Originally Posted by
yellowtriumph
Boeing's mission is the same as any other publicly listed company - to maximise profits for the shareholders and to act in their best interests. To do otherwise would probably be a dereliction of the directors legal responsibilities. It does this by designing and manufacturing equipment to the highest standards but that is not its mission, it's the means to the end. I do not mean to denigrate Boeing's equipment and staff and all their efforts which I personally admire hugely. But it's the truth.
The statutory duties of directors are not what you state as a 'mission' and maximise profits.
The board of any public company, is in the statute, required to act in good faith and the best interest of the company.
Pursuit of profit is not necessarily in the long term interests of the company owners.
For management may pursue all sorts of profit maximising activity which could include simply sell off all the assets. This may maximise 'profit' in the short term, but may damage the company and the interests of the owners, both current and future.
The role of the board is governance. That is how it is framed in the statute in the United states, the UK and the antipodes.
Directors have at their disposal both internal and external resources and are as demonstrated by case law, required to satisfy themselves by conducting any investigation into a matter they deem appropriate.
Eye pleasing stock prices satisfy management, and you can bet the CEO of Boeing's statement have careful consideration of share market impact. After all personal remuneration is at stake.
Weasel word statements carefully vetted by in-house legal and
PR contain nothing admissible, no admission of fault, wrong doing or responsibility.
They are as lightweight as the paper on which they are written.
The directors of Boeing will be looking closely at any personal exposure.
Were one to look at the statute in Germany, directors are far more accountable for impact on among other things customers.