Monday, February 16, 2015

Minsky quoted in the WSJ

Saturday, 02/14/15: Why Bear Markets are Inevitable (Morgan Housel).

We have mentioned Minsky a lot, over the years (he has his own category). It's nice to see him referred to, albeit in a Saturday issue which implies reflective views rather than something more operational (that is, until we have the downturn with the accompanying pain).

At the FEDaerated blog, we're doing a series (albeit slowly) on why the markets crash so fast.

Look at the graph (below) that Housel touts. Now, be aware of several things. For one, the current level is supported by largess on the part of the Fed and other central bankers. Then, recall that those higher levels are supported by rules that keep runaway falls from happening (though they did not catch the not-so-long-ago falls due to technical glitches [it is said, but who knows?] which caused some to experience losses - not golden sacks who was let off the hook). Then, remember that we now have computational influences of an unknown nature, as well as the existence of dark pools, and such, muddying the whole framework. ... We will, in time, go on and on.

Yes, inflated market
We appreciate the Hyman Minsky mention as it will allow another relook: A Theory of Systemic Fragility. ... We intend to show that his sequence (hedge, speculative, ponzi [made-off?]) has been perturbed in ways never consider by Prof Minsky. Namely, computation (dark pools, et al) have exacerbated the problem. My put: flim-flam use of mathematics (easily done since the algorithmic tools allow this) has run amok (it's time for a review).

Remarks: Modified: 02/16/2015

02/16/2015 -- The left side's view.

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Gab standard II

The original post was dated June 10, 2008. Gosh, over 6 1/2 years ago. Since then, financial discussions have mostly been under the context of FEDaerated (fiat money) in a continuing fashion as problem abound. And, we all of rational mind are waiting for the bubble to burst. The FED's roles dealing with fiat money have exacerbated the problems as seen from the reality of the street (as in, Main and others not called Wall).

One problem is that there is a chimera that comes about, in part, due to charades. Yes, Wall likes to make sure that the game is in their favor. And, a good example of that type of thing could be the dark pools and like ilk. There are others (and, if we could lift the skirt or open the kimono, we would see many, many more).


I noticed, today, that some of the older posts are being read - see the image - which could indicate several things. All of these were from back before the spurt of mania that came from the FED's largess. And, that spurt mainly is equity oriented; savers have been flayed to an inch of their lives (how much longer can they hold on?).

Be that as it may, no one seems to be pushing a normative view. Why? So, we intend to do that. One approach will be to pick up these old posts and bring them up to date. That, of course, will take work and time. But, then, we have already said that we're under no time constraint.


The original post looked at the concept of stable money. You know, figuring that out is not easy. In fact, some approach, such as bitcoin, might be the solution. However, it would be a generally adopted scheme and not privately owned (ah, lots to discuss there).

Now, for a real gas, one of the WSJ articles was talking about the weak dollar. What we know has happened, of late, is that the dollar is strengthening, perhaps too much. One thing for sure is that manipulations like done with the FED's type of operations are oriented to the benefit of the country doing the machinations. Others have to react as best they can.

What kind of strategy is that (asking normatively, okay?) for a sustainable economy?


Before quitting, notice that another of the posts is "Silly games" and refer to the dark pools above. Then, "Why finance?" mentions leeches; yes, still very much apropos.

Remarks: Modified: 01/15/2015

01/15/2015 --  

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Summary, 2014

This is our fourth year for a summary: 2011, 2012, 2013. In earlier years, there were more posts: 2008 (82), 2009 (60). This year we only had 11 posts.

Part of that is due to the focus. Perhaps, by 2010, the realization of the Fed's largess continuing, and increasing (QE infinity), sank in and caused depression. Not. Rather, it has taken time to get to the current situation which is just ripe for failures all around. How many modes? Ah, we will get into that.

Remember when we said that we were done? Well, we're back!

However. let's look at this year's numbers for Past 30 days and for All time.

