new entities, as you state in the video, whereby both the aircraft manufacturer and GE benefit from this symbiosis by both assuming responsibility for the entity's P&L. It would diversify GE somewhat and would give each aircraft maker 'their own' engine building and design 'division'. I realize that this sounds simplistic but, at least conceptually, may be worth it to them.
Those composite blades are 🤤
80% of GE aviation profit is from the aftermarket.... And when planes sit, they don't need to be repaired and when the engines on those planes still flying do hit their time to be overhauled, the engines don't get overhauled, the get pulled, and get replaced by engines of grounded aircraft.... So then GE doesn't sell highly profitable parts to large airlines and highly profitable MRO services to smaller airlines... Pratt and rolls Royce are suffering too
I think there are a lot of reasons why Boeing and Airbus are not in the engine building business.
Raytheon? Isn't that the company that make earbuds?
The picture you show from the Denver incident is NOY an uncontainable failure the fan blade came out the front, not radialy
By the way, the gp7000 powered the A380, not the a350.
9:54 a380?
I'd say that in the event of a bankruptcy the engine technology of GE could be bought by Honeywell more so than by Raytheon.
I also thought Honeywell could be a good fit, Perhaps Siemens could work as well.
@@peterkotara Siemens wants to sell its gas and power division and expand its healthcare/windturbine division.
Alstom in France sold its powerplant division so they could merger with Bombardier to become the biggest railway stock company in the world.
Toyota in Japan is silently requiring other branches of hightech transport industries for years.
Toyota motor cars is just one (important) division.
They have the money and buy other companys for the long run.
So don't count them out.
@@obelic71 I did not know that. I suppose if Toyota have the cash then GE might make a fitting addition to the stable.
Pity though, I like the thought of Siemens/GE.
I must say a GE9X powered Prius mould be killer though.
@@peterkotara Toyota has the cash 2 years ago they had the biggest buy of a companny in History 12 Billion dollars.
thats the GDP of a small country!
Toyota is one the least known tech giants regarding industrial transport equipment.
But personally i think if GE is going to go belly up it will be bought by a consortium of US companies.
@@obelic71 _" i think if GE is going to go belly up it will be bought by a consortium of US companies"_
I would say you are correct there, But which companies?.
Which company did Toyota Group purchase for 12 Billion? are you sure it wasn't 12 billion yen?😁
GE is a defense is contractor they’re not going ANYWHERE
The idea of an airframes owning an engine maker is really unlikely
Also it would require a ton of money Boeing doesn't have or it will require to maintain itself afloat.
Also, an aircraft manufacturer can't even produce it's own engines in the us.
It is prohibited
De Havilland would beg to differ
@@roberts9095 De Havilland has been gone (asorbed IIRC) for decades.
Cody, Boeing and Pratt and Whitney were once the same company. The government broke them up for antitrust competition reasons. Therefore it is unlikely that Boeing would be allowed to own GE.
You are one of the few that even know this fact…..the rest seem like babbling folks with very little knowledge about…..anything aviation.
Pratt & Whitney was originally a Boeing company. The government made Boeing sell it because they considered owning their own engine company was a monopoly.
They owned United Airlines as well..
@@ACPilot indeed
Lockheed Martin can be a serious contender for GE takeover
Similar issue to what Colby stated for Boeing except the anti trust issue would be with Boeing for military engines vs LM, plus LM's military lineup is very heavy Pratt and Whitney .
CFM International (the manufacturer of the LEAP and CFM56) is 50% GE and 50% Safran. It's not that easy for GE to be bought...
And also I think this is where too big to fail comes in I mean the consequences will be too harsh to bear
I think it’s more likely GE would buy Boeing then the other way around.
Marc not sure why you thought GE would buy Boeing Jets have to have engines but GE Will Survive without Boeing. Cars and trucks obviously need tires but I don't think Goodyear has ever thought about buying GM or Ford. Although nothing would surprise me nowadays. As of late GE has had trouble developing the triple 7x engine admittedly it's huge but they've had trouble I don't know if they want to take on the problems of developing Jets the giant Boeing has flopped at it the last couple of years.
