10 Companies Profiting Most From War: 24/7 Wall St.9MAR13

PROFITING from war is nothing to be proud of. How can anyone be proud of increasing profits by spilling blood, by taking lives? The greed of these companies is disgusting as are the government policies that subsidize, promote, encourage and direct weapons sales to conflict zones without regarding the morality of the conflict and the combatants, no consideration or analysis of the concept of "just war". It is all about the money. IT is time to impose an excess profits tax on these war profiteers, these war pigs. This from HuffPost and 24/7WallSt.....

From 24/7 Wall St.: The business of war is profitable. In 2011, the 100 largest contractors sold $410 billion in arms and military services. Just 10 of those companies sold over $208 billion. Based on a list of the top 100 arms-producing and military services companies in 2011 compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 companies with the most military sales worldwide in 2011.

These companies have benefited tremendously from the growth in military spending in the U.S., which by far has the largest military budget in the world. In 2000, the U.S. defense budget was approximately $312 billion. By 2011, that figure had grown to $712 billion. Arm sales grew alongside general defense spending growth. SIPRI noted that between 2002 and 2011, arms sales among the top 100 companies grew by 51%.

However, the trend has reversed recently. In 2011, the top 100 arms dealers sold 5% less compared to 2010. Susan Jackson, a defense expert at SIPRI, said in an email to24/7 Wall St. that austerity measures in Western Europe and the U.S. have delayed or slowed down the procurement of different weapons systems. Austerity concerns have exacerbated matters since 2011. The U.S. federal government budget cuts that took effect beginning this month — commonly known as sequestration — mean that military spending could contract by more than $500 billion over the coming decade unless some of the cuts are reversed.

In addition, the U.S.’s involvement in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have wound down significantly. The last American convoy in Iraq left the country in December of 2011. Troop withdrawals from Afghanistan also began in 2011. Finally, SIPRI pointed out that sanctions on arms transfers to Libya also played a role in declining arms sales.

Many of these companies are looking overseas to try to make up for slowing sales in the U.S. and Europe. Arms producers are especially keen on areas in Latin America, the Middle East and parts of Asia, Jackson said. For instance, BAE is in the process of securing contracting agreements with Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, the chief financial officer of Northrop Grumman has recently indicated his company may sell its Global Hawk airplane to South Korea or Japan.

Based on the report, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 companies with the most arms sales in 2011. Arms were defined as sales to military customers, either for procurement or for export, but do not include sales of general purpose items such as oil or computer equipment to military customers. We also looked at arms sales from 2010, as well as the company’s total sales in 2010. Furthermore, we considered the company’s 2011 total sales, profits and the total number of employees at the company, all provided by SIPRI.

There are the 10 companies profiting the most from war,according to 24/7 Wall St.

