> Airbus isn't focused on profit

Why would you say that?

> profit (cutting corners)

Is profit the same as cutting corners?

The context of the reply is why Airbus would not encounter the same organizational faults as Boeing. The general consensus is that Boeing pursued profit over safety with respect to the MAX. & they did so by cutting corners.

I think it is fair to say that Boeing cut some corners which resulted in the current situation - but even Airbus surely only prioritises safety over profit to a point - and I'm also sure Airbus cuts some corners. And this is also not really clarifying why Airbus, a publicly listed company with shareholders, is not focused on profits.

I think what is being missed here is nuance - I don't think air-travel with 0 risk is possible - most things come with risk and if we are not willing to consider anything else nothing will ever get done.

You really think Airbus will never prioritise profit over increasing safety? And if so do you think that Airbus planes are 100% safe?

Was it profitable for Boeing to cut corners?

It was for the execs for 20 years.

There is being prudent and then there is being negligent - I think people conflate them. I don't think there is any publicly traded company that does not care about profit - Boeing is not somehow unique in this. If the profit is competently pursued then you won't jeopardise safety beyond a certain point though - because that will in the long term impact profits and shareholders who appoint execs are not benefited by reduction in long term profits and therefore the value of the company.

Quite the contrary, they are bound by fiduciary duty. Short term profits for long term disaster breaches that responsibility.

It was ‘til it wasn’t.

Aerospace has the same level of politics when it comes to jobs in the USA.