@@garyhughes9649 Hey Gary, I don’t think GE is going to buy Boeing necessarily, but I definitely don’t think Boeing would acquire GE, but like you said nothing would surprise me. There was a time GE was buying everything.
GE is not in a financial position to buy Boeing, GE has been divesting assets and business units for over 5 years as to works to get to a much smaller / leaner company.
GE and PW is like Honda and GM. The design teams and management have to be from the right half, otherwise both brands will fall apart before our eyes. Boeing management came from the wrong half of the Boeing-MD merger, thus the 787 issues and MAX debacle, but what if Boeing kept their legacy management?
Boeing was having big problems long be for the MD merger jal 123 Us air 427 united 585 say it all
I thought rolls royce would buy ge if they sell lol
anti trust : nah
Lol it’s too British to buy ge
RR isn't doing well now either
Nah
Rolls Royce is in bad financial shape too.
GE stock is worth over $100B. If they need cash, they can sell $10B worth of stock. That having been said, they made nearly $6B in 2020, so they're doing fine.
Boeing has a huge competency problem as it is, building "cheap outsourced " jet engines is not the best plan for success
You should talk about Why The 787-9 has more range than the 787-8, even though it's a stretched variant, and why the 787-10 has the shortest range.
787-9 has larger tanks than the 787-8 and the 787-10 shares the exact same tank size as the 789 ,
@@mmm0404 I really think Boeing should introduce a HYBRID version of the 787-10 to increase the range. It will use both Jet fuel and an onboard battery to power the engine.
@@dennisthebrony2022 don't worry , Boeing is already working on improving the range of the 787-10. It will have a similar range to the 777-200ER/300Er. Using larger fuel tanks will do the trick
@@dennisthebrony2022 Any hybrid version would LOSE range, or LOSE load capacity.
Batteries weigh more *AND* store less energy than kerosene per pound or per kilogram.
Dont forget the GE and Safran partnership company CFM
Yup they both make up cfm, I’ll say cfm 56 is more Safran and the Leap series is more GE.
Raytheon can't acquire GE since it owns P&W. If it does it would go against anti-trust regulation.
Air Canada's flight decks all look like they're wearing a pair of shades.
Hello again, after a long time!
To answer the question, I would prefer GE to survive, I have always been a fan of this company.
Their engines are amongst the most reliable. Pratt and Witney's old engines are having their problems as was their geared turbofan. Rolls Royce had issues with the Trent 1000. Cfm seem to be doing OK and GE have a share. Covid will decide. I suspect that single aisle long haul planes will do well so good news for CFM and Pratt and Witney. Rolls Royce need to get the Ultrafan into single aisle planes ASAP.
Absolutely NOT ! First, we don't want shady Boeing management crap driving GE. Second, most of GE engines sold and maintenanced are in partnership with French SNECMA (CFM International) or Safran (LEAP). Hence most of the business and revenue is linked to European engine companies and EU would not let a Boeing takeover of GE fly!
**You guys wanna know how GE took care of an employee WHO MADE GE WHAT IT IS AND MADE IT BILLIONS??? GE gave said employee a $100 BOND VOUCHER........**
Well... If Boeing take over...Than the Join venture with Safran will be dead, And RR as well PW will move more aggressively....Airbus, Embraer, Comac will see differently.... Like all Carriers around the world. Best option Safran take over GE Aviation
This must be old video. GE stock has doubled.
its funny how you used so many clips from the swiss 777-300 er launch video! otherwise great job making this video and you got yourself a new sub
Why haven’t you been posting as much :(
**I just wish they would instead of making GIANT ENGINES, they would focus more on SPEED OF TRAVEL....**
That was a stupid comment. It is not always about speed... The aviation industry doesnt go around, "I want to do this". They developed these giant engines for the giant 777 that required big engines. They do what the aircraft manufacturers need.
Speed is inherently inefficient, planes already fly at the edge of transonic flight so if they go faster they'll be transonic and kill their fuel efficiency, if they go supersonic they'll also kill fuel efficiency and capacity.
Not eveybody likes being cooped up in a tiny seat 12+ hours on end just to get somewhere. So Op gets my vote!