Ten Companies Profiting Most from War

March 6, 2013 by Mike Sauter

Source: Thinkstock

The business of war is profitable. In 2011, the 100 largest contractors sold $410 billion in arms and military services. Just 10 of those companies sold over $208 billion. Based on a list of the top 100 arms-producing and military services companies in 2011 compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 companies with the most military sales worldwide in 2011.
These companies have benefited tremendously from the growth in military spending in the U.S., which by far has the largest military budget in the world. In 2000, the U.S. defense budget was approximately $312 billion. By 2011, that figure had grown to $712 billion. Arm sales grew alongside general defense spending growth. SIPRI noted that between 2002 and 2011, arms sales among the top 100 companies grew by 51%.
However, the trend has reversed recently. In 2011, the top 100 arms dealers sold 5% less compared to 2010. Susan Jackson, a defense expert at SIPRI, said in an email to 24/7 Wall St. that austerity measures in Western Europe and the U.S. have delayed or slowed down the procurement of different weapons systems. Austerity concerns have exacerbated matters since 2011. The U.S. federal government budget cuts that took effect beginning this month — commonly known as sequestration — mean that military spending could contract by more than $500 billion over the coming decade unless some of the cuts are reversed.
In addition, the U.S.’s involvement in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have wound down significantly. The last American convoy in Iraq left the country in December of 2011. Troop withdrawals from Afghanistan also began in 2011. Finally, SIPRI pointed out that sanctions on arms transfers to Libya also played a role in declining arms sales.
Many of these companies are looking overseas to try to make up for slowing sales in the U.S. and Europe. Arms producers are especially keen on areas in Latin America, the Middle East and parts of Asia, Jackson said. For instance, BAE is in the process of securing contracting agreements with Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, the chief financial officer of Northrop Grumman has recently indicated his company may sell its Global Hawk airplane to South Korea or Japan.
Based on the report, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 companies with the most arms sales in 2011. Arms were defined as sales to military customers, either for procurement or for export, but do not include sales of general purpose items such as oil or computer equipment to military customers. We also looked at arms sales from 2010, as well as the company’s total sales in 2010. Furthermore, we considered the company’s 2011 total sales, profits and the total number of employees at the company, all provided by SIPRI.
There are the 10 companies profiting the most from war.
10. United Technologies (NYSE: UTX)
> Arm sales 2011: $11.6 billion
> Total sales 2011: $58.2 billion
> Total profit: $5.3 billion
> Total employment: 199,900
> Sector: Aircraft, electronics, engines
United Technologies makes a wide range of arms — notably military helicopters, including the Black Hawk helicopter for the U.S. Army and Seahawk helicopter for the U.S. Navy. The company was the most profitable of all companies on this list, making more than $5.3 billion in 2011. It was also the largest company on this list by headcount, employing nearly 200,000 people worldwide as of 2011. Arms comprised just 20% of the company’s $58.2 billion in sales in 2011. Other products made by United Technologies include elevators, escalators, air-conditioners and refrigerators. International sales comprised 60% of the company’s total revenue in 2012.
9. L-3 Communications (NYSE: LLL)
> Arm sales 2011: $12.5 billion
> Total sales 2011: $15.2 billion
> Total profit: $956 million
> Total employment: 61,000
> Sector: Electronics
Some 83% of L-3 Communications sales in 2011 came from arms sales, totaling just over $12.5 billion. This was down, however, from about $13.1 billion in arms sales in 2010. The company has four different business segments: electronic systems; aircraft modernization and maintenance; national security solutions; and command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Among many products manufactured, the company has become a major provider of unmanned aircraft systems. In 2011, the company turned a profit of $956 million and employed approximately 61,000 people.
8. Finmeccanica 
> Arm sales 2011: $14.6 billion
> Total sales 2011: $24.1 billion
> Total profit: $-3.2 billion
> Total employment: 70,470
> Sector: Aircraft, artillery, engines, electronics, military vehicles, missiles, small arms/ammunition
Italian company Finmeccanica makes a wide range of arms, including helicopters and security electronics. Of the company’s nearly $24.1 billion in sales in 2011, 60% were in arms. Finmeccanica lost $3.2 billion in 2011. The Italian company is currently fending off allegation that it paid bribes to win an approximately $750 million contract to provide 12 military helicopters to the Indian government back in 2010. The then-head of the company, Giuseppe Orsi, was arrested in February but has denied wrongdoing. Other executives, including the head of the company’s helicopter unit, have been replaced, and the company has delayed the release of recent financial results until the situation is resolved.
7. EADS 
> Arm sales 2011: $16.4 billion
> Total sales 2011: $68.3 billion
> Total profit: $1.4 billion
> Total employment: 133,120
> Sector: Aircraft, electronics, missiles, space
The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS), based in the Netherlands, had $16.4 billion worth of arms sales in 2011, roughly in line with 2010. Arms sales, however, comprised just 24% of the company’ entire sales, which totaled about $68.3 billion in 2011. EADS and BAE Systems attempted to merge for $45 billion in 2012, which would have created the world’s largest aerospace company. However, the deal collapsed in October after German Chancellor Angela Merkel expressed concern that the new company would marginalize the influence of the German government and would focus decision making in France and the U.K.
6. Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC)
> Arm sales 2011: $21.4 billion
> Total sales 2011: $26.4 billion
> Total profit: $2.1 billion
> Total employment: 72,500
> Sector: Aircraft, electronics, missiles, ships, space
Like many of the companies on this list, Northrop Grumman makes a wide range of arms, including unmanned systems; air and missile defense radars; and critical incident response systems. In 2011, Northrop Grumman reported about $21.4 billion in arms sales, comprising 81% of the company’s $26.4 billion in total sales. But arms sales in 2011 declined from $28.2 billion in arms sales in 2010, after growing by $3.5 billion between 2007 and 2010. The company attributed the decline to reduced government spending on defense projects. Nevertheless, the company reported a profit of more than $2.1 billion in fiscal 2011, slightly better than the company’s earnings the previous year.
5. Raytheon (NYSE: RTN)
> Arm sales 2011: $22.5 billion
> Total sales 2011: $24.9 billion
> Total profit: $1.9 billion
> Total employment: 71,000
> Sector: Electronics, missiles
Raytheon, based in Waltham, Mass., is one of the largest defense contractors in the U.S. The company makes a wide range of defense products, including missiles such as the Tomahawk Cruise Missile. Arms sales totaled about $22.5 billion in 2011, comprising about 90% of the company’s total sales that year. However, these sales were down slightly from the $23 billion in arms sales in 2010.The slide hasn’t let up. Total sales in 2012 fell 1.5%, and Raytheon is expecting sales to fall 3% in 2013, a projection which doesn’t take into account the effects of sequestration on the company. Fortunately, the company can rely on overseas customers to somewhat offset weak sales at home. As of January, approximately 40% of the company’s backlog was booked overseas. The company expects approximately a 5% increase in international sales in 2013.
4. General Dynamics (NYSE: GD)
> Arm sales 2011: $23.8 billion
> Total sales 2011: $32.7 billion
> Total profit: $2.5 billion
> Total employment: 95,100
> Sector: Artillery, electronics, military vehicles, small arms/ammunition, ships
With 18,000 transactions worth $19.5 billion in 2011, General Dynamics was the third-largest contractor to the U.S. government. Of those contracts, approximately $12.9 billion worth went to the Navy, while an additional $4.6 billion went to the Army. The company reported just under $23.8 billion in arms sales in 2011, comprising 73% of the company’s total sales. Arms sales in 2011 were slightly below 2010 levels. The company employs approximately 95,000 workers worldwide and makes a host of products, including electric boats, tracked and wheeled military vehicles, and battle tanks. The company has expressed concern about the potential effects on U.S. military budgets due to sequestration, issuing layoff notices this week.
3. BAE Systems
> Arm sales 2011: $29.2 billion
> Total sales 2011: $30.7 billion
> Total profit: $2.3 billion
> Total employment: 93,500
> Sector: Aircraft, artillery, electronics, military vehicles, missiles, small arms/ammunition, ships
BAE Systems was the largest non-U.S. company based on arms sales, bringing in $29.2 billion worth in 2011. This represented 95% of the company’s total sales that year. Yet 2011’s arms sales were lower than 2010′s, when the company sold $32.9 billion worth of arms. The products that BAE sells include the L-ROD Bar Armor System that shields defense vehicles, and the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer that provides sophisticated simulation training for military pilots. In 2013, the company said its growth would likely come from outside the United States and Great Britain — its home market. BAE noted that its outlook for those two countries was “constrained,” likely due to the diminished presence in international conflicts and government budget cuts.
2. Boeing (NYSE: BA)
> Arm sales 2011: $31.8 billion
> Total sales 2011: $68.7 billion
> Total profit: $4.0 billion
> Total employment: 171,700
> Sector: Aircraft, electronics, missiles, space
Boeing was the second-largest U.S. government contractor in 2011, with about $21.5 billion worth of goods contracted that year. The Chicago-based company makes a wide range of arms, including strategic missile systems, laser and electro-optical systems and global positioning systems. Despite all these technologies, just 46% of the company’s total sales of $68.7 billion in 2011 came from arms. Boeing is the largest commercial airplane manufacturer in the world, making planes such as the 747, 757 and recently, the 787 Dreamliner. The company is also known for its space technology — Boeing had $1 billion worth of contracts with NASA in 2011.
1. Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT)
> Arm sales 2011: $36.3 billion
> Total sales 2011: $46.5 billion
> Total profit: $2.7 billion
> Total employment: 123,000
> Sector: Aircraft, electronics, missiles, space
Lockheed Martin notched $36.3 billion in sales in 2011, slightly higher than the $35.7 billion the company sold in 2010. The 2011 arms sales comprised 78% of the company’s total 2011 sales of $46.5 billion. As of 2011, the company employed 123,000 people worldwide. In the company’s aerospace and defense unit, Lockheed makes a wide range of products, including aircrafts, missiles, unmanned systems and radar systems. The company and its employees have been concerned about the effects of both the fiscal cliff and sequestration, the latter of which includes significant cuts to the U.S. Department of Defense. In the fall of 2012, the company planned on issuing layoff notices to all employees before backing down at the request of the White House.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/09/war-companies-profiting_n_2839564.html

