The implications this merger could have for local and national politics is understated.
Entire Congressional Districts whose main employer is either Raytheon or UTC could see their plants consolidated. Or closed.
Lobbyists for both companies will be working with each other on projects and initiatives, which could result in pressure for other defense companies to merge.
Did you see their website posted for the merger? There will be 4 divisions/segments/??? 2 are from UTC and 2 from Raytheon, it does not seem like they are planning for a real integration.
I did not, so maybe this disqualifies me from commenting further, however I typically don't read press releases because they often contain lies, spin, and everything in between.
Reading press releases is rarely as useful as reading the filings. Whether it's a company's financial numbers (ignore the PR, read the 10-K), an up and coming IPO (definitely ignore the investors and underwriters, read the S-1), or even a piece of legislation (ignore the congressional testimony, it's for cable news soundbites, read the floor text and amendments).
I really don't see "Entire Congressional Districts" losing anything. The whole point is probably to get more votes in congress. The more districts the better.
It's amazing and refreshing when a company breaks this costly trend. Relative newcomer SpaceX is already up to at least 5 states plus DC.
Once they gain a larger foothold on certain communities and districts, their incentives will change. As well as their ability to solidify votes in the affected states.
Kind of like how the electoral college system vs. popular vote system influences where presidential candidates campaign, I believe Raytheon will have a greater incentive to target one or two communities with a lot of sway at different political levels as opposed to several districts with little. It's cheaper to do and more cost effective.
Maybe I don't see it the way you do, but I do not see this as a net positive for communities whose sole employer is Raytheon. The measures I'm using are wages, employment, and quality of life.
There is very little product overlap so this is categorically false. UTC makes aircraft engines, commercial jet interiors, and avionics. Raytheon makes missiles, radars, and ISR equipment. Please explain how you make a missile in a a turbine engine factory.
>Please explain how you make a missile in a turbine engine factory
It's pretty rare for a single office to create, from start to finish, an entire product, like an engine or missile. The assembly line is distributed in the first place, with separate offices attaching, refitting, and validating different pieces of the entire weapon system.
So I do not believe this comment comes from a place of knowledge on this subject. My comment also asserts that factories are not static, just because they produce something now doesn't mean that they can't be assigned something later.
Entire Congressional Districts whose main employer is either Raytheon or UTC could see their plants consolidated. Or closed.
Lobbyists for both companies will be working with each other on projects and initiatives, which could result in pressure for other defense companies to merge.