@@ifpstopmotions9720 You moron, an engines physical size has NOTHING to do with the size of the plane... the engines are bigger to allow for higher "AIR BYPASS RATIO"...... lol
@@ifpstopmotions9720 The bigger the diameter the more air is sucked in thus increasing the bypass ratio which then translates to more thrust.
You do realize that not all of the thrust created comes from the air that is used to mix with fuel???
And they definitely go around saying "I want to do this", why do you think there is RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ? AND YOU JUST SAID THE 777 REQUIRES the bigger size engines so that means they went to engine maker and said "I WANT TO DO THIS"...
LOL You are such an idiot.
You must be living under a rock, GE book has been improving much over the last 2 years. 2020 FCF is doing exceptional well.
You think GE, the company that will make *all* of the engines for the 777X, plus the vast majority of the 777 fleet, plus multiple other aircraft types, is going to go out of business??
I definitely don't agree.
Boeing won't buy them, they have enough financial problems without adding further debt to the mix. Airbus wouldn't want them.
It would come down to P&W (Ratheon) or Rolls. Of those two, the US govenrment would probably have a problem with Rolls taking them over.
Even Safran (despite being a partner) would draw too much scrutiny from the US government as a foreign company.
The only option would be P&W, and that would mean the end of GE
Ummm, if that purchase were to happen between PW and GE, there'd be anti trust issues as well
Lockheed Martin or Honeywell would be the most likely candidates
As an ex air force engine guy, let GE survive, their reliability is legendary. Rolls-Royce use to be the same, but not as much recently.
RR went bust in the 1970s with the RB211 program. engineers forwarned of the trent issues if it was rushed. so suits did just that. sped to market. we all know how that turned out. ultra fan sounds awesome, but RR have not been percieved to be in the cutting edge of engine design for a while.
YEA
Very soon here, Btw a nice one
Here in Brazil, GE Aviation is known for underpaying extremely high qualified workers, while the Executive body that has no clue what they are doing or what the company does have their wages on the sky. The company is unable to keep talented workers that always find something better.
Pratt and Whitney
GE is the one that I would choose to remain
thanks for a very interesting video. As I live in the U.K I would suggest Rolls Royce, but RR has made some losses as well; so I doubt they want to buy GE.
Being from Cincinnati, OH (their HQ) I definitely root for GE 😅
Excellent analysis!! Thank you for putting this together. My first thought was a purchase by a competitor rather than Boeing. May also see a spin off and a capital raise. Seems like the new CEO is getting GE moving in a better direction. It would be a shame to see one of the legacy US manufacturers go out of business.
I'm sure RR would have a word to say if Boeing wanted to take over GE haha
General Electric❗❗
I'd have to say: Safran ;)
More likely float the GE aviation separately.
They will be given 25 billion dollars next month. That's in the stimulus package
GE will go nowhere. If the unlikely event takes places, Raytheon is the most likely to overtake GE aviation
Would they be able to as they own P&W?
@@cjmillsnun nope...huge antitrust issues
The hardships are behind them. They are totally transformed and new orders are coming in now in anticipation of sustainment money recovery.
Raytheon merging Pratt and GE would be a long term disaster... the same flowery projections were misguidingly applied to the Boeing-McDonnell Douglas merger.... now we know it was a bad deal and basically MCD disappeared....
Mm I thought GE stood for 'Goliath Engines'
GE suffered a financial indigestion in the 2008 financial crisis. Historically, was a "banker" to help its large customers finance large purchases (airplanes, nuclear plants etc). But it got drunk during 2000s and got into funky banking beyond its core business. I think most of that indigestion was sold in 2015.
Also, GE's silicon plant near Albany had severely polluyted the Hudson river for decades.GE spun off that company, but Courts rules GE was still responsible for billions in cleanup costs.
After the financial crisis, GE also eventually got rid of its shares in NBC/Uiversal. Sold off appliamces, lightbulbs and many other divisions.
GE recently sold off its locomotive division. But also bought the power generation division of ALstom. But it still has many divisiions it can sell off to avoid chapter 11.