Past 30 days                        All time       

Again, "Confoundedness" is the overall top post for readership. Last year, it switched with "Wing and body" and has kept the position. Too, the top posts are older. Usually, when one is read, another of the older variety is picked up. One task will be to put an up-to-date pointer on these so that the reader can follow a link to current discussions.

Last year, the top of the "Past 30 days" was the overall top (prior paragraph). This year, there is a recent post, albeit from earlier in the year.

Remarks: Modified: 01/06/2015

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Page feature

I just noticed this facility. How long has it been around (rhetorically, of course)?

Now that it's part of the set up, we'll find a way to use. First up, let's get back to the financial turmoils that are around the corner (which we have been, patiently, awaiting for, now, for a bit) whether that corner is soon or far. It is inevitable.

The trouble is that the past few months have had such jawboning in favor of risking money on the ca-pital-sino that those who were leery before are now being pulled in to become instance (guaranteed) losers (proverbial sheep being led to their slaughter). There are worse things.

So, this time around, perhaps our observations/comments might be more in line with events as they unfold.

BTW, silence does not mean that there were no oops around. Rather, too many are around and about. It is the upcoming financial fall outs that will be of interest, again.


Oh yes, pages. One on Minsky references.

Remarks:  Modified: 12/16/2014

12/16/2014 --

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Pause or not

Things sure do look different now than they did in 2007, from all sorts of angles. Yet, oops are and will be.

Those that are the most inimical come upon us gradually and subtly. And, these get us tied into warped worldviews from which it is hard to do the proper analysis.

There are several examples of this, but computation is right at the core of a lot of problems (current and latent). And, it is our principal focus for several reasons: applied mathematics, epistemology, and the phenomena of crowd'ish things (many, many examples).


One big issue, not recognized, it seems, is lack of quiescence. We mentioned ca-pital-sino in a related discussion. Problems there are made more difficult due to the 24/7 (whatever) thinking. For one thing, many world views allow for rest. Yes, despite the markets being closed, somewhat, we still do not see the proper analysis being done (to be discussed).

Remarks:  Modified: 10/30/2014

10/30/2014 --

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Renewal of faith

The Internet has been more a source of chagrin than otherwise, of late. There are many reasons for this which we will elucidate coherently, at some point. As one ponders the changes over the past couple of decades, not all of the change has been progressive .
    To wit, we have legions of people already hooked with more clambering to join in the frey. What frey? Being tethered to masters (real and virtual) through a so-called "smart" device that can dumb one down considerably, but not by necessity (more below). 
    Bloomberg, this week, had an article about so-called, again, patent trolls who many want to hate. Yet, in one case, the leaders of the firm are quite technical and have related ambitions. They are not of the type who claim (I almost barfed): the cloud is a marketing space. No, one of these guys says that he is trying to do (as in, solve a problem with and produce) something that people want (as in, pay for and use) to use (again, more below).
Now, to the point. Below is a sequence that is chronological but which, as well, follows a logical progression. We are talking a little bit of information here that will be expanded upon, in time.

