Mobile Development Thread - Page 108

elb401 · #**2141** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:02 PM**

I am getting bored with this talk. can we change the topic? please.

I saw were there was a house being built in the detonti area. looks like more single family homes are going to be built there.

alexjon · #**2142** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Tim)

OK, I understand your side, however Mobile is not an economic depressed area. The only reason change had not taken place in the past decade is that most people of Mobile did not want it. Mobile is a wealthy city, if you have never been to Mobile you would not know it. Keep your uneducated comments to yourself!

The median and per capita incomes of the area indicate otherwise. Why do you think your city is fighting so hard for it? For Seattle, it's about the tradition of Boeing work (which has dwindled since they moved HQ to Chicago, funny that), but for Mobile, it's how many jobs it will produce and economic impact.

10101000 · #**2143** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:27 PM**

Like I said I see your point, however WHO CARES about the per capita figures. From what us Mobilians know, it has been a wealthy place. This is a new generation for our city! Yes it does produce jobs and yes this will grow our city, but we are not economically depressed.

alexjon · #**2144** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:29 PM**

Well in that case, you guys are fine without John McCain's fabulous gift to his lobbyists and French benefactors

10101000 · #**2145** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjon

Well in that case, you guys are fine without John McCain's fabulous gift to his lobbyists and French benefactors

Spare us!

alexjon · #**2146** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:57 PM**

I am being supportive!

Big city folks just act supportive in a really mean-sounding way. Emphasis on -sounding.

10101000 · #**2147** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 3:59 PM**

Ok, I believe you----

elb401 · #**2148** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:17 PM**

Can we drop this.....alexjon thanks for your "supportive" mean comments but lets drop this were it is. Let the big multinational companies and political people fight it out.....we don't have to on this forum. Mobile let's hope for the best and hope that NG/EADS gets this contract in the end.

10101000 · #**2149** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:22 PM**

Amen, well said.

OCA REP · #**2150** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by elb401

Can we drop this.....alexjon thanks for your "supportive" mean comments but lets drop this were it is. Let the big multinational companies and political people fight it out.....we don't have to on this forum. Mobile let's hope for the best and hope that NG/EADS gets this contract in the end.

I second this motion... Hope no one is opposed to this!

Port_of_Bama · #**2151** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenixboi08

What infuriates me the most about the whole tanker contract is the fact that it seems that they're just screaming "unfair" and trying to find ANYTHING to prove that they are right. It's a sad day when one company can bully another just because it is naturalized. I mean it's easy to argue that it's dangerous to use military aircraft built by a foreign company, but when it comes down to it, when a war is being fought, it's for the welfare of EVERYONE anyways. I mean look where we are now. In Iraq, I'm not going to go into this here...but if WE weren't there who would be? And I mean IT'S JUST FRANCE for crying out loud! Jeeze Boeing grow up!
And what ANGERS me the most is that this is not the FREAKING first time this happened! Remember when Boeing got in trouble a few years ago...? It was because they had someone on the inside leaking information about Airbus to win the KC-767 tankers! They are a company that will resort to ANYTHING to get their way.

I know you guys want to put a stop to this but I want to put my input in

I was thinking the same thing, didn`t Austal (an Australian company ) beat Lockhead Martin( American company) for a 500 mill dollar contract ( Independince)for the Navy I saw that thing floating downtown yesterday. Lockhead Martin didn`t cry about it they sucked it up and kept moving. If i`m not mistakin NG in Mississippi won a contract with the Navy as well righ ?

Boeing is saying it is a threat to national security if NG builds the tanker. well it should be a threat for Austal and NG to build combat ships for the Navy. It `sonly a tanker , if national security is what they are concerned about shoulden`t that apply to the Navy as well ? !

10101000 · #**2152** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:50 PM**

Whats up POB, have not heard from you in a while, hows it going?

Port_of_Bama · #**2153** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Tim)

Whats up POB, have not heard from you in a while, hows it going?

just working man I been looking on but not commenting, I see that guy from seattle talking big trash it`s all good. I don`t care what he says it`s all about money !!!!

Del · #**2154** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 5:05 PM**

Gee, and here I was thinking the Alabama economy, looking brighter though it may be, couldn't hold a candle to the Pacific Northwest.

Port_of_Bama · #**2155** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 5:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

Gee, and here I was thinking the Alabama economy, looking brighter though it may be, couldn't hold a candle to the Pacific Northwest.

lol yeah we are econimicaly depressed right ?

10101000 · #**2156** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 5:33 PM**

I know, cannot even afford to drive our phat SUV's on the road!

Port_of_Bama · #**2157** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Tim)

I know, cannot even afford to drive our phat SUV's on the road!

not to mention 13,000 plus millionaire families. I believe that new money you have to work , old money you don`t have to work and that is exactly what Mobile is old money.

The 251 · #**2158** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 6:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCA REP

... and the DRAMA award goes to...

I think some on this forum have not really read the GAO report. The report does a pretty good job of explaining why the selection process was flawed; NOT THE PLANE THAT WAS SELECTED.

I am not happy that this has happened to Mobile. I love this state and want all of us to flourish. But at the same time, I do not want a contract of this magnitude handed to Airbus just because the selection process appears to have been tailored to their product.

This is definetly going to be an interesting story to follow and one that politics is going to play a MAJOR role in... Please keep your seatbelts fastened!!!

actually what I was saying is that the tankers that the air force are using now are very old and are a hazard to our men in uniform. it had nothing to do with Boeing or NG/EADS

SouthSky · #**2159** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 9:09 PM**

Seattle is just pissed Mobile is #1 rainiest city in the US.

I think in order for Boeing to take this contract in the end would be a transition to a 777-based model. (Can they even change what they are offering in that time frame?) That is a much more modern plane and is considerably more comparable to the A330.

Seattle smells like burnt coffee grinds anyway.

alexjon · #**2160** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 9:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthSky

Seattle is just pissed Mobile is #1 rainiest city in the US.

I think in order for Boeing to take this contract in the end would be a transition to a 777-based model. (Can they even change what they are offering in that time frame?) That is a much more modern plane and is considerably more comparable to the A330.

Seattle smells like burnt coffee grinds anyway.

Boeing is merely operating off of the previous judgement from some time ago that ruled for the 767 over the 330. I don't know why they aren't going to move toward equity by choosing the 777 since that would make it easy for them to balance their argument and, well, move away from the politidrama that caused the loss in the first place.

And Seattle smells like Orca pee and snowmelt-- get it right!