From: running_man@writeable.com   
      
   On 28/10/2024 09:24 Snidely  wrote:   
   > The Running Man formulated the question :   
   >> On 27/10/2024 02:57 Snidely  wrote:   
   >>> On Friday, The Running Man exclaimed wildly:   
   >>>>    
   >>>>   
   >>>> "I think that that we're better off being doing less and doing it better   
   >>>> than  doing more and not doing it well," Ortberg said. "So we're in the   
   >>>> process of  taking an evaluation of the portfolio. It's something a new   
   CEO   
   >>>> always does  when you come into a business."   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This doesn't bode well for Starliner IMHO.   
   >>>   
   >>> NASA has it pencilled in for 2H 2025.  NASA really wants a choice.  And   
   >>> Eric Berger has suggested that NASA would be willing to pay for a cargo   
   >>> flight if that's needed to prepare for manned operation.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>    
   >>   
   >> What NASA wants isn't relevant. Boeing may well consider that bowing out may   
   >> be  more financially beneficial than continuing the program.   
   >   
   > Starliner may well be a drop in the bucket compared to the hemorraging   
   > in the airliner business, and bowing out may result in losing a   
   > customer on other projects as well.   
   >   
      
   Even if they received money for a cargo mission it wouldn't compensate   
   the enormous amounts of money it costs to continue the Starliner program.   
      
   Therefore Boeing execs may well find it advantageous to eject the space   
   business (except SLS, which is a Cost Plus Program where they make   
   ridiculous amounts of profit).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)