Interestingly, despiote all those divestitures, it invested in oil/gas quite a bit and those are hurting real bad (and have no longer term fiuture with climate change). Those may be sold off over time, and even if at a loss, will still provide cash neede dto continue to make debt repayments.
GE will shrink. But somehow, I think GE's jet engine division will be one of the last to be let go.
A purchase by Boeing would be blocked by anti trust in USA and Europe. And airlines will not like a Boeing that has single engine choice for its airplanes.
GE may have ditched its funking banking, but now, GECAS will be a big question over next few years. How many aircraft will be returned to the lessor by failing airlines? How many paymenst are being skipped by airlines?
I am a commercial aircraft mechanic with several decades of experience on P/W, GE and Rolls engines and am currently working the 737 MAX return to service program. I don't care for the high By-Pass P/W engines because they are not very user friendly. All of the components on these engines are very hard to maintain due to limited accessibility. I have experience on the P/W 2000, 4000 and 4100 series engines. Rolls has been plagued with failures due to workmanship issues that caused inflight failures including the failure and uncontained failure of the #2 engine of a Quantas A380. Rolls did have a winner with the RB211-535-E4 power plants installed on the B-757. I personally prefer the GE power plants due to their reliability and access to components. The GE engines I have worked are the CFM-56-3B, 7B, Leap-1A, Leap-1B, CF-6-50 and CF-6 80C2. GE would be my choice of the 3. Hope this is helpful.
GE takeover??? Market cap is at close to 110 billion and GE already has a debt-to-equity ratio of more than 2! I'd have my doubts that anyone from the aviation industry can bring that up, nor that anyone would finance such a deal. Especially if Boeing (with quick ratio already at .46!) is at the helm, most of whose revenue streams are strategically outmaneuvered and their program accounting bubble not even burst, would you trust such a construct to return your investment? The DTI and DTE would make me cringe...
Dude, it's not the late 1990s/early 2000s anymore....
What about BMW? Are am i behind the curve? I thought threre were Four Manufacturers making Engines, (In no particular order), BMW, GE*, Pratt and Whitney, and Rolls Royce.
* As an aside, were such a sell off to hapen, what do you think would happen to there Electromotive (i.e. Diesel Locomotives), Division?
The United Aircraft and Transport Corporation was formed in 1929, when William Boeing of Boeing Airplane & Transport Corporation teamed up with Frederick Rentschler of Pratt & Whitney to form a large, vertically-integrated, amalgamated firm, uniting business interests in all aspects of aviation-a combination of aircraft engine and airframe manufacturing and airline business, to serve all aviation markets, both civil aviation (cargo, passenger, private, air mail) and military aviation.
With headquarters at Hartford, Connecticut, the holding company controlled the stock of the Boeing Airplane Company of Seattle, the Chance Vought Corporation, the Hamilton Aero Manufacturing Company (a propeller manufacturer), and the Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Company, an aeroengine manufacturer. Sikorsky Aviation Corporation, the Stearman Aircraft Company of Wichita, Kansas, and the Standard Steel Propeller Company were added to United's portfolio shortly thereafter, followed by several more airlines brought into the fold. The airline interests were soon grouped under a new management company known as United Air Lines, Inc. However, the individual airlines (as well as the individual companies held by United) continued to operate under their own names.
After the Air Mail scandal of 1934, the U.S. government concluded that such large holding companies as United Aircraft and Transport were anti-competitive, and new antitrust laws were passed forbidding airframe or engine manufacturers from having interests in airlines. This law forced United Aircraft and Transport to split into three separate companies. Its manufacturing interests east of the Mississippi River (Pratt & Whitney, Sikorsky, Vought, and Hamilton Standard Propeller Company) were merged as United Aircraft Corporation (later United Technologies Corporation), headquartered in Hartford with Rentschler as president. The western manufacturing interests (including Northrop Aviation Corporation, formerly Avion Corporation), became Boeing Airplane Company, headquartered in Seattle. The airline interests were merged into a single airline, United Air Lines.
