I am a political economist studying innovation, industry, and international security. Since September 2001, I have been advising industries and ministries on their issues of strategy, planning, and policy. My work aims to inform investors, industrialists, technologists, and policy-makers on how to effect, economically, a secure future.

Recent Articles

« The marketing challenges of OEMs and others in the AMPV competition | Main | Succeeding in the Downturn: Making the Most of a Critical Supply Position »

05 September 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sir, as far as we can determine Navistar was dropped mainly because of its unresolved legal issues with ATS and pending criminal case in that regard.

A blog has been active since May 2010 and over 30 open and directed letters send to decision-makers and various actions done in the US. As mentioned on this side the US decision-makers may not respond but has surely taken notice.

Jacob, I feel your pain. Legal disputes can be trying and irritating, and more so when they're with your customers or alliance partners. But I'm not sure that this particular case, or any case, affected the decision. Just today Navistar received a $282 million order to upgrade 2,300 MaxxPro Dash trucks for better survivability. If the US DoD really didn't want to do business with Navistar, it could have solicited that work from another OEM or from an MRO specialist. If Boeing can put new cockpits in Lockheed-built C-130s, I think that Oshkosh or GDLS could retrofit somebody else's MRAPs.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Accolades

  • Read only the first few pages. The clarity and eloquence of them is highly unusual. Extremely un-boring. Everything that one does not need to know seems to have been removed before publication.
    — Attorney, politician, academic, and strategist
  • I'm continually amazed and impressed with what appears to me to be some magical ability you have to synthesize a tremendous sweep of ideas and sources and to cogently streamline into a tight and, most importantly, readable essay.
    — Test engineer, Naval Air Systems Command
  • One of the most insightful analysts on issues of defense economics...
    — Senior defense industry equities analyst
  • I need a Jim.
    — DC think tank director
  • Simply outstanding.
    — Deputy Under Secretary at the Pentagon, on recent analyses of future force structure requirements
  • You and Aboulafia are the only two publicly-quoted defense consultants worth paying attention to.
    — Public policy advocate
  • You’re one of the few guys who brings me real numbers. Most people just try to blow smoke...
    — President of a major military trucks and armored vehicles manufacturer
  • You are an impressive madman whom I am glad to know.
    — Vice President and M&A practice leader with an aerospace & defense consultancy
  • One of the best strategic moves we could have made, short of starting another war.
    — General Manager, leading weapons manufacturer, regarding recommendations for using the lessons of the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq to plan the future of the company’s product lines
  • Exactly what we needed.
    — CEO of a defense buy-out firm, on market insights and financial projections regarding an acquisition target
  • Your ability to infer from open sources is wonderful.
    — Vice President for Corporate Strategy, leading armored vehicles manufacturer, on recent studies of fatality patterns in military vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq
  • We should have done [this] a year ago, but I could never find someone like you with the right perspective.
    — Vice President for Business Development at a fast-growing manufacturing firm, on recommendations for managing the company’s problematic alliance with a Fortune 500 defense contractor