785 users online (86 members and 699 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mobile, AL
    Posts
    359,932

    A Finger For Boeing

    http://www.wkrg.com/mobilesmakeover/..._boeing/15153/



    Mobile's future as the world's third manufacturer of large airplanes is still very much up in the air.

    The Air Force has made no decision about what to do since the Government Accountability Office sided with Boeing on Wednesday.

    Their recommendation is a re-bid on the 40 billion dollar military contract.

    Northrop Grumman and EADS are flying under the radar these days... giving a local chicken-finger restaurant the chance to steal the spotlight.

    They have a deal for Boeing that some say is finger-licking good!

    The Mobile-based Foosackly's chain has a new sign up that says "We would like to offer Boeing a finger."

    The brainchild of the billboard is Foosackly's owner Will Fusaiotti. He says he was clearing the marquis sign and was thinking of what to put up. "I was like we're gonna go with "71 days til football season" to start ramping up football season letting people know. As we were doing it, I said ahh let's wait on that. Let's do something about this whole Boeing thing they announced."

    Usually Foosackly's creative advertising comes from the Red Square Agency. Rich Sullivan admits that his team had no hand in this one. "Sometimes the client will come to the table with some pretty great stuff and this is one of those cases. He managed to do something tongue in cheek that obviously people get a huge kick out of when you've got the guts to say what everybody else is thinking."

    Depending on the feedback, the billboard will stay up through the end of the week.

    If you're interested in a mini version of the message, bumper stickers will be available at the restaurant soon.





    This is a local restaurant that I eat at weekly...pretty funny stuff

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,395
    Kind of a shame how the deal got taken away. That could have created a lot of jobs for the folks of Mobile. The ground breaking ceremony for the facility was supposed to be this week, but that's obviously been shelved.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,139
    I think the GAO was absolutely correct. Northrop Grumman should never have been awarded the contract to start with. Can anyone forget their shipbuilding fiasco that cost taxpayers billions?
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...0/ai_n25487668

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ntegrity View Post
    I think the GAO was absolutely correct. Northrop Grumman should never have been awarded the contract to start with. Can anyone forget their shipbuilding fiasco that cost taxpayers billions?
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...0/ai_n25487668
    What are you basing this assessment off of?

    That link has nothing to do with the current situation.

    Maybe you forgot how a Boeing employee had secret papers belonging to Lockheed Martin in a bid for another Airforce Contract.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ockheed09.html

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
    What are you basing this assessment off of?

    That link has nothing to do with the current situation.
    I'm basing it on the GAO's findings comments that Boeing proposed to do more work and was more responsive to the technical requirements in their proposal. How can you say that Northrop Grumman's prior performance on government contracts is not relevant?? It's normally a big factor in deciding who will be awarded the contract.

    Maybe you forgot how a Boeing employee had secret papers belonging to Lockheed Martin in a bid for another Airforce Contract.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ockheed09.html
    I wasn't aware of the link you provided. Sorry for being so dense, but what does that situation have to do with this one?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ntegrity View Post
    I'm basing it on the GAO's findings comments that Boeing proposed to do more work and was more responsive to the technical requirements in their proposal. How can you say that Northrop Grumman's prior performance on government contracts is not relevant?? It's normally a big factor in deciding who will be awarded the contract.


    I wasn't aware of the link you provided. Sorry for being so dense, but what does that situation have to do with this one?
    Looks like Boeing hires some dishonest people.

    However you slice it...the people who lose is our warfighters. They need those tankers YESTERDAY. The current ones in deployment are 50 years old.

    Also, the Airforce doesn't have to follow the GAO's recommendation. They could still go with Northrop if they wanted to, although at this point it seems they will start from scratch and start the bidding process all over again.

    It's still anyone's contract to win, and it's $35 billion. It's only 1 of 3 upcoming contracts totaling $100B.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
    Looks like Boeing hires some dishonest people.
    Do you think all NG employees are saints? Hopefully not. There are dishonest people everywhere. If they hired that guy because of the proprietary information he could provide them, then I would agree with you. But I don't think that's an issue.

    However you slice it...the people who lose is our warfighters. They need those tankers YESTERDAY. The current ones in deployment are 50 years old.
    I'm all for our military and anything that makes their job safer or easier. It's a shame this procurement wasn't put out many years ago.

    Also, the Airforce doesn't have to follow the GAO's recommendation. They could still go with Northrop if they wanted to, although at this point it seems they will start from scratch and start the bidding process all over again.

    It's still anyone's contract to win, and it's $35 billion. It's only 1 of 3 upcoming contracts totaling $100B.
    The government shouldn't put out RFP's and then not follow their own guidelines for evaluating the responses. I'm sure both companies invested many thousands of dollars in preparing their proposals and what's happened here is very unfair to both of them. I don't believe the AF will go against the GAO on this ruling either because the AF has already screwed this up big time.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,139
    Here's a summary of the GAO's reasons for upholding Boeing's protest:
    http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/200...-boe.html#more



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2016, 09:43 AM
  2. CA - Boeing 777 from S. Korea Crashes at San Francisco SFO
    By Skittles in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 213
    Last Post: 07-06-2014, 03:34 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-17-2013, 05:37 PM
  4. Boeing Wichta Closing
    By Shelby1 in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-04-2012, 05:09 PM
  5. ANOTHER Finger!!!!
    By IrishMist in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-04-2005, 01:55 PM