Yes, I agree that Boeing should buy GE's engine manufacturing facility. Given a choice of the 3-main engine makers, GE would be my choice. In a random sampling of opinions of friends of mine who are airline pilots, ALL of them concurred that GE made the best engines. They were torn as to who was 2nd and 3rd (some felt Pratt & Whitney was 2nd, some felt Rolls Royce was 2nd and the other being 3rd. Additionally, several of the pilots stated that they felt that the Rolls Royce engines were "junk" compared to GE's. Opinions were mixed on Pratt and Whitney engines (some felt they were OK, others thought them to be inferior) but all seemed to agree that GE's engines were the best of the 3. Just my input.
Sorry, but your analysis really does not make much sense to me. First of all, GE Aviation is in excellent shape and their business is basically sound. They are the clear market leader, RR is struggling badly, PW is improving but still has a long way to go. The vaccination campaigns are gaining momentum, so the pandemic will hopefully be a thing of the past in 2022, with millions and millions of people wanting to travel again. Short and medium haul is going to improve first (CFM56, LEAP, GE38), with long haul taking more time to recover. Boeing, on the other hand, has some serious structural problems ...
You commented about Airbus raising a conflict of interest charge if Boeing tried purchasing GE. They might have part of a point, yet.... I confirm from Wikipedia that Airbus exists because the European aerospace companies consolidated, each time with their respective governments' approvals. They did it...to compete with Boeing.
What's more, governments in Europe tend toward subsidizing their industries when they feel the need. Boeing...does not have such an option.
Airbus essentially already has done--for approaching 50 years--what they would be complaining about Boeing doing. I should think such a lawsuit would be worthy of summary dismissal, on ground of rank hypocrisy.
You don't get to consolidate into a big conglomerate, then complain when someone else does the same thing.
Boeing will not buy GE. They've faced the antitrust act when they spun off PW in 1934. And also, If Boeing bought GE and GE comes out with a bad engine after that, then it would be Boeing's fault. However, given that Boeing does not own any engine makers in the likes of the Trent 1000 issues and PW4000 issues, Boeing can have an argument on why engine issues are not Boeing's fault: Boeing doesn't own any engine makers, the engine is a separate company's patent, the third party is the one that inspects the engines, and Boeing can't legally design engines in-house, etc. Even though GE is the best, GE isn't perfect, and if Boeing acquires GE, they acquire blame for any problem surrounding GE engines.
Your viewers are presumably comprised (a majority) of Americans.
So to ask "wich of the 3 major engine makers would you choose"...is rather pointless - at least that's how it seems to me.
(Also: -I wanted to post this answer *before I read the comments.
Maybe I'm wrong ?
-Anyhoo...I see RR as the strongest innovator.
But *of course* there would be a steep downward spiral if suddenly there were no competition !
Raytheon all ready owns Pratt & Whitney. If you though that a Boeing purchase of GE would attract lawyers, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Other than the joint venture with Safran as CFM, GE produces few engines for the A330 since Airbus offered the A330 neo verses the A330 ceo. Rolls Royce has a lock on Airbus business.
I've worked eith genersl electric engines namrlybyhe CF6-80C2 on virgin stlsntic sn Atlas Air B747-400ssnd found yhrm yo becrrlisble dnd relayively eady to eork eoth no climbing indside yhe Engine like ehen wotking on Rolls Royce RB211s snd Trents!
All of these mentioned companies have their issues. Through gross mismanagement, GE had a fire sale of their banking, appliance lightbulb, locomotive and other sectors in an effort to keep the last 3 afloat. The new CEO, Larry Culp, has been working to restructure internally in an effort to stop the bleeding. RR motors don't run without GE-built parts. PW's gear motors, after over 30 years of development by their head engineer, still don't work very well. It was an old idea from the 60's that has been dredged up and improved, but still not right.
History: William Boeing helped start a bunch of small airlines on the west coast of America in an effort to sell his products. Later, these small airlines were joined into one large unit as Boeing was more profitable...that airline was named, United. Now with antitrust laws, large mergers and acquisitions are far more complex...should GE Aviation slip further into trouble, my money would be on COMAC writing a check. The Chinese need the technology desperately.