It was while visiting the TED site that I saw a page related to on-line courses. Not a new subject to me (see comment about Prof Osgood's take on Fourier's work). In fact, that such material is available, on the web (so far, I have dabbled with courses at Stanford, Harvard, and MIT - for one thing, the difference in culture is obvious, yet the underlying reality being taught is ONE - ah, yes -- of course, there have been other courses sampled, such as those that are based elsewhere, say, the U.K.), counters (can help counter), a little, the rest of the maniacal collective (aggregated idiocy). What I branched to, from TED, was a nice list of course options. We'll start there and continue in a bulleted fashion.
  • - Essentially, the sequence started with the openculture site. The graphic shows the list (shown here in that websites change, so we need a snap as of now). Notice the inclusiveness of the list, plus the mention of MOOC. Too, given that the autodidact's view is going to be the most important in many situations, that these things are accessible can calm things. 
  • - So, picking Math, we get this list of courses which is quite extensive. So, I picked Diff Eqs with Arthur Mattuck at MIT (Math 18.03). As with most courses, there are materials provided to the student that the web watcher does not typically have access to. In the case of this course, the students were allowed to use a program. The Prof mentions it several times in Lecture 1. 
  • - In Lecture 2, near the end (46:59), the Prof says that he wants to talk pitfalls (ah, my favorite subject - oops). He mentions two (this list I will enumerate, fully and completely, at some point). One of these the students are to work out. For the other he uses a particular equation and discusses the issues graphically (more below). He tells the students that the exercise won't cause them grief. But, the understanding that might come from doing the exercise will destroy their faith in the methods (I like that - there is too much love of abstraction and too many unwarranted pursuits for applying such; yes, big daddy data is a real big problem).  
  • - Later, I thought that I would see what the modern solvers do with y' = y^2 which the Prof says illustrates one of the pitfalls. Of course, Google was the starting point (could have been Bing or a number of others). But, an old friendly site pops up. Whose? Wolfram's. The company has been doing computational mathematics for a long while now (pre web). Too, the Alpha system is for knowledge searches. But, I got inspired on looking at their historical view starting at 20,000 BC. Naturally, there is something for recent advances with Wolfram on the list. But, note that the theme is computable knowledge (hence our friend Leonhard Euler is skipped over). BTW, the whole subject of computability will be coming back to fore.    
  • - So, let us go to Alpha: As one expects, there is an place to make a query. Otherwise, the interface has nothing that is noisy. All buttons that go away from this page are minimized (there if you want them, otherwise not intrusive). 
  • - Now, typing in y'=y^2 brings up a nice response. If you try other examples, you will see that the response can be quite lengthy. But, it returns quickly (letting you know if there will be more information coming later - after computing continues). Too, there are links to related material. 
  • - One final thing. Some links go to another Wolfram effort, MathWorld, which is a very extensive encyclopedia of mathematics started (and maintained) by Eric Weisstein (it is so good to see this type of effort).
Timeline of Systematic Data and
the Development of Computable Knowledge
This little sequence of events ending with Wolfram was so refreshing that it has motivated several things that will be added to my todo list. You see, news reports of Apple's little shindig last week talked swagger. Anyone who has bumped against hard problems knows that swagger does not bring anything to the table.

I have been following Wolfram's work (no swagger there), albeit from a distance, since the beginning (my life work has had computational mathematics at its core - see Truth Engineering, for one). Yes, swagger leads to failure and oops (ah, so many ways to address this).

However, even engineers can be tempted. Look back at the beginning of this blog, for instance. As one mathematician said: they just go by the book (nice, if the ground work was done well by the math and science types - otherwise, problematic).

As well, though, the main message is that there is no excuse to not know something if it is important to you and your life. That is, having a grasp of things of a knowledge basis (as opposed to the gossip-laden worlds that we see so much energy put into) is essential to coping with the current issues, such as that which ensues from complexity.

And, you know, folks, those who are the supposed best are not of any better capability, in this sense, than any other thoughtful, capable human. Perhaps, MOOC can help balance some of those issues related to the age-old problems of elitism (lots more on this).

Remarks:  Modified: 09/17/2014

09/13/2014 -- Seeing those who are tethered, I have to tell a story: supposedly, Newton was so involved in his thoughts that he did not eat his meal after it had been served. Eventually, his meal companion ate Isaac's food. At some point, Isaac noticed that his food was gone and mentioned that he must have eaten. ... Those with their nose to the devices are posturing in real life (think Rodin) as if their little brains are actively pursuing universals (when they are actually doing what? Playing a game, watching some video - tv included, reading some trashy novel, ... wait, it's elitistic to even think such thoughts). Like mentioned before, the management class started this with their love of the mobile (won't name the name) as indicative of their stature and status (tetheredness, 24/7).

09/13/2014 -- Have to mention Cyc and Doug Lenat. Alpha did not know the former; it knew the latter. ... Alpha's tie to equational parsing and processing is tremendously useful for those who are looking for such type of support.

09/16/2014 -- Is math discovered or not? Beside the quasi-empirical issues, we'll weigh in, soon (truth engineering).

