If I am an adversary to U.S. I would see a currently Boeing produced equipment/weapon on other side as good news. It is a top military technology that actually works to be feared of, not a lobbyist-produced deal that later proves a bit hollow. If they moved HQ back to Seattle, it would be a message for everyone that they are on the way to put Boeing back on track.

It would be sad if this was just the death throes of a dying company. But it seems to be representative of something much deeper in our society. I am afraid it is something deeper. This is so sad to watch even I never worked on a Boeing product (MD-80/DC-9 does not count as Boeing to me). Joe Sutter must turn in his grave.

Their military business is doing okay it seems. It's the airliner business that has the most issues. It used to be the cash cow. Orders are okay but deliveries are down so not enough cash is coming in.

In the grand scheme of things, I don't think moving HQ to DC does any harm, but it doesn't do any good either.
What it does do is create a perception that Boeing is more focused on cozying up to the politicians and Pentagon than fixing any of their issues. Like hoistop mentioned in #42, it's the message rather than the move itself.
And perception and messaging has a tendency to become reality.

At least they will not have to charter a private jet any more to collect their government bailout...

and may be they can save travel time for their lawyers when attempting to recover the extra costs of the new Presidential 747s

They need move back to Seattle and build an office for the top managers that looks out over the factory floor on one side and the flight line on the other, if the management don't reconnect with the company's engineering heritage they are doomed I suspect.

Well, they didn’t move to Wall Street. There’s some expertise there.

Instead they moved to DC, the den of liars and politicians, but I repeat myself. At least what engineers and assembly experts that remain will be in Seattle til the bitter end.

It suggests, Boing does not have issues to attract money, but has issues with the regulations and/or future military business.

Something of an interesting point. Striving for zero failure or loss incurs an ever-increasing cost in both time, effort and money. That is incompatible with profits.