SAj Ahmad's lack of understanding SEC rules

Fact Checker finally got a copy of Saj Ahmad's "protected" posting on the Pratt & Whtiney geared turbo fan and it is stunning in its lack of understanding.

Ahmad relies on Pratt & Whtiney including what is called "Forward Looking Statements" in the press release that are required under US securities laws to attack P&W claims on fuel efficiency.

“It comes as a surprise to see Pratt & Whitney caveat all of its fuel burn claims from once cited as "16%" to now "double digit" in its press releases”, Ahmad writes.

If he is surprised, he hasn't been reading his own writings. He has been whinging on about "double-digit" references for years.

He then repeats P&W's Forward Looking statement:

"Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated or implied in forward looking statements include changes in the health of the global economy and the strength of end market demand in the aerospace industry; as well as company specific items including the ability to achieve cost reductions at planned levels; challenges in the design, development, production and support of advanced technologies including this engine, and new products including the engine discussed in this press release; and delays and disruption in delivery of materials and services from suppliers."

“Why else would such a forward looking statement contain, what effectively amount to get out clauses, if the technology suite in the GTF was or is as good as Pratt & Whitney claim to be”? Ahmad writes.

This shows a remarkable lack of understanding (or worse, a willful desire to ignore) US securities laws.

This is a typical Forward Looking statement from one of the most successful companies in the world, Southwest Airlines"

 

"This website contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements are based on, and include statements about, the Company"s beliefs, intentions, expectations, and strategies for the future. Specific forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and include, without limitation, words such as "plans," "believes," "expects," "anticipates," "may," "could," "intends," "goal," "will," "should," and similar expressions and variations thereof. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual results may differ materially from what is expressed in or indicated by the Company"s forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to, the factors described under the heading "Risk Factors" in the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, and in other filings, the press releases and materials contained on this website. The Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events, or developments, except as required by federal securities laws."

There is very similar language between Southwest and P&W.

If this example is not enough, then look at the Forward Looking statement of Boeing and note the similarities between the statements. Of course, Saj loves all things Boeing but this doesn't come in for the same sort of whinging directed at P&W.

"Forward-Looking Statements
This document contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  Words such as "may," "should," "expects," "intends," "projects," "plans," "believes," "estimates," "targets," "anticipates," and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements.  Examples of forward-looking statements include statements relating to our future financial condition and operating results, as well as any other statement that does not directly relate to any historical or current fact.  Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions, which may not prove to be accurate.  These statements are not guarantees and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Many factors could cause actual results to differ materially and adversely from these forward-looking statements.  Among these factors are risks related to: (1) general conditions in the economy and our industry, including those due to regulatory changes; (2) our reliance on our commercial customers, our suppliers and the worldwide market; (3) our commercial development programs, including the 787 and 747-8 commercial aircraft programs; (4) changing acquisition priorities of the U.S. government; (5) our dependence on U.S. government contracts; (6) our reliance on fixed-price contracts; (7) our reliance on cost-type contracts; (8) uncertainties concerning contracts that include in-orbit incentive payments; (9) changes in accounting estimates; (10) changes in the competitive landscape in our markets; (11) our non-U.S. operations, including sales to non-U.S. customers; (12) potential adverse developments in new or pending litigation and/or government investigations; (13) customer and aircraft concentration in Boeing Capital Corporation's customer financing portfolio; (14) changes in our ability to obtain debt on commercially reasonable terms and at competitive rates in order to fund our operations and contractual commitments; (15) realizing the anticipated benefits of mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, strategic alliances or divestitures; (16) the adequacy of our insurance coverage to cover significant risk exposures; (17) potential business disruptions related to physical security threats, information technology attacks or natural disasters; (18) work stoppages or other labor disruptions; (19) significant changes in discount rates and actual investment return on pension assets; and (20) potential environmental liabilities".