09/17/2014 -- In a recent WSJ (letters to the editor), the writer rues that "smart" device tethering of a human's mind does contribute to shallowness. However, people were shallow before these mobile things came on the scene. What is new is that shallowness can now be broadcast far beyond what was the case before the new times. ... Message heard: the fact of the "smart" device is not the cause of (but, it is a contributor to) lack of depth (discussion: why is this important?).

Tuesday, August 12, 2014


Over the years, we have had many opinions of Finance (see Remarks at this post on how it goes toward non-realistic models - how is it to not get so entrapped, given funny money is our norm?) Now, let's stop and look at FAME. In short, Finance and Accounting MEmos.


Nice, like the business model which expends the effort to condense, summarize academic papers in order to present these little overviews in a coherent form. And, on-line access is free. The printed copy requires one to come up with money.

To date, there have been two publications. These will be the source for coming posts.

We will have to give a nod to editors and supporters. Great idea.


As an aside, CALPERS seems to want to downplay equities. Perhaps, they're seeing that the aerated property causes things like the Minsky dump.

Remarks:  Modified: 08/12/2014

08/12/2014 -- 

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Laser-like focus leaves out a whole lot of information

This post will be brief with only two concepts thrown out. The purpose for casting out these ideas is to raise the discussion level, if that is possible.

You see, data-driven and computational methods are insidiously entrapping us. Say what? Yes, unfortunately, those in the monied state want this of us.

So, we can use eye glasses as an example here. Notice how most are running around with narrow bands of glass that are supposed to do several things, I suppose. Now, whether this expectation works in general is something for study. But, it doesn't work on this guy (who has been four-eyed since childhood and who prefers a wider span of vision - you never know what you might miss).

Now, the more narrow the glass, the smarter the person? Isn't that the message of some ads? Or, does the narrowed frame indicate some notion of minimalism (which would be acceptable if done in a zen sense, rather than posturing)? One can ask several other questions. Is it vanity alone, with the eye glass and frame drawing attention to the eyes?

We could consider that the slightest of eye wear indicates some type of focus, as in concentration (which, incidentally, is one attribute of the best and brightest - oh, by the way, you knew that I would get back to that class, right?). And, isn't that [focus] expected with the growing emphasis on [an underdetermined] physicality? Now, that is all fine and dandy (as some used to say), except does life as a whole have to be subjected thusly (like we're all under the microscope - thanks, big daddy data)?


The concepts: the Illusion of Now and the Blinders of Data.


Antithetical to a whole lot of dogma? True. Stupid? Not by any necessity that you will be able to demonstrate. Perhaps, of bitter taste to those who think rich is smart and who want to enslave mankind? Well, why any other motivation?

... Again, a younger set has led us astray (I have seen many of these cycles) without knowing (said this way to acknowledge, at least, that intents were, may have been, worthy - except, chasing after money always leads to turmoil for the rest -- near zero, folks) since there are insufficient ways to improve their comprehension (heck, the older generation, time and again, bows - in some cases, they fill their pockets, too). ... We now have going on a quarter century of experience, so it's time to step back and to consider what the heck has happened here and there, ...,

Remarks: Modified: 07/27/2014


Sunday, June 8, 2014

9 years ago

From seeing some of the questions that pop up in Eagle-supported forums whenever the related topic is discussed (or harped about), one has to ask: where is there a fuller summary of what happened then than what we have seen? Too, whenever the topic is touched upon, viewpoints come forth that lead to people taking sides in the issue (like bragging, "I work there - you don't know what you're talking about" ---- or, like from the other side, "it was wrong, wrong").

So, does it not look as if there ought to be a summary of what went down on that weekend in June, of what led up the weekend of infamy, and of what ensued (all sides - more complete look - as in, not representing that history is written by the victors) after the fact of the weekend?


The topic? We'll get to that. Actually, one might argue that, since Boeing was such a major presence in the city of interest, for such a long time, those in the city ought to know what was behind all of this; too, the impacts upon those whose lives were seriously influenced make for stories that ought to be of interest both now and later.

Why? The recent downturn (recession) came about via those in power making decisions and being involved in activities very much of the type that can be associated with this particular affair (and its downs as well as it ups). So, the intent is not to belabor that which is misunderstood; rather, a bit of necessary analysis ought to have some attention, at some point. So, let's start that.


Below is a brief look at the weekend. In time, the story will (ought to) be more fully told - especially, in terms of the larger picture that has emerged so clearly - bringing forth disparities, for one. Too, though, given that the tenth year has rolled around (started, the ninth completed), preparations for celebrating / bemoaning the tenth anniversary ought to be of interest.

As an aside, we are looking for stories which can be conveyed anonymously. The mechanism will be more fully described in time, but, for now, if you have something to offer, send a note.


So, what is the timeframe? Nine years ago, last weekend, as in the first weekend in June, in 2005, Boeing (and Newco, so called, at the time) pushed all of its employees (who were under the proposed removal to Newco) out the door right before the weekend (lots of details glossed over here). Why? We'll see below.

Now, the more insightful workers took their stuff with them when they left on Friday as it turns out that many did not get an "offer" over the weekend and so could not come back.

Offer? Yes, an invitation to work at the Newco. In the planning, Nigel of Onex (who was running the show as the buyer) had this thought (which he denies): why not humiliate a whole bunch of people (Jobs, labor, disrespect) and make a statement? Remember, at the time of the planning, these people (not receiving offers) were still Boeing employees (until pushed out the door on Friday), so that whole bit of display was counter to what Boeing claimed was its ethical-ness.

The plan, you see, was that offers would come in the mail (which is, for the most part, private). Some seem to have thought that offers would be in Saturday's mail (actually, many got their offer on Friday). And, the other part of Nigel's plan, to which Boeing managers (yes) capitulated due to their starry-eyed lust for the big time (as in big pockets - and, folks, near-zero needs more attention), was how ought non-offer (read, rejection) letters be sent out.


Why start with this? Well, when one considers the human aspects, that weekend looms large, as we will see. Too, such shenanigans represent deep seated disrespect for workers (albeit, one might claim that Unions having caused Boeing grief over the years were fair game - but, there are two side to that story).


And so, some (many, by certain counts) did not get an offer. As mentioned here and elsewhere, many employees were left hanging and awaiting. Then, on the Saturday of that weekend in June, a DHL truck pulled up in front of a large number of houses in town in order to deliver to the occupant a package from their old-beloved (many times) employer that contained bad news: get lost, you were not welcomed back.

In many cases, this message was delivered to old-time, devoted employees.

Too, the package told the ex-employee about a day that had been set aside for them to line up at Boeing and get their stuff.


Now, this is short, however we do intend to get as many stories together over the next year as we can. Too, we'll be researching the incident more fully, including making the arguments about how this little case represented the mania of those times. Mind you, the motivation is more toward a closure state than any other goal. Too, lessons learned are lurking there; so, let's pull them to visibility.


Now, we can consider some cases, from that one weekend.

