Boeing posts 4th quarter $8.4 billion loss

[568]

Weaker demand for new aircraft and the C-19 virus hasn't helped Boeing or aviation in general worldwide.
Wonder what Airbus will report.

Boeing posts $8.4 billion loss on weaker demand for planes | KOMO (komonews.com) (https://komonews.com/news/local/boeing-posts-84-billion-loss-on-weaker-demand-for-planes)

The 777X pre-tax charge was included in the 4th quarter loss.

[tdracer]

Most of that is due to write-downs (with the big one being against the 777X since Covid has made it's future value questionable).
What's more concerning is that negative cash flow for 2020 was around $20 Billion.:uhoh:

[568]

Indeed TD, that negative cash flow for 2020 hasn't helped Boeing at all.
We all know that C-19 is serious, but in my humble opinion, governments worldwide should get together and start the process of getting the world on it's feet again. Perhaps 2021 can be the best year yet after the debacle of 2020!

[swh]

If only C-19 was out of production like C-17.

[568]

That's funny!

[BewareOfTheSharklets]

I find it hard to believe that the 777X will ever be cashflow positive for Boeing in the long term, let alone the medium term.

[Webby737]

568

We all know thats not going to happen.
As usual politics, internal squabbles and vanity have taken president over a coordinated common sense approach.
We can't get one block such as the EU or even the UK to coordinate their efforts, so there's little hope of the world's governments agreeing on anything.

[FlightlessParrot]

568

The Economist has just published a comparison of the experience of two, contrasting, US states, California and Texas: Economist: California and Texas (https://www.economist.com/united-states/2021/02/06/americas-two-largest-states-are-fighting-covid-19-differently?utm_campaign=coronavirus-special-edition&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=2021-02-06&utm_content=best-of-article-link-3&etear=nl_special_3&etear=nl_special_3)
It's behind a paywall, but the take-away is that, despite the predictable differences of approach, California has only a moderately lower death rate than Texas, whereas the prioritisation of economic concerns and normal life hasn't produced any detectable economic benefit for Texas.

It seems that what is causing most of the disruption is the virus itself, and the reactions of individuals to the virus. A few governments that were in a fortunate position have managed to get a really good control on the disease, at the cost of closing their borders, but once the disease is established, that doesn't seem to be a possibility. At this point, all that governments seem able to do is to get vaccines out as quickly as possible, and work together to ensure that they get everywhere there is a need.

[Gordomac]

Did Economics when 'A' levels were really hard but I still boggle at the numbers. I know it is just numbers but billions being posted as a loss. Out of what kind of pot ? - Trillions-? that's ok then. And I get really lost in the creative accounting bit. 'negative/positive cash flow ....all paper money anyway....... astonishing !

[Peter H]

FlightlessParrot

Do they make any comment about the differences in population density? Cal=253/sq-m, Texas=110/sq-m. I would have expected this to make a big difference to transmission risks.

[etudiant]

Iirc, both states have the large bulk of their population in a handful of big cities, with the rest of the space pretty sparsely if at all settled. So it is hard to adjust for population density in an informative way.

[Anti Skid On]

Going back tp Flightless Parrot's original comment related to Texas and California, I note he is in NZ like me, where the prophets of doom said unemployment would rise, the economy would shrink, etc. if we didn't open borders. We went hard and stopped Covid. There's an article from a Public Health Professor in Edinburgh who stated that even if the UK had closed their border in March (NZ's closed in January), things would be much better. Regrettably, the bug is relocated by people, and it is people and their behaviour that is the issue. The more stringent measures, although marginal, have shown there can be a difference. Too many people took C=19 too lightly.

The business model for Boeing and Airbus is for commercial passenger aircraft, where now most flights are freight. The market for passenger flights will take years to return to 2019 levels

[rattman]

Ditto for australia, we even had the debate about our internal borders. Last calander year (australia uses different financial year) we had a yearly increase in GDP of a few percent, while some of that would be attributed to cash thrown at country by the federal government . Taking that out its not the doom and gloom predicted by open all the borders people. For us (australia) the big next one will be when the government ends the a employment support in march.

At the moment what australia, NZ and other countries did by locking down internally and internationally has proven to be the right decision in both a health and economic measures. Does that continue to be the correct decision in 2021, well have I no idea. Glad I am not having to make the decision

[568]

Webby737

Yes indeed.
Always better to be optimistic in these trying times.
Vanity, politics and the usual squabbles are certainly not helping.

[WHBM]

Gordomac

"Profit" is just an opinion. Cash is a matter of fact. You go out of business when you don't have the cash to pay anyone any more.

The accounting profession has progressively over time twisted and distorted the traditional metrics (balance sheet; income statement; profit & loss reporting, etc) to some short term advantage, but where they end up useless. They can say "that thing is worth a billion dollars", and gain a billion dollar profit in their accounts. Next year they say "that's not worth anything", and now you have a billion dollar loss. Nothing has changed. Quite a lot has to do with the equally convoluted way tax is assessed on businesses, and twisting figures to avoid paying tax over.