Re: McDonnell Douglas & Boeing To Merge -- Press Release Text

Date:         17 Dec 96 03:09:17 
From:         cbstone@yuma.Princeton.EDU (Christopher B. Stone)
Organization: Princeton University
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.2871@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
jfmezei  <nospam.jfmezei@videotron.ca> wrote:

>Out of curiosity, would there be any warranted efforts to stop this
>merger because of anti-competitive forces (or over concentration) ?

I don't see any anti-trust problems, myself.  On the civilian side of the
equation, McDonnell-Douglas had increasingly become a niche player in
commercial aviation: only the MD80/90 planes were commercially viable, and
even the MD95 derivative did not seem to be selling well.  Furthermore,
Airbus will continue to provide more than enough competition for Boeing.

Far from being an example of anti-competitive pratices, this move
demonstrates how the free market should work: new companies (Airbus) force
existing companies to compete (Boeing) or restructure (McD).  Fortunately,
Boeing's civilian products are in such demand that few layoffs should
occur at McD, and certainly fewer than would have occurred had McD tried
to slug it out alone.

On the military side of the equation, Lockheed, as well as Eurofighter,
continue to provide competition for Boeing; McD will bring some
comparative advantage to Beoeing in this area as well.
--
Chris Stone  *  cbstone@princeton.edu  *  http://www.princeton.edu/~cbstone
"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been
granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger.
I do not shrink from this responsibility.  I welcome it." -JFK