http://247wallst.com/2013/03/06/ten-companies-profiting-most-from-war-2/

Excess-profits tax on defense contractors during wartime is long overdue 31DEZ12

NOT only should an excess-profits tax be levied on all defense contractors, but the military should also go back to training troops to be cooks and medics, truckers and tank drivers, supply troops as infantry and mortar teams. It is ridiculous to pay the outrageous rates military contractors charge for the services to the troops that the troops could perform with the proper training. AND the bloated officer corps needs to be reduced to the level where these men and women actually have to work for their rank and pay and benefits. At least 2/3 of the generals, the leaches of the pentagon, need to be reduced in rank and put to work or let go from the military and their "flotillas" eliminated, the remaining generals need to have their "flotillas" reduced from costing the pentagon approximately $1,000,000 each to approximately $100,000 each. If they need more pampering than that they can pay for it, just like enlisted men and women have to pay for essentials they need but not provided by the pentagon. There's more on budgetary waste by the pentagon at my earlier post 7 Shocking Ways the Military Wastes Our Money 11DEZ12 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/7-shocking-ways-military-wastes-our.html
This from the Washington Post.....

By Walter Pincus

No one can safely predict what will happen in 2013, but here are a few things I would like to see occur when it comes to national security.
My most radical idea — and it should have been done 10 years ago — is for an excess-profits tax on defense contractors while we have troops fighting overseas. As I have often noted, Afghanistan and Iraq are the first U.S. wars in which taxes were not raised to pay for the fighting. Instead, the cost has been put on a credit card.
In World Wars I and II and the Korean War, Congress approved new taxes, including one directed at defense contractors. In introducing his request in 1940 for a “steeply graduated excess-profits tax,” President Franklin D. Roosevelt said the government should make sure that “a few do not gain from the sacrifices of many.”
Since 2002, profits of the five largest U.S.-based defense contractors have “increased by a whopping 450 percent,” said Lawrence J. Korb, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
Profits of the five rose from $2.4 billion in 2002, adjusted for inflation, to $13.4 billion in 2011, according to an August study co-written by Korb, a former assistant secretary of defense for manpower during 1981-85 and an expert on Pentagon spending
“This success applied both to companies with large civilian sections of their businesses and to those almost wholly dependent on defense funding,” Korb wrote. He noted that defense profits faltered at the beginning of the recession but “rapidly recovered, rising over 40 percent between 2008 and 2011 and nearly returning to their 2007 peak.”
“In short, the largest defense contractors have prospered to a degree that would have looked very unlikely just eleven or twelve years ago,” he said.
General Dynamics was one of the companies that grew during this period. Its earnings went from $5.08 a share in 2001 to $6.87 in 2011, while its stock price rose from $38 a share in September 2002 to $66 in September 2012. GD stockholders also benefitted from increased quarterly dividends, which rose from 14 cents a share in 2001 to 51 cents a share in 2012.
GD has a monopoly on nuclear submarine building, owning for years the Electric Boat Division and buying Newport News Shipbuilding in 1999. In 2001, it bought Motorola’s electronic defense business and two years later General Motors’s defense division, which made armored vehicles and fit well with GD’s division that makes M1 Abrams tanks.
The company, like many of its competitors, hired former Pentagon senior officers and officials to be top executives and board members.
Jay L. Johnson, a former company president who retired Monday as chairman of the GD board, is a retired admiral and was chief of naval operations from 1996 to 2000. After retiring, he joined the GD board in 2002 while he was an executive of a Virginia gas and power company. Six years later, he became GD’s chief executive.
Johnson’s successor as chairman, GD President Phebe N. Novakovic, worked at the CIA in the 1980s and from 1992 to 1997 at the Office of Management and Budget. Her last position there was as deputy associate director for national security, responsible for managing and submitting the president’s budget for the Defense Department and U.S. intelligence agencies.
The GD board includes Paul G Kaminski, who joined in 1997, shortly after he left the Pentagon following three years as undersecretary of defense for acquisition and technology; retired Gen. Lester L. Lyles, who was Air Force vice chief of staff and commander of Air Force Materiel Command until he left that service in 2000, three years before joining the GD board; retired Gen. John M. Keane, who served as Army vice chief of staff until 2003 and joined the board a year later; and most recently, in 2011, retired Gen. James L. Jones, former commandant of the Marines, Supreme Allied commander and national security adviser to President Obama from January 2009 to November 2010.
The Defense Department revolving door has been spinning at an unusual rate the past 10 years, mainly because the Pentagon has contracted out activities that in the past were normally carried out by service members. Difficult to track but in need of reform are consultant firms created by former service personnel that helped get companies the inside track on Pentagon contracts.
Inevitably, as fighting in Afghanistan winds down, there are going to be calls for more defense spending reductions. Contracting out services should go down. A military compensation and retirement modernization commission has to be established, a new effort to raise Tricare fees needs to be made, the $200 million-plus earmark for congressionally mandated research on cancer and other non-military generated illnesses should be ended, and, I hope, some reductions in the $388 million spent on military bands.
Larger amounts could be saved by buying fewer than the now-planned 2,440 F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters and reducing the future strategic nuclear force by cutting the number of new $4.9 billion strategic submarines, new heavy bombers and land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles.
No one is more qualified than Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta to shepherd the fiscal 2014 defense budget through its introduction to the new Congress. Therefore, I hope Panetta stays on through at least April to handle what is bound to be a difficult transition for his successor.
Former senator Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), who became co-chairman of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board after being considered for top positions in the first Obama administration, met with the president to discuss him replacing Panetta in the second. No rush needed, but if Hagel is Obama’s choice, the president should get on with it and not be deterred by a handful of objectors.
Another nomination that should not be delayed is for CIA director. In this case, Acting Director Michael J. Morell, a veteran agency intelligence officer, should be named. After going through four non-agency directors in the eight years since 2004 when George Tenet resigned, the agency needs one of its own to provide some leadership stability.
Looking at today’s world, it’s difficult to welcome 2013 with a “happy new year.” How about toasting “a better new year” as we look to the future?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/excess-profits-tax-on-defense-contractors-during-wartime-is-long-overdue/2012/12/31/c8f03416-513f-11e2-950a-7863a013264b_print.html