First, the winner side, as is that not the American way?
    - Of course, we ought to start with those who got an offer. Yes, they were many, of several types. But, all came back to work with a heavier non-disclosure onus (3-paragraph piece of paper replaced by three pages of small type) plus they were in limbo as the divestiture was not complete for a couple of weeks or so. Too, there are so many ways to characterize the state of the returnees, such as some came back with less pay.   
    - Most came back with lessened benefits, such as those related to insurance and retirement. Let's take retirement, for instance. Some who were within just a handful, or less, of years from being able to retire (so close as to smell it) had their 401K frozen and their pension taken over by the Newco. There was some controversy over this, but enough time has elapsed to see the effects. In one case, someone who recently thought of retiring (was close to the age of 55 that weekend) has a big disparity between the estimated amount shown by a Boeing report from the earlier years and the reality (a difference of greater than half). Is that winning (some wag might mention the downturn, sure, however recall that things behind the downfall were being done by those who were principal actors in this case)? 
    - You see, many of these older folks could not transfer to other Boeing sites, either within Wichita or elsewhere. That was part of the plan (more below). So, they were trapped. And, these people saw an immediate bifurcation. Many were over 55 and could retire. That meant that these workers had their Newco pay plus the Boeing retirement pay plus (and this is the biggie) Boeing retiree insurance that would be in place until Medicare age (as opposed to those insurance plans offered, in general, to Newco persons). Minor? Perhaps in the eyes of some, but, in the aggregate, these little stories add up to a hugh, stenching mess. 
    - Let's talk another type of winner. Those who received an offer but did not opt for Newco (more on that below). 
Now, for the loser side (perhaps of a much larger set than allowed if we looked at the near-zero aspects of this thing) of the issue:
    - One, of very many, long-time employees got the Saturday treatment. That person did not think to take personal things on Friday. What was lost? Years of information (contacts, etc.) that had been accumulated. Not his? Consider, please, that Boeing (as would any forward-looking company) sponsored many external professional relationships. Evidently, this employee did not catch a drift of the bad spirit'd-ness that was around and about. Fortunately, this guy landed on his feet and is doing very well (thank you, Boeing, for setting him free). Too, the guy got his retirement, and related benefits, after a wait of just a couple of years. Almost a winner would you not think?  
    - Others, of a certain age, who did not get an offer, were out of their early retirement by design. There was much discussion about this decision when it became known. Some even wondered how this whole way of thinking could be legal. That is, the shock was palpable in a whole lot of homes (both for those not getting an offer and those facing Newco's reality). 
    - There is one class that needs some attention (yes, Eagle). Some got an offer (supposed winners) and did not take the offer. Now, further below is one such case (with a little more detail). In general, though, many of those who made this choice to opt out suffered unexpected travails. Why? They did not believe that Boeing managers would stoop to such types of shenanigans that ensued. But, read below (doubters, especially). 
    - Then, there were those workers (winners who got an offer) who were not old enough to retire from Boeing such as the one example (above, winners). Many of these were just too young to be close to retirement. But, they had to go back to work with gloaters who could retire and get retirement benefits. Do we know the size of this class? Essentially, these people had reduced benes and pay from the new company while they were working alongside the double-dippers. 
No doubt, there will be more types of cases. I know of several who were heart-broken (Shattered dreams - see Comments) by this whole deal.

Also, Raytheon/Beech went with the same approach, later, which event was followed by so many deleterious results (Hawker spooked) that we all know (but that will be part of the story, too - imagine, all this in little Wichita).


Now, about winning and losing. One person got the offer (winner?) but rejected it on Tuesday morning. Basically, Monday had been used to tie things up and to mull over the situation. On Tuesday, the worker told the boss about the decision.

At that time, the plan (Nigel's or of Boeing managers who were gleefully applying the boot to the behind) kicked in. The worker was summarily thrown out the door (perhaps, we could say, ceremoniously - ah, those gloating idiots with starry eyes) in a nape-of-the-neck, arse-kicking mode (yes, like a drunk from a bar being thrown into the dirty street). However, that was not the worst part of the deal this person would soon find out. Those Boeing managers put the worker on a slippery slope (details will be forthcoming, when the story is told). Essentially, "thugs" comes to mind when one considers these folks and their methods.

Briefly: retirement insurance taken away, stock options declared null, general trashing of the guy's record, etc. And, these were Boeing managers (the company that touted its best-ness and talks about fairness and so forth) doing this type of mischief!

Needless to say, the managers did not prevail as the worker was able to counter their attempts (for the most part - more to tell here), and their machinations were temporary irritations (and lessons).

In retrospect, one can understand the enthusiasm of these people chasing after their Newco goals (pursuing the American dream?). Too, one can get the gist of this type of thinking (Bush made it famous): you're either with us or agin' us.


Yet, business does talk ethics (while stabbing you in the back simultaneously?). In the larger context, the little incidents from that weekend in June in Wichita are representative of so much. We will need to consider the totality of the historic unfolding that started so long ago on the shores of this nation and continue to this day. Yes, the historic perspective would put little Wichita right in the center of a whole bunch of messes (from which, perhaps, we can learn something).