You’re not completely right when you said Boeing never built engines. Check the history of United Aircraft and Transport Corporation in the 1930’s. Boeing is actually one of the three companies that results from a breakup of that company (and was merged into it before): Boeing, United Airlines and the company that is nowadays called United Technologies, that builds the Pratt & Whitney engines.
You need some history. The Government forced the breakup of United Aircraft in the 1920s because of airmail contracts with the Gov't. Who was United Aircraft? - Boeing, Pratt and Whitney, and United Airlines. A merger of GE and Boeing would kill all orders of GE engines on Airbus planes and probably kill all orders of other engine makers on Boeing planes. Also, spinning off GE Aviation makes the GE Corporation very weak, as you are selling their best business. Not happening soon, unless the Chinese make huge gains in the engine market.
GE is not going anywhere. GE, P&W and RR have all recently had problems with certain engines but all 3 also have ground breaking new tech and each have at least one very successful program with a huge order backlog. So can't see any of the 3 going under any time soon. Besides US/UK governments would not allow it because all 3 are vital to their respective countries economic and defence interests. Indeed RR was nationalised for a while by UK government in the 1970s for exactly those reasons, no doubt US government would do something similar if needed.
You really think the EU will allow GE and Raytheon to merge? Even if its just their engine divisions? You already mentioned the aviation industry is highly concentrated, engines is part of that. The best way is for GE get rid of the majority of that sinkhole timebomb that is GE Capital & then to get a large but patient outside investor to put money in the company, something like BRK to stabilize the stock and bring some investor confidence. They should then focus of their core competencies instead of trying to run a hedge fund. Plus BRK has $138 billion in cash holdings.
FTC would not allow Airbus or Boeing to purchase GE. Even if one of them did, the other company (or any other aircraft manufacture) wouldn't use them. They would go from being a profit center for GE to a money pit.
GE may spin off most of its remaining holdings, but they will keep Aviation and Healthcare (hospitals are still buying equipment). They may need Healthcare to keep Aviation afloat for the next 3-5 years, but it would be worth it.
Also; the PW 4000 failures were not uncontained failures. Contrary to most people's beliefs; the engine cowling is only there for aerodynamics and is not part of the engine. Just like the hood/bonnet on a car is not part of the engine. That is why you do not see a cowling on engines when they are on a test stand. That orange ring around the blades (8:48) is what keeps them from shooting straight out the sides and into the wing/fuselage. That ring is fully intact and did its job as designed. As bad as this may look, that was a Contained Failure. If you watch test stand footage of an engine test (blowing a blade off the engine at max rpm) that ring is going to move a lot... that is the force takes out the cowling.
It will never happen “bankruptcy” or in better terms a full collapse to zero on the exchange. The precedent for this is the collapse of ‘29. When GE was deemed “too big too fail” and was bailed out by Uncle Sam.
If the US had a strong history of enforcing anti-trust laws, this deal would not be possible... That said, I don't have much faith that this deal would be blocked. Two shady corporations merging to become a mega-conglomerate... that would not be good news ... Not to mention I think Boeing should hang onto its pennies for the time being given their ongoing issues.. Also, I'd actually argue in many ways the pandemic was good for Boeing. It provided a much-needed distraction from the constant news about MAX disasters... they also got an excuse to slow production which gave them more time to convince airlines that the MAX is safe, let the public forget a bit, and make changes / do tests...
Boeing used to own an engine manufacturer, and an airline. They were forced to split the company by the US Gov't in the 1930's and the engine company became Pratt & Whitney. The airline that was split off from Boeing is United Airlines.
I would have taken a second to mention the history of "United Aircraft and Transport Corporation". The one company built the planes, the engines and also flew them back in the 30's.
But after some incidents, were broken up as a vertical monopoly and were the reason that we have many of the antitrust laws that we do now.
The companies that came out of it were United Technologies (Pratt and Whitney) (now Raytheon Technologies), Boeing and United Airlines.
In other words, Boeing did used to make its own engines and the government has already established that this is unacceptable. Precedents can be changed, but the likelihood is low.
Maybe this is a whole video topic.