While Saj Ahmad disses GTF, Time magazine honours it

Saj Ahmad and Fleetbuzz has renewed the long-running attack on the Pratt & Whitney GTF, returning to his private postings but issuing inflammatory headlines and Tweets. In his latest, Ahamd, the "analyst" without a public CV, claims concerns continue with the GTF.
In the meantime, Time magazine honoured the engine as one of the 50 best inventions in 2011. Time has been doing this list for years.
With Ahmad's post returning to "protected" status, there is no way to know if he talks about the challenges CFM is having with the LEAP-X engine. Or is it possible to know if Ahmad talks about the concerns the industry has about the exoctic materials for the LEAP-X that are used to try and meet the GTF fuel economy.
How about making this post public, Saj?

Saj Ahmad: All mouth and no trousers

Saj Ahmad resurfaced in recent weeks, showing a complete lack of "analysis", but resorting to invective and insults instead of providing any rational or rationale for his positions.
He started with insults for John Leahy of Airbus, followed by a remarkable display of hypocrisy over the A350.
His latest is over scruitiny of A350 delays, with the question why the delays are receiving the same attention as those of the Boeing 787.
Never mind that Airbus is owning up to delays well in advance of consturction of the first A350.
Boeing rolled out the 787 and said the first flight would be two months later.
As further delays were revealed, led mostly by Jon Ostrower of Flightblogger, but also by JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and some other key analysts, who was the biggest denier? None other than Fleetbuzz Editorial and Saj Ahmad.
Ahmad was the biggest denier of delays for the 747-8.
Boeing denied delays all the time and Ahmad was the biggest denier of them all.Also, the 787 scruitiny began as roll-out neared.
This makes his latest missive all the more hilarious.

Saj Ahmad back to his insulting ways

NO comment from Fact Checker is needed.

FleetBuzz FleetBuzz Editorial

@

@vumi10 Typical cop-out from armchair expert. Do one, #tool

11 Nov

FleetBuzz FleetBuzz Editorial

@

@vumi10 Funniest #shit I ever seen! Bwhahahaha!!! #A340 & "efficient" #oxymoron if there ever was one. #A340 = #craptacular.

Saj Ahmad finally publishes a public post--with no analysis

Saj Ahmad, the self-proclaimed "analyst", finally published a public post  after more than a year. No wonder he keeps his posts private. This post about the A340 termination and A350 delay was completely absent of any analysis or information. It was a self-congratulatory bloviating piece of opinion.

A true "analyst" would provide information and analysis about why Airbus did what it did. Nothing.

There still is no information about his CV that gives anyone any basis on which to determine his credentials.

Ahmad's "About":

About

FleetBuzz Editorial.com is a private intelligence and analysis resource for the aerospace, airline and aviation industries.
Do not ask for a password to the content because you won’t be given one.
Strictly by invitation only.

Saj Ahmad is back with his snide comments

After a long and blessed absence, Saj Ahmad--the "analyst" without any discernable CV--is back with his snide comments.

Instead of offering useful commentary, Ahmad is up to his old tricks of trashing Airbus:

"Will @Airbus John Leahy follow thru on promise he made to shoot himself now that A350-900 is delayed? @qatarairways CEO might be 1st to it!"

"Time To Kill Off The Waste-Of-Time Airbus A350-800"

These pointless, snide comments provide no useful "analysis" and certainly no facts.

When is Ahmad going to actually provide useful comment for all of us to read?

Where is Saj Ahmad about Embraer 2,000nm concept?

According to Flight International and Merrill Lynch's aerospace analyst Ron Epstein, Embraer is planning on a new airplane with 2x3 seating and 2,000nm range.

These are both elements Ahmad has bleated about for two years with the CSeries (even though he constantly misrepresents the CSeries range capability).

Where is he on the Embraer concept? Silent, just like he is silent on Boeing's No Launch Operator for the 737RE.

What's that game, Where's Waldo?

Where's Saj?