Comments on: Top Gun economics http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2008/12/08/top-gun-economics/ Insights behind the investment headlines Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:43:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Patrick http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2008/12/08/top-gun-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-972 Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:45:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/?p=587#comment-972 5 billion for a corrupt corporation in need of bail out, or 5 billion for a new aircraft carrier? I’ll take the shiny new boat!

]]>
By: Raul http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2008/12/08/top-gun-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-964 Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:21:14 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/?p=587#comment-964 The main menace in these days are terrorists. Therefore, why would you need to invest in a carrier?? It won’t save you from promt terrorist attack!!

]]>
By: Sage http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2008/12/08/top-gun-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-962 Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:36:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/?p=587#comment-962 Gene,

I agree w/ you 100%. The 11 US acc battle groups are obsolete & vulnerable. They also reflect huge legacy & operating costs. If analysed using the objective metrics of business, they would fail analysis.

These are the 21st century floating naval maginot lines. There’s just too many egos wrapped around these slow boats & their support groups.

]]>
By: Gene Strong http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2008/12/08/top-gun-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-959 Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:43:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/?p=587#comment-959 Aircraft carriers have probably already become obsolete
due to modern missile development. This has not yet
been acknowledged by those superpowers capable of building
and operating these monster targets as we have not yet
had a war between nations with carriers and nations with
sufficient modern missile capacity.

]]>