Saj Ahmad sucks up Boeing's fantasy

Is Saj kidding?

Is Boeing kidding?

"Mike Bair's words still resonate after ISTAT"?

Who are they kidding?

Boeing Marching To Put Airbus Out Of Business In The Twin Aisle Space? (Part One)

Posted on May 22, 2012

• Three-Part Overview
  
• Long Term Airbus / Boeing Positioning
• Airbus Overview
  
• Mike Bair’s Words Still Resonate After ISTAT

While the end of the decade is some time away, the next two-to-three years will ultimately define whether Airbus or Boeing has the better, revenue generating widebody airplane line-up.

Saj Ahmad to Everett: Charleston will snare all 787 production

Saj Ahmad has given another one of his "sage" predictions: he thinks Charleston, SC, will get all Boeing 787 production.

He's quoted in the Charleston newspaper on this prediction. He said:

Saj Ahmad is chief analyst at StrategicAero Research, a private aviation consulting firm operating in Europe and the Middle East. Ahmad said he thinks South Carolina could well become one of the country’s largest aerospace manufacturing hubs in the coming years. Boeing would not have invested so much in the area had it not planned on maintaining a long-term presence, and other aerospace companies will likely be drawn here as a result, he said.

While Boeing’s roots go deep in Everett, Wash., it has a spanking new production facility in Charleston and a workforce here that is trained in the latest technologies and processes. Workers here didn’t have to unlearn old ways of doing things to make this new-generation plane, he said.

That bodes well for the plant landing more and more work as Boeing expands its lines, and it could conceivably become the main assembly point for 787s in the future, he said.

“I don’t think South Carolina will be a one-trick pony,” Ahmad said. “I think there is a very real opportunity for Charleston to snare all of the 787 production.”

Fact Checker is sure IAM 751 will find this prediction of more than passing interest. Everett has the primary 787 line and the surge line, which gives Everett the ability to produce 10 787s a month. 

The "analysis" reported  by the Charleston paper is not only weird, the first part is hardly insightful--of course Boeing plans a long-term presence there.

The Everett IAM also had to fix all the problems coming out of Charleston.

Saj Ahmad and his new Strategic Aero Research still leave a lot of "analysis" behind.

Saj Ahmad is 'back,' with 'analysis' at Strategic Aero Research

After a long absence, Saj Ahmad is back with supposed "analysis" that looks more to be public relations promotions for Boeing and CFM than analysis that actually is meaningful.
Its hard to tell for sure, since he once again is using password-protected blog postings to hide what he writes, but what is in the public domain certainly lends to the conclusion that he is back to his old ways at Fleetbuzz Editorial.
His latest posting simply repeats the line promoted by Boeing that the 787 will "kill" the A330 and the claims about how much kore efficient the 787 is than the A330. From the public portion of his posting, it appears that there is no balance that would make an "analysis" meaningful.
A previous blog about CFM's win at Qantas suggests in the public portion that Pratt & Whitney is in dire shape after CFM won this competition. A blog from Aeroturbopower puts a better perspective in fewer words about what is behind the Qantas win.
Fact Checker enjoyed the time off, hoping that Ahmad might have mended bhis ways. No such luck. It looks like Fact Checker is back as well.

Boeing asks GE, RR and P&W for engine proposals on 777X

Note to "Matthew": Aspire Aviation was right all along. Boeing did ask for data from the three engine manufacturers.

Saj Ahmad quiet on P&W JetBlue win

Saj Ahmad, the unrelenting cheerleader for CFM, had nothing to say when JetBlue selected the Pratt & Whtiney GTF for its A320neo order. This was a hot competition between P&W and CFM. JetBlue leases a lot of Embraer E-190s, which are powered by GE engines, from GECAS, a sister company to CFM.

Aeroturbopower, who obviously knows something about engines and a lot more than Ahmad, delves into some technical issues between the GTF and LEAP engines. But as Fact Checker has long pointed out, facts don't seem to be important to Ahamd.

SAj Ahmad and "StrategicAero Research"

Saj Ahmad now identifies himself as being with "StrategicAero Research", whatever that is. The website for this company is http://strategicaeroresearch.com/ and initially is "Under Maintenance, Check Back Later".

The first evidence that Ahmad now uses the new name appeared 11 December in the Gulf regional newspaper "The Nation".  Ahmad's Fleetbuzz Editorial password protected website still is published.

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".