I don't think Boeing could buy a pack of gum right now and I don't see why they would want to buy GE when they can get their engines. Look at the Rolls-Royce Trent series and the ge9x was a pain a massive pain but hopefully they got it right now. Obama propped up GE roughly 10 years ago financially with a hundred and fifty billion dollars so GE is going to stick around a while.
Rolls Royce makes engines and hay!!
Well for anyone who knows US Politics knows that GE aviation is a US Department of Defense contractor, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
I'd choose Rolls Royce, in my opinion of working on all 3 manufacturer's engines, RR definitely do a great job
Sadly not as well as they used to as they seem to have a lot of issues now. Their reputation has been badly damaged by Trent 1000 and so is P&W’s over the P&W 1000G frequent issues and now P&W 4000-112 failures on the oldest 777’s
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 that by-product of pushing the limits of new technology. no one survives in aviation without getting their hands dirty. boeing with the dreamliner and MAX fiasco, airbus and bombardier both getting caught in illegal bribes.
Girl, you haven't watched the news didn't you? RR is on the rock as well.
GE makes great engines. Better track record than RR. Sorry.
Sorry GE and CTM engine is far better than RR
Lol. GE isn't going anywhere. I bought a thousand shares last July, doubled my 💰i dont really understand your analysis. They have plenty of free cash flow that it is extremely unlikely they would go bankrupt. Did you bother looking at their 10k or their income statements or cash flow statements or do any kind of financial review before forming this theory of yours?
Thought the same from the beginning of the video (liked!)
Great analysis of this potential purchase ramifications; however, Boeing’s argument may reference Apple Silicon for utmost optimizations, safer operations and maintenance, and longevity support for in-house engine in relation to the aircraft. That will definitely boost sales due to airlines confidence in a more harmonious product and shorter delivery schedules. Plus Boeing does have a dominating influence that ironically led to manufacturing the latest A220 in the USA, and that’s how it could maneuver its way in court.
GE is Owned By Boeing!!! Because GE has a Joint Venture with Safran which a percentage is owned by boeing..BUSINESS
I've thought about what would happen if PW and GE merged to compete with Rolls-Royce
No, Boeing should not buy GE but, they should buy Embraer. If they don't the CCP will and Embraer is a primary source for a lot of military hardware in the "free world".
Don't think RR are in the position to buy GE aviation. Anyway, the US government wouldn't allow the sale even though RR is on the same side. I think things will stay as they are and they will see how the 777 develops. If that is a flop, hopefully it won't be, then they may consider selling.
GE aviation has been messing up for over 20 years. With 27 years experience working on GE engines. The quality has gone down. Everything is outsourced.
Hmmm, Larry Culp came from Danaher and already sold some GE assets back to Danaher. Would Culp sell GE aviation to Danaher??
I think this is a nonstarter. Maybe PW should, or one of the other engine makers. Imagine the recent issue when the 787 had Trent issues but the engines were GE? BA got enough issues, get my drift? Heck they got blamed anyway.
According to Markopolis GE should have went bankrupt over a year ago! And when he said it almost everyone thought he was genius. We're is he now anyway?
GEAE is a great company and their engines are highly recommend to any aircraft model, the only problem is the GEAE management system is really obsolete and not high end applicable for the employees, the only way to save GEAE is to change the management regimes that has been stable ever since the earliest 2003. Sincerely Global aerospace engineering in Seattle and Los Angeles…
GE Aviation is very profitable. It would sell GE Aviation to RR or Raytheon before it goes under
Why would GE Aviation sell to Boeing when they have a crazy backlog for both commercial and military customers.
Boeing is a wretched choice. It puts them in a conflict of interest in terms of its relationships with other engine manufacturers. It substantially reduces the attractiveness of future Boeing-GE engines to Airbus and other airframe producers. Last but not least, Boeing has severely tarnished their formerly good reputation as a builder of quality airframes and have no track record in the engine business. Would you trust a plane from a vendor who bets passenger lives on cutting corners and has brought that corporate culture to the engine as well.
I would hate it if they buy GE, they would stop doing stuff with amtrak and a bunch of household items etc, boeing would just make it for planes it would suck.