I could see justification for clawback on any stock awarded or exercised for the executives responsible for 737 Max problems, but I don’t see any evidence that the 737 Max is unredeemable.
Hey mods, is it possible to attach it to that one? Or if not, just kill this one and let me know so I can repost it there...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/15/boeing-737-...
Which sadly means all my future flights will probably be on Spirit, but I'm willing to take the hit for my safety.
Yes, this is negligent behavior, yes, Boeing and the FAA should have their come-to-Jesus moment. But the odds of a crash on a MAX for you are one in five hundred thousand. Put another way you have a 0.0002% chance of being involved in a crash.
You have an 0.01% chance of dying each year being involved in a car accident in the United States. That's 50X higher risk. [1] On a per-trip basis it's pretty much the same.
Normally, of course, driving is much more dangerous than flying. On a MAX8 it's ball-park (based on an incredibly limited sample size).
[1] https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortalit...
Your approach also fails to take into account the non-uniform distribution of accidents at take off and landing vs at cruise, so if you take a 3 stop itinerary on an Airbus-only airline with a worse safety track record, you may be at more risk than a nonstop on an even unpatched MAX.
[1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mcall.com/business/transpor...
0.0002% X 172 passengers -> 0.0334
You can divide that way to yield the risk per passenger, but multiply back out to obtain the per flight amount which is what’s relevant given the group impact.