Mobile Development Thread - Page 119

sandebr00 · #**2361** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 1:41 PM**

Phase II of the renovotion of the old Press Register building into Space 301, the new art complex downtown, has been completed at a cost of $5.2 million. Here is an article about Space 301.

http://www.al.com/entertainment/press-re...entertainment/121533571375390.xml&coll=3

10101000 · #**2362** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 1:59 PM**

Nice, good to see extra space being used.

sandebr00 · #**2363** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 4:52 PM**

Defense Secretary Gates will hold a press conference at noon today to discuss the tanker contract. According to Fox Ten News, it is expected that he will call for a "limited repeat" of the contract. Boeing's protest listed approximately 110 alleged errors, but the GAO upheld only 7 of them. The repeat will be limited to re-reviewing these 7 errors, scoring these areas properly, and then reassessing the contract award taking into consideration the prior findings that were not in error (most of which, presumably, were in Northrop's favor), and the new findings with respect to these 7 errors.

Here is an article that I found about the expected recommendation. If Defense Secretary Gates does recommend this, then it would be a blow to Boeing -- which wanted an entirely new competition (presumably because Northrop might still be favored based on the other prior findings). Also, this would be an "expedited" process, which means that we might get some good news soon!

http://blog.al.com/live/2008/07/gates_to_recommend_quick_recom.html

10101000 · #**2364** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 4:56 PM**

Never fails, I understand the position that Boeing is in. However, I believe that the contract should be awarded to N.G.

Shawn35816 · #**2365** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 5:07 PM**

I find it kind of ironic that years ago Alabama was really the heel of the U.S. but now the state is starting to hit it's economic stride while a lot of other states around the U.S. are stumbling over themselves. With VW looking to maybe have a large presence in Alabama soon, and with EADS looking to get into the U.S. market via Alabama things have definetly never been better. It's also ironic that years ago U.S. companies wouldn't have given Alabama a second glance but now foreign companies are coming in and kicking tail left and right by way of, you guessed it, Alabama.

I'm rooting for Mobile on the tanker deal.

alexjon · #**2366** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 5:12 PM**

The Air Force has been pulled from the bid process and it's in the hands of the Pentagon with oversight by the Secretary of Defense.

Basically, this is going to be a decision made by the Senate working through the Pentagon. What will Senator Murray tell Senator Byrd?

10101000 · #**2367** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 5:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn35816

I find it kind of ironic that years ago Alabama was really the heel of the U.S. but now the state is starting to hit it's economic stride while a lot of other states around the U.S. are stumbling over themselves. With VW looking to maybe have a large presence in Alabama soon, and with EADS looking to get into the U.S. market via Alabama things have definetly never been better. It's also ironic that years ago U.S. companies wouldn't have given Alabama a second glance but now foreign companies are coming in and kicking tail left and right by way of, you guessed it, Alabama.

I'm rooting for Mobile on the tanker deal.

Thanks! Shawn

sandebr00 · #**2368** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 5:32 PM**

I just watched the news conference on the tanker deal. According to Defense Secretary Gates, the Air Force will reopen the bidding on the tanker contract. The rebidding process will be an expedited one that will focus on as few of the original criteria possible, but will at the very least include re-evaluation of the 8 errors upheld by the GAO. In other words, the new competition will not be an entirely new one that reevaluates all of the criteria that were originally considered. Defense Secretary Gates stated specifically that he hoped the competiton would be completed by December of this year, and he also stated that he did not believe that any new criteria (such as WTO disputes) would be considered.

As mentioned in a previous post, this appears to be the best option for N.G. Given the GAO's findings and Congressional concerns, it was expected that a new competition would be held -- the issue was whether there would be an entirely new competition (which could take more than 18 months), or a limited competition (which is essentially what is happening).