The economic bifurcations, of so much interest currently, are the consequence of decisions (as said above), can indicate to us a whole lot of underlying problems, and will stand as a measure (almost) against which we might assess progress toward a more sustainable economy (assuming that we really want to attain such).


So, finally, as we are being brief, here is little more of a tale (from BW, Boeing worker):
    On one day in early March, 2005, BW went to Ethics training. This was mandatory, that year. One CEO had been bounced; another was shortly to be bounced. Jim M was brought in - a little later - to raise the ethical standard. Has he (more to discuss)? At Ethics, the expert touted that the golden rule was (had to be) the focus. This rule was seen as essential; how else? any reasonable person might ask. Too, at the time, Boeing management stressed, quite emphatically (harped and harped), that relationships and dealings at work had to be open and honest (ah, we do have to get back to this - heard it on the telly today). 
    After the Ethics training of that day, the BW went to another type of indoctrination (in a room that, later, SPR used Greenwood - Weagle - to talk about, as being a "bat cave" -- er, rat hole?). Essentially, it was a war room that was being used to plan/execute this whole affair (as in, that event which included the infamous weekend in June). Actually, the cave/hole had been in operation several months, already (let's say, the Fall of 2004). On that day, the BW got marching papers, so to speak. 
    What ensued between that time of seeing the good (trying to be ethical), the bad (green-eye'd plotters who were at it with such vigor) and (what turned out to be) the ugly and of experiencing the weekend is an interesting tale of subterfuge, chicanery, almost sophomoric glee at breaking the Unions, and other un-glamorous behavior on the part of Boeing managers (is that point emphasized too much? not!). 
    Essentially, over those last few months, the extent of split-tongue'd talking at all levels was an eye-opener for BW. Remember, these managers had stressed that their ethical selves demanded such good behavior from the employees (classic moral: do as I say not as I do?). Too, the anticipation of "big bucks" was so palpable (yes, it was way before Google and Facebook, but the takings that have been recorded pale in comparison (say, with FB) - at the time, Boeing was doing something called the Chairman's Innovation Initiative -- this whole thing seemed to be a massive example of a CII project). But, there is more to the tale, here, too.  

Some who have discussed what the DHL/email weekend meant to them have used a term related to early pre-WWII events; it was of such impact, especially to those who have not experienced, prior to this, such slapping up the side of the head (or, could not believe such bad manners could be associated with Boeing managers (ah, le creme) - oh well, they could point to Nigel).

In other words, we ought to express the facts about this and document the effects; in other words, even if they point to a reality of complicity, manipulation, and stench (all to be explained, in due time), the tales need telling.


The above is only a part of the story. At the appropriate time, we expect to offer a means for others to tell their side of this story (no doubt, there will be many sides). Will lil jefe Jeffy give us his take? Yes, do you not want to hear from him?

All in all, the tale has not been told, as it ought. As well, can this whole thing be considered good, in general? Yes, Boeing might have some things to tell us about lesson learned.

Remarks: Modified: 07/10/2014

06/08/2014 -- We all need a fresh look (even those with big, distracting pockets). 

06/15/2014 -- Timing? This week, SPR celebrated shipment of the 5Kth 737, of a certain variety. Nice accomplishment (for a Boeing sub-organization?). So, congratulations are in order for maintaining output through the past nine years. ... To be complete, though, there has to be mention that this post was motivated, in part, by the discussions surrounding a possible sale of fabrication supposedly to make more room for assembly. Some comments at the site (see article above) seemed to indicate that many do not know what went down nine years ago. Is it important? Depends, okay. At least, the facts ought to be somewhere that we can see. ... Now, other talk, currently, is about whether the site (or SPR) would drop other customers and concentrate on Boeing work. Too, some rumors point toward other types of sales. ...

07/10/2014 -- Business week had a little ditty about Gerry. Thrives in the shadow, it says. Has a big impact upon the lives of  many, it does not say. ... As we're getting technical again, of course, this topic will be studied in depth. We'll, perhaps, have a journal, like this tech one. ... Along with this, we'll be considering Sandberg and more. This bit on what makes for success foretells some topics.