Egyptian President’s Private Jets Have Cost US Taxpayers $111 Million 28JAN11

WAR IS BUSINESS, and here is another example of how the American government, controlled by the military-industrial complex, placed war profits over the human rights of Egyptians....just imagine the number of lives that could have been improved in Egypt if this money had been foreign aid to develop education, nutrition, health care, housing and economic interest in the country.....what a waste of American taxpayer dollars.

WIth all the worldwide news coverage of street protests in Egypt, conflict academic Chris Albon makes an astute point via Twitter: “Want to know why foreign military assistance is often a bad idea? Imagine video of Egyptian protesters being crushed by US-built APCs.”
As it happens, the anti-riot trucks favored by Egyptian police bear the logo of an Italian company, Iveco SpA.*
Albon’s concern is not misplaced, however. The US government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to equip the Egyptian security forces with high-tech military hardware.
But unless things get really, really bad there, it’s unlikely that any big-ticket American military hardware will be used directly against the Egyptian demonstrators. A selection of Defense Department contracts dating to the mid-1990s reveals weapons sales to Egypt that include a Black Hawk helicopters (Sikorsky), a dizzying variety of missiles (Raytheon), Abrams tanks (General Dynamics), Humvees (AM General Corp.) and all manner of ammunition.

WHAT CAN YOU FIND OUT ABOUT GENERAL DYNAMICS?
JOIN THE INVESTIGATION.

• This is the company you selected:

• Can you track this down?

• Who is the company's chief executive officer?
  Is he or she listed on the company's website?
  (Check the Look for his or her name in the "about us"
  or "investor relations" sections). If not, see if
  the company is listed at Forbes or BusinessWeek
  or Yahoo! Finance. Small and obscure companies may not publish this
  information widely. If all else fails, see what a
  "deep web" search turns up at Biznar.
• Who is the chairperson of the board of directors?
  Is he or she listed on the company's website?
  (Check the Look for his or her name in the "about us"
  or "investor relations" sections). If not, see if
  the company has a listing at Forbes or BusinessWeek
  or Yahoo! Finance. Small and obscure companies may not publish this
  information widely. If all else fails, see what a
  "deep web" search turns up at Biznar.
• Who is the company's principal owner?
  For public companies, this will be the largest shareholder.
  Search the company's stock ticker symbol at Morningstar.Also check: Forbes, BusinessWeek, Yahoo! Finance, Biznar.
• How much does the company give to politicians?
  Run the company's name through OpenSecrets.org.
  Use the totals though the most recent year. Large companies may funnel donations through a "PAC,"
  or political action committee. If you find a PAC, check
  the "summary" tab for totals, and "recipients" for a tab list of
  major donees (example).
• How much are the company's military contracts worth?
  Search USASpending.gov for the company's name (example).
  The number will be reported as "Total Dollars" (example).
  Include every available year in the total.
• Provide a link to the source of this info (required):*
• Did you turn up anything curious? Leave notes here.
• Comments
  This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Now, if through some incredible circumstance Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak decides to flee the country, à la Ben Ali, there’s a good chance his first-class flight would come courtesy of the American taxpayer.
Pentagon contracts show that the US government has spent at least $111,160,328 to purchase and maintain Mubarak’s fleet of nine Gulfstream business jets. (For those keeping score, Gulfstream is a subsidiary of General Dynamics.)

Amateur planespotters have photographed several of the planes around the world. Mubarak also apparently travels in a Airbus A340; I have no idea who put up the money for that one.
Here are the relevant contract summaries:

Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $9,535,315 firm fixed price contract modification to provide for continued fleet maintenance support for nine Gulfstream aircraft owned by the Egyptian government. This modification extends contract for 12 months plus 1-year option. Total funds have been obligated. This work will be complete by October 2006. Headquarters 72nd Air Base Wing, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (FA8106-04-C-0001/P00005).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $19,825,221 firm fixed price contract modification to provide for the Foreign Military Sales Program in support of FMS Case Egyptian. The Air Force provides follow-on maintenance support for the Egyptian Government’s Presidential fleet of Gulfstream aircraft. The program will provide depot maintenance support, parts and material repair, and supply, field team, and Aircraft on Ground or urgent situation support. At this time, $14,825,221 of the funds has been obligated. Further funds will be obligated as individual delivery orders are issued. This work will be complete by November 2005. Solicitation began October 2003 and Negotiations were completed October 2003. The Headquarters Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (FA8106-04-C-0001).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $14,907,400 firm-fixed-price contract modification to provide for the Peace Lotus III Program, which is a foreign military sales program for the procurement of two Gulfstream G400 aircraft, Cleopatra modification, associated spares, logistics, support equipment, program management and training on behalf of the government of the Arab Republic of Egypt. The aircraft will become part of the Egyptian Presidential Fleet. Current modification is to establish negotiated firm-fixed prices for the outfitting of two aircraft interiors. Previous effort established negotiated firm-fixed prices for the procurement of two “green” aircraft (airframe only, no interior completion), Cleopatra modification and program management. Future effort will establish firm-fixed prices for associated spares, support equipment, logistics and training and will be covered under a separate 1279 report. Total funds have been obligated. This work will be complete by August 2004. The Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (F34601-03-C-0038, P00001).
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Ga., is being awarded a $66,892,392 firm fixed price contract to provide for two Gulfstream GIV-SP executive aircraft, associated spares, logistics, support equipment, and training. Contract is expected to be completed September 1998. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. There was one firm solicited and one proposal received. Negotiations were completed March 1997. This effort supports foreign military sales to Egypt. Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., is the contracting activity (F34601-97/C-0244).

* This tidbit also comes via Twitter, thanks to eagle-eyed Foreign Policy magazine managing editor Blake Hounshell; Hounshell also noticed a report that Egyptian First Lady Suzanne Mubarak once “commandeered a bus that had been bought with money from the United States Agency for International Development and that had been meant to carry children to school.”