Sikorsky May Be Sold to Lockheed

Helicopters and tilt-rotor aircraft
Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

by lookieloo » 11 Jul 2015, 02:54

Report: Lockheed Nears $8B Deal for Sikorsky

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /29979577/

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin is nearing an agreement to purchase the Sikorsky helicopter unit from United Technologies Corp. in a deal that could be worth $8 billion....
Uh... that's gonna be a problem for FVL because LM is already a partner on the V-280.


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

by popcorn » 11 Jul 2015, 03:04

lookieloo wrote:
Report: Lockheed Nears $8B Deal for Sikorsky

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /29979577/

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin is nearing an agreement to purchase the Sikorsky helicopter unit from United Technologies Corp. in a deal that could be worth $8 billion....
Uh... that's gonna be a problem for FVL because LM is already a partner on the V-280.

Not necessarily. They can continue V-280 partnership and the Army would srill have a choice.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh


User avatar
Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1197
Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
Location: 77550

by mor10 » 20 Jul 2015, 20:25

Lockheed Martin Q2 report states that they will acquire Sikorsky

Acquisition of Sikorsky Aircraft

On July 20, 2015, the Corporation announced that it entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Sikorsky Aircraft (Sikorsky), a global company engaged in the design, manufacture and support of military and commercial helicopters, for $9.0 billion of cash, subject to certain adjustments. The Corporation expects to fund the acquisition with a combination of new debt issuances and available cash. The Corporation and United Technologies Corporation have agreed to make a joint election under Section 338(h)(10) of the Internal Revenue Code, which treats the transaction as an asset purchase for tax purposes. This election generates a cash tax benefit with an estimated net present value of $1.9 billion for the Corporation and its shareholders. The acquisition is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approval, and is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2015 or the first quarter of 2016. Once the acquisition is complete, the Corporation plans to align Sikorsky under its Mission Systems and Training business segment. The Corporation’s financial results will not include Sikorsky’s results until the acquisition is closed.


http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2015/july/0720hq-earnings.html
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

by lookieloo » 21 Jul 2015, 02:38

popcorn wrote:Not necessarily. They can continue V-280 partnership and the Army would srill have a choice.
I don't see how it couldn't be a problem. On some level, Lockheed leadership will be looking at the two FVL projects to decide which one they want to set up for success...as in most-likely to make the greatest profit for shareholders. The Army will only have the faintest illusion of choice.


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

by popcorn » 21 Jul 2015, 02:45

I wouldn't be surprised if different business units wihin LM would pursue the dual-approach. Besdes, AFAIK Bell is the prime for the V-280 and getting a potential slice of that pie is compelling. A no-lose scenario.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

by lookieloo » 21 Jul 2015, 07:51

popcorn wrote:A no-lose scenario.
Again... for Lockheed shareholders, possibly not for the Army. We'll see how it goes. I don't have a favorite yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if Defiant gets left to whither on the vine due to its involvement Lockheed's main competitor, Boeing.


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: 20 Jul 2005, 04:28
Location: Langley AFB, VA

by checksixx » 21 Jul 2015, 22:35

lookieloo wrote: The Army will only have the faintest illusion of choice.


Anything funded by Uncle Sammy gives Uncle Sammy 100% choice. There is no half-way. Anything funded by the contractor give the contractor 100% choice. Its VERY simple.


Banned
 
Posts: 984
Joined: 24 Sep 2014, 22:56

by sergei » 21 Jul 2015, 22:52

Lockheed for plane and Lockheed for helicopter,next Lockheed for ships ?


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: 20 Jul 2005, 04:28
Location: Langley AFB, VA

by checksixx » 21 Jul 2015, 23:18

sergei wrote:Lockheed for plane and Lockheed for helicopter,next Lockheed for ships ?


May want to check out Lockheed Martin...they've been in the ship building business for 10 years.


Banned
 
Posts: 984
Joined: 24 Sep 2014, 22:56

by sergei » 22 Jul 2015, 00:49

checksixx wrote:
sergei wrote:Lockheed for plane and Lockheed for helicopter,next Lockheed for ships ?


May want to check out Lockheed Martin...they've been in the ship building business for 10 years.


LOL indeed :doh:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_USV

And also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_beta_fusion_reactor


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5910
Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

by sferrin » 22 Jul 2015, 15:55

checksixx wrote:
sergei wrote:Lockheed for plane and Lockheed for helicopter,next Lockheed for ships ?


May want to check out Lockheed Martin...they've been in the ship building business for 10 years.


They still don't build tanks though. :) (Thinking of GD in the 80s. They did it all.)
"There I was. . ."



Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests