Re: FOKKER BANKRUPTCY?

From:         rna@gsb-crown.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft)
Date:         6 Feb 1996 19:51:08 -0800
Organization: Graduate School of Business, Stanford University
References:   1 2 3 4
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <4f8ksp$i2c@kragar.kei.com>,
geoffrey stoel <g.stoel@lr.tudelft.nl> wrote:
>>The best thing, however, would be for Fokker to die and for the Koreans
>>and the Chinese to stop this nonsense about building the AE100.
>I don't think so. Here in Holland Fokker is one of the most
>High-Techiest industries. With this industry gone, I doubt if we ever
>get it back.

Fokker also does (apparently profitable) things in the military sphere.
These parts are likely to continue to operate, so it's not a total loss.

>>So far as I can tell, there is only one company regularly making a profit
>>making airliners, and that is Boeing.  It makes no sense, no sense at all,
>>that others want to join this party.  It seems entirely a matter of
>>national virility.  Ah well, maybe 50 years from now, when we're still
>>flying 777s, the whole thing will seem less glamorous.
>
>Little note on that: Boeing could have been bankrupted if the 747
>wouldn't have been a great succes.

Indeed.  What's the connection?

RNA