However, on a less positive note, Boeing, at its option, may submit a different, larger plane for review for the new competition. One of the primary complaints by Boeing was that the Air Force originally indicated that it wanted a smaller plane, but ultimately accepted N.G.'s larger one. If Boeing does submit a different, larger plane, it would make sense that the Pentagon/Air Force will have to re-evaluate more of the criteria than it otherwise would if Boeing sticks with its original plane.

alexjon · #**2369** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 6:12 PM**

Or the Pentagon could declare, in the best interest of the other armed services, that it's impractical to go with a plane the size of the Airbus. The amount of infrastructure upgrades required would be shouldered by not just the Air Force but all the armed forces.

sandebr00 · #**2370** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 7:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjon

Or the Pentagon could declare, in the best interest of the other armed services, that it's impractical to go with a plane the size of the Airbus. The amount of infrastructure upgrades required would be shouldered by not just the Air Force but all the armed forces.

Taxpayers, not the branches of the armed forces, shoulder infrastructure upgrades costs. And, it is in the best interest of taxpayers for a military contractor not to overcharge systematically the government (and, thus, to overcharge the taxpayers), or for a government employee to agree to inflate prices on contracts to curry favor with her prospective military contractor employer, with the implicit consent of at least one of the military contractor employees ....

Yet, Boeing paid $75 million in 1994 to settle accusations of systematic overcharges to the military (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1230F933A05757C0A962958260), and the Boeing CFO in 2004 pled guilty to a conflict-of-interest charge, and admitted his role in the illegal hiring of an Air Force official who was overseeing military contracts involving the aerospace giant (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51778-2004Nov15.html). Perhaps the Pentagon/Air Force should consider this in awarding the contract, and should penalize Boeing accordingly?

In any event, what you are complaining of is only one of many criteria that were considered, and this one criteria may or may not ultimately favor Boeing. However, I don't see why that one criteria should weigh more heavily than other criteria such as mission capability, risk, cost, fuel storage capability, etc. If Boeing's plane is ultimately determined to be superior in this new process, then so be it. But, by the same token, if N.G.'s plane is judged superior, Boeing needs to get over it, base any future appeal exclusively on the merits of the contract process, and stop politicizing the procurement process.

10101000 · #**2371** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 7:32 PM**

Round 2!

Port_of_Bama · #**2372** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 7:33 PM**

Was downtown to day and things are looking great !! people were out it was nice. I wish some one would dio something with the Van Antwerp building.

We all know that D.Tobile is full of lofts and retail is picking up. I had this radical idea about having big box reatil stores on some of the floors in the Van Antwerp such as the 3rd and 4th floor being a Dillards and th3 4th,5th,and 4th being a Macy`s or Nordstrom.

I think the decision that Gates mad was a fair decision and if i`m not mostaking maybe someone from the B-ham area can bag me up but I think Boeing skrewd the B-ham area over a in a 1 billion dollar deal to reapir jet engines I believe.

I wish the people in Miami will soon give us another vessel the contract with them will be up in October so if they don`t get it right down there Mobile will be looking in other areas. The Holiday has been well over 100 % in occupancy so I know we can do the same with a vessel with around 1800- 2000 occupants !!

10101000 · #**2373** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 8:10 PM**

It's coming, just hang in there. The peeps know that Mobile is a great investment and people are starting to catch the vision. I am going to O.B. tomorrow hope you all have a great week and weekend.

10101000 · #**2374** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 8:11 PM**

Oh, has anyone heard anything about Auburn expanding in Mobile?

alexjon · #**2375** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 8:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandebr00

Taxpayers, not the branches of the armed forces, shoulder infrastructure upgrades costs. And, it is in the best interest of taxpayers for a military contractor not to overcharge systematically the government (and, thus, to overcharge the taxpayers), or for a government employee to agree to inflate prices on contracts to curry favor with her prospective military contractor employer, with the implicit consent of at least one of the military contractor employees ....

