From:         rna@gsb-crown.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft)
Date:         12 Feb 1996 21:14:42 -0800
Organization: Graduate School of Business, Stanford University
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <4fdv8m$>,
geoffrey stoel <> wrote:
>rna@gsb-crown.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft) wrote:
>>>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.
>OK, but what operator or military power would buy planes or products
>from a bankrupted, low credited company

That's why Fokker has been given a bridge loan---to separate the profitable
parts from the commercial aircraft producer.

Lockheed is still a respected military producer despite the fact that it
failed in the commercial arena.

>>>Little note on that: Boeing could have been bankrupted if the 747
>>>wouldn't have been a great succes.
>>Indeed.  What's the connection?
>I meant to show, that in aviation you sometimes have to make very big
>decisions and Fokker had some bad luck.

But luck, good, bad or indifferent, is an accepted part of life, and
of business.