5.11.2006
No news is ULA news
I've created an automatic post that reads, "Oh sure, we've heard that before" and set it to appear on SLP each time reports pop up in the media that a decision on ULA is expected "within a few weeks." Which of course happens approximately once a month.But this week there was a real development in the ULA deal: An apology from the DoD that there are no developments.
That's right. And there's more. Apparently officials at Boeing and Lockheed said, "the review was taking longer than expected." Oh wait, they said that in January.
The plot thins.
But thank goodness, as Jeff noted, a company called Labwire is ready to monitor would-be ULA workers for alcohol and such. Because if we all don't start bending the elbow while awaiting a development in the ULA saga it'll be more of a miracle than an actual development.
No really. Stay tuned for an imminent decision by the FTC. Something. Anything. And many will toast to it, whatever it is. (Oh sure, we've heard that before.)
(Meanwhile, my question is, why is the Pentagon apologizing for the delay? They've already weighed in. Shouldn't the FTC apologize?)
* * *
By the way, reputable defense analyst Loren Thompson makes reference to "financial burdens that government lawyers keep adding to the proposal" which "threatened to undermine the business case for the deal." That certainly could gum things up. I would also include other "burdens" lawyers may be blamed for creating which also serve to complicate the calculus in this joint venture, including, for example, the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. And for more on all that, read through the meaty Second Amended Complaint in SpaceX v. Boeing (2006 WL 819759 C.D.Cal.) -- Elon Musk's ongoing attempt to block the merger.