Yet, Boeing paid $75 million in 1994 to settle accusations of systematic overcharges to the military (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E3DF1230F933A05757C0A962958260), and the Boeing CFO in 2004 pled guilty to a conflict-of-interest charge, and admitted his role in the illegal hiring of an Air Force official who was overseeing military contracts involving the aerospace giant (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51778-2004Nov15.html). Perhaps the Pentagon/Air Force should consider this in awarding the contract, and should penalize Boeing accordingly?

NG gave the government defective aircraft in an ongoing case that looks to involve over $200 million in settlement. They also overcharged the government and settled for over $110 Million. Boeing paid $75 million and fixed its Personnel problem. EADS is involved in billions of dollars of ongoing litigation involving insider trading and defense contractor incentives.

By your own metric, I'm not entirely sure why they're even running.

Quote:

In any event, what you are complaining of is only one of many criteria that were considered, and this one criteria may or may not ultimately favor Boeing. However, I don't see why that one criteria should weigh more heavily than other criteria such as mission capability, risk, cost, fuel storage capability, etc.

In fuel costs alone, it will cost the Air Force an additional 35 Billion in the service lifetime of the Airbus planes, and that's at $140/gallon oil prices. How much is this first contract? The KC-767's defense and survivability are higher and are almost completely independent, meaning there is almost no need for the entire flight crew to devote their total attention to defense of the craft in any case whatsoever. The KC-30's fuel capacity would go largely unused (similar to the KC-767) due to limited fueling requirements, meaning that most of that $35 Billion of extra fuel costs would be for nothing.

Edited to Add: Boeing employes 3,200 people in Alabama. This all sounds like a really REALLY good way to lose 3,200 jobs. +4,800 and -3,200. Net gain of 1,600. Woo.

HSVTiger · #**2376** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Tim)

Oh, has anyone heard anything about Auburn expanding in Mobile?

Yes recruiting is going very well in that area.
If you mean another campus no, especially in light of the recent tuition hike
due to shortfalls in funding.

OCA REP · #**2377** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandebr00

However, on a less positive note, Boeing, at its option, may submit a different, larger plane for review for the new competition.

777 in Air Force Gray

But, for Alabama's sake, the NG EADS will work...

bayou15 · #**2378** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 10:01 PM**

If Auburn comes to town, Will they bring their cheating refs with them?

Bogue · #**2379** Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 10:19 PM**

Not an Aubie by any means, but it would be nice to have a university in or very near downtown. Too bad that one couldn't just purchase the Bishop St. property and replace it w/ a nice campus and 10K or so students.

I also feel that the city needs a new large community college located closer to commuting routes on a magnitude of Shelton State in Tuscaloosa.

SouthSky · #**2380** Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 12:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjon

NG gave the government defective aircraft in an ongoing case that looks to involve over $200 million in settlement. They also overcharged the government and settled for over $110 Million. Boeing paid $75 million and fixed its Personnel problem. EADS is involved in billions of dollars of ongoing litigation involving insider trading and defense contractor incentives.

By your own metric, I'm not entirely sure why they're even running.

Boeing fixed its personnel problem? Why did I read a report the other day about 787 delays because of "personnel issues?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjon

Edited to Add: Boeing employes 3,200 people in Alabama. This all sounds like a really REALLY good way to lose 3,200 jobs. +4,800 and -3,200. Net gain of 1,600. Woo.

Why would Alabama lose jobs because of this? Boeing's employees are working here (Huntsville area) on rockets, etc for the space program.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjon

Or the Pentagon could declare, in the best interest of the other armed services, that it's impractical to go with a plane the size of the Airbus. The amount of infrastructure upgrades required would be shouldered by not just the Air Force but all the armed forces.

The size of the A330? I've read that Boeing is considering resubmitting with the 777! The 777F is 209 feet long while the longest derivative of the A330 is 208 feet. The MTOW for the 767 is 7900 ft, 777 is 8200 ft at a minimum, and the A330 is anywhere between 7200 and 8200 ft. What upgrades are you speaking of?